Marshmallow Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 From Rotoworld.com NFL Network's Adam Shefter believes the Bills will be forced to release Eric Moulds. Like the Terrell Owens situation with the Eagles, the Bills lost all their leverage when they made it clear Moulds was facing release. Buffalo is asking for a fourth-round pick, but Shefter reports no one will give it up. Houston and Philadelphia are reportedly the favorites to go after Moulds. Mar. 27 - 8:20 pm et
Dr. Fong Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 So what is supposedly FORCING them to release him? Philly went a whole season before they finally gave up on TO. What makes people so sure that the Bills won't do the same with Moulds?
Marv's Neighbor Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 So what is supposedly FORCING them to release him? Philly went a whole season before they finally gave up on TO. What makes people so sure that the Bills won't do the same with Moulds? 644262[/snapback] Conceptually you're right but we're probably facing a different economic reality than the Eagles.
tennesseeboy Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 Why release him? We have the money to pay him, and we have a need for a quality receiver. I say pay him and let him stay. I wouldn't be all that happy with a fourth rounder for him in any event.
scribo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 There is a big flaw in that little piece: The Billshave not "made it clear Moulds was facing release." That is just the opposite of reality. Marv reportedly told Moulds' rep that the Bills woud not release him, that if he wanted out of Buffalo, he would have to find a trade partner. Once again, a national sports idiot making claims about a team he really doesn't cover.
mead107 Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 There is a big flaw in that little piece: The Billshave not "made it clear Moulds was facing release." That is just the opposite of reality. Marv reportedly told Moulds' rep that the Bills woud not release him, that if he wanted out of Buffalo, he would have to find a trade partner. Once again, a national sports idiot making claims about a team he really doesn't cover. 644286[/snapback] throw enough sh-- and some has to stick . kind of like the weather people , keep calling for rain and one day it will .
The Senator Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 Didn't virtually all the national and local media morons report over a month ago - with great metaphysical certitude - that Moulds would be released within days, when free agency started? Have these idiots nothing else to write about today?
Like A Mofo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 If cutting Moulds is the only option at this point, then do so...if Moulds does not want to be here so be it already...id rather see a rookie play hard and want to be here next year then a 33 year old declining WR who is on a bitchfest like most WR's these days.
slothrop Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 So what is supposedly FORCING them to release him? Philly went a whole season before they finally gave up on TO. What makes people so sure that the Bills won't do the same with Moulds? 644262[/snapback] I believe the new CBA has a new rule which prevents teams from doing what teh Eagles did with T.O. If a startng player is healthy and not suspended the team cannot simply deactivate them without cause.
scribo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 If cutting Moulds is the only option at this point, then do so...if Moulds does not want to be here so be it already...id rather see a rookie play hard and want to be here next year then a 33 year old declining WR who is on a bitchfest like most WR's these days. 644293[/snapback] Wouldn't you rather see us draft that rookie than have to claim him off waivers? Cutting Moulds = getting nothing for him except dead cap space. Marv is smart enough to trade Moulds when the time is right for the right price.
mead107 Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 If cutting Moulds is the only option at this point, then do so...if Moulds does not want to be here so be it already...id rather see a rookie play hard and want to be here next year then a 33 year old declining WR who is on a bitchfest like most WR's these days. 644293[/snapback] worth the try to get an extra pic even if it is late rounder
scribo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 I believe the new CBA has a new rule which prevents teams from doing what teh Eagles did with T.O. If a startng player is healthy and not suspended the team cannot simply deactivate them without cause. 644296[/snapback] Would refusing to play be "cause"?
Like A Mofo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 Wouldn't you rather see us draft that rookie than have to claim him off waivers? Cutting Moulds = getting nothing for him except dead cap space. Marv is smart enough to trade Moulds when the time is right for the right price. 644297[/snapback] Oh I agree with you there....Im just saying if there are zero takers for a pick, then let Moulds go...I say if Houston gives a 4th (and that is a high 4th) and that is the best offer, take it. As long as all the options were considered.
Dr. Fong Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 I believe the new CBA has a new rule which prevents teams from doing what teh Eagles did with T.O. If a startng player is healthy and not suspended the team cannot simply deactivate them without cause. 644296[/snapback] So why deactivate him? Pay him and tell him "You better show up." The worse he plays the less leverage he'll have on his next contract.
tennesseeboy Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 What on earth makes people think he won't play for the Bills. We pay him his salary...he shows up and he plays. After the season he is going to want big bucks from someone, and causing trouble will only make him less attractive (he is NOT a TO quality receiver who gets away with that crap.) Further he hasn't done or said anything that would lead me to believe he wouldn't play if we forced his hand. People work in jobs they don't like all the time. Its all about the Benjamins.
BillsGuyInMalta Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 This was all reported for the first time yesterday afternoon...before all of this Moulds to be traded to the Texans or Eagles talk broke so its already outdated.
scribo Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 What on earth makes people think he won't play for the Bills644310[/snapback] Maybe it is the fact that his representitive said Moulds would "never play for Buffalo again." That just gave me a feeling.
Coach Tuesday Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 I am interested to see what happens when Moulds tries to negotiate a contract with the Texans/Eagles/whomever. I would be shocked if he gets what he's asking for (although I've been shocked before, see: Terry Glenn's contract). More likely, he'll be offered very close to what the Bills were offering. Not that that means he'll end up staying - I think it's clear he wants to leave, and he's boxed himself into a corner by his public statements to that effect. But now the onus is all on Moulds and his agent - the Bills have made it clear they're willing to take a draft pick. There's no way to blame anything on the Bills anymore. If he works out a contract with another team, they'll trade him. If he doesn't, it'll be because he overestimated his value - in which case, why would he want to be released?
Sen. John Blutarsky Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 So why deactivate him? Pay him and tell him "You better show up." The worse he plays the less leverage he'll have on his next contract. 644306[/snapback] And there is the winner kids. Don't cut him becuase he HAS to play hard, if he dogs it he'll then be the 34 year old WR who probably has lost something instead of the 33 year old who might still have it on a better team. We hold the cards as long as we're willing to pay him to play this year and quite frankly, I don't see anyone left on the market that we're going to bring in that will require us to free up cap space. He can whine and complain as much as he wants, if Marv is willing to toe the line with this guy we can get something for him, or at least one more year of decent production. We don't have to TRADE him until week 6...that's a long time. The more WRs get signed the more valuable he is, the more WRs get hurt in camp the more valuable he is. The only way this goes south for us is if Moulds gets hurt in camp and can't play, that way were stuck paying him and he's worthless. I say risk it becuase he's probably gonna hold out anyway.
John from Riverside Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 I fail to see where the bills are on the short end of the stick here..... - The bills have more then enough cap room to keep him right where he is..... - Refusal to play is only going to cost him money....both this season and in future seasons from future GM's Eric WILL be traded for.....its all a chess match right now....truth be told the chess match might already be over and the detailes being worked out.... Oh... and Erics advisor can kiss my @ss
Recommended Posts