GhostsOfTheRockpile Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 Tags was right on when he said who Buffalo puts on the field is more important to their long-term viability than anything else. Too bad Marv & Co. weren't listening. That pick could not have been much worse. A guy they could have gotten in the second round at #8 overall? I would have preferred trading down, but hell... at least take Bunkley, Ngata, Hollywood Matt, ANYONE that's a LEGIT TOP-10 PROSPECT! Awful. Hello 3-13.
Dennis in NC Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 Well, no, Whitner was likely to go at #13 to Ravens if Bills did not take him. He would not have been a 2nd rounder as you say. None the less, I was shocked (and not in a good way).
jarthur31 Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 One pick today at #8 wasn't going to help us. Until we have 5 near PB at the LOS for the QB and RB, we won't be winning many games.
ExWNYer Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 One pick today at #8 wasn't going to help us. Until we have 5 near PB at the LOS for the QB and RB, we won't be winning many games. 675035[/snapback] Not to worry. I'm sure we can pick up an undersized slot receiver at #42.
WhitnerIsAGod Posted April 29, 2006 Posted April 29, 2006 Well, no, Whitner was likely to go at #13 to Ravens if Bills did not take him. He would not have been a 2nd rounder as you say. None the less, I was shocked (and not in a good way). 674856[/snapback] Yep. The Ravens are in desperate need to get rid of Ed Reed.
Recommended Posts