Mike formerly from Florida Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 from Free Agency, that will be good enough for me. Then, we can concentrate on MLB, OL, and WR/RB. What say you?
Matt in KC Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 Given that they have 12 other free agents they could lose and only have about 6-7 draft picks (we'll see how the compensitory picks shake out), I think your scenario leaves us short. 2006 Bills who are free agents: UFA LB London Fletcher DE Chris Kelsay FB Daimon Shelton CB Kiwaukee Thomas G Mike Gandy RB Anthony Thomas WR Andre Davis RFA DL Anthony Hargrove DT Tim Anderson CB Jabari Greer RB Shaud Williams Also, I think Villlareal is "shot" and Holcolm could be gone if I read into the press conference right 8-9 of the above are positions we need to fill (others are mainly ST/depth). I'll be very uncomfortable if we head into the draft still needing a OG, MLB, DE, DT, nickle/depth CB, RB2, FB.... The impact of picking up "scraps" after the draft or needing to find players at each of these position who can play in 2007 is frightning. I think it's more likely we sign a couple players before FA (K Thomas, Hargrove, Gandy? Greer?) , match 1 during FA? (Kelsay?) and pick up 3-4 veterans who could play, or who may be bonus-friendly enough to cut if someone better is found. Then we pick up a couple UDFA's and a couple more vets who likely will be cut after training camp.
BuffaloRebound Posted February 16, 2007 Posted February 16, 2007 Marv wasn't exactly tight-lipped about the Bills off-season plans. From the press conference, one could reasonably gather a day 1 pick on a RB, a second day pick on a QB, 1 or 2 OL FA pickups, maybe a late round pick on a WR or TE (he sounded happy with our TE's and WR's), a day 1 pick at LB, and a FA pickup at CB if Nate is not retained (it sounds like the Bills will try to keep him though). The only position Marv didn't elaborate on was defensive line.
Recommended Posts