thebug Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Tonight I was listening to Prime Time Sports in Canada (Toronto) they had Marv on for a live interview......they asked the usual questions.....was Willis traded because of statements made in Playboy Blah Blah Blah.....was it attitude, character etc etc...Marv gave the standard answers we have been hearing all day....but.....the comment that caught my ear (and the interviewers) was that in talks with Willis and his agent they were made aware(or reminded) that Willis, without a contract extention could sit out 10 games next year and still be a FA at the end of the season....Marv said they had to take that into account when considering trading Willis......It sounded to me that they didn't have a choice.....and getting 3 picks is better than none.....if anyone else saw the program they can confirm this....sorry no link this is a TV/Radio program in Canada.....
ThreeBillsDrive Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Tonight I was listening to Prime Time Sports in Canada (Toronto) they had Marv on for a live interview......they asked the usual questions.....was Willis traded because of statements made in Playboy Blah Blah Blah.....was it attitude, character etc etc...Marv gave the standard answers we have been hearing all day....but.....the comment that caught my ear (and the interviewers) was that in talks with Willis and his agent they were made aware(or reminded) that Willis, without a contract extention could sit out 10 games next year and still be a FA at the end of the season....Marv said they had to take that into account when considering trading Willis......It sounded to me that they didn't have a choice.....and getting 3 picks is better than none.....if anyone else saw the program they can confirm this....sorry no link this is a TV/Radio program in Canada..... What network is that on? TSN? Rogers Sports Net?
thebug Posted March 9, 2007 Author Posted March 9, 2007 What network is that on? TSN? Rogers Sports Net? Rogers Sportsnet channel 55 where I am(fan 590 on radio).....they are still on the air talking baseball they may mention it agian?
ConradDobler Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 sorry no link this is a TV/Radio program in Canada..... Shouldn't the word be programme? You're talking about Canada, after all.
Kelly the Dog Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 The thing is, if I actually took this to the banque, they would look at me like I was a moron.
Nanker Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 The thing is, if I actually took this to the banque, they would look at me like I was a moron. Or worse... a maroon!
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Why WMc was traded? It all started when Thurman Thomas started to grace the top banner here at TSW... "When TSW talks... Everybody listens!"
thebug Posted March 9, 2007 Author Posted March 9, 2007 Shouldn't the word be programme? You're talking about Canada, after all. Actually Canada's first language is English.....
bbills17 Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Tonight I was listening to Prime Time Sports in Canada (Toronto) they had Marv on for a live interview......they asked the usual questions.....was Willis traded because of statements made in Playboy Blah Blah Blah.....was it attitude, character etc etc...Marv gave the standard answers we have been hearing all day....but.....the comment that caught my ear (and the interviewers) was that in talks with Willis and his agent they were made aware(or reminded) that Willis, without a contract extention could sit out 10 games next year and still be a FA at the end of the season....Marv said they had to take that into account when considering trading Willis......It sounded to me that they didn't have a choice.....and getting 3 picks is better than none.....if anyone else saw the program they can confirm this....sorry no link this is a TV/Radio program in Canada..... Exactly, after all the BS surrounding WM, and his average (at best) production and desire on the field, would you extend this dolt for 5+ years (as he was apparantly demanding??). He'd be a distraction, sit out, and then head out of town, OR we commit 5 years and 40+ million on him? See you later, and with a great return!
ricojes Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Tonight I was listening to Prime Time Sports in Canada (Toronto) they had Marv on for a live interview......they asked the usual questions.....was Willis traded because of statements made in Playboy Blah Blah Blah.....was it attitude, character etc etc...Marv gave the standard answers we have been hearing all day....but.....the comment that caught my ear (and the interviewers) was that in talks with Willis and his agent they were made aware(or reminded) that Willis, without a contract extention could sit out 10 games next year and still be a FA at the end of the season....Marv said they had to take that into account when considering trading Willis......It sounded to me that they didn't have a choice.....and getting 3 picks is better than none.....if anyone else saw the program they can confirm this....sorry no link this is a TV/Radio program in Canada..... I mentioned that this was a possibility in a previous post and was crucified. How could WM hold with no leverage? He wouldn't be that stupid in contract year? and yada yada yada. But that is the truth, HE WOULD HAVE HELD OUT!!!! The Bills options were either sign or trade him. Even though I did like WM, I billieve they made the right decision.
tennesseeboy Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 A guy who sits out ten games after being pretty much rejected for trades this year would not be making much money. I think when push comes to shove Marv just figured the guy wasn't all THAT good, and didn't want to renegotiate and be stuck with a headache that might not even perform well. He will have a revamped O-line this year and he might as well go with a guy who will move the chains for him. Leonard of Rutgers might fill this need and will be available at two or even perhaps at three. Guys like Irons, Pittman are going to be around as well. Bottom line is Willis just doesn't appear to be all that good a bet. Maybe Marv is wrong and the Ravens will be laughing at us next year...but as of this moment I think Marv is coming out better in the deal.
ricojes Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 A guy who sits out ten games after being pretty much rejected for trades this year would not be making much money. Are you kidding me? Today's salaries are ridiculous and just keep getting bigger. Even if WM held out 10 games or whatever, he still would have raked in the big bucks! All he would have to say is that without an extension, he would not take the financial risk off playing an entire season. It just blows my mind that some people actually think like this. Have you not followed the NFL? You don't think Dan Snyder would sign a guy just because he held out? C'mon people get real here!!!
inkman Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 Actually Canada's first language is English..... I thought it was hoser, eh.
McGill Bill Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 I thought it was hoser, eh. Bain no, moi j'pense que it's Franglish bain la. Bain go les Bills!
bud8andbills Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 He is gone and in a couple years time will be remembered about as much as Antowain Smith. Let him go.
Peter Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 The contract that WM signed with the Ravens was very reasonable for an NFL RB. He clearly was not demanding something that was out of line -- as demonstrated by what the Ravens did.
OnTheRocks Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 I hope the Ravens game in Buffalo is a primetime Sunday nighter in late December. And I hope the Bills crush the little prick.
Lurker Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 I hope the Ravens game in Buffalo is a primetime Sunday nighter in late December. If it is, I hope the Bills have a defensive front 7 by then...
John from Riverside Posted March 9, 2007 Posted March 9, 2007 When it all said and done I am glad he is gone because he isn't a hard runner.....simple as that..... I truly feel that has the Oline been better in the running game we would have like our backup much better for multiple reasons...... I really dont feel this hurts our team.....but lets get a young RB in this draft to groom regardless of what we do in FA
Recommended Posts