BoondckCL Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 If so then why did he refuse to renegotiate with the bills who wanted to restructure his contract....The guy flat out could not work with Losman and he thought Carr was a better QB than Losman A lot of Bills fans thought that Carr was better than Losman as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thank You Marv! Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Hell yes...he'll definitely play for Marv and that's no Mularkey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 Marv MAY have had final say on drafting Moulds, but he quickly grew disenchanted with him. I recall him saying something to the effect back in 1997 that Moulds was never going to get it. Of course he was wrong, but that impression and the way things played out last year probably have closed the book on Moulds in Buffalo for good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanInSouthBuffalo Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Of course he was wrong, but that impression and the way things played out last year probably have closed the book on Moulds in Buffalo for good. Exactly. Eric should remember why he was traded from Buffalo in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BILLS4LIFE Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 NO!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 if he couldn't cut it as the #2 man in houston,why should he be able to do it for buffalo?eric also burned some bridges in buffalo.i do imagine he could have ate some humble pie,but i doubt he has anything left in the tank.go bills in"07 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinVA Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I'm not about to read all five pages of this thread, however Moulds' problem wasn't with the Bills but with Mularkey. As a #2 I would welcome him back in a heartbeat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 if he couldn't cut it as the #2 man in houston,why should he be able to do it for buffalo?eric also burned some bridges in buffalo.i do imagine he could have ate some humble pie,but i doubt he has anything left in the tank.go bills in"07 They have a horrible OL, crappy defense, and no running game. Moulds wasn't the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Got this from BB.com, but apparently on a Mississippi radio station, Moulds said he'd like to come back to Buffalo, would like to be the #2 WR, and would like a 3-year deal. Would you want him back? No, I don't want Moulds back. Houston didn't want him as their #2 WR. Why would a Houston reject be good enough for Buffalo? We should be building this team with younger players, not guys on the tail ends of their careers. By the time Moulds learns the offense and develops chemistry with Losman, he'll be retired. Moulds would take the roster spot of a younger guy we already have. Who do you get rid of? You can't get rid of Parrish, because he's actually useful as a WR. And the Bills should hold onto Price, because of his production and the way he's taken Parrish under his wing. So the Bills might need to get rid of a guy like Sam Aiken, and that would hurt our special teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I think his problems came from Meat Head. Actually, every one was pissed on the team that year. And do you blame him? Remember, Marv drafted Eric in 96 and I bet he would like to have him back. I still think he has the talent and I believe he would be a great option for JP and the offense. I was just about to mention that. If the deal is right and knows he'll have to compete for a job, then what can it hurt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift Sylvan Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Until Andre Davis is resigned, and that's an if, we need a WR anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I 90 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I'm not about to read all five pages of this thread, Let J.P. make the call. If he's game, I'm game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Mmmm, big time no ! He punched his ticket in Buffalo ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I suppose he'd make an OK #3 WR, but he had the chance to stay here - wasn't he shooting his mouth off that he'd NEVER play in Buffalo again when Marv was trying to keep him here? Screw 'im! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingwing Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Eric Moulds was a big time. go to receiver.......... He choose to move on and we shouldn't look back... We need to move on and develope R. Parrish and Josh Reed....... I would like to see Marv and Dick throw open the #2 job to Roscoe and Josh....... I was quite critical of Josh in his first two years, but last year he was a favorite of J.P.'s in 3rd and 4, 3rd and 7 passing type situations on a short slant or quick curl ....... I remember on a number of occassions he picked up the hard yards after the catch by putting his head down and picking up the first down........ I think it is time to move on past Peerless Price and develope Roscoe and Josh as our everydown wideouts in a three receiver set and go with a one back backfield.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I hope that he stays where he is, and not because he wouldn't be a decent wideout. The guy threw a hissy fit when it became obvious that Evans was the primary receiver. Would getting him back be good for team chemistry? My guess is no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I'm not about to read all five pages of this thread, however Moulds' problem wasn't with the Bills but with Mularkey. As a #2 I would welcome him back in a heartbeat How do you and everyone else here know that Moulds problem was with specifically Mularkey? Everyone is engaging in pure speculation about why Moulds' was pissed off. The only thing that seems to be confirmed is that he was outspoken against Losman according to the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generaLee83 Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 The chemistry crap is total B.S. The only question IMO is what kind of $$ is he looking for? If he's cheap, it's a no-brainer. I totally disagree with you, have you ever been part of a team that was going through internal strife? Everyone tries less, doesn't give a sh_t about winning and does whatever they can to take their minds off of playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 old, slow and arrogant is not the way to build your WRs. Marv has spent 2 off-seasons cleaning out the turds. NO way does Moulds come back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 I totally disagree with you, have you ever been part of a team that was going through internal strife? Everyone tries less, doesn't give a sh_t about winning and does whatever they can to take their minds off of playing. The guy is saying that he WANTS to play here... (BTW, has anyone confirmed this?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts