stinky finger Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 I get the whole "it's a new day..." argument from some here. I however, can forgive the guy for going out and trying to make some money. If he wants to come back and we can get him at the right price, I say "go for it". He stayed with us through an awful lot and if he wants to come back, contribute to our goal and retire a Bill-- why not? Sign him for a modest contract and lets go play some football. He would have a field day with the #2 CBs. Though I'm not crazy about how he left, I still want what's best for this team and me not wanting to sign him stems from the notion that he won't necassarily upgrade our WR position. It's the extracuricular crap coupled with his playing demise that I wish not to sign him. If I felt he could really contribute, I could look past the extra BS.
BoondckCL Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 No problem, Boon. We can agree to disagree. I have a sore spot for EM, is all. BTW, I was up watching ESPN. Something tells me you were in a better place with your term paper. Godspeed! No i do agree with you. He shouldn't be let on the team just because he says i want to come back. If they were to let him back on the team, they should make it clear that they are not taking sh-- from him and he has to make right with JP Losman, as well as the city of Buffalo. My Term Paper = The items my dog left outside this morning.
Gordio Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 No i do agree with you. He shouldn't be let on the team just because he says i want to come back. If they were to let him back on the team, they should make it clear that they are not taking sh-- from him and he has to make right with JP Losman, as well as the city of Buffalo. My Term Paper = The items my dog left outside this morning. Why bother, the guy is not good anymore & not worth the hassle. Let him finish his career somewhere else.
BillnutinHouston Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 New leaders have to be found---not gumpy old men with a history of being locker room lawyers (albeit with good reason during the TD/MM era). Exactly!!
johnnychemo Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 If he is coming back with his tail between his legs and humbled by the experience of the past year, then and only then would I start looking at him to see if he can fill a need. No other team has made a move to get him on the roster, he isn't a hot commodity. After the draft and the early June washed up veteran yard sale, we'll see if he merits some attention. I wouldn't object to him coming back, I have the feeling Marv and DJ would make the situation pretty clear that he would need to sing the company song before they give him a contract.
jrfife22 Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 No dont do it the only reason this is a topic is because he was a Bill one time but if say he spend his previous years in Atl we wouldnt want him so no i dont want him he was good when he was here but no
Phil Hansen Forever Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Eric was quoted as being a Leader in the locker room, until mularkey came along. They all of sudden he is a problem, causing dissention. I call it revisionist history. He was always a man of character and had the guts to stand up to a pile of chit and call him on it. Like the old saying goes: if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck...mularkey called him a goose.
JAMIEBUF12 Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Eric was quoted as being a Leader in the locker room, until mularkey came along. They all of sudden he is a problem, causing dissention. I call it revisionist history. He was always a man of character and had the guts to stand up to a pile of chit and call him on it. Like the old saying goes: if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck...mularkey called him a goose. well when mularky was the coach it was also the 1st time erics play wasn't #1 material anymore.mularky was a crap coach,but they did recognize that lee evans was better.eric threw a hissy fit and only caught touchdowns when kelly holcomb was the qb.and lets not forget the game when lee had 3 td's in the 1st quarter and eric refused to come back in the game.you do what you are told by the coach right or wrong.eric thought it was a waste for him to run his ass off and be a decoy,but it was working.if he had been a team leader he would have done the whole assignment that he was given.a vet is supposed to put the team first.now eric is totally washed up and he wants to be a bill again?he does know j.p is the undisputed#1 qb?i would have no problem with signing eric for a day so he could retire a bill,but thats about it.go bills in"07
Rico Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 I say sign him to the veteran minimum with no bonus, let him sit all pre-season, then cut his punk ass before Week 1, and let JP be the one to tell him... at the Sundowner if you will.
BoondckCL Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 I think some people are missing the point. No one is saying bring him back expecting him to be the premier reciver on this football team. But I think personally that Eric Moulds could fill the void in the red zone that most of you have bitched about in the previous months. He is a six foot plus reciever, with great hands and he has the ability to still run short possession routes. Yes he should experience some shame before coming back to the team. Mularkey obviously did a number on him, but lets not forget Mularkey ain't the Sheriff in town anymore. We have a new regime. It might be worth our while to look into it.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 He's gotta be better than peerless at this point.
BoondckCL Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 He's gotta be better than peerless at this point. Point well taken, Joe.
Sketch Soland Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 He may want to come back, and a lot of fans could want him back.... But does Marv Levy? I think the answer to that is a resounding "no".
Realist Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Having EM back would not be a bad thing as long as he patched things up with JP. As mentioned by others, he is the type of receiver we are lacking at this time. Unfortunately, I don't see him signing for the vet minimum. If he signs, look for a contract similar to Price's. There is no way he is going to play for minimum when Peerless is making, what, $2M a season.
BoondckCL Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 He may want to come back, and a lot of fans could want him back.... But does Marv Levy? I think the answer to that is a resounding "no". Maybe it was all part of Marv's evil plan. He'd deal Moulds to the Texans, get Kyle Williams, Moulds would get himself cut, and come back to wearing Buffalo blue.
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Moulds,Bledsoe and Bennie Anderson are all out there. Get 'er done Marv !
Sketch Soland Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Maybe it was all part of Marv's evil plan. He'd deal Moulds to the Texans, get Kyle Williams, Moulds would get himself cut, and come back to wearing Buffalo blue. It's the classic "High Motor Swindle"!
Patience Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 Your Both Wrong it was John Butler, Polian left after the 3rd super bowl trip, Marv was the coach at the time He said the "Polian/Butler era". Not referring to Moulds, I was responding to the part I bolded. It's a quote from a seminar at Canisius College.
apuszczalowski Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 How many of you are hypocrites here? When Eric was a Bill how many of you said 1. He was still a productive Receiver and should be kept, losing him would be a mistake 2. JP should not have been handed the starting job that year Half the board wanted him to be kept, now after one bad year on a horrible team, he's released and expressed interest in coming back and people want to stay away from him like he's the Plague If Marv were to sign him, obviously he would be here to compete for one of the starting #2-7 WR jobs, not the #1 spot, and he would be catching balls from JP, which I doubt he would have a problem with because his only problem was he though JP was too young and inexperienced to be handed a starting job on a team that was supposed to be playoff bound (a point most of us would agree on) If Peerless can come back humbled from his time away, I think Moulds can too. As long as he comes back cheap, I say why not.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted March 14, 2007 Posted March 14, 2007 How many of you are hypocrites here? When Eric was a Bill how many of you said 1. He was still a productive Receiver and should be kept, losing him would be a mistake 2. JP should not have been handed the starting job that year Half the board wanted him to be kept, now after one bad year on a horrible team, he's released and expressed interest in coming back and people want to stay away from him like he's the Plague If Marv were to sign him, obviously he would be here to compete for one of the starting #2-7 WR jobs, not the #1 spot, and he would be catching balls from JP, which I doubt he would have a problem with because his only problem was he though JP was too young and inexperienced to be handed a starting job on a team that was supposed to be playoff bound (a point most of us would agree on) If Peerless can come back humbled from his time away, I think Moulds can too. As long as he comes back cheap, I say why not. I wanted him gone, and now I want him back...at a bargain price.
Recommended Posts