The Big Cat Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Do you have a link for that quote? no, he said it candidly. I believe it was mentioned some time before this past year's superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Do you have a link for that quote? daquix, you seem to be a nice enough person but I notice that you question EVERYTHING someone posts or look towards the negative. Are you a Bills' fan? If so, for how long? No link is needed for this quote, it's common knowledge for quite some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daquix Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 no, he said it candidly. I believe it was mentioned some time before this past year's superbowl. daquix, you seem to be a nice enough person but I notice that you question EVERYTHING someone posts or look towards the negative. Are you a Bills' fan? If so, for how long? No link is needed for this quote, it's common knowledge for quite some time. Maybe I should have clarified. I did'nt mean it in the way, that I was questioning whether Marv ever said that. The reason I asked for a link, is because I wanted the full quote so I could put it in my signature, and have the link available if anyone else asked me for it. Yes I am a Bills fan and have been all of my life. I'm just not the type of person who is going to complain about ESPN or other media outlets because we get little coverage or bad coverage. Why should we get coverage? We have been a bad-mediocre team for the past 7 years. Everyone is giddy on this board and I hope the Bills go 16-0 and win the Super Bowl also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted April 3, 2007 Share Posted April 3, 2007 Maybe I should have clarified. I did'nt mean it in the way, that I was questioning whether Marv ever said that. The reason I asked for a link, is because I wanted the full quote so I could put it in my signature, and have the link available if anyone else asked me for it. Yes I am a Bills fan and have been all of my life. I'm just not the type of person who is going to complain about ESPN or other media outlets because we get little coverage or bad coverage. Why should we get coverage? We have been a bad-mediocre team for the past 7 years. Everyone is giddy on this board and I hope the Bills go 16-0 and win the Super Bowl also. Fair enough. I wasn't trying to question you, I just truly wanted to know. When I get out of work I'll try to find that quote for you. Go Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCCEO Posted April 4, 2007 Author Share Posted April 4, 2007 I'll agree with you, mainly b/c I don't want to appear idiotic. Smart position I stopped reading after the 1st paragraph. My guess is M Turner will command a contract of 5yrs 35 million with 18-20 mill guaranteed. If we were lucky enough that AD fell into our laps my guess is he would get a slotted contract of 5yrs 16-18 mill, 10 of it guaranteed. Big difference in contracts pal. At least if your going to make a 5 paragraph rant, try to pretend like you know what your talking about. I know exactly what Im talking about. Turner couldnt possibly be asking for more than starting backs have been getting the past 2 offseasons (4-5 years - 23-28 million with 12-16 guaranteed). As you said if we drafted AP then wed still be sinking 10 mllion in guaranteed money into an unproven commodity, plus we would be using the 12th pick while we have other needs. Obtaining turner for a 2nd and change would allow us to get a high-caliber player while addressing different needs in the first(LB, WR, CB etc). Everyone here is getting all wrapped up in the contract terms of this whole thing. The bills can go over their "cash to cap" if they want. Itd be easy to argue that the initial investment in quality players could produce significant returns both on the field and at the ticket office. I understand its important for teh bills to be fiscally responsible in todays NFL landscape. The bottom line of this argument is either you think turner will be a stud or a dud. Theres little more to it than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 To me I'd rather swap first round picks than surrender a second. Think about it you end up with a late first and an early second vs. an early first and no second. If you walk in to the draft still having 4 picks on the first day PLUS having your starter at RB then that's huge. The only way to get playmakers is to draft them. By giving up the 12th pick, the Bills give up a high probability of landing an elite playmaker like Willis. 2 "good" players is not what puts good teams over the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 Its an idiotic argument. People sit around and clamour for Turner then the other faction comes in with the backlash, "oh hes gonna cost too much", maybe, but then you cant support us drafting peterson, even if he fell to 12 hed likely be asking for a lot more $$$ than Ngata got last year bc hes an offensive playmaker. I know that its structred but that doesnt stop peoples demands and to be honest if you were ADs agent, wouldnt you try to squeeze the most out of that lemon as possible before another bone snaps without contact. THe 2nd argument against turner is: "lets get a rookie with no miles on his tires". This is the one that bothers me, TUrner has a total of 3 years in the league, very light workload, but enough to tell if talent is there. We dont know if he can play every down but as a poster stated the other day he will definatley be part of a 2 back system, so its not like all the weight would be on him. The biggest problem with the argument is that come september these are a lot of the same folks who willb e saying, "oh but we're going with a rookie RB, he could use time to work on blocking, routes etc". Turner has had this time, hes studied behind THE BEST DAMN GUY IN THE GAME for 3 years. I support trading for turner very much, but not if it involves giving up more than a 2nd round pick(IMO a swap of firsts is too much because we would not then be able to select one of the last elite prospects on the board). The idea is that it would likely be hard to draft a back better than turner in the 2nd round and I cant help but agree with that thinking. A lot of people on here have been saying, "well this is a deep RB class and there are plenty of guys to choose from". I disagree. Last year was a very deep draft at RB. 2 years ago, the draft was deep at RB. This year there are 2 near-elite prospects and about 5-7 more guys who grade out as day 1 picks. Could I be wrong? definately. The one thing that bodes well if we draft a late first day RB to start is that our OL should resemble a steamroller. I got way off topic on this one. Sorry. The point is I believe that if we can snag turner for a 2nd rounder (or even a swap of 2nds and a third next year) that it would allow us to field the best team because we would still have a chance to draft Patrick Willis or trade back and pick up Puz(Poz, pus, puss, whatever you wanna call him) or address other positions of need. Imagine if our draft looked something like this: 1(trade back): Robert Meachum 2: Michael Turner 2(acquired through trade down): David Harris or Jason Durant. 3a-Daymeion Hughes. or 1: Patrick Willis 2: Turner 3a: Anthony Gonzales, Steve Smith, Craig Davis etc. or a CB. I think that would address our needs most sufficiently. In either scenario we could choose an upper eschelon player with our first pick, fill needs with our top 3(one of them being Turner RB) and use our final 3rd rounder to either move around in the draft or sit on it and choose the absolute best player available for depth. Jeez, I think i just turned into the type of poster whose been driving me nuts lately. Time for a TBD break. if marv drafts a reciever day 1 (unless CJ drops to 12) ill eat my right foot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ROCCEO Posted April 4, 2007 Author Share Posted April 4, 2007 if marv drafts a reciever day 1 (unless CJ drops to 12) ill eat my right foot I wish this post weren't a lock to be forgotten. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 The last time I checked most of the starting RBs for teams were 1st day draft picks...You do not find UDFA dime a dozen starting in this league. The steelers were lucky to get willie parker and also were lucky to find out that they had a gem hidden beneath the depth chart when the guy from philly couldn't cut it at the starting position... I didn't say "undrafted free agent" running backs are a dime a dozen. I said you can get a "serviceable" running back anywhere in the draft, as they are a dime a dozen. But I wouldn't call it lucky to get an UDFA RB--more a result of the small difference in talent between late round and early round RB's and the excess supply of RB's. Willie Parker, Mike Bell, Priest Holmes--there are guys like this every year, but few are given a chance to show that they can run just as well as the 1st round picks. I am a proponent of spending a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a RB. Of the starting RB's in the league, there's no huge difference (exception of LT) between a top-10 RB and a 3rd round pick. In fact, these top-10 RB's of recent have sucked by comparison (Cadillac, Ronnie Brown, Cedric Benson) to their later round counterparts. In addition, you don't need a great RB to succeed in the NFL, as recent Super Bowl participants like the Patriots (Kevin Faulk/Antoiwan Smith), Bucs (Micheal Pittman), Raiders (Charlie Gardner), Panthers (aging Stephen Davis), even the Colts this past year (average rookie in Addai + Rhodes) have shown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 In addition, you don't need a great RB to succeed in the NFL, as recent Super Bowl participants like the Patriots (Kevin Faulk/Antoiwan Smith), Bucs (Micheal Pittman), Raiders (Charlie Gardner), Panthers (aging Stephen Davis), even the Colts this past year (average rookie in Addai + Rhodes) have shown. JR, Sorry I mistook your UDFA thoughts. The Patriots had Tom Brady, the Bucs had a very efficient Brad Johnson, the Panthers had a aging Davis, but that year got great production from him and Addai was a 1st round RB and was the 3nd RB selected in the draft after Bush and Maroney. The Bills are still a young team and don't have any good WRs outside of Evans. They need a very strong running game and I definitely think we need that extra advantage that you talked about between the RBs in the top rounds and RBs in the later rounds....You want opponents to respect our running game to get JP and the passing game going. That is why I would like to see a 1st day RB preferably a Peterson or Lynch in a Bills uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted April 4, 2007 Share Posted April 4, 2007 JR, Sorry I mistook your UDFA thoughts. The Patriots had Tom Brady, the Bucs had a very efficient Brad Johnson, the Panthers had a aging Davis, but that year got great production from him and Addai was a 1st round RB and was the 3nd RB selected in the draft after Bush and Maroney. The Bills are still a young team and don't have any good WRs outside of Evans. They need a very strong running game and I definitely think we need that extra advantage that you talked about between the RBs in the top rounds and RBs in the later rounds....You want opponents to respect our running game to get JP and the passing game going. That is why I would like to see a 1st day RB preferably a Peterson or Lynch in a Bills uniform. If Peterson is there and he is the rare talent that many have made him out to be, then I think we have to take him. Lynch, on the other hand, looks ordinary to me. I'd take my chances on passing on Lynch, drafting a top-notch defender, and then going RB in the 2nd or 3rd. (By the way, early prediction, the Bucs will draft Peterson; Gruden is enamored with him). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts