bananathumb Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 These are strange players we're adding. No true tight end or fullback. How is our offense going to be better? One tall receiver?
nucci Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 Does anyone here remember signing Barnes as a FB???
deep2evans Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 These are strange players we're adding. No true tight end or fullback. How is our offense going to be better? One tall receiver? actually yea, one tall playmaking receiver goes a long way. the fact that our qb and rb are a year older, and the o-line is finally together over an offseason says a lot too.
DrDawkinstein Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 These are strange players we're adding. No true tight end or fullback. How is our offense going to be better? One tall receiver? one tall receiver one new Offensive Coordinator one more year with our line together one more year under our young QB's belt
Oneonta Buffalo Fan Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 You do realize that ST is part of thi team and that we lost quite a few guys on ST. Why not the probably the best unit on the team for the past 2 years.
jarthur31 Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 These are strange players we're adding. No true tight end or fullback. How is our offense going to be better? One tall receiver? You don't draft FB you sign them after.
UConn James Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 one tall receiverone new Offensive Coordinator one more year with our line together one more year under our young QB's belt You realize of course, that at this point, our OL is one injury away from seeing Duke Preston take a giant dump on the field?
bananathumb Posted April 27, 2008 Author Posted April 27, 2008 We've had good STs for several years, but haven't made the playoffs. I want some new players who can actually start on offense and from my admittedly minor knowledge of who as avaialable today, I'd suggest that we passed over some good centers, guards and tight ends, let alone fullbacks. Am I wrong? Do I have to name them? Most have already been selected by other teams. Are the other teams run by idiots or GMs who make the playoffs? You do realize that ST is part of thi team and that we lost quite a few guys on ST. Why not the probably the best unit on the team for the past 2 years.
Fan in Chicago Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 one tall receiverone new Offensive Coordinator one more year with our line together one more year under our young QB's belt Same talent as last year plus one rookie receiver. Same poor depth on OL
obie_wan Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 We've had good STs for several years, but haven't made the playoffs. I want some new players who can actually start on offense and from my admittedly minor knowledge of who as avaialable today, I'd suggest that we passed over some good centers, guards and tight ends, let alone fullbacks. Am I wrong? Do I have to name them? Most have already been selected by other teams. Are the other teams run by idiots or GMs who make the playoffs? Exactly Drafting guys whose upside is special teams is pretty short sighted. Which is why the Bills donot produce any late round gems that can actually produce on the field.
lets_go_bills Posted April 27, 2008 Posted April 27, 2008 There are three sides of the ball. ST is important. But I don't think we're just drafting STers for all of day two. The guys who get drafted later are guys who play less glamorous positions, lack something (size, speed, ect.), are tweeners with no true position yet. We filled our two biggest needs, while adding a good DE which was a need also. Guys who are drafted rounds 4 through 7 usually don't become starters, which is why the play special teams. I mean no offence, but this is a silly post.
Recommended Posts