Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Count me in on going after Jason Brown. Sure, it hurts when we could have just drafted him instead of Puke Preston and we obviously will have to build almost the entire O line by free agency but it needs to be done. There are also two center prospects coming out in Alex Mack and Jonathan Luigs who I like so hopefully we finally get it right this offseason at the center position.

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Ellison, Simpson, Kyle Williams, and to a certain degree Butler are fringe starters at best. I'd argue that Youboty is the best of the bunch, aside from Donte of course.

 

Of course, claiming Ellison is a "starter" is a stretch to begin with. If it was not for Crowell's surgery/non-surgery, and subsequent placement on IR, Ellison is riding the bench this year. At this point, I think it's obvious Ellison is on the short list to be replaced this upcoming off-season.

Posted
Of course, claiming Ellison is a "starter" is a stretch to begin with. If it was not for Crowell's surgery/non-surgery, and subsequent placement on IR, Ellison is riding the bench this year. At this point, I think it's obvious Ellison is on the short list to be replaced this upcoming off-season.

 

There's a need to get a better starter than Ellison on the field, but there's no need to cut him or get rid of him. Ellison is a solid backup LB/coverage LB. And for a 6th round pick, i'll take that in any draft.

Posted
Count me in on going after Jason Brown. Sure, it hurts when we could have just drafted him instead of Puke Preston and we obviously will have to build almost the entire O line by free agency but it needs to be done. There are also two center prospects coming out in Alex Mack and Jonathan Luigs who I like so hopefully we finally get it right this offseason at the center position.

 

The last DraftTek.com simulation had us taking Luigs, as MAck wasn't there when we picked-- 5th from the end of RD#1!

Posted
The last DraftTek.com simulation had us taking Luigs, as MAck wasn't there when we picked-- 5th from the end of RD#1!

If Mack is expected to be significantly better than Luigs, I wouldn't have any problem with the idea of using our 3rd round pick to trade up for Mack.

Posted
"Private companies have virtually no obligation to publicly distribute financial and other strategic information which can be used by its competitors."

http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/pnealis.pdf

I'd be interested to find out if you are sticking with this claim after the trade was reversed because McCargo "failed his physical". It's a pretty big coincidence that this got reported late and was summarily reversed don't you think?

Posted
I'd be interested to find out if you are sticking with this claim after the trade was reversed because McCargo "failed his physical". It's a pretty big coincidence that this got reported late and was summarily reversed don't you think?

 

 

Why would'nt they just say the trade was reversed because of some "late reporting" violation?

Posted
And pay the fines that go along with it?

It has nothing to do with the fines. I'm sure those are being paid.

 

The Feds are looking pretty bad right now with the economic turmoil and my guess is that they didn't want to look even worse. They probably didn't report this as a Sox violation because if it looked like the NFL was trying to get around Sox then others might try. One big bank trying to get around Sox because the NFL did would make the markets very jittery. The quieter the better for the Feds. Behind closed doors Goodell is getting lambasted by the Feds over this.

 

You may have noticed that the return of McCargo has been pretty hush hush. ESPN is spending a lot of cycles on "reaction" to the Roy Williams trade which was done on time but little to none on a reversal like this. The whole thing with Pacman is also a smokescreen that is starting to unravel as you can see.

Posted
It has nothing to do with the fines. I'm sure those are being paid.

 

The Feds are looking pretty bad right now with the economic turmoil and my guess is that they didn't want to look even worse. They probably didn't report this as a Sox violation because if it looked like the NFL was trying to get around Sox then others might try. One big bank trying to get around Sox because the NFL did would make the markets very jittery. The quieter the better for the Feds. Behind closed doors Goodell is getting lambasted by the Feds over this.

 

You may have noticed that the return of McCargo has been pretty hush hush. ESPN is spending a lot of cycles on "reaction" to the Roy Williams trade which was done on time but little to none on a reversal like this. The whole thing with Pacman is also a smokescreen that is starting to unravel as you can see.

 

 

I bet the Cowboys didn't even want Williams but the trade was forced on them by the league to cover-up this up.

 

 

GO BILLS!

Posted
There's a need to get a better starter than Ellison on the field, but there's no need to cut him or get rid of him. Ellison is a solid backup LB/coverage LB. And for a 6th round pick, i'll take that in any draft.

 

Sorry. I was not trying to imply they should get rid of the guy, but they would be looking to replace Ellison in the starting line up with somebody else. Ellison is clearly a back up LB, and to call him a "starter" in order to promote the idea a certain draft was good is dubious.

×
×
  • Create New...