bills_red Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index...%3dclayton_john McCargo's days numbered: The Bills accepted defensive tackle John McCargo back after his trade to the Indianapolis Colts was voided because of a bulging disk but it will be interesting to see how long he remains in Buffalo. The trading deadline is over, so he can't go anywhere. Coaches took a few public shots at McCargo so it's pretty clear they don't want him back. Expect him to be released pretty quickly. Why not just put him on IR and trade him in the offseason? not just cut him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGimp Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 This situation makes no sense. The trade is voided due to the bulging disk yet he passes the Bills test. Now if we cut him the Colts would instantly pick him up. WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Considering the source, and the fact that McCargo participated in practice yesterday, I look forward to a long and fruitful career from McCargo as a Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Considering the source, and the fact that McCargo participated in practice yesterday, I look forward to a long and fruitful career from McCargo as a Bill. McCargo's on life support with this team right now, and everyone knows it. They're practicing him in an attempt to prove he's healthy, but with the trade deadline passed, he's in no man's land. They could entertain a trade after the season, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's cut. Let's all agree the guy was a bust, though not without some decent plays. It's bad when a player isn't capable of playing in the NFL. I think it's safe to say McCargo has great ability, but serious motivational issues. Then again, Indy drafted Quinn Pitcock in the third and he didn't want to play football. It happens to teams, just hopefully not with first rounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Release him and replace him with...whom? Corey Mace? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Keep him but make him inactive. I'll be pissed if we release him and he instantly gets picked up. That's what you get for being a lazy millionare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKOOBY Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 If the Bills cut him and the Colts pick him up, that's tampering in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JStranger76 Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Yeah but not in the NFL's mind. Anything that could help improve an NFL poster boy led team would get a free pass. It would get called a "great strategy" by all the Manning pole smokers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsfaninFl Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 I was tickled by the article that said that the Colts will make McCargo a solid player. I guess they think the Bills coaching staff is not very good. But in my opinion, if we had Peyton Manning at QB our O-line would be looking a lot better than Indy's. I believe Edwards has a lot of potential, but he cannot be expected to carry a team while he has yet to play in 16 games. Peyton can and does carry that team often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 McCargo's on life support with this team right now, and everyone knows it. They're practicing him in an attempt to prove he's healthy, but with the trade deadline passed, he's in no man's land. They could entertain a trade after the season, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's cut. We now know that when healthy he is worth at least a 4th rounder, for this reason, I don't see us cutting him. I hope he gets healthy and starts to contribute or if not, he lands in the IR. I agree withthe poster that said the Colts will pick him up if we drop him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kota Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 It doesn't make sense to put him on IR or release him. You gain nothing by doing it. They traded Mccargo to get a 4th round pick. If they release him they get nothing but a open roster spot. I hope this lights a fire under Mccargo because he is playing for his 2nd contract at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 I hope he plays on Sunday, to tell the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davefan66 Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 It doesn't make sense to put him on IR or release him. You gain nothing by doing it. They traded Mccargo to get a 4th round pick. If they release him they get nothing but a open roster spot. I hope this lights a fire under Mccargo because he is playing for his 2nd contract at this point. Problem is, if we trade him it won't be until the offseason. Right now is when Indy needs a DT and are willing to pay up with a 4th rounder. I don't see us getting anything, unless it is a late-late rounder, for him. I fully expect us to release him, or to prevent another team from using him this season (yep, this has happened before), be put on IR. Just a case of supply and demand, and the fact now the entire NFL knows we don't want him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davefan66 Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 I hope he plays on Sunday, to tell the truth. Me too, and see if he answers the bell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsVet Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 We now know that when healthy he is worth at least a 4th rounder, for this reason, I don't see us cutting him. I hope he gets healthy and starts to contribute or if not, he lands in the IR. I agree withthe poster that said the Colts will pick him up if we drop him. How much more motivation did he need than this off-season? Signing Marcus Stroud (admittedly to play the 1 tech position), seeing unheralded UFA Spencer Johnson come in AND Kyle Williams get a moderate extension. I really think the Bills have given up on the guy and will remain in the unenviable position of taking him back. He's not going to fetch a 4th rounder unless he plays real well and the market is a tad limited as well. He fits mainly with C2/T2 teams. As far as I can tell, this means teams like TB, IND, CHI, DET, PHI would be more interested in him than most. That also hurts is trade value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GripnRip Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Really no reason to release him, either keep him in his current role or put him on IR. In either case, trade him in the off-season for a late round pick or as icing in another deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Release him and replace him with...whom? Corey Mace? They were prepared to do this if the Colts didn't send him back. Why all of a sudden should he be part of their plans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChevyVanMiller Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Juat a thought about the whole "didn't pass the physical" deal: Do you think a team uses that as a safety valve? For instance: Let's say that McCargo shows up in Indy and has a terrible interview. He shows a bad attitude and the team figures he's a bad fit. Do they then "fail" him to get the pick back? Also, could Indy figure that there's no way the Bills keep him after he's sent back so why not get him on waivers and keep the draft pick? If that's the case the NFL should make it a rule that if you void a trade you can't claim that player if they are waived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhg Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Also, could Indy figure that there's no way the Bills keep him after he's sent back so why not get him on waivers and keep the draft pick? If that's the case the NFL should make it a rule that if you void a trade you can't claim that player if they are waived. I would be surprised if there isn't a rule like that already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Didn't "the shots" happen before the season even started? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts