Jump to content

Lions to cut Furrey


Fewell733

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Michael Clayton of the Bucs is available. If you want downfield blocking, this guy is the BEST in the NFL at that. He's been plaged by injuries, but was healthy last year and started to show flashes of his rookie year play.

 

LMAO...ever heard of Hines Ward or Steve Smith? These guys are the best at that and will take your head off...there isnt anything Clayton does thats close to saying hes the best in the NFL at it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the downward slope is amazing. And, we know that FAs that come to Buffalo always pick up their games.

 

He didn't have many catches cause he wasn't on the field much over Johnson, Williams (while he was there), and McDonald. And their quarterbacking was in total disarray. I think the Bills don't need a spectacular veteran receiver, we just need a competent guy in the mix that knows what he's doing while the young guys learn the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Furrey is a very good football player although he's been a bit injury prone. He's played 64 games, the equivalent of 4 seasons, in his 5 seasons.

 

Other than that, he's been buried as the Lions' 4th receiver for most of his time in Detroit due to Calvin Johnson, Roy Williams, and Shaun McDonald, all excellent players. In spite of being the 4th receiver, he's put up good numbers (200 receptions, 7 TDs) in a limited role on a bad team.

 

He'll remind you of Ricky Proehl who had a very good pro career. There's lots of players that never made a Pro Bowl who are just excellent pros. They tend not to be remembered until you're watching an NFL production years later and you see the name on the back of a jersey and you think, "I remember him, he was pretty good." Long time Bills' fans will remember wideouts like Frank Lewis, Ron Jessie and Lou Piccone. Furrey is not like them stylistically but he's about the same caliber of player.

 

He would be an immediate upgrade over Roscoe Parrish who, many of us have a soft spot for, but who can't get open consistently.

 

In addition he would come cheap. It's just the sort of wise move that good organizations make. Good player for little money, immediate upgrade.

 

Good teams have good depth. Remember it was the Patriots' 4th string running back, ex-Bill Sammy Morris that was demolishing us in the season finale, while our own Fred Jackson was valiantly driven into the ground because the coaches had no trust in Xavier Omon.

 

This is a no-brainer to me. Sign Furrey. Would it be a cure all? Of course not. Would it improve our football team? Yes.

 

From Scouts Inc.

 

Comment: Furrey has average size and good athleticism, and he is a smart, instinctive player who gets the most out of his ability. He is a steady effort player who pays attention to detail, understands the nuances of the game and knows how to set defenders up as a route-runner. He is smooth converting routes when defenses disguise coverages and can find voids in zone schemes. Furrey has good quickness, agility and speed but it is his craftiness that allows him to gain leverage on defenders. He has reliable hands and can extend away from his body and has courage in traffic. He has decent run-after catch ability but isn't very elusive in space and has average power to break tackles downfield. He is a willing blocker and somewhat of an overachiever in that area as well. Furrey has seen some action as a returner but does not excel on special teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

all but official now

 

http://www.themorningsun.com/articles/2009...93873097698.txt

 

 

Furrey out, Culpepper in for Lions

Story Tools

 

Mike Furrey (AP Photo/Paul Sancya, File)

Thursday, January 29, 2009 6:29 AM EST

 

By DAVID BIRKETT

JRC News Service

 

ALLEN PARK — Receiver Mike Furrey told reporters in Tampa Bay for Super Bowl XLIII that the Lions have informed him he will be released once the NFL calendar allows it next month.

 

Speaking to the Detroit News and Free Press, Furrey said Lions general manager Martin Mayhew spent Tuesday “calling the guys they were releasing” and he was one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LMAO...ever heard of Hines Ward or Steve Smith? These guys are the best at that and will take your head off...there isnt anything Clayton does thats close to saying hes the best in the NFL at it...

I'll give you Hines Ward he is also a great blocker. But Steve Smith is nowhere near as good a blocker as Clayton & I have seen them go head to head twice a year (excluding games not played due to injuries).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, we need someone who will throw him the football downfield instead of "checking down" to running backs. Lee was open as was Steve Johnson as was Reed as was Roscoe. Too often football was not thrown their way.

 

Reed runs solid routes and can find open spots. The others? They could use improvement. There were times that they got open and the checkdown champ couldn't find 'em, but to say that all of our WRs were wide open 24/7 is patently false.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I feel the need to cut in here on both arguments going on.

1) Clayton might be a great blocker, but the Bills need a wideout who can catch the ball and help take Evans out of triple coverage.

 

As for Furrey

2) Someone said "he's put up good numbers (200 receptions, 7 TDs) in a limited role on a bad team" ... isn't it usually a red flag when someone on a bad team has a limited role?

 

3) Furrey was the #4 WR on a team that went 0-16. I don't know about you, but that screams 'game changer' in my book. Is he really going to be any upgrade, help take any pressure off of Evans? I'd take him as a #3 guy, but that's all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I feel the need to cut in here on both arguments going on.

1) Clayton might be a great blocker, but the Bills need a wideout who can catch the ball and help take Evans out of triple coverage.

 

As for Furrey

2) Someone said "he's put up good numbers (200 receptions, 7 TDs) in a limited role on a bad team" ... isn't it usually a red flag when someone on a bad team has a limited role?

 

3) Furrey was the #4 WR on a team that went 0-16. I don't know about you, but that screams 'game changer' in my book. Is he really going to be any upgrade, help take any pressure off of Evans? I'd take him as a #3 guy, but that's all

WR is the only good position on the lions.

 

 

Just because you are a bad team, does not mean everyone is bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I feel the need to cut in here on both arguments going on.

1) Clayton might be a great blocker, but the Bills need a wideout who can catch the ball and help take Evans out of triple coverage.

 

As for Furrey

2) Someone said "he's put up good numbers (200 receptions, 7 TDs) in a limited role on a bad team" ... isn't it usually a red flag when someone on a bad team has a limited role?

 

3) Furrey was the #4 WR on a team that went 0-16. I don't know about you, but that screams 'game changer' in my book. Is he really going to be any upgrade, help take any pressure off of Evans? I'd take him as a #3 guy, but that's all

1)Joey Galloway & last year Antonio Bryant were able to get open because Clayton was the other WR on the field, so he definately would help Lee get open. 2) You are right about that usually, that is the case ..........but this is the Lions that draft WR's like the Bills draft DB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I feel the need to cut in here on both arguments going on.

1) Clayton might be a great blocker, but the Bills need a wideout who can catch the ball and help take Evans out of triple coverage.

 

As for Furrey

2) Someone said "he's put up good numbers (200 receptions, 7 TDs) in a limited role on a bad team" ... isn't it usually a red flag when someone on a bad team has a limited role?

 

3) Furrey was the #4 WR on a team that went 0-16. I don't know about you, but that screams 'game changer' in my book. Is he really going to be any upgrade, help take any pressure off of Evans? I'd take him as a #3 guy, but that's all

My post addresses Furrey, not Clayton. In addressing point #2:

 

Here's Furrey's line for the 2006 season:

Year Team GP REC YDS AVG TDs

2006 DET 16 98 1086 11.1 6

 

Ninety eight receptions in one year. As I recall, something in the area of 75 of those receptions were for first downs. He was not a starter because the Lions had drafted Roy Williams, and Calvin Johnson as high first round picks (as well as Charles Rogers and Mike Williams, both who busted). Shaun McDonald is also a fine receiver. Furrey was excellent in a limited role. No one is advocating him being brought in to start. As I posted earlier, he would be an upgrade over Roscoe Parrish. He would be a big help in the passing game. I said he was not a cure all. I'm not clear on why that post is being reconstituted into something that it was not.

 

As for the comment about playing on a bad team, LeRoy Selmon played on a bad team. He went to 6 straight Pro Bowls, won Defensive Player of the Year in 1979, and is in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He played on horrible Tampa Bay teams including the one that went 0-14. Playing on a bad team says absolutely zero when evaluating how good a player is. Look up the numbers for Ricky Proehl's career. Proehl's career was spent mostly as a reserve behind people like Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt. Furrey is almost a carbon copy. He could start for many teams in a Brandon Stokely, Wes Welker type role but even as a reserve slot receiver, he'd be a big upgrade for the Bills. In other words yes, he would help take pressure off Evans.

 

No one is saying he's the savior of this franchise. But if you're trying to build a strong roster, he's the type of player you bring in to compete and play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally,

 

I have to add (and I'm probably in the majority of Bills' fans) that I am a big fan of Steve Johnson and believe that he will be a starter. In the past I've called him a poor man's Larry Fitzgerald. Not great speed but everything else.

 

The thing is, you can build a team on potential and projections or you can build a team on proven productivity. In view of the difficulties the Bills have in the passing game, wouldn't it be wiser in this case (at this position) to bring in a proven commodity like Furrey?

 

Moreover, is there something wrong with having a glut of talent at any position? O-line coaches commonly identify their 5 best guys and fit them together. What do we lose bringing in a guy like Furrey. Maybe Johnson wins the job opposite Evans, Reed and Furrey are the slot receivers, and we bring in a good tight end? People tend to get fixated on the big name/big money players. But it's a 53 man roster.

 

As I've stated many times, its not only a matter if you like a player or not, it's also a matter of how much he costs. In other words, what is the value. Furrey's a free agent. We wouldn't have to give up players or picks for him. It's only a matter of if we could sign him to a deal commensurate with his expected value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's funny how people automatically equate the idea of any signing as needing to be a silver bullet solution to all the team's problems - and because it wouldn't be, it's a dumb idea. The idea is to build a better team in ways you can. Furrey is a reliable veteran receiver - he's not a superstar or even a star - he's a decent player that can be productive for us in an offense that is currently extremely young and especially young at receiver.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...