Stussy109 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Agreed. I don't know whay everyone is so eager to get rid of Parrish so bad. He is one of the best at his job in football. He can get us 20 yards of field position on a punt. That shouldn't be discounted. That said, it still was a dumb pick by a very dumb GM. I think he counts about 2 mill towards the cap and with evans, owens, reed, Hardy/Johnson, where does roscoe fit? He is basically our 4th or 5th WR at best reight now.
Maddog69 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 I agree with most of the other posts. I would hate to see Parrish traded for a 4th pick or similar. He is more valuable to the team than that. With T.O., Evans and Reed ahead of him, he can come in and be an extra weapon of offense and he is an explosive returner. Unless we can trade him for Scheffler or in a package with Peters for 2 high picks, I think it would be a terrible idea to trade Roscoe.
Sisyphean Bills Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 No matter what his stature is, he is still one of the best returners in the history of the NFL. I would have thought a town like Buffalo that typically appreciates underdogs and special teams would not have so many Roscoe bashers/haters (at least on this board). Actually, I'm not bashing him as a return man. Indeed, I don't think the Bills will get good value for him because he is a return man. There is a big difference.
billybob Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Nothing wrong with testing the market- but I hope they remember that he is the best punt returner in the game and that special teams is one third of the game or so I was told.
Buftex Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 I swear to God, if we trade Parrish and some team puts him in motion and he turns into a Wes Welker, I am going to blow a gasket. I like the idea of Parrish, as another Wes Welker type, the only problem is, he isn't nearly as reliable with his hands, as Welker is. But, like everyone has said, I wouldn't want to trade him, just for the sake of trading him. His return game is spectacular. Jeez, it seemed like he and/or McKelvin accounted for most of our points, for stretches. I don't mean this as a Terrell Owens bash, at all, but supposing TO has a great year, but doesn't re-sign for 2010? And, suppose that Steve Johnson isn't the stud that everyone seems to imagine he is, and is nothing more than the next Russell Copeland, or Antonio Brown? What if Hardy doesn't get over the injury, or doesn't pan out? All three of these scenarios have a decent chance of coming to fruition. Then, what was perceived as being an over-abundance of receiving talent, starts to look pretty thin for 2010. And we are out of a valuable weapon in the return game, to boot...
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 There is no reason, barring injury, that McKelvin shouldn't be returning every punt, kick, free kick, pooch, etc in 2010. Love Roscoe, but he has not been a reliable receiver, we have an instant replacement in the return game, and you can bring another pick in
Maddog69 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 I like the idea of Parrish, as another Wes Welker type, the only problem is, he isn't nearly as reliable with his hands, as Welker is. But, like everyone has said, I wouldn't want to trade him, just for the sake of trading him. His return game is spectacular. Jeez, it seemed like he and/or McKelvin accounted for most of our points, for stretches. I don't mean this as a Terrell Owens bash, at all, but supposing TO has a great year, but doesn't re-sign for 2010? And, suppose that Steve Johnson isn't the stud that everyone seems to imagine he is, and is nothing more than the next Russell Copeland, or Antonio Brown? What if Hardy doesn't get over the injury, or doesn't pan out? All three of these scenarios have a decent chance of coming to fruition. Then, what was perceived as being an over-abundance of receiving talent, starts to look pretty thin for 2010. And we are out of a valuable weapon in the return game, to boot... I wonder how mad T.O. would be if we Franchise tagged him after the 2009 season.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 There is no reason, barring injury, that McKelvin shouldn't be returning every punt, kick, free kick, pooch, etc in 2010. Love Roscoe, but he has not been a reliable receiver, we have an instant replacement in the return game, and you can bring another pick in Name one player in the NFL that starts at a full-time position and is the team's full time PR and KR.
colin Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 i love scoe, but if we get a pick that we can swap for the TE from denver, well that makes us a much more balanced team right now. we have 2 other sick return men, and you will notice that now only our slot back (reed) and our super deep threat (evans) are small without him. our two young guys and TO are big giant WRs, that's a better fit for our O.
lets_go_bills Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 This only confirms what most of us had been thinking. It makes sense with all the WRs we now have. It also says that the team is both high on and confident in both Johnson and Hardy moving forward. It's not easy paying a guy what 'scoe makes to pretty much just return kicks. Although he is very good at it.
Thoner7 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 If we trade Roscoe, our first round CB better be a good return man too.
Maddog69 Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Name one player in the NFL that starts at a full-time position and is the team's full time PR and KR. Devin Hester
McBeane Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 The only way I would agree with this deal (not like it matters ) is if we could get Scheffler for him. Otherwise, I say pass on any deal and for God's sake, don't take a 4th rounder for him.
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 I like the idea of Parrish, as another Wes Welker type, the only problem is, he isn't nearly as reliable with his hands, as Welker is. But, like everyone has said, I wouldn't want to trade him, just for the sake of trading him. His return game is spectacular. Jeez, it seemed like he and/or McKelvin accounted for most of our points, for stretches. I agree that Welker has better hands and is bigger/stockier, but many on here have wondered why he isn't put in motion more often. I guess I was saying that if he leaves and another OC utilizes him properly I would be less than happy.
Kelly the Dog Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Devin Hester No. He started half the games at WR (8 out of 15), and he split KR duties with Danieal Manning who had more returns than Hester did.
BuffaloRebound Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Roscoe and a late round pick to KC for Waters? If Peters is traded, the Bills can't start 2 rookies on the OL and expect the QB to remain upright.
Leonidas Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Agreed. I don't know whay everyone is so eager to get rid of Parrish so bad. He is one of the best at his job in football. He can get us 20 yards of field position on a punt. That shouldn't be discounted. Agree. That said, it still was a dumb pick by a very dumb GM. Disagree. A little high, but as you said, he's the best at what he does (returning punts). He also adds value as a slot WR and I assume he could return kicks as well if needed. McKelvin will be our #2 guy at CB. I don't want to over use him and have him play CB, KR, and PR. That's just too much. Finally somebody with some sense. How about to the Eagles? Jason Peters and Roscoe Parrish for both of their 2 first round picks? They don't want him. They already have a shrimp WR (DeSean Jackson) and he's actually a very good WR. Someone please explain to me why a WR who catches 4-60 per game is decent, but a PR who returns 4-60 per game is a waste of a roster spot. I'll be livid if we ever traded roscoe for less than a 2nd. Amen brother. Steve Johnson will be fine playing the 4th wr role I wonder if he'll be fine playing the 2nd WR in 2010?? I think he counts about 4 mill towards the cap and with evans, owens, reed, Hardy/Johnson, where does roscoe fit? He is basically our 4th or 5th WR at best reight now. Hardy/Johnson aren't going to factor in so much in '09 with Owens here. With Reed finally progressing as a solid #3, Parrish will probably be relegated to the #4 WR used primarily on passing downs. But with his speed and quickness, having him out there on 10-15 passing plays per game in addition to his special teams touches makes him a very valuable weapon. I just hope the FO realizes this. This only confirms what most of us had been thinking. It makes sense with all the WRs we now have. It also says that the team is both high on and confident in both Johnson and Hardy moving forward. It's not easy paying a guy what 'scoe makes to pretty much just return kicks. Although he is very good at it. Frankly, I don't really understand that logic. Roscoe doesn't make all that much (what, $1M/year in base salary?). His value added in the return game is off the charts, and he plays the slot (whereas Johnson and Hardy (especially)) will be groomed/compete for the outside WR spot opposite Evans (moreso for 2010). I just hate to see Buffalo willingly give up talent when you don't need to. He isn't disgruntled, he doesn't cost us much, and he helps our special teams units be one of the best in the game. Keep him!!
dave mcbride Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Oh God. I'm not even going to read what other people are writing (for which I apologize), but this is just plain stoopid. The only justification is as a cost cutting move, but the Bills aren't even near the cap. Penny wise and pound foolish yet again. I suppose Brandon considers Kiwaukee Thomas Mach II more valuable.
dave mcbride Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Someone please explain to me why a WR who catches 4-60 per game is decent, but a PR who returns 4-60 per game is a waste of a roster spot. I'll be livid if we ever traded roscoe for less than a 2nd. Thank you.
Steely Dan Posted April 10, 2009 Posted April 10, 2009 Echo that. "Send a fourth for him." !@#$ that. I'd rather have a dynamic punt returner than another fourth round draft pick. Apparently Tom Modrak was reading TSW... If they are offered a third rounder or more I'd say trade him. The Bills are over stuffed at WR right now. JMO I really don't see the point of trading Parrish only because we are never going to get anything really good for him. A third round pick is just not worth it to me. And I doubt we can get a second round pick. The only way I would do it would be straight up for an established player who can come in and start, or be a solid reserve like a situational pass rusher who will produce. Now, Parrish for Tony Scheffler might be a good idea. Definitely! Josh McDaniels comes from NE* and he might want a Wes Welker type player! How about to the Eagles? Jason Peters and Roscoe Parrish for both of their 2 first round picks? I'd do it. I like the idea of Parrish, as another Wes Welker type, the only problem is, he isn't nearly as reliable with his hands, as Welker is. But, like everyone has said, I wouldn't want to trade him, just for the sake of trading him. His return game is spectacular. Jeez, it seemed like he and/or McKelvin accounted for most of our points, for stretches. I don't mean this as a Terrell Owens bash, at all, but supposing TO has a great year, but doesn't re-sign for 2010? And, suppose that Steve Johnson isn't the stud that everyone seems to imagine he is, and is nothing more than the next Russell Copeland, or Antonio Brown? What if Hardy doesn't get over the injury, or doesn't pan out? All three of these scenarios have a decent chance of coming to fruition. Then, what was perceived as being an over-abundance of receiving talent, starts to look pretty thin for 2010. And we are out of a valuable weapon in the return game, to boot... You can play the what if game about any positions. A team can't draft and retain players based on what ifs. JMO Roscoe and a late round pick to KC for Waters? If Peters is traded, the Bills can't start 2 rookies on the OL and expect the QB to remain upright. Pioli may want a Wes Welker type player.
Recommended Posts