C.Biscuit97 Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 The pats get pass rushers the bills develop cornerbacks. One team wins superbowls, the other dwells in the foils of mediocrity. Let me get this straight. You are whining about a trade that the Pats may or may not be considering and the Raiders have expressed any interest in & you're upset??? Geez, get some happy pills.
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 Let me get this straight. You are whining about a trade that the Pats may or may not be considering and the Raiders have expressed any interest in & you're upset??? Geez, get some happy pills. I'm happy the bills don't really address their defensive front 7 in favor of defensive backs. Seems like a winning football strategy to have. My post was not a means to wine, but rather point out the obvious. The pats just happened to be the team this tread is about. I could've done the same if talking about the giants, or countless other bowl/playoff caliber teams who can come at you in waves of front 7 players. The Bills can come at you in waves on secondary players. One strategy is time tested and proven. The other is a losing strategy.
Bill from NYC Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 I'm happy the bills don't really address their defensive front 7 in favor of defensive backs. Seems like a winning football strategy to have. My post was not a means to wine, but rather point out the obvious. The pats just happened to be the team this tread is about. I could've done the same if talking about the giants, or countless other bowl/playoff caliber teams who can come at you in waves of front 7 players. The Bills can come at you in waves on secondary players. One strategy is time tested and proven. The other is a losing strategy.
stuckincincy Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 The Bills can come at you in waves of secondary players. The Gnat Pack!
Orton's Arm Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 I'm happy the bills don't really address their defensive front 7 in favor of defensive backs. Seems like a winning football strategy to have. My post was not a means to wine, but rather point out the obvious. The pats just happened to be the team this tread is about. I could've done the same if talking about the giants, or countless other bowl/playoff caliber teams who can come at you in waves of front 7 players. The Bills can come at you in waves on secondary players. One strategy is time tested and proven. The other is a losing strategy. Good post, and I agree completely. I've written about the Bills' CB issue here. From 1990 - 2005, there were five successful non-CBs chosen in the first round. All of them were retained for the majority of their careers. During that same span, four successful CBs were chosen in the first round. Those four players averaged 5.5 years in Buffalo before leaving.
wonderbread Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 Karl Hungus the Nihilist starring in Logjammin' Jackie Treehorn is that you?
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 20, 2009 Posted May 20, 2009 I'm happy the bills don't really address their defensive front 7 in favor of defensive backs. Seems like a winning football strategy to have. My post was not a means to wine, but rather point out the obvious. The pats just happened to be the team this tread is about. I could've done the same if talking about the giants, or countless other bowl/playoff caliber teams who can come at you in waves of front 7 players. The Bills can come at you in waves on secondary players. One strategy is time tested and proven. The other is a losing strategy. Fair enough point but we have drafted 5 linemen in the last 2 drafts, so maybe that philosophy is changing.
Big Turk Posted May 21, 2009 Posted May 21, 2009 How does the Boston reporter deem a 2nd or 3rd round future pick for a guy that had 35 sacks in 3 years to be "more than fair"? Those type of players just aren't hanging around on every street corner...
Recommended Posts