Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Burgess' sack numbers; Burgess' sacks, by year Kelsay = Burgess? Right, I make stupid posts...not you pom pom girls.
buffaloaggie Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Right, I make stupid posts...not you pom pom girls. How old are you? 2? Calling people pom pom girls? You can do better than that. It's hard to judge Burgess also. Injuries and playing for a bad team have hampered his production. It is a stretch equating him to Kelsay, though.
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 This is terrible news. I'm amused by all the posters that don't think this is a big deal. The same guys would be doing cartwheels in thier front lawn if we signed this guy. Hopefully this doesn't turn out like that other disgruntled raider the pat s* signed Watch out for the avalanche of sticks and stones, as in, QUOTE (Fingon @ Aug 6 2009, 07:55 PM) *Are you that dumb, or just a new fan? You've seen his posts and you still have to ask that question. He's that dumb, all right. ...from what's his dean.
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 How old are you? 2? Calling people pom pom girls? You can do better than that. It's hard to judge Burgess also. Injuries and playing for a bad team have hampered his production. It is a stretch equating him to Kelsay, though. What else would you have me call pom pom girls? You like blind homies better?
Kettle Creek Football Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Yeah, but we got Derrick Jones so I consider it a wash. The next Pat Williams??????
RayFinkle Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 I'm not worried. Me either. It isn't like Bellyache has a history of turning veteran player past their prime into probowlers or anything.
ThereIsNoDog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Burgess, who has never played OLB before, at OLB in the Patriots' system, after missing a week of training camp? Not to mention he's 31 and has been tailing-off the past 2 years? Good luck with that one.
Alphadawg7 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Who cares...Burgess isnt what scares me about the Pats...this does: Moss, Welker, Galloway, Taylor, BB, oh and some dude named Brady...
MattM Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Me either. It isn't like Bellyache has a history of turning veteran player past their prime into probowlers or anything. I'm sure Rodney's left some HGH for him as well, so he won't be playing like a 31 year old speed rusher.....
San Jose Bills Fan Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 This is terrible news. I'm amused by all the posters that don't think this is a big deal. The same guys would be doing cartwheels in thier front lawn if we signed this guy. Hopefully this doesn't turn out like that other disgruntled raider the pat s* signed The Patriots didn't "sign" Burgess. They traded for him...although his unhappiness in Oakland stemmed largely from his contract. I imagine the Pats will sweeten his deal a bit. On top of trading a high and a mid round pick for Burgess and dishing out some more money, I guess it's a good trade for them. It would also be a good trade for Philly. Both the Pats and the Eagles are arguably one player away from a Super Bowl. It makes sense for their organizations. As for the Bills, I'm pleased that they didn't get involved in the derby which drove Burgess' cost up. Although we could definitely use a proven pass rusher, giving up two picks and increasing our payroll for a guy like him doesn't make sense for the Bills. The Bills are at least two years away and trades like this one can often come back to haunt the team who got the aging, declining veteran player. On a totally different subject, I'm just loving this feature: You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Billistic. · View this post · Un-ignore Billistic It's a new and wonderful experience to not care enough to know what a certain person is vomiting up. And I never get the urge to click the "Un-ignore" option. I urge you guys to make use of this setting...instead of allowing yourselves to get annoyed by some idiot, yet again.
scoring is not hardy Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 On a totally different subject, I'm just loving this feature: You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Billistic. · View this post · Un-ignore Billistic It's a new and wonderful experience to not care enough to know what a certain person is vomiting up. And I never get the urge to click the "Un-ignore" option. I urge you guys to make use of this setting...instead of allowing yourselves to get annoyed by some idiot, yet again. :worthy:
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Looking at his stats from 2005 on 16 sacks, 11 sacks, 8 sacks (missed 2 games) and then 3.5 sacks (missed 6 games). This can be a HUGE pick up for the Putz or it could flop.
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 SJBF said: As for the Bills, I'm pleased that they didn't get involved in the derby which drove Burgess' cost up. Although we could definitely use a proven pass rusher, giving up two picks and increasing our payroll for a guy like him doesn't make sense for the Bills. The Bills are at least two years away and trades like this one can often come back to haunt the team who got the aging, declining veteran player. Translation: 7-9 really isn't all that bad. and: You have chosen to ignore all posts from: Billistic. · View this post · Un-ignore Billistic It's a new and wonderful experience to not care enough to know what a certain person is vomiting up. And I never get the urge to click the "Un-ignore" option. I urge you guys to make use of this setting...instead of allowing yourselves to get annoyed by some idiot, yet again. Translation: Do not place head into wood chipper.
Pneumonic Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Burgess, who has never played OLB before, at OLB in the Patriots' system, after missing a week of training camp? This is incorrect! Burgess played the hybrid OLB/DE spot, and in the Pats defense, while in Oakland, under Raiders DC Rob Ryan who, before joining the Raiders, spent 4 years coaching LB's for Belichick's Patriots.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 This is incorrect! Burgess played the hybrid OLB/DE spot, and in the Pats defense, while in Oakland, under Raiders DC Rob Ryan who, before joining the Raiders, spent 4 years coaching LB's for Belichick's Patriots. While technically correct, that really doesn't seem to be the case. From the Boston papers... At 6 feet 2 inches and 260 pounds, Burgess projects to outside linebacker in a base 3-4 defense, a position he played briefly in the early part of his Raiders tenure under Rob Ryan. But the Raiders didn’t use much 3-4, and Burgess has been most comfortable at end in the 4-3.
SteamRoller67 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Trent is a dead man walking. I love the guy but he is Mr Glass.I see a top ten pick in our future! I can't wait to get another defensive back. As old Dicky like to Say " you can never have enough defensive backs" I love your intellectual and optimistic posts......do you actually root for the Bills? Are you a Jets fan in disguise?
naj377 Posted August 7, 2009 Posted August 7, 2009 Report also notes Eagles offered a third. So, the Pats gave up more than a third, most likely. I JUST WISH OUR TEAM COULD DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS!!!!!!!!! we need to be taking advantage right now, god stop bein a cheap skate for one season... TO isnt god he cant just automatically make up for the weaknesses
Recommended Posts