BillsGuyInMalta Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...de-block-again/
Fezmid Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd rather keep Roscoe on the roster than get a 5th or 6th round draft pick... Injuries happen.
inkman Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd only move him with a proven punt returner on the roster, who's that? McGee? McKelvin? Fred Jackson? Lankster? Lankster is the only guy I'd put there with regularity as the others are starters and too valuable right now.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 He's keeping Steve Johnson on the bench. The Bills do not have a viable fourth wide receiver as a result. How many more chances do we give Roscoe to prove he can be effective from scrimmage? Trade him while he still has value...because that value is diminishing by the week in my opinion.
MattyT Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd rather keep Roscoe on the roster than get a 5th or 6th round draft pick... Injuries happen. Ugh. Me too...or get a player that can start at a position of need by mid-season at the latest.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 He's keeping Steve Johnson on the bench. The Bills do not have a viable fourth wide receiver as a result. How many more chances do we give Roscoe to prove he can be effective from scrimmage? Trade him while he still has value...because that value is diminishing by the week in my opinion. I also think they want to move him before Hardy comes off PUP. I'm surprised no one is biting; the guy is pretty much the best punt returner in NFL history.
Peter Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd rather keep Roscoe on the roster than get a 5th or 6th round draft pick... Injuries happen. Totally agree. Rather than repeat everything that I have written on the subject, I merely will say that I would love to keep Roscoe on the team and incorporate all of my previous posts the many, many times that this has been brought up. I even heard a rumor that the Sabres were thinking about trading Roscoe for a late round pick.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd only move him with a proven punt returner on the roster, who's that? McGee? McKelvin? Fred Jackson? Lankster? Lankster is the only guy I'd put there with regularity as the others are starters and too valuable right now. And as for Roscoe's value as a return man, my continuous observation over the last few years is that when he returns it he does a good job but that he lets too many balls bounce and roll. That loses us a lot of field position when it happens and it has to be weighed against his nice return numbers.
Peter Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 He's keeping Steve Johnson on the bench. The Bills do not have a viable fourth wide receiver as a result. How many more chances do we give Roscoe to prove he can be effective from scrimmage? Trade him while he still has value...because that value is diminishing by the week in my opinion. Wasn't Steve Johnson inducted into the Bills 50th anniversary team?!? He may end up being a good WR, but from reading this board, one would think that he is the next Jerry Rice.
BuffaloBill Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...de-block-again/ Much to the dismay of some people on this board I have said for a long time that he is useless as a WR. However, it would be surprising to trade him at this point in the season for a low round draft choice. He is on the roster so why not keep him for punts? Maybe the Bills just have to have a roster spot due to injuries.
Dan Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I like Roscoe as much as the next guy, but lets be realistic... he's a marginal player in our offense. If we can trade him for a decent and, more importantly, a contributing player at a position of need (tackle or LB, currently); I'm all for it. If it were for a draft pick, I guess I'd have to see what the pick is and what we do with it. Good teams trade marginal players with a highly perceived value when the can. Bottom line, if his departure helps us get a player that contribute more frequently, it's only good for the team.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Wasn't Steve Johnson inducted into the Bills 50th anniversary team?!? He may end up being a good WR, but from reading this board, one would think that he is the next Jerry Rice. You don't think that Johnson's shown enough to be given the chance to actually be activated on game day? No one has said he'll be a star in this thread. But he's shown enough flashes that he deserves the chance to play and show what he can do. Because the Bills choose Roscoe as our #4 wideout, Johnson does not dress. How is the team to evaluate his play if he doesn't get into games? No, you overstate your case.
Kingfish Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Much to the dismay of some people on this board I have said for a long time that he is useless as a WR. Parrish is probably the NFL's all time leader in plays where he turns a 1st and 10 into a 3rd and 1.
zdro22 Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 You don't think that Johnson's shown enough to be given the chance to actually be activated on game day? No one has said he'll be a star in this thread. But he's shown enough flashes that he deserves the chance to play and show what he can do. Because the Bills choose Roscoe as our #4 wideout, Johnson does not dress. How is the team to evaluate his play if he doesn't get into games? No, you overstate your case. Im with you man i get sick every time i see Johnson isnt dressed. He is an NFL WR, Rosco is not! Id move him for a pick or a player. I also wonder what kind of locker room presence a frustrated WR brings to the table.
wonderbread Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 He's keeping Steve Johnson on the bench. The Bills do not have a viable fourth wide receiver as a result. How many more chances do we give Roscoe to prove he can be effective from scrimmage? Trade him while he still has value...because that value is diminishing by the week in my opinion. Personally I think Steve Johnson is keeping Steve Johnson on the bench. The best players plays period.
The Senator Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'm reaching here, but wasn't there a play - I think it was in the 4th quarter - where Roscoe had advanced the ball beyond the first down marker, then, in trying to gain more yardage, ran back and got tackled behind behind that line to bring up a 3rd (???) down? I like the guy, but he does stuff like that too often, IMHO.
cmjoyce113 Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I think Roscoe is very over rated and wouldn't care if he is cut. He costs us first downs and valuable yards by running backwards quite a bit. I don't see it as a loss without him.
bbills17 Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 You don't think that Johnson's shown enough to be given the chance to actually be activated on game day? No one has said he'll be a star in this thread. But he's shown enough flashes that he deserves the chance to play and show what he can do. Because the Bills choose Roscoe as our #4 wideout, Johnson does not dress. How is the team to evaluate his play if he doesn't get into games? No, you overstate your case. yes, Peter used to state, overstate, state, overstate his case on Willis McGahee and how he would be a 'top-5 RB on any team in the NFL' and letting him go would be a huge mistake. We all know how that worked out!
billsfreak Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I'd rather keep Roscoe on the roster than get a 5th or 6th round draft pick... Injuries happen. I totally agree. If they don't want to use him as a reciever, have him return both kicks and punts, and keep McFumble healthy to play corner. He is too dangerous to "give away."
Recommended Posts