Magox
-
Posts
19,321 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Magox
-
-
The Bills if they make a trade for Peters will probably give him away........What is a LT who made the pro bowl two years running, and voted the Best young tackle in the league worth? Last year he laid back wanting a new contract... When he wants to be he is the best LT in the league game in and game out... He should be paid so. What is he now making? 3 to 4 million when other good ones are making double or more.
Philly knows what they are getting and that is why they will push the trade... He is worth a lot but the Bills will excect anything
I say sign Peters and get it over with... But the Bills history tells us different...
I think the Bills will pay him a contract of $10 Mill a year with incentives that could possibly take him to $11-12 Mill a year.
I don't see the Bills trading away unless they get a really sweet deal. They know that we have a lot invested in this season, with Jauron, T.O, Trent and the desperate Bills fans. We have him for $4Million this year, the Bills FO have the leverage on this deal. If we don't trade him during the draft, which I hope to God we don't, then I see him coming into camp and trying to renogotiate a deal.
We'll see
-
11 is too early for pettigrew IMO. Cook, Beckum, Coffman will all be available in rounds 2 and 3 and I think any of them can be just as effective.
I hear what your saying, but how can you really say that Cook, Beckum and Coffman can be just as effective as Pettigrew?
Apples and oranges.
In Pettigrew you have a player that can be an asset in every single down, run and pass.
In Cook, Beckum and Coffman they could be slightly better (which I have my doubts) than Pettigrew in the passing game, but they are tremendous liabilities in the run game.
First, Cook in my view, after doing more research on him, has been seen as a disappointment, considering his skill set.
They say he has been questioned by Spurrier for having heart, he never had better than decent #'s, little productivity, and is seen to not only be a bad blocker, but a non willing Blocker.
To me that says. STAY AWAY!! Scratch him off.
Coffman, I like him. I think he will be a good pro. But we know blocking is not a strong suit of his, they say he is a willing blocker, but not an effective one. But the big thing about Coffman is that his speed is the same as Pettigrew's. So I don't see him as having a receiving advantage as far as stretching Defenses up the middle. That in my view make's Pettigrew much more valuable than Coffman.
Beckum is an intriguing prospect. I like him as well, but as an H back, situational player. He has tremendous #'s and production. Very athletic and can stretch the field. But he is 235 lbs, and is not known to play on the line. There is little doubt that he would get manhandled and we would not be able to put him in on many plays.
Remember, we run and pass 50/50 .
I wouldn't be upset if we got players like Coffman or Beckum, but we have to realize that they would not be every down players and would not be effective as blockers, at least not for a good while.
In Pettigrew, you know what you get. Defenses will not be tipped off if we are to be passing or running, he would keep defenses more unbalanced.
To say that these guys would be just as effective, I just don't see it. Pettigrew in my view definitely brings more total value than the players you just mentioned.
But I really hope that we don't consider Cook. He is a work out warrior, but that is about it. He lacks courage, blocking and never has produced up to his talent. Stay away from this one.
-
The reports are that the Bills offered Peters a contract better than what Jake Long the #1 overall pick got last year.
Peters now wants to be the highest paid left tackle in the NFL.
If the Bills negotiated with Peters in March of '08, they would not be in this position.
The Bills promised to re-work Peter's contract in '09 in order to get Peters to report.
Peters made the pro-bowl again.
If Peters was a free agent, he'd be the highest paid left takle in the nfl.
When you promise a guy that you will re-work a deal, you've got to pay the market rate.
show me the link that they offered him a contract better than Jake Longs?
-
Beacuse some teams are in dire need of a solid LT and they are hard to come by. I dont think he is all that either but he is one of the better options for some teams.
like we aren't in dire need?
do some people actually think before they post?
-
The problem with the bolded statement is that he had ONE good year at LT and one BAD year at LT. You assume because of one GOOD year that he's a good LT. Others are choosing to believe that because of one BAD year, it's not safe to assume we'll get nothing but quality play from the guy. He's sucked 50% of the time, to me that's no guarantee of ANYTHING. Therefore, he doesn't deserve any more money.
But you omit his 2006 season at RT. Where he had a good year.
I keep hearing people with your argument, but they conveniently forget his 2006 season at RT.
So the Reality is that he had 2 good years and one substandard year. That is the reality. So according to your logic he played well %66 of the time. That makes 2 good and one not so good.
Not to mention, the year he didn't play well was the year he didn't participate in any of the minicamps, preseason and held out till right before the day the season started. Undoubtedly this played a role in his substandard play.
-
No matter what we pay Peters now, it will not be good enough in 2 years. We have a problem and he is never going to be happy.
Ok
just think about this for a second. For all of you who want Peters gone,
Look who you are in agreement with
Skooby
-
Um, they threw it that much because they Cutler was effective when throwing...if we had a QB who could throw like I am sure we would pass more too...
Instead, our staff is so iffy on our QB that we run the ball 3 straight downs to end a game with a long FG with lots of wind instead of using the final minute on the clock to throw the ball and try and get better field position...
So, to me, that shows a lack of confidence in our QB not to turn the ball over AGAIN in that game...where in Denver, they rode Cutlers arm because without him they win maybe 2 or 3 games last year.
Alpha, I thought you said you were going to just chime in one more time about this,
about 5 times ago.
-
you need to edit your page.
The reason why he is being mentioned in trade talk here at TBD is because of his lack of production as a WR. Josh Reed is clearly the better slot receiver. So where does he fit other than as a PR? Sure he could be used as a 4th WR in the slot, but at a cost of more than $2 Million a year, it starts to look pretty questionable. Specially considering that his greatest value is at PR and Freddy Jackson and McKelvin could both do the job, which makes him more replaceable
-
I think there is little doubt that Raji could help this team out tremendously. He is very quick for his size, strong and plays with good leverage. He is very effective at shooting the gaps and I believe would help out our team not just in the run defense department but also in collapsing the pocket.
However I do believe he would be more effective with our team if he weighed about 10-15 lbs less than what we've seen him.
I just don't see him making it to us. He seems to be moving up the charts, specially after his proday workout.
-
I'm thinking that Roscoe could possibly be a trade target. $2.5 Million less pay and very little production as a WR. Josh Reed has shown to me that he will be a very effective slot receiver, and the leaves Roscoe odd man out. What Roscoe brings to the table is his elite PR ability. Freddy Jackson has shown he can fill in PR duty very effectively, and let's not forget about McKelvin. McKelvin was more known coming out of college for his PR abilities than his KR. So, in my view the person that is most at risk of leaving the Bills is Roscoe.
After Roscoe, I see Jenkins as the next odd man out. He hasn't and won't contribute on the offensive side of the ball field, unless some sort of freak accidents occur with our WR's. He contributed as a special teamer and that does have an importance, but if we were to keep Roscoe I just don't see how Jenkins stays. Unless we were to keep Hardy on PUP for the first half of the year and then on the practice squad through out the year if they didn't believe he was ready and we were short on special teams help.
1)Roscoe
2)Jenkins
3)Hardy
-
If I remember correctly, , that was one of the main points folks made when arguing not to give him the $$$gazillions$$$ he was demanding last season - "let's take a 'wait & see' approach' and make sure he's still playing at a high level."
If I also remember correctly, he's again coming off an injury, and didn't exactly play at the level expected of him last season anyway.
some people never learn
-
I thought Kirk Chambers did a very good job last year considering this was his first stint with the Bills. I think he proved to be valuable, I see him more as quality depth, that can step in and do the job when called upon. I don't know quite enough about him to know if he can step in and be a starter, but I do know that last year, he did show promise last year with the exception of the Dolphins game.
According to the breakdown that the www.buffalorumblings.com site had of him, which btw was very imformative, he looks as if he could step in at the gaurd position if need be. Great site the Buffalo rumblings has
-
oh what short memories many of us have.
-
Great article, found it interesting he senses Peters is on his way out and mentions it twice:
"This team has few options. It sounds as if they are about to discard the best offensive lineman they have had since their Super Bowl days, left tackle Jason Peters, whom they should have tied up for the next five or six years. They don’t have a left guard. They may or may not have a center. They don’t have a tight end. They need a pass rusher. Now they may be bidding bye-bye to Peters.
"
http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/billsnfl/story/608132.html
I get the feeling he is about to slit his wrist
-
Reportedly a "well known" OG is coming-in for a visit soon. Stay tuned!
I'm not doubting you. But from where did you hear this? Or is this some sort of a mock of Soprano?
-
On the contrary. The fact is that we had one of the easiest schedules in the league. Except for our division foes and the Cards, we mostly got creampuffs. And the Cards defense just wasn't that good.
And as you pointed out, the Jets defense was just average and Miami slightly above average. Only the Pats were really good.
It just went right over your head didn't it?
*sigh*
-
What do our division opponents have to do with the fact that 7 of their out of division opponents last year sucked on offense. If you don't think that our defensive ranking is misleading because of this, you need to take off the rose colored glasses.
I mean, did you really read through what I read, and if you did, did you digest it, understand the gist of it? If you don't understand the point I was making, then it's useless with you. But I will try to speak sense to you, it will be difficult, but I will try.
We play N.E ranked #5 offensively in the league twice a year. We played Miami ranked #10 offensively twice a year, We played the Jet's who were ranked #16 twice a year, throw in Denver at #2 and SanDiego at #11.
If you average out the rankings of the teams I just mentioned that gives them an average ranking of #9
that's 8 games, half the games in our schedule. are you following so far?
Then I brought up who other teams have to play, I made it very clear. The whole point of the exercise is to show you that at least half of the teams has had to play crappy offenses within their own division at least twice a year.
You see, it is all comparative. So when you just brought up those examples, of the weak offenses we played, I brought up 8 teams, which most of them had a well above ranking offensively. So it evens out.
So let's recap here. 8 teams above average , 8 teams below average.
So your point, really was pointless
No rose colored glasses, just facts
you really got to stop with this incomplete and inaccurate information you post. Yesterday you said that Peters wasn't an All Pro and you were adamant about it, now this.
-
Hey, Gox. I think you mean Beatty at the #21 spot. Here's that simulation draft from www.DraftTek.com.
The Eagles take Andre Smith (now the 4th ranked LT) at #11, and Chris Wells (RB) at #28. They get what they want.
Detroit at #20 takes Brandon Pettigrew, and our plan is foiled temporarily.
The Bills take LT William Beatty at #21, DE Robert Ayers at #42, Jared Cook TE at the Eagles RD2 pick, Andy Levitre OG at their RD3, and Alex Magee DT from Purdue with their RD4. We get the Eagles RD4 at #117 and take Jason Phillips ILB out of TCU. At the Philly pick in RD5#133 we take A.Q. Shipley OC Penn State, and at #139 we nab Courtney Greene SS Rutgers. At our 170 we take Chris Clemons FS Clemson, and the computer takes the BPA in Round 7, Arian Foster RB Tennessee.
Note that Robinson and Sidbury weren't available at the the second round picks.
Astro,
I was talking about Eben Britton, I mispelled his last name, I think I typed Bretton.
He seems like an interesting prospect if we had to go that route.
TE Pettigrew at #11
LT Britton at #21
LG Duke Robinson at #42
DE Lawrence Sidbury with second round Philly pick (we probably would have to trade a fifth or 6th rounder to move up a few spots to get him
Now I know that this is highly unlikely, but I am basing it if we traded Peters under your draft scenario.
-
The Bills also faced more than their fare share of pitiful offenses.
Jacksonville 20th
San Francisco 23rd
Kansas City 24th
St. Louis 27th
Seattle 28th
Oakland 29th
Cleveland 31st
This is not a good point.
Every team in the AFC West had to play, Oakland #29 and K.C #24 twice a year.
Every team in the NFC West had to play San Fran #23 , St. Louis #27 and Seattle # 28 twice a year
Every team in the NFC North had to play VIkings #17, Lions #30 and Bears #26 twice a year
AFC North has to play Ravens #18, Bengals #32 , Browns #31 and Pittsburgh #22 twice a year
AFC South has to play the Titans #21 and Jaguars #20 twice a year
Where the Bills had to play
N.E #5 , Miami #12 and Jets #16 twice a year
All the teams in our division were in the top half of offensive stats.
Your point now isn't so compelling.
-
Raji would be my #1 choice. He is being projected to go somewhere between 10-12. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't make it past 6
-
Why is it when the Bills bring in players to look at them and interview them, people complain that the Bills are wasting money on bringing people in for visits and trying to do their due diligence. But if the Bills don't bring anyone in for a visit, then their FO is terrible because they aren't doing anything in FA? Some people just have a no-win attitude when the team does anything. Buffalo hasn't signed a ton of guys, but we have made some pretty good progress. Two real needs have been addressed in FA and the Florence signing isn't too bad either. The fact is the Bills have made offers to a number of guys who have come in but they haven't signed. Of course, many of those players haven't signed a contract with anyone else, and if things don't get better, they'll be back. We're a long way from done in FA, and I think we're still likely to pick up a couple more good FAs to fill a few more holes on the team. I wouldn't be disappointed if they resigned Crowell, and also added Keiaho to the LB corps. We need more veteran talent in the mix and those two guys would be great to have.
It's called impatience and frustration.
I personally like the way the Bills are handling this offseason so far.
There is no rush to sign a linebacker right now. There are at least 4 LB's that I can think of off hand that I wouldn't mind having and none of them have signed as of yet. Keiaho, June, Crowell and Derrick Brooks. I have a feeling once one of those LB's get signed then we will see the Bills make a move. Until then, they can afford to be patient, just in case another player gets cut or released, meanwhile the asking price of each of those players are falling by the day.
-
If he doesn't get traded, which I hope to god he doesn't.
Then I believe the deal go something like this. He will get a 6 year $60 Million with incentives that can escalate his pay to up to as much as $1-2Million a year in incentives. With $30 Million gauranteed over the next 3 years.
-
Corey Moore was taken in the third round of one of the horrendous Bills drafts ever, IMO.
1. Erik Flowers
2. Travares Tillman
3. Corey Moore
4. Avion Black
5. Sammy Morris
6. Leif Larsen
7. Drew Haddad
7a. Dashon Polk
P.U.
OMG
That set us back for half a decade
-
Okay...let's follow your argument for a moment. It's Eugene Parker's duty to earn as much money for his client. Is that what you are saying?
I would argue that it's agents job to make his client happy.
Agents work for the athletes. Not the other way around. Players tell agents what they want, or at least they are supposed to. So if Peters is telling his agent to make him the highest paid, no matter what it does to his team or teammates, then he's a royal douche. If Peters is too stupid to stand up for himself, and Peters is letting Parker run the show, that's bad too.
You could have said the same thing about stock brokers and investment bankers. It's their duty to make their clients as much money as possibe. But wait...what if making the most money destroys the economy and causes others to lose their life savings?
The best agents, I think Drew Rosenhaus is a good example, makes deals that make both sides happy. He understands that you can only !@#$ over the team once. Then your bridge is burned for good. Instead he leaves both sides feeling like they won something. He understands that team chemistry is fragile and his clients don't need to be seen as team wreckers.
Eugene Parker only wants to be shown the money. !@#$ you. !@#$ your team. Show me the money. The Bills don't need this.
PTR
I myself value happiness over anything. So I do agree with that.
But I just can't see too many players and too many agents, talking about the philosophy of happiness, about philosophies of life and if they are, that happiness includes $.
Let's be real here.
My guess is that when Peters fired his last agent, it didn't have to do with his opposing views of family and etc. I would have to think it had to do with the undervalued contract his last agent got him.
So when Peters hired Parker, and I'm going out on a limb here, It probably went something along the lines of "show me the money".
I don't see things as black and white as you do. In between the black and white, there is a lot of gray.
I'm a realist, and I see things in a logical manner, not from a biased, skewed stand point.
I suppose We will just have to agree to disagree.
Pats sign Joey Galloway
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I gotta agree with Pneumonic. Too many people here on this board are downplaying his ability. Thank God the Bills Coaching staff and players don't feel the same way you guyz do. He did have back to back 1000 yard seasons before last season. Also, just so people know, even the games he played last year, their were many games where he was playing with a Hammy, so that did hamper his play.
Galloway in the slot. That scares me.
The guy knows how to get open, he's crafty, quick, undoubtedly lost a step, but still dangerous.
If he is healthy, this will be a very good pickup for the Patriots