Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

127 Excellent

About 1ManRaid

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

393 profile views
  1. Why would WE do this unless we were getting a good deal? If the Jets want to trade down so badly, let them cut us a deal on it. Works both ways.
  2. I wouldn't go so far as to call it suspicious. Maybe they just wanted that positive news fresh on GMs' minds for the draft, or they only just found out themselves. Suspicious implies some nefarious reason for it, and I'm not really seeing a reason to see it that way. Suspicious would be hacked clips of a player smoking a bong being released hours before the draft.
  3. Just saw someone on NFL.com mock Fant to us at 9...ugh. Granted they had Hock go at 8 but I'd want a DEEP trade down first if we grab Fant.
  4. Clarifying a potentially serious heart condition is a hell of a lot different than leaking something like "lots of teams are looking to trade up for X player". There's legal ramifications lying about or botching something like this. Teams also don't want to tip their hands before the draft so will generally stay quiet about these things.
  5. If the team moving up ALWAYS pays a premium, then it's not really a premium? Isn't that the new normal and the calculation should be adjusted as such? It's like when a call centre is permanently "experiencing higher than normal call volumes".
  6. Give us your top 10 list of better role models from Shreveport then. I'll wait.
  7. Maybe he figured the health care would be better with an NFL team backing it. I've heard lots of horror stories about how injured players are treated (or not treated, specifically) in the NCAA.
  8. I wouldn't mind finding a party for it, if anyone knows of a bar or anything hosting near the Canadian borders.
  9. "Righteous cause"? It's a basic statistical fact. Week 17 games are no more important than week 1. Asserting an objective truth is kind of the exact opposite of a righteous cause... But please, do tell me how a 9-7 one year is more "earned" than any other year with an identical record. Did we benefit from teams forfeiting games just to help get us in? Was there a "just let the Bills in already" special exception tie-breaker? Educate me. I could maybe buy the argument if we got like multiple games in a row at the end against teams resting starters in some fluke of scheduling, but no.
  10. Assuming Oliver and a couple others are gone by 9 and there is no trade down available, I would love this. Maxx looks like good value.
  11. If Oliver is not there at 9, sure. Then take that 2020 2nd and our day 3 picks to trade up our 2nd and 3rd rounders.
  12. Really meant "at least second best". Haskins looks better but I'm not fully educated on the prospects this year.
  • Create New...