Jump to content

Warriorspikes51

Community Member
  • Posts

    9,697
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Warriorspikes51

  1. it would be a mistake to not take one of the 6-7 Round 1 level talents at WR IMO.
  2. too bad. We could have done both if we wanted with Hollywood on a 1 year deal and still drafted someone. But, Hollins is a well rounded big guy who can actually make plays and block. Which is more than we got from Sherfield
  3. “time for a fresh start”
  4. Nabers is worth it too IMO
  5. I’m insane but I’d do a 4th for Sutton and still draft WR Round 1 let em battle for playing time
  6. I’m not a fan of the guy but…. For a 4th?
  7. fine then trade 28 and next years 2nd and a 4th for DK Metcalf 😎 ahahah
  8. TEAM WIDE RECEIVER UNITE that would be fun
  9. clearly this was done to start trouble on purpose
  10. IMO Beane may trade our 2025 1st to get high enough for Brian Thomas Jr. Hopefully he can pull it without that but challenging.
  11. saw on X 7 years prior to Buffalo: Beasley 319rec. 3,271yds 23TDs Samuel 317rec. 3,383yds 22TDs Except Samuel is more of a mix between a taller Beasley and a stronger John Brown
  12. But but BUT I read on here that Terry Pegula was being cheap this offseason 🙄
  13. Once again….. the cap is like a pylon on the goal line Just hit it and you score….it goes to infinity
  14. seems likely. I expected they’d get 1 of Mooney Samuel Brown
  15. he can be similar to Deebo Samuel in a good offense
  16. probably a combination of Beane being pissed off / Samuel’s price dropping enough for him to feel good about it. tough to say what would be better at the moment. Armstead is a very good playoff performer. Hopefully we can find effective DT help elsewhere
  17. this matches with them specifically saying “explosive” multiple times
  18. Got 1!!!!! Thanks Beane
  19. Diggs ______ Round 1 Samuel Shakir Hollins Shorter Hamler
  20. I want some credit! I’ve mentioned Samuel tons of times!!😎 Also I think this makes Thomas / Legette / AD as VERY likely
  21. he’s not that small….. 5’11 194
  22. what exactly would you call this?
×
×
  • Create New...