Jump to content

Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Members
  • Content Count

    4,847
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

586 Excellent

About Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

  • Rank
    Veteran

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Wilmington NC

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Amazing how it seems so hard for people to understand that. They are wanting to shape the roster just to get picks.
  2. Uh Oh, he we go. This will get ugly fast!
  3. You don't need ATT internet to get Direct TV. You can have whomever for your internet service and and just have DTV with ST, but that means a dish on your roof and 2 year contract. Or you can watch the games online though many of the illegal streams that others here talk about. Personally myself, I'd never do anything that's illegal but many others do. But you still are streaming through your internet access and if that's going down all the time then so will the illegal streams too, Most of the other options mentioned, Roku's planbeeTV (whatevet that is) are still dependent on your internet signal, so they really won't help you at all, unless what you're saying is your internet is great all of the time except when you watch a game via ST online.
  4. It's not like the owners agreed to this deal in a vacuum. people from the union were involved and have to believe that overall there is much agreement. Could be the owners will have to make another concession someplace to gets the votes to pass. Think they are way to close to end up in a lockout situation. I wonder too in Watts case do most of the Texans agree with him or is this just him speaking out against it.
  5. Pretty much agree with your comments except think the item in bold would be difficult to accomplish while also doing the other things you mention East coast teams play in London or Montreal, midwest teams in Canada, makes sense, but then you suggest Dallas vs Buffalo in London or Toronto. Small point, but just seems to me the part in bold would become too difficult to schedule around. They can try to o that, but will be exceptions and guarantee there will be 60 plus page thread right here on this site complaining how the Bills got screwed by the schedule makers while NE got the easy travel deal out of it.
  6. The first pic I saw of Hughes made me real nervous. Thinking this doc doesn't know the difference between a wrist and a groin! Don't want him operating on me! Then I read his wife's comment
  7. you're saying these things kick if if NOT agreed to.
  8. So the way I understand it, if a new CBA isn't agreed to by the beginning of the new year March 18th, teams can then use both a transition and franchise tag on two separate players. So I'm hoping it's all signed sealed and delivered prior as would make more potential FA's available. Dallas couldn't protect both Dak and Cooper.
  9. True, in hindsight everyone was ripping the Bills for the pick, but pre-draft almost all the mocks had Williams up at the top. There was much debate about who should be selected higher him or McKinney, and there were enough experts out there who also rated Williams higher, so the Bills weren't completely crazy with the pick.. Again in hindsight neither ever panned out as well as expected, though McKinney certainly was the better of the two.
  10. I don't know, I think it still would have happened. My thinking is Beane and McD planned to have Knox pretty much sit and learn behind Kroft last season, play some in 2 TE set's, then this coming season let Knoxtake over as the starter, but keep Kroft for 2 TE sets and in case it turns out Know wasn't ready. But last years injuries accelerated everything and one year later you know Knox can take over as the starter, so does make Kroft more expendable. Smith I'd keep at least thru training camp as don't save a ton by cutting him, and keep him in case of injury. Bates was a very versatile lineman, could play all positions. I wonder how he'd be a blocking TE and an occasional like 4 to 5 times a season catch a ball, kind of like Smith was. I'd think as a lineman should be as good if not better blocker. Don't know if he has the size though for TE?? Would be nice to use only one roster slot toy be your backup swing tackle and blocking TE.
  11. Certainly tend to agree with the Brady Kraft part. BB not so sure he's on board, but will find out soon enough.
  12. I'll see your Aaron Maybin and raise you Mike Williams!
  13. Let me rephrase that, I understand the concept, but question the value in giving up very much to jump one spot when likely the outcome will be the same either way as the top 3 players selected will all be the same, just in a slightly different order. Seem to recall the other top pick wasn't someone San Fran was that interested in. This draft to me seems like there are 2 really really top picks, Young and Burrow. After that little bit of a drop. So would Washington really want to give up on Young which they would be if they trade with anyone other than Detroit. Unless they trade/cut Stafford prior to the draft, Detroit also isn't in desperate need of a QB so would they be that bad off instead drafting Young. And BTW how have the Bears done since then? Maybe if they hadn't given up multiple picks they'd be in better shape. If the Lions gave up a 4th rounder to move up one slot, fine, but to give up a second, when likely Washington is just bluffing that they'd trade the pick, I have trouble with that one. Unless start hearing that Washington is in a full rebuild and wants many picks, then that changes things. In the case of Buffalo giving up 2 rd's for JA, they were moving up multiple slots and already a number of players picked.
  14. Never really understood the logic there. Happened was it 2 or 3 years back when the Bears traded up for Tribitsky one spot. If Washington wants Young, then why does Detroit need to trade up and give up picks, let them take Young and then you grab who you want a #3. Could someone else trade with Washington and then grab Tua, sure, but then Washington is likely losing out on Young as likely the Lions would grab Young or trade with another team who'd want him at #3. So why would Detroit give up assets to move up one pick when very likely they will get the guy they want at #3 anyway. Would only make sense if Washington didn't want Young, but even then whomever they do want could be gone by the time they do pick unless they are looking for many multiple picks in return.
  15. Yeah but SU was there first. Plus Ernie Davis died at his peak so a little more significance there I'd say.
×
×
  • Create New...