LABills08 Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 I don't know how you can compare Reed and Tate. Tate is a much faster player. And speed has always been the difference between Josh Reed being an average possession receiver to being an actual threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Tate compares to a Percy Harvin. He'll be a playmaker and is not a guy you build a team around. The Bills need to spend the fist few picks on guys you build a team around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Having Golden Tate would be outstanding. The guy is a straight up playmaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Agree.... and Reed could have done more damage IMO without having to deal with miserable coaching throughout his time here. Coaching has nothign to do with catching the football. I like Reed and he was serviceable but was ultimately done in because of his NFL limitations - speed, size, and hands. Tate is a much more explosive player and the Steve Smith comparison is a good one. He also went to ND as a running back, so he's still learning the position. That said, with all of the needs we have for big guys, taking a receiver before the 4th or 5th (I love Eric Decker of Minnesota and he should be available then), it would be stupid to take a recevier in the 2nd. Taking 4 receivers in the first 2 rounds helps led to a decade without playoff football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllDayADay Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 I love the idea of adding Golden Tate. Think he the most underrated receiver in the this years draft. Although, if Mount Cody is there, we HAVE to take him, no option we need that BUM (Big Ugly Man). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldTimer1960 Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 I like Tate and think he improved his physical play last season, but I would be wary of drafting another small WR when we've already tied up a lot in Evans. But mostly, I think the weaknesses in other areas are so significant that the Bills simply can't afford to spend any picks in the first 4-5 rounds on WR/RB/DB. I agree that there are major weaknesses at other positions, but really, the Bills have only 1 #1, 2 and 3 WR and his name is Lee Evans. NOBODY else on the roster has caught more than a handful of passes in their NFL careers. I am not advocating taking a WR in the 1st 2 rounds, BUT, it is probably as big of a need as any other position on the roster. That being said, it is probably easier to find an older FA that can be at least moderately servicable at WR than at LT and NT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsCelticsAngelsBama Posted April 2, 2010 Share Posted April 2, 2010 Coaching has nothign to do with catching the football. I like Reed and he was serviceable but was ultimately done in because of his NFL limitations - speed, size, and hands. Tate is a much more explosive player and the Steve Smith comparison is a good one. He also went to ND as a running back, so he's still learning the position. That said, with all of the needs we have for big guys, taking a receiver before the 4th or 5th (I love Eric Decker of Minnesota and he should be available then), it would be stupid to take a recevier in the 2nd. Taking 4 receivers in the first 2 rounds helps led to a decade without playoff football. He caught the football or weren't you watching ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts