Doc Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Money may have factored into it, but it was one of several factors, and probably doesn't top the list. Here's a list of possible factors: - One-dimensional outside receiver who doesn't fit the profile for Gailey's offense - Never "clicked" with Fitz - Money - A couple of younger guys (Jones and Easley) ready to take the next step I'm sure there are more. I also don't think it was a financial move, and that saving money was a side-benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7boogiewoogie Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 Trading him was still a financial decision. Nothing wrong with that as long as it was a good football move and I'm pretty sure the coaching staff and front office agreed that it was, besides the way they spread the offense without Easley and also using Parrish in a limited role I'd say Evans doesn't look like he is going to be missed. IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defend Greece Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 one game three weeks after joining a team hurt and i didnt see the whole game but im guessing it wasnt 4 drops. he isnt going to be a probowler, but im confident he will help that team. Bam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted September 12, 2011 Share Posted September 12, 2011 If they ever build an "Overrated Wall of Fame" in Buffalo, Lee Evans would be the first inductee. Smartest thing that guy ever did was choose #83, it's still paying dividends in the minds of 3/4 of the fanbase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts