Stussy109 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Proven guy, he's 25, perfect speed guy opposite shifty possession oriented Steve Johnson, ready to produce. Most rookie WR'd do NOT contribute yer #1. I dont see a better way we could spend our #1 pick and get the most bang for our buck. Fill a glaring hole at #2 or 1b however you call it, and the guy is proven, the bust factor is minimal. Only downside is he would require a newcontract very soon, bjt who cares let's be in it to win it. Lets surround Fitz with everything he needs to be successful and give this our best shot of getting into Post season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjmac Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Proven guy, he's 25, perfect speed guy opposite shifty possession oriented Steve Johnson, ready to produce. Most rookie WR'd do NOT contribute yer #1. I dont see a better way we could spend our #1 pick and get the most bang for our buck. Fill a glaring hole at #2 or 1b however you call it, and the guy is proven, the bust factor is minimal. Only downside is he would require a newcontract very soon, bjt who cares let's be in it to win it. Lets surround Fitz with everything he needs to be successful and give this our best shot of getting into Post season! Let's not. I agree that he is young, fast, and talented. However, we are already paying Stevie to be our #1, so you don't spend a #1 pick on a WR who is, at most, going to be our #2. Now, I can hear you thinking that Stevie is not a #1. There may be some validity to that, but I think he is our #1 because of Fitzpatrick's arm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksilver Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Proven guy, he's 25, perfect speed guy opposite shifty possession oriented Steve Johnson, ready to produce. Most rookie WR'd do NOT contribute yer #1. I dont see a better way we could spend our #1 pick and get the most bang for our buck. Fill a glaring hole at #2 or 1b however you call it, and the guy is proven, the bust factor is minimal. Only downside is he would require a newcontract very soon, bjt who cares let's be in it to win it. Lets surround Fitz with everything he needs to be successful and give this our best shot of getting into Post season! Also the player drafted @ 10 will be a cap figure of 4-5mill yr. Your guy will cost way more than that and we have other holes to fill as well as sign some of our own (Levitre, Byrd..etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Let's not. I agree that he is young, fast, and talented. However, we are already paying Stevie to be our #1, so you don't spend a #1 pick on a WR who is, at most, going to be our #2. Now, I can hear you thinking that Stevie is not a #1. There may be some validity to that, but I think he is our #1 because of Fitzpatrick's arm. LOL c'mon man w/ your #s. It doesn't matter. We NEED another receiving option. Put whatever numbers you want by whomever it doesn't matter the point is we'll suck if we don't have another guy that is really wanting the ball @ WR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bladiebla Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 You guys realise that most WR's take one or two seasons to develop right? It's a rarity that a freshly drafted WR produces straight away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 The move would make sense, if we had a qb that could throw a good deep ball. We don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muffmonster Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 The move would make sense, if we had a qb that could throw a good deep ball. We don't. Exactly my thought. Wallace's strength is his break away speed. Do you think Fitz will be hitting him in stride down the field? I like Wallace and I like Fitz, but I just don't see this making sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted March 19, 2012 Author Share Posted March 19, 2012 The move would make sense, if we had a qb that could throw a good deep ball. We don't. The Deep Ball was there when TO ran his go routes every game...remember a receiver can make his qb look better than he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefenseWinzChampionshipz Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 You guys realise that most WR's take one or two seasons to develop right? It's a rarity that a freshly drafted WR produces straight away. Yeah that's why A.J. Green and Julio Jones contributed in 2011, Dez Bryant in 2010, Jeremy Maclin and Hakeem Nicks in 2009 and so on... A football player is a football player... WR isn't one of those positions where it takes 2 years to develop. Route running maybe but if you can catch the damn ball, you'll have a roster spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjmac Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 LOL c'mon man w/ your #s. It doesn't matter. We NEED another receiving option. Put whatever numbers you want by whomever it doesn't matter the point is we'll suck if we don't have another guy that is really wanting the ball @ WR At what cost? I'd rather see some cap flexibility, now that Mario Williams has a BIG contract. I think our receiving option is either already on the roster or about to be drafted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billshank Redemption Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 floyd is going to be good year one, we just need to get him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShipUPride Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I agree with the OP. Mike Wallace for our 1st is a smart decision. Instant Impact Player. Draft OT in Round 2 and go Defense the remainder of the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I think LT carries a much greater value. Wallace is a deep ball threat, not a complete WR. Any AFC team who spends a top 20 1st rounder is not only overpaying, but also handing a 1st round pick to a conference opponent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWVaBeach Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Flipping a coin here, I can't decide about the guy, he is a lot like Evans 6 years ago IMO but he does come back to the ball if need be and is better running after the catch (from what I have seen of him). The money is something that could be taken care of after the season unless I am mistaken. Get the details done when you pick him up and make a promise? Does that make sense? A number one is a lot but he is young and very good. "Handing a 1st round pick to a conference opponent", yeah 50/50 there.On the fence about that too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stussy109 Posted March 19, 2012 Author Share Posted March 19, 2012 Flipping a coin here, I can't decide about the guy, he is a lot like Evans 6 years ago IMO but he does come back to the ball if need be and is better running after the catch (from what I have seen of him). The money is something that could be taken care of after the season unless I am mistaken. Get the details done when you pick him up and make a promise? Does that make sense? A number one is a lot but he is young and very good. "Handing a 1st round pick to a conference opponent", yeah 50/50 there.On the fence about that too. U really have to think about it, would you trade D Whitner, M Lynch, Leodis Mckelvin, Aaron Maybin, CJ Spiller, M Dareus(no to Dareus) yes to all the others. Look at our success rate, are any of them franchise players contributing to the team right now? Greenbay has had 2 well paid WR's in Jennings and Driver on the team at the same time, as did New England while Moss was on the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I think LT carries a much greater value. Wallace is a deep ball threat, not a complete WR. Any AFC team who spends a top 20 1st rounder is not only overpaying, but also handing a 1st round pick to a conference opponent. We need a big physical WR with great hands who can run multiple routes, we don't need another Lee Evans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Proven guy, he's 25, perfect speed guy opposite shifty possession oriented Steve Johnson, ready to produce. Most rookie WR'd do NOT contribute yer #1. I dont see a better way we could spend our #1 pick and get the most bang for our buck. Fill a glaring hole at #2 or 1b however you call it, and the guy is proven, the bust factor is minimal. Only downside is he would require a newcontract very soon, bjt who cares let's be in it to win it. Lets surround Fitz with everything he needs to be successful and give this our best shot of getting into Post season! You can't tie up that kind of money on one position. Especially a position in which it's somewhat easy to find #2 receiver replacements in the draft. The Bills should bring back Owens for this year to give us time to groom Easley and/or whoever the draft at WR in the 2nd or 3rd round. If they do pickup TO, it won't be till after the draft though. In case either Blackmon somehow fell to them or they traded up a couple spots to land him. TO is such an obvious and logical one year stop gap answer for this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrankReichComeback Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 It sounds like we will trade down and take on the left tackles expected to go toward the bottom of the first. I really do think we could use the extra to address some of the needs on this team - OLB, CB and WR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPS Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Can't afford him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tipster19 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I would to have Wallace on this team but I don't think Buddy will cough up our #10 pick overall for him. I personally think that he would be a very safe pick for us. Maybe something could be worked out along the lines of us trading our 1st (#10) and our 3rd (#72) rd picks for Wallace and their 2nd rd pick (#56) or something like that. As far as the salary cap goes I would think that something could be finagled, it seems like the Redskins are always able to figure something out, even with their violations. Pittsburgh is in a pretty big rebuilding situation and having a pick in the top third of the draft might be very appealing to them if there is a certain player at a position that they want. I meant to start my previous response with that I would love to have Wallace on our team. I'm doing this from my IPhone it's difficult to proofread. Lol! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARMchairgm Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 i'd swap first but wouldnt trade the 10th pick straight up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punch Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 (edited) I think LT carries a much greater value. Wallace is a deep ball threat, not a complete WR. Any AFC team who spends a top 20 1st rounder is not only overpaying, but also handing a 1st round pick to a conference opponent. We need a big physical WR with great hands who can run multiple routes, we don't need another Lee Evans. Wow... Lee Evans isn't fit to sniff Mike Wallace's jock, even though he may like to. For the record, I don't think paying a 2nd WR $7-8 mil/year is in the Bills best interest, but Wallace is nearly uncoverable in the right offense. He can run any route and has excellent hands. Lee Evans could run one route, and that's why his NFL may be over. Edited March 20, 2012 by Punch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 I started a vote on this and there were very few takers. If the Bills were picking at 18 or 20 I think the move would make sense but if Jonathan Martin is there at #10 take him and pencil him and Levitre together for a very long time. LT is just too much of a need to go after Wallace and the money doesn't make sense either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts