The Big Cat Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Nelson 6'5" came back from a ACL also , 12 games ,36 rec, 423 yds for the Jets with Geno. He'll be back to full speed next season like Scott. Okay. So, 3 catches a game at 11 yards per catch? But your prognosis is he'll be back to full speed? You know this...how? BTW, speed and David Nelson should never come in the same sentence, anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I don't know where the Chandler criticism comes from. He's got soft hands and can play. He's the best the Bills have had since Jay Reimersma. He had more drops this year than I remember. He also had a key fumble in the Falcons game. I really like Chandler. He was a great pick up. But it would be nice to have a dynamic difference maker at TE for the first time in forever. I think a guy like Ebron could be an elite weapon. That said, if they re-signed Chandler & drafted a stud wr, I'd be fine. But it seems like most of the really good teams have dynamic TEs. Chandler is a solid TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I believe 31 other teams would sign Chanlder if they could. At his age he will not be terribly expensive and if nothing more he is the ideal target in the red zone As for our most consistent player who is about as dependable as they come for a clunker TE, we should make him an offer. 2-3 years. 1.75 a season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I believe 31 other teams would sign Chanlder if they could. At his age he will not be terribly expensive and if nothing more he is the ideal target in the red zone As for our most consistent player who is about as dependable as they come for a clunker TE, we should make him an offer. 2-3 years. 1.75 a season? And this is where I come down: the guy may play like a lumbering clutz, but he's the most consistent, most productive lumbering clutz we've had at the position for more than a decade. An indictment of his predecessors, to be sure, but let's not pretend like the guy has done NOTHING in a Bills uniform. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I believe 31 other teams would sign Chanlder if they could. At his age he will not be terribly expensive and if nothing more he is the ideal target in the red zone As for our most consistent player who is about as dependable as they come for a clunker TE, we should make him an offer. 2-3 years. 1.75 a season? That's kinda my one issue with Chandler. I think he should be a better red zone target. IMO, he plays a lot smaller than his size. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I believe 31 other teams would sign Chanlder if they could. At his age he will not be terribly expensive and if nothing more he is the ideal target in the red zone As for our most consistent player who is about as dependable as they come for a clunker TE, we should make him an offer. 2-3 years. 1.75 a season? 3 of them did before he joined the Bills. One of them tiwce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Here's my take on Chandler: I think most people would agree that this team could use a more dynamic threat at the TE position. I like the idea of Chandler as our #2, as long as we are able to re-sign him at a fair price for that position. However, I see Chandler seeking #1 TE money...not necessarily top-end TE money....but likely more than our decision-makers are willing to pay. I also think the signing of Moeaki was somewhat of an indication that Chandler's days as a Bill are numbered. The team likely has a plan that includes an upgrade at the TE position, and I believe that plan includes Moeaki, Gragg, and at least one person not currently on the roster. I always liked Chandler, and I appreciate the productivity he gave us considering how he was acquired. But I think now is the time the Bills finally move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 (edited) Chandler is the 2nd, maybe even 3rd string TE on a team that makes it to a conference championship game. He is not good enough. I'll leave it at that. Edited February 17, 2014 by peterpan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Here's my take on Chandler: I think most people would agree that this team could use a more dynamic threat at the TE position. I like the idea of Chandler as our #2, as long as we are able to re-sign him at a fair price for that position. However, I see Chandler seeking #1 TE money...not necessarily top-end TE money....but likely more than our decision-makers are willing to pay. I also think the signing of Moeaki was somewhat of an indication that Chandler's days as a Bill are numbered. The team likely has a plan that includes an upgrade at the TE position, and I believe that plan includes Moeaki, Gragg, and at least one person not currently on the roster. I always liked Chandler, and I appreciate the productivity he gave us considering how he was acquired. But I think now is the time the Bills finally move on. I heard that since he didn't block much and had 81 targets, Chandler wants to be paid like a #2 WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I heard that since he didn't block much and had 81 targets, Chandler wants to be paid like a #2 WR. The Bills better not franchise him, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I heard that since he didn't block much and had 81 targets, Chandler wants to be paid like a #2 WR. if that is true pears needs to restructure as a RB because he did not spend much time blocking and he spent more then half the downs he played in the backfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 if that is true pears needs to restructure as a RB because he did not spend much time blocking and he spent more then half the downs he played in the backfield. He would have to switch jerseys with Spiller... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 He would have to switch jerseys with Spiller... true. Spiller spent a little time down field. Seldom beyond 3 yards and usually running right at LB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 And this is where I come down: the guy may play like a lumbering clutz, but he's the most consistent, most productive lumbering clutz we've had at the position for more than a decade. An indictment of his predecessors, to be sure, but let's not pretend like the guy has done NOTHING in a Bills uniform. Exactly. Let's also put to rest the notion that replacing him is easy, especially with a Davis or Graham clone. Those guys don't exist. Not in any facet of the draft process. You wanna try to upgrade the position? Go ahead, but let's not act like they will be once in a generation talents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 He is no Gronkowski (no YAC to speak of), but Chandler has good hands. I agree, we could use an upgrade at the position (sombebody who can block, catch, and run after the catch), but you have to keep in mind, TE is one of the tougher positions to get all the production you want. Guys like Graham and Gronkowski are the "new breed" types...there are not a lot of those guy around. I don't think Chandler is without his merits. I like him as a red-zone threat... his blocking seems to be his biggest problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 This type of thread is perhaps why I hate the off season so much. We get thread after thread, comment after comment, ragging on our best players wanting to cut them because they're not the best player in the league at their position. And then the typical repsonse of, we need someone like Vernon Davis, not Chandler. Well... duh. Sure if we cut all our starters and replaced them with all pros at their position, we'd be better. But, you can't do that. This isn't a video game where you can just pick and choose the best players in the league and then get upset when our front office doesn't do that. Yes, we need an upgrade at TE. But, do you build a winning team by cutting your best TE, keeping the 3rd and 4th stringers? No. You keep Chandler, cut the scrubs behind him, and bring in someone that can develop behind him to be better. Same with Stevie, CJ, Pears, and so on and so forth. Build a team, don't dismantle and reassemble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max997 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Just wanted to share an evaluation on local radio here in D.C. of our own Scott Chandler. In the Redskins off season report, Chris Cooley (now a reporter on local D.C. radio) gave his breakdown of available free agent tight ends. He ranked Chandler as #1 (assuming Graham and Pitta are franchised). It was interesting to hear Chris Cooley rave about him and call him a poor man's Gronkowski. I do like Chandler, but have never thought of him this highly. Thoughts? With this kind of review, should we be thinking higher of him? why would you think differently of him now than before? anyone who has watched Chandler play and Im sure you have knows that assessment is not accurate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 This type of thread is perhaps why I hate the off season so much. We get thread after thread, comment after comment, ragging on our best players wanting to cut them because they're not the best player in the league at their position. And then the typical repsonse of, we need someone like Vernon Davis, not Chandler. Well... duh. Sure if we cut all our starters and replaced them with all pros at their position, we'd be better. But, you can't do that. This isn't a video game where you can just pick and choose the best players in the league and then get upset when our front office doesn't do that. Yes, we need an upgrade at TE. But, do you build a winning team by cutting your best TE, keeping the 3rd and 4th stringers? No. You keep Chandler, cut the scrubs behind him, and bring in someone that can develop behind him to be better. Same with Stevie, CJ, Pears, and so on and so forth. Build a team, don't dismantle and reassemble. Dan..I agree with you...but keep in mind, these threads pop up as much during the season, as they do the off-season! Also, in the case of Chandler, it is a litte more relevant, because the Bills will have to decide, in the next few weeks, if they plan on re-signing him. He will be a free-agent. So, it really isn't a question of cutting him, but asking "should the Bils" re-sign him, or see if they can find antoher option. This is one of the rare cases where the thread has some merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Okay. So, 3 catches a game at 11 yards per catch? But your prognosis is he'll be back to full speed? You know this...how? BTW, speed and David Nelson should never come in the same sentence, anyway. Should have said both players should be back to pre ACL tear , speed. The Bills need tall targets in the red zone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T master Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Just wanted to share an evaluation on local radio here in D.C. of our own Scott Chandler. In the Redskins off season report, Chris Cooley (now a reporter on local D.C. radio) gave his breakdown of available free agent tight ends. He ranked Chandler as #1 (assuming Graham and Pitta are franchised). It was interesting to hear Chris Cooley rave about him and call him a poor man's Gronkowski. I do like Chandler, but have never thought of him this highly. Thoughts? With this kind of review, should we be thinking higher of him? Well what were our collective thoughts about Pete Metzelars ?? Chandler matched or beat his highest out put in his second year so i would say seeing as Metzelars is a highly touted TE of the Bills of the past that Chandler could be thought of as close to the same . If he can be brought back for a decent contract o would say bring him back ! With Moeoki & Chandler add in another good rookie from this years draft we may have a good TE group for a while rather than what has been on hand in the recent past !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts