machine gun kelly Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 This only makes sense if the Bills can move up without losing next year's 1st round pick AND to select Clowney. Agreed. If we were to give away this year's 2nd round and next year's 2nd round, I would pull the trigger on Clowney, but I doubt they would go for that deal. Clowney opposite Mario and everyone else would be pretty daunting. Look how dominant Seattle was against the best offense probably ever in Denver. Wouldn't it be fun with Spikes plugging the middle, Lawson and Hughes rotating the Sam, and Kiko on th e Wil. This defense you would think would be pretty punishing. They may bank on this deep WR/TE draft to get later in the rounds. Maybe we can beat the 57 sacks and get the NFL record this year, a top 3-5 defense where even the Pats can't score well on us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBuff423 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I just don't buy the hype that the BILLS, ala Whaley, would trade so much to get so little in return, if it's not a QB....I think the BILLS see the Draft as quite deep in WR and OLine like just about everybody else, and after an active, and to me intelligent, FA period, they really are slated to solidify those two positions in the Draft...and even though you could argue Watkins demanding a #1 overall pick, I just don't think the BILLS feel the need to do that...Mike Mayock said of Mike Evans that he had the best hands since Calvin Johnson and the guy is a big man who can run, exactly what the BILLS want in a WR...I think they stay put and Draft Evans, get their OL / RT situation in the 3rd or 4th Round, maybe even that Candian football player they hosted who seems to be quite good in the 4th Round and allow BPA dictate their Draft after Evans...I initially thought the BILLS would trade down, and sort of hope they still do, but this Draft is deep and many of the trading partners have multiple picks and can really separate themselves for years if they Draft properly... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIllsNation Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Sammy Watkins or Jadaveon Clowney if the price for trade down is right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 An awful big jump according to the draft value chart-something along the lines of 1350 to 3000! I wonder if they could jump that far without trading an additional number one, like next years's. Or just an off the wall idea, maybe trade EJ and this years number one and draft a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 moving from #9 to #1 would cost this years 2nd and next years 1st. I would do it in a heartbeat. just take the money you would have to pay next years #1 and use it on a UFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 In other news, Team Captain and Coach Reggie "Reg" Dunlop indicated that a retirement community in Florida is interested in buying the Charlestown Chiefs and relocating them. Really?! So, on a Buffalo Board no one gives a s*** about a Slap Shot reference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I notice that Brandon used the term "were all in" when the Bills signed Mike Pettine. Meaning Brandon, Whaley, and Marrone all went down to interview the man. http://www.buffalonews.com/20130201/brandon_bills_were_all_in_on_pettine.html Recently Whaley used that same phrase to to say the Bills were " all in" on EJ, and they had Thad, Dennis Dixon, and Tuel. "Whaley said the Bills never inquired about Michael Vickbefore he landed with the New York Jets and don't plan to add a veteran who would threaten to steal snaps from Manuel." http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000336423/article/doug-whaley-buffalo-bills-all-in-with-ej-manuel Now, it could just be a coincidence of phrasing, or it could really mean the Bills are 100% behind EJ. Then later Doug Marrone said that the team could go in any direction at QB...interesting stuff. If they want an elite WR then sign DeSean Jackson, and forget the trading up stuff. Clowney...Manziel... Watkins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dollars 2 donuts Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 (edited) I notice that Brandon used the term "were all in" when the Bills signed Mike Pettine. Meaning Brandon, Whaley, and Marrone all went down to interview the man. http://www.buffalone...on_pettine.html Recently Whaley used that same phrase to to say the Bills were " all in" on EJ, and they had Thad, Dennis Dixon, and Tuel. "Whaley said the Bills never inquired about Michael Vickbefore he landed with the New York Jets and don't plan to add a veteran who would threaten to steal snaps from Manuel." http://www.nfl.com/n...-with-ej-manuel Now, it could just be a coincidence of phrasing, or it could really mean the Bills are 100% behind EJ. Then later Doug Marrone said that the team could go in any direction at QB...interesting stuff. If they want an elite WR then sign DeSean Jackson, and forget the trading up stuff. Clowney...Manziel... Watkins? I don't think it is going to happen, but I got to tell ya, the idea of signing Jackson and then getting a 3 down LB or Rushing DE/LB in the top 10, followed by a new starting RT in the second who I fantasize about being as good as Glenn...just all makes me happy! EDIT: "Jackson and Johnson...no more tears!" Edited March 28, 2014 by dollars 2 donuts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadOTC Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Just saw on the ESPN bottom line that the Bills are interested in trading for the #1 pick. Not sure what it means, but the story seems to be picking up speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 I think its most likely a smokescreen. If not its Robinson,Clowney or Mack. this. And these are the only 3 players worthy of #1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trader Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Actually I think Evans will be gone by 9. I expect that Robinson and Mathews will also be gone. I would hate to see them trade up at 9. I think a move up with their second and third pick might be the best option for them in terms of acquiring value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 moving from #9 to #1 would cost this years 2nd and next years 1st. I would do it in a heartbeat. just take the money you would have to pay next years #1 and use it on a UFA. Any one in particular? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 One simple stat catches my eye. No team has gone from the #1 overall pick in the draft to a Superbowl victory that season. That's enough for me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 It's possible that this rumor could be floated by the Texans to try to drum up more interest in the #1 pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 It's possible that this rumor could be floated by the Texans to try to drum up more interest in the #1 pick. Disagree. NFL teams won't make things up. And they would tell media members exactly what they are trying to do and who htey are going to draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klos63 Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 It's possible that this rumor could be floated by the Texans to try to drum up more interest in the #1 pick. how would that drum up interest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 @JoeBuscaglia Buscaglia: Why Bills trading for #1 does/doesn't make sense http://bit.ly/1h3kigE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Maybe the Bills are interested in moving up but that doesnt mean it is to #1 CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4BillsintheBurgh Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Thanks! I trust him and just didnt know if it was from his source or if he actually read it some where CBF I have read something to the effect of "if Watkins is there at nine the Bills will sprint to the podium" written by Chris Brown on the BB.com blog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted March 28, 2014 Share Posted March 28, 2014 Sounds like bull**** to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts