Jump to content

Edit: now confirmed rumor that Bills will release Cassel


eball

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 692
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Rex just said that the odds were stacked against Simms making the roster. That, coupled with the prior comments about keeping 3 QBs, tells me that they appear to be keeping all 3. Time will tell of course and we'll know in a couple of days. Just thought I would throw that out there.

That's what I'd say if I wanted teams to trade for one of my backups. Let them think they won't be available via cuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's what I'd say if I wanted teams to trade for one of my backups. Let them think they won't be available via cuts.

 

I just watched that presser and tbh, what else could he say? It was a thinly veiled question designed to figure out whether Cassel would or wouldn't be on the roster. He could only have answered it like he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I felt Rex was pretty honest about the competition and how the QB's were performing, the media convoluted a lot though. I think he tries to speak the truth but also plays with his wording, the "we'll most likely keep 3 quarterbacks" never qualified if that meant Sims or not.

 

I do believe Russ Brandon when he goes on record being unhappy about something. The rest of the time he's a gloss-over rainbow-farting unicorns guy. That's ok by me, it's his job.

 

I think Cassel gets released as did Fred in big part because of the salary cap and upcoming FA's. I don't think Rex and FO would have gotten rid of Freddy otherwise. If either Tyrod or EJ show as a potential franchise QB there's that payday upcoming too.

I like how people ignore the other part of that statement. He said they will keep the best 53 players regardless of position. Are you saying Simms is better than Cassel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rex just said that the odds were stacked against Simms making the roster. That, coupled with the prior comments about keeping 3 QBs, tells me that they appear to be keeping all 3. Time will tell of course and we'll know in a couple of days. Just thought I would throw that out there.

 

I just watched that presser and tbh, what else could he say? It was a thinly veiled question designed to figure out whether Cassel would or wouldn't be on the roster. He could only have answered it like he did.

 

Just because the odds are stacked against Simms doesn't mean he can't beat them. If he shows well against the Lions, he makes the team. And I agree Ryan wasn't going to say "he'll be the 3rd guy" and really piss off Cassel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bash Cassel as I have watched him play and think he really brings nothing to the table personally.

 

I'm an ABC guy not an EJ lover fwiw. I'm fine w Tyrod.

enough

 

OK so you feel that they should wing it with the two young guys and I think it wouldn't hurt keeping Cassel around even if he's just a #3. Is that worthy of "bwahahahahaha'ing" me, telling me that I'm not a realist and that my logic is flawed?

enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

With a running QB like Tyrod though, doesn't the injury concern have to cause some pause here? Is another tight end, even one who is a ST contributor, more valuable than that insurance? Not leading questions, just asking.

 

If Tyrod went down and we had EJ, who has injury history, and Simms backing him up, that's concerning.

If Aaron Rodgers went down, and the team had to use Scott Tolzien, who has injury history, and Brett Hundley is backing him up, isn't that concerning?

 

If [Name an NFL Starter] went down, and the team had to use [second String QB], who has injury history, and [3rd String QB] is backing him up, isn't that concerning?

 

There aren't 20 people that can play NFL QB on the planet let alone 96. I don't think teams are stressing too much on their 3rd stringer's relevant starting history. If you're down to your 3rd stringer you are F-ed either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Aaron Rodgers went down, and the team had to use Scott Tolzien, who has injury history, and Brett Hundley is backing him up, isn't that concerning?

 

If [Name an NFL Starter] went down, and the team had to use [second String QB], who has injury history, and [3rd String QB] is backing him up, isn't that concerning?

 

There aren't 20 people that can play NFL QB on the planet let alone 96. I don't think teams are stressing too much on their 3rd stringer's relevant starting history. If you're down to your 3rd stringer you are F-ed either way.

That maybe true. But Cassell could as a three.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they let him get the majority of the 1st team reps in order to see if he improve or do something different then what they already know. Guess he didn't show much, but EJ did......(if thats the case). I think EJ shouldn't be cut because he has shown at least some progression this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

His ceiling ??? !!! We can walk on his ceiling. Slow twitch and inaccurate.... not much of a ceiling

You can't be serious. Have you been sleeping for the past couple of weeks? EJ needs a little more work but he's far from the guy who people wanted to push into a hole and throw dirt over.

Edited by DerekJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I would think they put Cassel and EJ on trade wire and see what they can get. But right now who knows. Again, my thought is one (likely EJ) would get traded with other staying (maybe). I also think/thought both could be gone and a backup closer to TT's style would be brought in.

 

Maybe you can get something for EJ, but Cassel, why would anyone trade anything for him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...