Jump to content

Lacanfora: Seahawks tried to trade for Glenn


YoloinOhio

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 165
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

The wheels will come off quickly if we lose to the Bucs and Taylor plays like trash in the process.

 

Beane and McD need to understand that in the NFL 'trusting the process' means win now or find a new job in a few years. They have the assets to immediately improve this roster, not too mention benching Taylor for Peterman to get things moving.

 

This act is beyond old. The topic here is about CORDY GLENN. I swear, someone could start a topic about eating ribs and you'd find a way to bring it back to your crusade, e.g "Tyrod doesn't even eat meat. You know who eats plenty of meat? Peterman, they should start him." Give it a rest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It makes no sense to trade Cordy - unless there is a long term injury concern. He has tons of talent. We made the mistake of not paying Peters and got lucky in being able to pick Cordy in the draft where we did.

 

It was not mistake with Peters - the Bills had three years left and caved due to an agent in hell now.

 

It was not luck with Glenn - he was targeted by front office with leaks foolishly distributed by press that Bills were looking at him (like other teams) as a guard at bottom of 2nd round while information they scouted stated he would make a good tackle.

 

This act is beyond old. The topic here is about CORDY GLENN. I swear, someone could start a topic about eating ribs and you'd find a way to bring it back to your crusade, e.g "Tyrod doesn't even eat meat. You know who eats plenty of meat? Peterman, they should start him." Give it a rest.

 

It is called campaigning and is against the rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really hope they don't trade Glenn. Before this current injury he has been a very reliable, and very good, LT. I know this new regime is all about availability but IIRC Glenn hardly missed a game until this foot injury. It's just unfortunate that it continued into this season.

 

Glad to hear thr asking price was high. I wouldn't give him up for less than a 1st (and maybe a player too, but I'm not sure how realistic that is). I'd rather just keep him though. He doesn't seem to be a problem on or off the field, or have any attitude issues etc.

Beside his relatively high cap hit (which I am ok with) I don't really see any reason why they'd want to get rid of him anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would we not just play Glenn at RT? Im worried that pride is an issue with this staff. Seems like Mc-D would rather lose with his guys, then win with someone elses...I hope im wrong.

I have those slight concerns too. Staying positive and hope I am wrong.

 

The first red flag to me is Miller vs Ducasse. This would be the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This act is beyond old. The topic here is about CORDY GLENN. I swear, someone could start a topic about eating ribs and you'd find a way to bring it back to your crusade, e.g "Tyrod doesn't even eat meat. You know who eats plenty of meat? Peterman, they should start him." Give it a rest.

 

Your post shows the limits of the ignore function. When you quote a guy I ignore, I end up seeing his posts as part of your post.

 

Using the ignore function not only benefits you, it's also a public service. Think about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a whole lot of stank coming off of the initial tweet, as well as the article that was linked, regarding any trade talks.

 

Glenn's price tag is not exactly a secret. So, how do trade talks stall over his price tag?

 

Are we supposed to believe that no one in the Seahawks organization has the ability to look up a contract that was filed with the NFL?

Or at least thought to look at something like RotoWorld, like any average joe could: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7482/cordy-glenn

 

They could have stalled over the trade compensation, but the price tag? I don't think so.

oh my are you Emily Litella (Gilda Radner) ......you must be joking right??

 

Pricetag comment means how much assets Bills wanted in trade to move Glenn to Seahawks. NOT how much his contract salary is.

Edited by cba fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sureee LaCanfora. If it is true, glad to hear that the Seahawks have learned that we don't give away our best players for nuthin anymore.

 

What a bargain we gave them for Beast Mode smh

 

 

 

Not like we had a choice at that time. Lynch averaged 3.8 and 3.6 YPC in 2009 and 2010. Everyone knew he wanted out of Buffalo and it was his 4th year. Nobody was giving us anything significant for him under those circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It was not mistake with Peters - the Bills had three years left and caved due to an agent in hell now.

 

It was not luck with Glenn - he was targeted by front office with leaks foolishly distributed by press that Bills were looking at him (like other teams) as a guard at bottom of 2nd round while information they scouted stated he would make a good tackle.

 

 

 

 

 

It was absolutely a mistake with Peters. The bracketing shows he was aiming for the contract he got with Philly, which turned out to be an extremely reasonable value for Peters, who has a good shot at the hall of fame at this point.

 

While we ended up with three or so years of Demetrius Bell and even for a moment or two Langston Walker, a void that continually left our QBs open to thunderous surprise hits.

 

And what the Bills did with Glenn may have been spreading disinformation but that's par for the course.

Edited by Thurman#1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's not farfetched to think something is up when you're highest paid offensive lineman is an emergency tackle and the HC can't commit to him starting when healthy.

 

 

 

Who - among guys not playing - have they committed to playing when he gets back.

 

"We'll see" and "The best guy will play" are their default positions.

 

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. They haven't seen him play healthy consistently yet. Of course they aren't committing to him. The guy's played 81 snaps, 73 offensive. Of all Bills who've played that little, how many have McDermott committed to starting?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Who - among guys not playing - have they committed to playing when he gets back.

 

"We'll see" and "The best guy will play" are their default positions.

 

I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill here. They haven't seen him play healthy consistently yet. Of course they aren't committing to him. The guy's played 81 snaps, 73 offensive. Of all Bills who've played that little, how many have McDermott committed to starting?

 

I don't think I'm making a mountain out of a mole hole. I just think there's suspicion when asked "is he your starting LT when he's healthy" and he can't say yes. Now we have 5 tackles on the active roster?

Jordan Matthews hasn't been consistently healthy in camp or the regular season. I'm sure if McDermott is asked "Is Matthews a starting WR when he's healthy/back?" I would be a dollar that McDermott says "yes".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It was not mistake with Peters - the Bills had three years left and caved due to an agent in hell now.

 

It was not luck with Glenn - he was targeted by front office with leaks foolishly distributed by press that Bills were looking at him (like other teams) as a guard at bottom of 2nd round while information they scouted stated he would make a good tackle.

 

It is called campaigning and is against the rules.

 

Jason Peters' career clearly has shown it was a mistake to not keep him.

 

As for Cordy, my use of the word "lucky" refers to the fact that he was still there when we picked him. We may have targeted him, but there was no guaranty that someone with his talent would still be there when we picked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Jason Peters' career clearly has shown it was a mistake to not keep him.

 

As for Cordy, my use of the word "lucky" refers to the fact that he was still there when we picked him. We may have targeted him, but there was no guaranty that someone with his talent would still be there when we picked.

I'm sorry. But oooof
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...