Jump to content

Greg Olsen visiting Bills, Redskins, Seahawks


FluffHead

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

I must just be dense or tired or something, but I don't understand his final sentence and conclusion:

 

Signing Greg Olsen wouldn't be a force. It wouldn't be putting a band-aid over a position the Bills need to desperately improve.

Signing Olsen would be a sign that 'The Process' is staying the course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Logic said:

Brandon Beane said he wants to get more "touchdown makers" for the Bills offense. That doesn't just have to mean wide receivers. A Henry/Knox or Hooper/Knox combo would be awesome. Most likely, they just roll with Kroft again (or Olsen, if he picks us), but consider me firmly in the minority of people who'd rather they sign a younger option. 

I love that quote from Beane. I get that it might be a bit of lip service, but I think they understand that they need to give Josh more weapons. To me though, that’s the type of quote that makes me think more and more that they take Shenault if he’s there at 22. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I must just be dense or tired or something, but I don't understand his final sentence and conclusion:

 

Signing Greg Olsen wouldn't be a force. It wouldn't be putting a band-aid over a position the Bills need to desperately improve.

Signing Olsen would be a sign that 'The Process' is staying the course.

 

Signing Greg Olsen wouldn't mean the team is signing a player who doesn't make sense for the team. Signing Olsen wouldn't be a desperation signing for a team with no prospects at TE who just needs anyone that might be good at the position. Signing Olsen would be consistent with the team philosophy of signing mid-ter FAs who can contribute and add leadership. - That's my translation fwiw.  

Edited by ndirish1978
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ndirish1978 said:

Signing Greg Olsen wouldn't mean the team is signing a player who doesn't make sense for the team. Signing Olsen wouldn't be a desperation signing for a team with no prospects at TE who just needs anyone that might be good at the position. Signing Olsen would be consistent with the team philosophy of signing mid-ter FAs who can contribute and add leadership. - That's my translation fwiw.  

 

That makes sense, Thanks!   I was confused by his use of the word "force".  I thought "force to be reckoned with" or "may the Force be with you" while he must mean "wouldn't be forcing a guy onto the roster due to desperate need"

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

That makes sense, Thanks!   I was confused by his use of the word "force".  I thought "force to be reckoned with" or "may the Force be with you" while he must mean "wouldn't be forcing a guy onto the roster due to desperate need"

 

I actually think he's saying that signing Olsen wouldn't improve our TE production and he's mocking the process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2020 at 11:46 AM, Logic said:

Personally, I'd love to see the Bills add another legitimate target at tight end. 

People seem to act as if spending big money on one of the younger guys like Henry or Hooper would be foolish, because it would take reps away from Dawson Knox.

I don't understand this line of thinking.

The Patriots offense seemed to me to be at its most lethal when it had two legitimate tight ends. The degree to which offenses can put opposing defenses in a bind by coming out in 12 personnel featuring two legitimate receiving and blocking tight ends should not be underestimated.

Brandon Beane said he wants to get more "touchdown makers" for the Bills offense. That doesn't just have to mean wide receivers. A Henry/Knox or Hooper/Knox combo would be awesome. Most likely, they just roll with Kroft again (or Olsen, if he picks us), but consider me firmly in the minority of people who'd rather they sign a younger option. 

are we actually in the minority ?

18 hours ago, Dkollidas said:

I love that quote from Beane. I get that it might be a bit of lip service, but I think they understand that they need to give Josh more weapons. To me though, that’s the type of quote that makes me think more and more that they take Shenault if he’s there at 22. 

Not with that nasty ***** bone thing going on ........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2020 at 12:08 PM, 2003Contenders said:

Given that his family lives (and apparently wants to stay) in Carolina, I would imagine his geographic preference would be Washington. That being the case, Seattle would seem to be his least inviting option.

 

He's not going to jump in the car after practice and drive to DC and I'm pretty sure he can afford plane tickets so I don't imagine location from Carolina really has anything to do with where he'll sign otherwise why even waste his time with Seattle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

Ladies and Gents - the Pegula jet landed in Seattle 2 hours ago

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/XSR960

 

I am truly shocked by this, I really thought we would go younger

 

 

Got me....damn...I am thinking Reed83HOF is a stand-up poster and a wonderful person..never even entered my mind.  Nice new photo at least.

Edited by JoeF
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did we win?

12 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:


I would not expect to hear anything definitive before Friday at the earliest.


And for the record, it’s only a hunch, but I believe Olsen will end up retiring.

He was on during Super Bowl week saying how he loves training(who loves that *****?) and just wants to get back into playing. I don't see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...