Jump to content

Buffalo Bills are reportedly interested in DE Chandler Jones

BuffaloBills1998

By BuffaloBills1998
in The Stadium Wall

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 398
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Brand J
Brand J

Do whatever you gotta do to fit his contract under the cap, up to and including trading Edmunds’ $12.7M/yr figure.

Milanos Milano
Milanos Milano

Whatever it takes. Make it happen. If we can manage to land Jones and Gronkowski, I will consider this offseason a success. 

Not at the table Karlos
Not at the table Karlos

Posted Images

Negan RFA

Negan

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

He was at Duffs the other day riding a Buffalo I heard. 

 

Watching walking dead right now and Negan made an appearance as you posted. 

I have to watch it when I'm done working tonight lol.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big Turk Hall of Famer

Big Turk

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, Negan said:

Has anyone seen Jones at Duffs yet or tracked the Pegula jet?

 

I was still waiting for them to reopen Tempo and have Buddy Nix and Russ Brandon go in the back entrance in disguise so as not be seen for this to be truly official.

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

smuvtalker

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, smuvtalker said:

F*****g hilarious!!  😅

True story, that was the first movie date I ever took my wife to see when we first started dating.  I sat in the theater and cried laughing throughout the movie, while she just sat in mortified silence staring at me.  It took like three weeks to get a second date.   I think it was because halfway through the movie, I said, "excuse me, I will return, I must go to the sh*thole to remove dirt from a-noose." 😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoSaint Hall of Famer

NoSaint

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

I want Jones

 

I just dont know how we afford him given the money that is being dulled out by teams today

Turns out the bills are also a team today. 
 

do you think we are back in the 90s or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Locomark Veteran

Locomark

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, muppy said:

haha lets start a trend. Instead of all the Williams who have played for Buffalo lets do a run in Jones'..........2 on Defense would be amazing just sayin'......

Jinx… I just said almost the exact same thing on the Jones singing thread…

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
muppy Hall of Famer

muppy

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

he really is a fan board fav Yep.  Maybe on a short term deal to put our defense over the top..? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
H2o Hall of Famer

H2o

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

Multiple pass rushers have been effective into their mid-30's. Jones seems like one of those guys to me. In every season he's played in at least 15 games, he's had at least 10.5 sacks. Last year be had 41 QB pressures and 26 QB hits to go with his 10.5 sacks. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Virgil All Pro

Virgil

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Chandler Jones and Daquon Jones aren't related.........but both from Binghamton high schools and same age range........their careers are followed closely by locals.    

 

Not sure if they are friends.

 

If we get Chandler Jones, I'll just be happy I won't have to track which Jones is which when not writing the reviews anymore.  Tracking lineman is frustrating at times

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ExWNYer Veteran

ExWNYer

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Chandler Jones and Daquon Jones aren't related.........but both from Binghamton high schools and same age range........their careers are followed closely by locals.    

 

Not sure if they are friends.

 

So these people are literally keeping up with the Joneses. 🤔

  • Haha (+1) 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patrick Duffy All Pro

Patrick Duffy

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Negan said:

Could be down to Bills and maybe 1 other team I hope 🙏 

It makes you wonder if that's the case that something is lined up for most part because he has not been mentioned at all with any team today to my knowledge. With him considered a pretty popular name available it's a little surprising I haven't heard him mentioned yet

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

This is so silly it’s hardly worth a response. You used Deion Sanders in your example as a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren’t visible and related that to Edmunds making impact plays that aren’t visible because teams are reluctant to throw in his area. Is that not what you’re doing in comparing Sanders impact to Edmunds? The length you will go to, to justify your rationale and then claim the comparison wasn’t your intention is ridiculous beyond measure. 
 

Ask yourself this… why do you more put on your wrinkly slacks and plastic rent-a-cop badge to patrol these threads? You claim everyone is entitled to an opinion, yet the first post in this thread you commented on had nothing to do with my “that’s just reality” claim. It was an opinion that was liked and supported by others but you swooped in with your “little fella” name calling. You need a bat signal, or better yet, a Tremaine Edmunds signal that entices you to crawl out of hiding whenever you do miss a critique. The effort must be exhausting on your behalf and you derailed this thread to make it about you and I, good job. 
 

Another poster above told me to “give it a rest,” but it’s you who constantly chirps at me, so who truly is the one who should give it a rest? I enjoy arguments, debates, and banter, it’s the reason I haven’t put you on ignore, even if you do go to great lengths to justify things no matter how faulty the logic. It’s annoying, but also humorous. This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post. Get a life… put that in your fecund mind.

 

 

 

No. That is simply bull#### you're talking there. Flat-out, pure 100% crap.

 

Yes, I did use Deion as an example of a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren't visible. No, I did not "comparing Sanders' impact to Edmunds," and you know it. Pure crap there.

 

To repeat, you said, " “Ignoring all the impact plays that don’t happen” is quite possibly the most baseless argument I’ve ever heard one use to defend a player. It’s an argument built on supposition and assumption."

 

I used the example of Deion to show that your argument wasn't just wrong, but stupid. Deion is probably the single most obvious example of a guy who proves that plays that don't happen can be huge. There were a lot of times when nobody threw near Deion, and yet all those plays that never happened were huge. No mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same sentence. Not even any mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same paragraph. Only use of Deion to attack your argument.

 

Again, the first person to compare the two was you, when you created your sad little straw man argument there. You said it, then were so happy about the idea that you'd created that you didn't just use it talking to me that you boasted about your kindness in not using my name in an early post about it, and then said I must be old not to remember that I'd made an argument I'd never made, an argument created entirely by you.

 

And I do have to crack up with you. I'm the one who "cracks at you," apparently? You're just an innocent little sweet thing, not insulting me for possibly being old, not consistently  ? Yeah, again, dumb argument. Both of us are involved here. And it ain't a coincidence that that poster told you to drop it, but not me.

 

You're the one who leapt in with the first post of the thread, so desperate to insult Edmunds that you felt it was worth the rudeness of thread-napping.

 

 

 

Oh, and yet more classic stuff in your post here. "This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post." Yeah, um, that's not how thread-napping works, dude. Nor any form of rudeness in conversation. The first guy who changes the subject doesn't to say the guy who answered his rudeness is the one at fault. You brought the whole thing up. And it's something you and yours do with tremendous consistency.

 

Some guy posts a thread on something he wants to talk about, and you or someone like you immediately darts in to change the subject to moan and whinge about Edmunds. Just like you did here. With such desperate eagerness that you were in whining and moaning about your feelings about Edmunds 6 minutes after the OP thought he'd start a conversation about Chandler Jones.

 

You won't accept responsibility for thread-napping. And you say it's only me and apparently not you who's cracking back. Two posts and we can see an absolute inability to accept even partial responsibility, from the guy who first thread-napped.

 

Pitiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
NewEra Hall of Famer

NewEra

Posted
Posted
On 3/14/2022 at 6:59 AM, JayBaller10 said:

This is so silly it’s hardly worth a response. You used Deion Sanders in your example as a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren’t visible and related that to Edmunds making impact plays that aren’t visible because teams are reluctant to throw in his area. Is that not what you’re doing in comparing Sanders impact to Edmunds? The length you will go to, to justify your rationale and then claim the comparison wasn’t your intention is ridiculous beyond measure. 
 

Ask yourself this… why do you more put on your wrinkly slacks and plastic rent-a-cop badge to patrol these threads? You claim everyone is entitled to an opinion, yet the first post in this thread you commented on had nothing to do with my “that’s just reality” claim. It was an opinion that was liked and supported by others but you swooped in with your “little fella” name calling. You need a bat signal, or better yet, a Tremaine Edmunds signal that entices you to crawl out of hiding whenever you do miss a critique. The effort must be exhausting on your behalf and you derailed this thread to make it about you and I, good job. 
 

Another poster above told me to “give it a rest,” but it’s you who constantly chirps at me, so who truly is the one who should give it a rest? I enjoy arguments, debates, and banter, it’s the reason I haven’t put you on ignore, even if you do go to great lengths to justify things no matter how faulty the logic. It’s annoying, but also humorous. This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post. Get a life… put that in your fecund mind.

 

12 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

No. That is simply bull#### you're talking there. Flat-out, pure 100% crap.

 

Yes, I did use Deion as an example of a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren't visible. No, I did not "comparing Sanders' impact to Edmunds," and you know it. Pure crap there.

 

To repeat, you said, " “Ignoring all the impact plays that don’t happen” is quite possibly the most baseless argument I’ve ever heard one use to defend a player. It’s an argument built on supposition and assumption."

 

I used the example of Deion to show that your argument wasn't just wrong, but stupid. Deion is probably the single most obvious example of a guy who proves that plays that don't happen can be huge. There were a lot of times when nobody threw near Deion, and yet all those plays that never happened were huge. No mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same sentence. Not even any mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same paragraph. Only use of Deion to attack your argument.

 

Again, the first person to compare the two was you, when you created your sad little straw man argument there. You said it, then were so happy about the idea that you'd created that you didn't just use it talking to me that you boasted about your kindness in not using my name in an early post about it, and then said I must be old not to remember that I'd made an argument I'd never made, an argument created entirely by you.

 

And I do have to crack up with you. I'm the one who "cracks at you," apparently? You're just an innocent little sweet thing, not insulting me for possibly being old, not consistently  ? Yeah, again, dumb argument. Both of us are involved here. And it ain't a coincidence that that poster told you to drop it, but not me.

 

You're the one who leapt in with the first post of the thread, so desperate to insult Edmunds that you felt it was worth the rudeness of thread-napping.

 

 

 

Oh, and yet more classic stuff in your post here. "This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post." Yeah, um, that's not how thread-napping works, dude. Nor any form of rudeness in conversation. The first guy who changes the subject doesn't to say the guy who answered his rudeness is the one at fault. You brought the whole thing up. And it's something you and yours do with tremendous consistency.

 

Some guy posts a thread on something he wants to talk about, and you or someone like you immediately darts in to change the subject to moan and whinge about Edmunds. Just like you did here. With such desperate eagerness that you were in whining and moaning about your feelings about Edmunds 6 minutes after the OP thought he'd start a conversation about Chandler Jones.

 

You won't accept responsibility for thread-napping. And you say it's only me and apparently not you who's cracking back. Two posts and we can see an absolute inability to accept even partial responsibility, from the guy who first thread-napped.

 

Pitiful.

Maybe you two should continue this nonsense in private messages from here on out gents 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thurman#1 Hall of Famer

Thurman#1

Posted
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, NewEra said:

 

Maybe you two should continue this nonsense in private messages from here on out gents 

 

 

I would have zero interest in saying anything that was purely to him, honestly. The fun for me is in pointing out ridiculousness for everyone to see.

 

Perfectly willing, though, to honor the Chandler Jones focus of this thread. It ain't me who threadnaps so relentlessly on this subject [EDIT: nor just him, but it's constant overall with one group of folks]. As for continuation, though, there are two of us responsible, despite the belief of one of us that it's only me.

 

 

Edited by Thurman#1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...