eball Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 …if this was already mentioned I apologize. Rumor is that the Pats*** were targeting either Coleman or Legette and had a deal “construct” in place with Buffalo before Beane dealt with Carolina instead, therefore taking away both of the Pats*** targets. They then moved back further from #34. I love it. 3 2 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 Not sure if this got merged into the Random Talking Head thread or it was posted there initially. Still, you love......uh.... I mean hate...... yeah, this is terrible, to see it everywhere. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 29 minutes ago, eball said: …if this was already mentioned I apologize. Rumor is that the Pats*** were targeting either Coleman or Legette and had a deal “construct” in place with Buffalo before Beane dealt with Carolina instead, therefore taking away both of the Pats*** targets. They then moved back further from #34. I love it. I wish they would have c***blocked the Chiefs instead 3 8 2 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt_In_NH Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 I am not one to care about this but I will ask the question. Why didn’t they cockblock the chiefs? Bottom line the bills did what they felt was right for them in the trades they made and did I not make. 2 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 (edited) 1 hour ago, eball said: …if this was already mentioned I apologize. Rumor is that the Pats*** were targeting either Coleman or Legette and had a deal “construct” in place with Buffalo before Beane dealt with Carolina instead, therefore taking away both of the Pats*** targets. They then moved back further from #34. I love it. It sounds like the Bills were down with either of them. It’s a little ironic though that they went down 4 spots giving KC their guy but were like, “oh no, not the Pats.” That feels backwards to me. 🤷🏻♂️ Either way, messing with the Pats is hilarious. They let them negotiate the deal and then took it to Carolina 😂😂. Edited May 6 by Kirby Jackson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calidiehard Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 3 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: It sounds like the Bills were done with either of them. It’s a little ironic though that they went down 4 spots giving KC their guy but were like, “oh no, not the Pats.” That feels backwards to me. 🤷🏻♂️ Either way, messing with the Pats is hilarious. They let them negotiate the deal and then took it to Carolina 😂😂. It's because the Pats were targeting the guy they wanted in Coleman. 8 5 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
518Buffalo Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: It sounds like the Bills were done with either of them. It’s a little ironic though that they went down 4 spots giving KC their guy but were like, “oh no, not the Pats.” That feels backwards to me. 🤷🏻♂️ Either way, messing with the Pats is hilarious. They let them negotiate the deal and then took it to Carolina 😂😂. If the Bills wanted Legette or Coleman they could move down one spot and definitely get one of them. If they knew the Pats wanted those guys too and Legette was Carolina's guy then they could have moved back 2 spots and been out of luck. Also possible Beane went to Carolina and said "hey New England is giving us X to move up, if you can beat that offer we'll swap picks so you can get your guy" which honestly makes more sense from Carolina's perspective why they gave up a relatively high amount to trade up one spot. 8 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 6 minutes ago, Calidiehard said: It's because the Pats were targeting the guy they wanted in Coleman. I understand that. They were okay going from 28 to 32 not knowing if Coleman would be there. What is the Pats went to 31? What is SF took him instead of Pearsall? There’s layers to this… 2 minutes ago, 518Buffalo said: If the Bills wanted Legette or Coleman they could move down one spot and definitely get one of them. If they knew the Pats wanted those guys too and Legette was Carolina's guy then they could have moved back 2 spots and been out of luck. Also possible Beane went to Carolina and said "hey New England is giving us X to move up, if you can beat that offer we'll swap picks so you can get your guy" which honestly makes more sense from Carolina's perspective why they gave up a relatively high amount to trade up one spot. I understand that. See above ^. When they went from 28 to 32 there was no guarantee that Coleman OR Legette would be there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 10 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: It sounds like the Bills were done with either of them. It’s a little ironic though that they went down 4 spots giving KC their guy but were like, “oh no, not the Pats.” That feels backwards to me. 🤷🏻♂️ Either way, messing with the Pats is hilarious. They let them negotiate the deal and then took it to Carolina 😂😂. Beane said he could care less who the Chiefs were picking. When the Chiefs took Worthy, Beane knew what the Pats were trying to do. They were moving for Legette or Coleman, one of the remaining 2nd Tier WR's, to pair with their newly drafted QB. Beane knew their cupboard was pretty bare and said, "Nope. Sorry, not Sorry." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calidiehard Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: I understand that. They were okay going from 28 to 32 not knowing if Coleman would be there. What is the Pats went to 31? What is SF took him instead of Pearsall? There’s layers to this… That's a risk you take moving too the back of the 1st to get the 3rd he wanted back knowing the Chiefs were targeting speed. Beane stated they didn't have any more 1st round grades at that point and was willing to take chances. I'm guessing if Coleman was gone we would have taken either Ladd, AD, Pearsall, or Polk. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Doug Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 I wonder how much GMs tell each other on draft day. For example, prior to a trade, do they tell the partnering team who they will be selecting? If so, it makes sense that we traded with the Chiefs. This is further supported by Beane saying the Chiefs would’ve picked Worthy anyways. If we knew they were going to pick a player we weren’t interested in, it makes sense to trade the pick to them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 37 minutes ago, Calidiehard said: It's because the Pats were targeting the guy they wanted in Coleman. Yea I said all along they knew who Dan Morgan wanted. He and Beane are tight. Its a rare case where a GM would say "come on who is your guy, as long as its not our guy I'll do it" and because if their relationship Morgan is gonna tell him. 4 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Low Positive Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 I don’t know why the Pats are complaining. Isn’t it standard operating procedure for GMs to call around to see if anyone is willing to beat a deal? And the Bills only had to make one call. The fact that they worked the Pats over is just gravy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweats Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 The whole scenario has Jacksonville rookie GM from "Draft Day" written all over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: It sounds like the Bills were down with either of them. It’s a little ironic though that they went down 4 spots giving KC their guy but were like, “oh no, not the Pats.” That feels backwards to me. 🤷🏻♂️ Either way, messing with the Pats is hilarious. They let them negotiate the deal and then took it to Carolina 😂😂. The Pats aren’t our rival lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WotAGuy Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 What I want to know is how the ***** is cockblocked allowed but the b-word isn’t? 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starr-Bills Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 3 hours ago, eball said: …if this was already mentioned I apologize. Rumor is that the Pats*** were targeting either Coleman or Legette and had a deal “construct” in place with Buffalo before Beane dealt with Carolina instead, therefore taking away both of the Pats*** targets. They then moved back further from #34. I love it. If true this makes the Draft a win in my book. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler#81 Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 18 minutes ago, WotAGuy said: What I want to know is how the ***** is cockblocked allowed but the b-word isn’t? The answer is simple. You just have to ***** ****** the ******* *****, then ***** **** ******. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NORWOODS FOOT Posted May 6 Share Posted May 6 Now if they can just 🐓 🧱 the whole NFL and win a Lombardi… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.