GG Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Moulds was actually in a pass happy offense, and he just didn't make any plays and that really hurt the Texans offense. He has not aged gracefully. Some wr's keep their speed and fluid movement skills right to the end, and then one day their hands just start dropping passes and they have to quit. Moulds got noticeably slower each year from 2003 on. It's about then when he stopped making yards after the catch. S-L-O-W. I'm sorry, but it's time for the Moulds lovers to face it, he is done. Texans were a pass happy team? By what standards? They were #23 in pass attempts and #26 in pass yards in '06, which was an improvement over #29 in attempts and #30 in pass yards in '05. Do you think that Andre Johnson felt better about Moulds on the other side than Jabbar Gafney & Corey Bradford? No one is arguing that Eric Moulds is a shadow of himself in 2001. The argument is that shadow is still better than what the Bills bring on the field to complement Evans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Texans announce they will cut Moulds, 1 year 57 catches, 567 yds, 1TD( The first drive and first TD of the season) that signing was doomed from the start. moulds said he wanted to leave bills to get away from a rebuilding team, so he signs with texans? hello!!! but hey he helped texan WR johnson have his best year by far. problem w/ eric he's just not worth the money he wants. he's middle of the pack now and not cream of the crop which he was in the late 90's with the bills. the guy should have a few good years left in him, question is will he play for middle of the pack money? my guess is he will. for example, NE with their caliber team and in desperate need of WRs could be a place for him if he comes cheap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Texans were a pass happy team? By what standards? They were #23 in pass attempts and #26 in pass yards in '06, which was an improvement over #29 in attempts and #30 in pass yards in '05. Do you think that Andre Johnson felt better about Moulds on the other side than Jabbar Gafney & Corey Bradford? No one is arguing that Eric Moulds is a shadow of himself in 2001. The argument is that shadow is still better than what the Bills bring on the field to complement Evans. I don't know if Andre Johnson felt better about having a sh*tty old has-been opposite him than he did about having Gaffney. For what it's worth, Gaffney's 2005 production was damn near identical to Moulds 2006 production. What is OBVIOUS, is that Houston thought Moulds blows, that's why they just cut him. And no, Moulds is not better than Price or Parrish or even Reed at this point. None of those players are outstanding, but Moulds is just plain SHOT. He can't run anymore, which is why he had 50+ receptions and just 1 TD despite defenses keying on Johnson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I don't know if Andre Johnson felt better about having a sh*tty old has-been opposite him than he did about having Gaffney. For what it's worth, Gaffney's 2005 production was damn near identical to Moulds 2006 production. What is OBVIOUS, is that Houston thought Moulds blows, that's why they just cut him. And no, Moulds is not better than Price or Parrish or even Reed at this point. None of those players are outstanding, but Moulds is just plain SHOT. He can't run anymore, which is why he had 50+ receptions and just 1 TD despite defenses keying on Johnson. Yet, with similar production out of the #2 WR, Johnson had a far bigger year in '06 than '05. What is OBVIOUS is that Houston has a new coach who realizes that the team is unlikely to be competitive this year, and it's better to save roster spots for players who may be able to contribute to the team in the next three years. And yes, as a possession receiver, Moulds is better than what the Bills have. Even though he can't "run," why were his yds/catch higher than the speedy Price's? How many passes did Price catch over the middle? How many times did Losman look to Price in clutch situations? (irony that Price caught the winning TD vs Houston, which caught everyone by surprise) Does the fact that Price only caught four 3rd down passes to Moulds' 18 bear any relevance to this discussion? Moulds' attitude aside, do you believe that Bills' receiving unit would be improved if you swapped Moulds for Price? Nice to poo poo his 57 receptions, when that places him at #18 among AFC WRs. Not bad for an old slow guy. Interestingly, his numbers are very similar to the aging Rod Smith & Troy Brown, yet there'd be no question about their utility in the clutch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obie_wan Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I know what you guys are saying im saying i dont believe moulds is done. The only Moulds is not done with is the bitching and backstabbing. He's a true veteran character guy that Marv would be happy to have tearin gup his lockerroom. He was done years ago when he tore his groin muscle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 its official like a referee with a whistle http://www.kffl.com/player/224/nfl i wouldn't mind bringing him back cheap and maybe he and price could duke it out for #2 reciever just for old times sake (they are buddies after all). No. He will kill the existing team chemistry. This team is jelling behind Losman/Evans and Peters and McGahee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Moulds' attitude aside, do you believe that Bills' receiving unit would be improved if you swapped Moulds for Price? No, because as was just proven with Moulds' recent comments about Carr (funny he didn't feel that way BEFORE agreeing to be traded there), his attitude is a major problem and something that's not going away. Maybe he needs to bounce around a few teams like Peerless did to get his ego in-check, but by that time, he'll be ready for retirement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 No. He will kill the existing team chemistry. This team is jelling behind Losman/Evans and Peters and McGahee. McGahee ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 McGahee ???? Yes...Until he gets traded or released he is the starting RB for this team and he is a big part of that offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Yes...Until he gets traded or released he is the starting RB for this team and he is a big part of that offense. Not denying that he is the starting running back. I am just not sure the team is gelling behind him or that he is a 'big' part of the offense ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Not denying that he is the starting running back. I am just not sure the team is gelling behind him or that he is a 'big' part of the offense ... I definitely think he was a big reason for the resurgence in the 2nd half of the season. He had some pretty good games running the ball during that run. The team gelling behind him and the management deciding to trade him because he might not be signable for long-term are two different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I definitely think he was a big reason for the resurgence in the 2nd half of the season. He had some pretty good games running the ball during that run. The team gelling behind him and the management deciding to trade him because he might not be signable for long-term are two different things. We dis-agree and that is perfectly fine. If he was seen as a key piece of the offense going forward, the management (specifically DJ) would have taken steps to pacify the current situation. Him being opened for trading appears to be a pro-active move by the Bills management - not one initiated by WM. This by itself implies that the management is down on his abilities as an individual and team player - not a vote of confidence in favor of him. Consider how they handled the Nate Clements situation last year. The team needed his services for one more year while the coaches evaluated personnel and Levy did the best thing possible at that time. I realize that the WM situation is not the exact opposite but isn't it telling that they are willing to let him go a year before his contract is up ? If they valued him enough for the 2007 season, they would not be worried about him hitting the open market next year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganesh Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 We dis-agree and that is perfectly fine.If he was seen as a key piece of the offense going forward, the management (specifically DJ) would have taken steps to pacify the current situation. Him being opened for trading appears to be a pro-active move by the Bills management - not one initiated by WM. This by itself implies that the management is down on his abilities as an individual and team player - not a vote of confidence in favor of him. Consider how they handled the Nate Clements situation last year. The team needed his services for one more year while the coaches evaluated personnel and Levy did the best thing possible at that time. I realize that the WM situation is not the exact opposite but isn't it telling that they are willing to let him go a year before his contract is up ? If they valued him enough for the 2007 season, they would not be worried about him hitting the open market next year. Except that McGahee would hold out in training camp for a contract extension. McGahee wouldn't have gone into that final year of contract without an extension. Also, the reason for the trade is not that McGahee is not a good back, but more about his ethics. The guy does not work out in Buffalo and prefers Miami. They are trying to build a team approach there and that is crucial to the team development that everyone is in sync. McGahee has requested for a extension and the Bills know that they won't be able to pay for McGahee, Losman and Evans in the next two years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Yet, with similar production out of the #2 WR, Johnson had a far bigger year in '06 than '05. What is OBVIOUS is that Houston has a new coach who realizes that the team is unlikely to be competitive this year, and it's better to save roster spots for players who may be able to contribute to the team in the next three years. And yes, as a possession receiver, Moulds is better than what the Bills have. Even though he can't "run," why were his yds/catch higher than the speedy Price's? How many passes did Price catch over the middle? How many times did Losman look to Price in clutch situations? (irony that Price caught the winning TD vs Houston, which caught everyone by surprise) Does the fact that Price only caught four 3rd down passes to Moulds' 18 bear any relevance to this discussion? Moulds' attitude aside, do you believe that Bills' receiving unit would be improved if you swapped Moulds for Price? Nice to poo poo his 57 receptions, when that places him at #18 among AFC WRs. Not bad for an old slow guy. Interestingly, his numbers are very similar to the aging Rod Smith & Troy Brown, yet there'd be no question about their utility in the clutch. The fact remains, he's through. I saw it with my own two eyes. Houston knows it too, and they DON'T have a new coach and they DO expect to be competitive. Can he find a hole in a zone, turn around and catch one between the numbers for a first down? Sure, but that does not make him a #2 receiver. And no, he's not a better receiver than Price at this point. That's not saying much, but Price can actually still get behind a DB and make a big play. Like it or not, Moulds fans, he is at the same point right now that Troy Vincent was last offseason and yours reminds me EXACTLY of the argument that Pyrite was making about how Vincent was still a quality player because he had lead the Bills in interceptions the year before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In space no one can hear Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 The fact remains, he's through. I saw it with my own two eyes. Houston knows it too, and they DON'T have a new coach and they DO expect to be competitive. Can he find a hole in a zone, turn around and catch one between the numbers for a first down? Sure, but that does not make him a #2 receiver. And no, he's not a better receiver than Price at this point. That's not saying much, but Price can actually still get behind a DB and make a big play. Like it or not, Moulds fans, he is at the same point right now that Troy Vincent was last offseason and yours reminds me EXACTLY of the argument that Pyrite was making about how Vincent was still a quality player because he had lead the Bills in interceptions the year before. Agreed. His best option is to follow the path of so many washed up players that came before him: 1. sign with the Redskins for more money than he is worth 2. be extremely unproductive 3. get cut 4. end up out of the league(but insist that you can still play) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Except that McGahee would hold out in training camp for a contract extension. McGahee wouldn't have gone into that final year of contract without an extension. Also, the reason for the trade is not that McGahee is not a good back, but more about his ethics. The guy does not work out in Buffalo and prefers Miami. They are trying to build a team approach there and that is crucial to the team development that everyone is in sync. McGahee has requested for a extension and the Bills know that they won't be able to pay for McGahee, Losman and Evans in the next two years... Ganesh, I am going to stop our discussion as we have hijacked this thread a bit. Maybe we can pick it up in a more relevant thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted March 7, 2007 Share Posted March 7, 2007 The fact remains, he's through. I saw it with my own two eyes. Houston knows it too, and they DON'T have a new coach and they DO expect to be competitive. Can he find a hole in a zone, turn around and catch one between the numbers for a first down? Sure, but that does not make him a #2 receiver. And no, he's not a better receiver than Price at this point. That's not saying much, but Price can actually still get behind a DB and make a big play. Like it or not, Moulds fans, he is at the same point right now that Troy Vincent was last offseason and yours reminds me EXACTLY of the argument that Pyrite was making about how Vincent was still a quality player because he had lead the Bills in interceptions the year before. In all seriousness, do you think he'd make for a good receiving tight end, sort of like a Ben Watson? I'm not sure he could live with that, but if he put on an extra 5-10 pounds, he'd have the bulk and would certainly be fast enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts