AKC Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 I'm telling you guys the release was because of the (lack of) hot read adjustments, which carried back to last year. 68776[/snapback] The stats for our WR corps this year support your position- While Shaw has only caught 41% of the balls thrown his way this year he has not been credited (or debited as it were) with a drop, while Reed has dropped three of the 13 balls thrown his way, bringing in only 31%. Moulds has dropped 3 also but his total catches (38) and percentage of caught balls is much higher at 68%. For some perspective on Moulds underachieving season so far, Hines Ward has had the same number of balls thown his way this year but he hasn't dropped one, putting him up around 90% in caught balls thrown to him. With Hines Ward on our roster instead of EMoulds it would seem fair to argue we're no worse than a 2-2 team right now. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the Shaw thing as a culmination of read problems, attitude and the fact that the balance of our WR corps needs a serious wake up call. RING RING RING Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 You dopesmokers who say we should trade for Rice-PUT THE BONG DOWN. We need OL help and if we trade for anyone, it should be for an O-lineman. We could have 10 WRs on the field, but if you don't have time to throw, no one can catch the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renfruzetz Posted October 13, 2004 Share Posted October 13, 2004 At first, this move surprised me a little but the more I think about it the more it makes sense. Whether it was TD or MM, the owner calls out our offense. Who's the sacrificial lamb? Depth concerns and upside rule out almost everyone. If the message was "vets aren't immune, WR's have to catch, blown assignments will get you canned"? Bobby Shaw was the perfect choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 i'm willing to bet that shaw was cut for reasons unknown to any of us. sure they said it was his production on and off the field, but i'm willing to bet it was something else... could it be possible that shaw was "cancer" in the locker room. maybe he was continuously bitching about the coaching staff and affecting others with his thoughts? i just don't understand this, not that i really liked bobby shaw, but something stinks in this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I think this may have been more about Eric Moulds and Sam Aiken than about Bobby Shaw. The Bills are likely to cut or trade Eric Moulds after the season: 1. Eric Moulds is declining 2. His cap figure will be $8 million next season 3. Sam Aiken has the same height and weight as Moulds 4. TD will be unable to resist the temptation to solve his cap problems by cutting an overpaid, declining Butler player. 5. When the Losman era begins, it will make sense for him to build chemistry with younger WRs who will be here a while. We can really attack our cap problems by cutting Moulds, but ONLY if we know that Sam Aiken can step into Moulds' shoes. That means getting Aiken playing time NOW rather than later. With Josh Reed underachieving and Bobby Shaw gone, the door is now wide open for Aiken to move into the #3 WR spot this year; en route to being one of our two starting WRs next year. I realize that Aiken for Moulds will probably be a downgrade. But with salary cap problems, you are going to get hurt somewhere. Probably Aiken for Moulds will give us a lot of salary cap improvement for only a little pain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I think this may have been more about Eric Moulds and Sam Aiken than about Bobby Shaw. The Bills are likely to cut or trade Eric Moulds after the season: 1. Eric Moulds is declining 2. His cap figure will be $8 million next season 3. Sam Aiken has the same height and weight as Moulds 4. TD will be unable to resist the temptation to solve his cap problems by cutting an overpaid, declining Butler player. 5. When the Losman era begins, it will make sense for him to build chemistry with younger WRs who will be here a while. We can really attack our cap problems by cutting Moulds, but ONLY if we know that Sam Aiken can step into Moulds' shoes. That means getting Aiken playing time NOW rather than later. With Josh Reed underachieving and Bobby Shaw gone, the door is now wide open for Aiken to move into the #3 WR spot this year; en route to being one of our two starting WRs next year. I realize that Aiken for Moulds will probably be a downgrade. But with salary cap problems, you are going to get hurt somewhere. Probably Aiken for Moulds will give us a lot of salary cap improvement for only a little pain. 69911[/snapback] Interesting take. But if Moulds is gone, Evans is #1, and Aiken is #3, who is #2??? At this time, I'm not sold on having Josh Reed start at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zamboni Man Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I wouldn't like it if we traded Moulds, but I bet we could swing a trade and get a first round pick for him. As far as Jerry Rice is concerned, I won't be suprised if he ends up in New England if he does get traded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Interesting take. But if Moulds is gone, Evans is #1, and Aiken is #3, who is #2???At this time, I'm not sold on having Josh Reed start at all. 69947[/snapback] In my scenario, Aiken moves up to #3 this year, and pairs with Evans to be part of our top two next year. Evans may already be the best WR on this team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 In my scenario, Aiken moves up to #3 this year, and pairs with Evans to be part of our top two next year. Evans may already be the best WR on this team. 69977[/snapback] Before we write-off Eric, let's see what he's willing to do with his contract first. He's always been a team player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 I wouldn't like it if we traded Moulds, but I bet we could swing a trade and get a first round pick for him. As far as Jerry Rice is concerned, I won't be suprised if he ends up in New England if he does get traded. 69954[/snapback] Imo, Eric would be tough to trade. As cp posted, he is under contract to earn approx 11.5 million in 05 and 06. I dont think that too many teams would pay this money to an aging wideout. I would like to see a renegotiation, but it is a safe bet that Eric will not play in Buffalo in 05 with his current contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CentralVaBills Posted October 14, 2004 Share Posted October 14, 2004 Message Received. WTF? 68330[/snapback] This isn't even a big deal. Big friggin deal, they cut Bobby Shaw. Yeah, this sends a clear message......it says that if you suck a few times and your a nobody, you're gone. If you suck, and you are not a no-name, then you'll continue to play. Shaw, big friggin deal. Bench someone who is a slacker (Mike Williams), OR who is just playing bad football (Henry), and then talk to me. Ummm, Shaw cut? Who cares. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts