atlbillsfan1975 Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 As a Bills fan number 1 and a Falcons fan 2, i love this for the Falcons. They need a vetran presence in the locker room. They just let Brooking and Malloy walk (rightfully so), and last year cut Crumpler and Dunn. Gonzo can definetly still play, and would be exactly what the Falcons were missing last year on offense. At 33 he probably has atleast another 2-3 years left. I also like th emove for the bills because it takes one more team off the board for him. Do you guys really think the Pats go for him? They never use the TE that much, and they do have Watson still right? I think NE goes heavy D in the draft. They need help all over the place in the Defensive backfield, also another LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 The Bills are probably still interested in Gonzalez. I would happily give up a #2 and a#5 to get him. We have a GAPING hole at Tight End (there is absolutely no proof he nixed a deal last year to buffalo). A tight end is even more crucial to the running game as a Blocker. That is why Pettigrew is rated so high (top ten talent wise on many boards). There is no way in hell he lasts into the second round. TIGHT END IS ABSOLUTELY THE WEAKEST position on the team. i know many want the bills to draft a DE with the #1 pick, but i guarantee he will be a backup for all of the first year. Pettigrew or Gonzalez would start immediately. I want the Bills to trade down a little and then grab Pettigrew. Either way, getting Gonzalez by trade or Pettigrew in the draft would fill the biggest hole on our team. Are you insane?? A #2 and a #5 for a 33 year old TE that says he has "one, maybe two years left"??? We have gaping holes at LG, OLB, and DE too, should we fill those with hope and delusion?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 should we fill those with hope and delusion?? Isn't that the Bills' free agency plan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RunTheBall Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 I say draft Pettigrew at #11 if thats the guy we want. I'm not sold on these DE's as instant starters and think we could get a solid guy who make take a year or 2 to develop in the 2nd or 3rd. RTB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 I say draft Pettigrew at #11 if thats the guy we want. I'm not sold on these DE's as instant starters and think we could get a solid guy who make take a year or 2 to develop in the 2nd or 3rd. RTB That's why you're not a GM. If Atlanta trades for Gonzo Pettigrew's demand is even lower and he potentially drops even further. Why take - and pay - a guy at #11 when you can do it at #25 or lower??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 #25 or lower??? How much lower do you think he'll go? 7 spots after 25 and you'll be homeless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 New England has taken two "Blocking" Tight Ends with recent 1st round picks. If Pettigrew were still there when New England picks at #23, i'd bet they take him. 2001 6 Richard Seymour DT Georgia 2002 21 Daniel Graham TE Colorado 2003 13 Ty Warren DT Texas A&M 2004 21 Vince Wilfork DT Miami (FL) 2004 34 Benjamin Watson TE Georgia 2005 32 Logan Mankins OG Fresno State 2006 21 Laurence Maroney RB Minnesota 2007 24 Brandon Meriweather S Miami (FL) 2008 10 Jerod Mayo LB Tennessee to Mr Leonidas.....IF we were lucky enough to get Gonzalez with a #2 & (#5's are useless), we could use our #1 pick on one of those other gaping holes you mentioned. i guess our priorities are different. I dont see a gaping hole at DE, i see three average players already signed to big contracts, but i would like to see a huge upgrade there. Chambers filled in admirably when Peters was out last year, i'm sure he can do the same at LG. We just signed KC former starting MLB which could put Puz at OLB. In my Opinion, we have NO viable option at Tight End, a position i believe is crucial for both the run and pass and therefore a bigger "need". It's no secret i'm a fan of Pettigrew, i would be thrilled if we picked him at #11. I would prefer we trade down, pick up an extra draft choice and still get Pettigrew. I just prefer a Blocking first TE with good hands who improves the run game over a "great hands" TE who can stretch the field, but not effectively block. For the record, i don't like any of these so called Hybrid DE's in this years draft. The only way i don't pick Pettigrew is if the DT Raji or the OT Andre Smith is there at #11, but i expect BOTH to be gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 How much lower do you think he'll go?7 spots after 25 and you'll be homeless good thing it's starting to get warm out... New England has taken two "Blocking" Tight Ends with recent 1st round picks. If Pettigrew were still there when New England picks at #23, i'd bet they take him. $100 says they don't. Deal? to Mr Leonidas.....IF we were lucky enough to get Gonzalez with a #2 & (#5's are useless), we could use our #1 pick on one of those other gaping holes you mentioned. Seriously? You want to have this discussion?? to Mr Leonidas.....IF we were lucky enough to get Gonzalez with a #2 & (#5's are useless), we could use our #1 pick on one of those other gaping holes you mentioned. i guess our priorities are different. I dont see a gaping hole at DE, i see three average players already signed to big contracts, but i would like to see a huge upgrade there. Chambers filled in admirably when Peters was out last year, i'm sure he can do the same at LG. We just signed KC former starting MLB which could put Puz at OLB. In my Opinion, we have NO viable option at Tight End, a position i believe is crucial for both the run and pass and therefore a bigger "need". It's no secret i'm a fan of Pettigrew, i would be thrilled if we picked him at #11. I would prefer we trade down, pick up an extra draft choice and still get Pettigrew. I just prefer a Blocking first TE with good hands who improves the run game over a "great hands" TE who can stretch the field, but not effectively block. For the record, i don't like any of these so called Hybrid DE's in this years draft. The only way i don't pick Pettigrew is if the DT Raji or the OT Andre Smith is there at #11, but i expect BOTH to be gone. If you don't see a gaping hole at DE then start watching the games. And I hope you're right about Andre Smith being gone. I don't want anything to do with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papazoid Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 i absolutely see a lack of top level talent at the DE position. it's hard to cover all the bases in these brief posts. i would be inclined to draft defensive lineman with my #1 draft pick almost every year as i feel it's the most important group to be dominant in. we are playing word games , but i dont see a "gaping" hole as Schoelbel has been All pro and Kelsay and Denney are adequate, but none are good enough for me, but at least they are adequate. We do NOT have adequate level talent at the Tight End position. So to me it is a position of greater need. as you have pointed out, we also have needs on the OL, DL & LB.....so i guess we will take the best available athlete at one of those positions of need. P.S.- i look at your picture and think you are yelling at me....lol.....btw, i know you picked Everette Brown as to who you think the Bills will pick at #11......is that what you would do if he was on the board at #11?.....if not, who would you pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
offde-fence Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 If we could pick up E. Brown and B.Pettigrew in the first, albeit by trading up, I think that'd shore up two starter positions, leaving the rest of the draft for the other two or three in need. I think we could, if we make the right moves, fill out our roster with this years draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PushthePile Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 I say draft Pettigrew at #11 if thats the guy we want. I'm not sold on these DE's as instant starters and think we could get a solid guy who make take a year or 2 to develop in the 2nd or 3rd. RTB I've got no problem with taking Pettigrew at #11. In fact he's one of the 4 or 5 guys in the draft I think can make an immediate difference. I don't understand how everyone is in such a panic about the o-line but can't get on board with a great blocking TE. He is the closest thing to a guarantee in this draft. With the next six picks you go nothing but linemen and one LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 A second rounder is too much to give up for Gonzalez at this point. Bad move by the Falcons in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 Sorry but Michael Lombardi is no Adam Schefter, I just don't see the Chiefs giving away a big target for their new QB Matt Cassel. Lombardi, isn't that the same moron who stated the Bills had the 12th pick in the draft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted April 14, 2009 Share Posted April 14, 2009 So do the Bills offer Parrish up in a trade for TG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts