seq004 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Just what we needed. Burgess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Jack Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 The talented but injury-prone veteran I'm not worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Mud Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Just what we needed. Burgess The guy had 2 good years on a very bad team, hopefully he will not return to his previous best while playing for the Pats. He is injury prone only playing a full season twice...does anyone know what the Pats gave up for him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Undisclosed draft choices? The Raiders were only looking for a third and fourth according to Yahoo! Sports. Seems like a small price to pay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Good pickup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Cold Bruschi Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 considering how well we fleeced the raiders last time I'd guess a 7th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Undisclosed draft choices? The Raiders were only looking for a third and fourth according to Yahoo! Sports. Seems like a small price to pay. Report also notes Eagles offered a third. So, the Pats gave up more than a third, most likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I read a 3rd in 2010 and a 5th in 2011 (as per Michael Lombardi) on a Pats* board. If he can return to his form of 2-3 years ago, this is unfortunately good news for them and bad for us...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Yeah, but we got Derrick Jones so I consider it a wash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 The worst owner in football, bar none: Al Davis. Nobody fails to recognize the value in their own guys like old Al. Burgess, great. It's so Belichick to pick up a guy who is known for low hits on QBs. Even when he has a clear path, he chooses to go low, putting the force of his blows in the knee area. Burgess, a very good and very dirty pass rusher. He'll fit nicely in the lineup next to Wilfork. May karmic injuries befall them all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 May karmic injuries befall them all They won't. They'll knock TE out in week one, and roll on to the SB whilst the Bills languish in non-playoff hell. You just KNOW that's how it'll work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 The worst owner in football, bar none: Al Davis. Nobody fails to recognize the value in their own guys like old Al. Burgess, great. It's so Belichick to pick up a guy who is known for low hits on QBs. Even when he has a clear path, he chooses to go low, putting the force of his blows in the knee area. Burgess, a very good and very dirty pass rusher. He'll fit nicely in the lineup next to Wilfork. May karmic injuries befall them all Hey if it means Richard Seymour or Ty Warren are on the bench and off the field, great. I know Warren is still recuperating and Bellicheat was looking for insurance but I think Seymour and Warren play and Burgess gets far fewer snaps unless there are injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Hey if it means Richard Seymour or Ty Warren are on the bench and off the field, great. I know Warren is still recuperating and Bellicheat was looking for insurance but I think Seymour and Warren play and Burgess gets far fewer snaps unless there are injuries. Belichick may well use him at OLB. Also, Seymour is out often and so is Ty. Burgess-Patriots _Globe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodnarb Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Hey if it means Richard Seymour or Ty Warren are on the bench and off the field, great. I know Warren is still recuperating and Bellicheat was looking for insurance but I think Seymour and Warren play and Burgess gets far fewer snaps unless there are injuries. It won't be an either/or situation - he'll play OLB. We'll be facing Seymour | Wilfork | Warren | Burgess | Mayo | Thomas That's 6 pro bowl guys coming at Trent. I hope our line is ready. Oy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 It won't be an either/or situation - he'll play OLB. We'll be facing Seymour | Wilfork | Warren | Burgess | Mayo | Thomas That's 6 pro bowl guys coming at Trent. I hope our line is ready. Oy. Thomas and Burgess are nothing more than "pretty good" players at this point in their careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Yeah, but we got Derrick Jones so I consider it a wash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 It's not possible that the Bills got Derrick Jones and Derrick Burgess mixed up, is it? Seems to be an awful lot of Derricks and Dereks and Dockerys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Thomas and Burgess are nothing more than "pretty good" players at this point in their careers. ..unlike Aaron Schobel... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason268152 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 It won't be an either/or situation - he'll play OLB. We'll be facing Seymour | Wilfork | Warren | Burgess | Mayo | Thomas That's 6 pro bowl guys coming at Trent. I hope our line is ready. Oy. Trent is a dead man walking. I love the guy but he is Mr Glass. I see a top ten pick in our future! I can't wait to get another defensive back. As old Dicky like to Say " you can never have enough defensive backs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 ..unlike Aaron Schobel... Schobel is better than Burgess, and on about the same level as Thomas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DIE HARD 1967 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I am happy with recently signed and future Hall of Famer Derrick Jones It is amazing how we got him for nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Schobel is better than Burgess, and on about the same level as Thomas. Oh, yeah? Whip out the end-o-meter, and let's have a look. Where do Chris Ellis and Chris Kelsay fit into your metric? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Oh, yeah? Whip out the end-o-meter, and let's have a look. Where do Chris Ellis and Chris Kelsay fit into your metric? Burgess is about as good as Kelsay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Oh, yeah? Whip out the end-o-meter, and let's have a look. Where do Chris Ellis and Chris Kelsay fit into your metric? You'd need to re-calibrate the "end-o-meter" for those two, but Schobel is definitely better than Burgess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Burgess is about as good as Kelsay. I feel better now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloaggie Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Schobel is better than Burgess, and on about the same level as Thomas. To be honest, I think Bills fans will have to make that call after we see Schobel back this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Burgess is about as good as Kelsay. They're different players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 To be honest, I think Bills fans will have to make that call after we see Schobel back this year. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Burgess is about as good as Kelsay. **scoffs** In Kelsay's dreams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I feel better now Kelsay isn't bad. He is solid against the run, and would average 5-7 sacks a year with a premier pass rusher on the left side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaGimp Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 GUYS-there is no debate here-the Pats are a better organization top to bottom. They figure out what it takes to win and go and get it. Unlike our dual pillars of continuity of the Bills and Sabres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Kelsay isn't bad. He is solid against the run, and would average 5-7 sacks a year with a premier pass rusher on the left side. Which side? BTW, Schobel WAS a "premier" pass rusher, and Kelsay was still nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 GUYS-there is no debate here-the Pats are a better organization top to bottom. They figure out what it takes to win and go and get it. Unlike our dual pillars of continuity of the Bills and Sabres. Well duh. But let's not act like this is the acquisition of the century. They picked up a decent player coming off an injury plagued season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Which side? BTW, Schobel WAS a "premier" pass rusher, and Kelsay was still nothing. Are you that dumb, or just a new fan? Kelsay had a career high 5.5 sacks when Schobel had 14. That's good for a RDE, and obviously you don't know the difference between a LDE and a RDE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 Are you that dumb, or just a new fan? You've seen his posts and you still have to ask that question. He's that dumb, all right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Well duh. But let's not act like this is the acquisition of the century. They picked up a decent player coming off an injury plagued season. click here for "19th nervous breakdown" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Just what we needed. Burgess Meh, no great loss. The Pets* overpaid for him. The guy had 2 good years on a very bad team, hopefully he will not return to his previous best while playing for the Pats. He is injury prone only playing a full season twice...does anyone know what the Pats gave up for him? What he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Are you that dumb, or just a new fan? Kelsay had a career high 5.5 sacks when Schobel had 14. That's good for a RDE, and obviously you don't know the difference between a LDE and a RDE. Pray tell, does Schobel play RDE or LDE? Ditto Kelsay. Who said, ...He (Kelsay) is solid against the run, and would average 5-7 sacks a year with a premier pass rusher on the left side.? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billistic Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 Kelsay's sack numbers, by year: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoring is not hardy Posted August 7, 2009 Share Posted August 7, 2009 This is terrible news. I'm amused by all the posters that don't think this is a big deal. The same guys would be doing cartwheels in thier front lawn if we signed this guy. Hopefully this doesn't turn out like that other disgruntled raider the pat s* signed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts