what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

[ublinkwescore]

First Tatonka states very adamantly that he feels Lance Briggs will be a Bill before next season starts - and was excited about it.

HHurricane replies to one of my posts in another thread with a :rofl2: when I say something to the effect of "get Briggs now Marv" - then his rebuttal is something like "you and I are usually on the same page, but we're not gonna make any more big deals the rest of this offseason"... Now he's gone and started a thread saying Briggs is worth our #12 over all.

make up your minds people.

I'll admit, I was all for us drafting Marshawn Lynch, but if we can get Briggs (according to an internet rumor, this is possible - but let me emphasize the word "rumor") I'd say go with Briggs - he's like Spikes part 2 (remember when we got him, our D was without question dramatically improved - along with Sam Adams) only this time, we should have an O that will play more consistent this year, and should have no problem putting up 20 points a game.

[camelcowboy]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

Ill take Briggs, and Turner

[ublinkwescore]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

I'd take Turner for a second at the most, I'd start with offering SD our third, and maybe a conditional 4th or something like that.

[kernowboy]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

I'll take Paul Posluzny in R1 and Brian Leonard in R2. I'd prefer to trade down for Posluzny but don't feel he fall below the Steelers at 15 so we reach a little but get two quality pro's, leaders on both offence and defence even in their rookie seasons, both with unshakeable character.

Posluzny = the new Spielman
Leonard = a better Alstott.

[Buckets]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

First Tatonka states very adamantly that he feels Lance Briggs will be a Bill before next season starts - and was excited about it.

HHurricane replies to one of my posts in another thread with a :rofl2: when I say something to the effect of "get Briggs now Marv" - then his rebuttal is something like "you and I are usually on the same page, but we're not gonna make any more big deals the rest of this offseason"... Now he's gone and started a thread saying Briggs is worth our #12 over all.

make up your minds people.

I'll admit, I was all for us drafting Marshawn Lynch, but if we can get Briggs (according to an internet rumor, this is possible - but let me emphasize the word "rumor") I'd say go with Briggs - he's like Spikes part 2 (remember when we got him, our D was without question dramatically improved - along with Sam Adams) only this time, we should have an O that will play more consistent this year, and should have no problem putting up 20 points a game.

You must be new around here.

(Sarcasim off)

[HHURRICANE]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

Dude, I didn't say I didn't want him I just said it isn't going to happen.

I never flip-flopped.

Plus I'm always right like when I said that McGahee wasn't leaving...well that was a fluke, but I was totally right on Spikes....well who saw that coming.....but I totally called free agency, Ralph that cheap......ohh, Dockery was a pretty big signing.

Nevermind.

[ublinkwescore]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

[ublinkwescore]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

You must be new around here.

(Sarcasim off)

Should I neg this rook?

[ublinkwescore]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

For the record, I didn't flip flop - I just (under the assumption that the rumor that Buffalo is willing to part with the #12 in exchange for Briggs and a later pick from Chicago has an inkling of validity) would rather have Briggs - an experienced probowl LB that we could very desperately use - than a rookie RB who has proven nothing at the next level, and could end up being the second coming of Willis McGahee or worse - Lawrence Phillips (I don't know how much of the legal trouble/accusations are true with Lynch, and I honestly could care less if we get Briggs because it makes Lynch a moot point - and possibly Turner more of a reality).

If Briggs ends up in Washington, then I'm all for Lynch (since Rookies have to be humble - hopefully, he'll pay attention at his rookie symposium and try to take something from it) or Turner.

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

For the record:

1 - I don't have anyone I don't like at 12. I am going to take whoever the Bills draft and be happy with it. I can't change it anyway. The following players will put a smile on my face if they draft them (included are players I have seen taken in mocks): Okoye, Lynch, Peterson, Willis. I will not be very happy if they choose: Branch or Posluszny

2. I do not want to swap or give up any part of the first round pick for Turner. I like him, but I do not want to trade out of that spot to get him. If they want to move something like a 3rd for him, I am OK with that.

3. I would take Lance Briggs in that scenario though, but I do not want to trade that pick. If it comes down to it and the players on the board are taken, I would be OK with that trade. It will also depend if they can get Briggs to sign an extension that doesn't have the same numbers that Nate Clements got. People can say they would take a Pro Bowl linebacker over a rookie all they want, but you have to pay that Pro Bowl linebacker Pro Bowl linebacker money and I am all about the price you pay for things.


These are subject to change.

[shelby]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

Posluzny = the new Spielman
Leonard = a better Alstott.

If this is true...

[patmoran2006]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

I'll give you the realist answer you'll fine.

Some people and im NOT saying anyone specificially, but some people downtalk a player, say he's overated, he's a product of playing with someone else, etc.. Because deep down the know the reality is they aint coming to Buffalo, either we won't pull off the trade or Wilson won't pay that kind of money.

So by talking the guy down that way, its less of a dissapointment when you turn on the news and that player ends up on another team.

IF there were published reports right now that we offered our 12th for Briggs and Angelo was on the verge of taking the dea; people would be losing their minds over Briggs right now, as they should be; he's the most talented LB this team would see since Bennett; he's a tackling machine, he's only 26 and he's experienced in the cover two.

People who say they'd rather draft POS than trade for Briggs are really clueless. IF the Briggs rumor were to be true, why would we want YET ANOTHER ROOKIE starting a defense, a guy that nobody even knows if he could play the cover two; as opposed to a guy who's already proven he can.

Frankly, its pretty amusing to see Briggs get talked down to like an average LB on THIS Board, yet universally around the league he's regarded as one of the top 5 LB's in football, and was on the very top of pretty much every Free AGent ranking list..

As for Turner, its the same thing but to a lesser degree. He's a backup, a product of SD, got his yards during garbage time, blahblahblah.. I do agree with everyone in that I wouldnt trade my 12th pick for him but he is clearly more established than any rookie RB we realisticaly can get; and he's worth some kind of draft package of picks.

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

You see PatMoran, I think that when you say people are clueless it just shows me something. If you get Lance Briggs this is how you have to look at it:

1. You have to give up a first round pick.
2. Lance Briggs is under contract this year for $7.2 million and he is free agent next year, of course that also means that you would have to put the tag on him again next year to keep him again. We all know how much players like getting tagged so you run the risk again of him coming out like he is doing with the Bears. He is trying to force a trade. That means you don't get him with a franchise tag or you get the same thing the Bears are getting now. That means you need to sign him to an extension. That means you need to sign him to or better than the contract that Nate Clements just got from the 49ers. That means you have an 8-year, 80 million dollar contract potential. That means that your cash to cap doesn't work.

I think on paper, without salary, you wouldn't find that many people that would rather have an unproven rookie than a pro bowl player.

When you say people need to get a clue, you might want to find one yourself.

[patmoran2006]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

You see PatMoran, I think that when you say people are clueless it just shows me something. If you get Lance Briggs this is how you have to look at it:

1. You have to give up a first round pick.
2. Lance Briggs is under contract this year for $7.2 million and he is free agent next year, of course that also means that you would have to put the tag on him again next year to keep him again. We all know how much players like getting tagged so you run the risk again of him coming out like he is doing with the Bears. He is trying to force a trade. That means you don't get him with a franchise tag or you get the same thing the Bears are getting now. That means you need to sign him to an extension. That means you need to sign him to or better than the contract that Nate Clements just got from the 49ers. That means you have an 8-year, 80 million dollar contract potential. That means that your cash to cap doesn't work.

I think on paper, without salary, you wouldn't find that many people that would rather have an unproven rookie than a pro bowl player.

When you say people need to get a clue, you might want to find one yourself.

There isnt a team in the NFL that will trade for Lance Briggs WITHOUT signing him to a long term deal beforehand. NO team is gonig to give up a first round draft pick for him so he can play for one year. And Briggs isnt getting 8 years and 80 million from anybody either.

[TheGhostofJimKelly]

Re: what the hell is with every one flip-flopping on here...

There isnt a team in the NFL that will trade for Lance Briggs WITHOUT signing him to a long term deal beforehand. NO team is gonig to give up a first round draft pick for him so he can play for one year. And Briggs isnt getting 8 years and 80 million from anybody either.

The Bears aren't going to give him away. They will want the 12 pick. Either way, yes they would have to trade that #12 pick. Wheter it be in a swap of picks or not. I just said they would sign him to a long term contract. And, whoever signs him will need to sign him for a dollar amount close to Clements. Before the tag was placed on Briggs he was probably the second best linebacker, 5th best free agent (possibly higher). Adalius Thomas signed for roughly $22 for the first two years with a signing bonus of roughly $12 m. Patrick Kearny signed a 6-year, 39.5 million dollar contract with a signing bonus of $10 m. Dwight Freeney was given the tag at $9.4 m. Joey Porter signed for 5-years, $32 ,million with a signing bonus of $12 million. Then there is Clements. Those are all the players that were signed or tagged in Briggs' talent level. What do you really think he is going to sign here cheaper, if he is a better player than Clements and maybe even Freeney? I will grant you that 8-year/$80 million probably won't happen, but the dollar figure is definitely close to Thomas' deal. You are kidding yourself if you think he comes here and takes a cheap bonus for what he is worth, otherwise he wouldn't be pissing and moaning about being tagged.