PDA

View Full Version : Eagles Bills in Serious trade talks



Raptor
04-07-2009, 05:20 PM
Per Michael Smith on ESPN NFL Live

Dumb Dumb move if it goes down

ptd86
04-07-2009, 05:24 PM
i thought he said they were and they might start back up closer to draft time?

bigbry
04-07-2009, 05:28 PM
Per Michael Smith on ESPN NFL Live

Dumb Dumb move if it goes down

For what? Losman for some cheese steaks? Better do it.

alohabillsfan
04-07-2009, 05:28 PM
Russ, both of their first round picks and maybe a 3rd...

acehole
04-07-2009, 05:32 PM
Ha I called that weeks ago!

Make to much sense...oh wait...the Bills wont do it then...



Per Michael Smith on ESPN NFL Live

Dumb Dumb move if it goes down

SeatownBillsFan21
04-07-2009, 05:40 PM
I hope we get something big in return.

WeAreArthurMoates
04-07-2009, 05:48 PM
Give me their 21st, 5th and Max Jean-Giles. That my friends will be a great trade. Just so everyone remembers, Long, Clady, Albert, Otah and Baker all played great as rookies last year. The myth of rookies suck a tackle is starting to get debunked.

alohabillsfan
04-07-2009, 05:50 PM
Picks 21 and 28 both owned by Philly gets them to about pick 7 which is where they would have to be about to get a franchise unproven LT. Now what is a pro bowl proven LT worth? Atleast picks 21 and 28.

realdealryan
04-07-2009, 05:54 PM
Whatever picks they get, at least try to swing some reasonable line depth. Please.

BillsWin
04-07-2009, 05:56 PM
If Peters wasnt a dick this wouldnt go down. But now it must. In Jauron's apparent last year as coach if he doesnt reach the playoffs, he cannot risk a holdout from his pro bowl left tackle, and if my sources are correct Peters has turned down at least 3 contract offers since last season began. AT LEAST.

alohabillsfan
04-07-2009, 05:59 PM
By Jason, hello Demetris Bell!!!!!!!! Or Michael Ohre

SeatownBillsFan21
04-07-2009, 06:04 PM
Would this mean we draft a OT at 11???

Jaybird
04-07-2009, 06:09 PM
Per Michael Smith on ESPN NFL Live

Dumb Dumb move if it goes down

Did he indicate for what?

Night Train
04-07-2009, 06:41 PM
The situation is unique to itself, so waving the broad brush of overpaying a supposed stud LT doesn't apply in this instance.

Peters is wanting far more than he's worth, plus he's basically being coached by a difficult agent seeing major $$ signs from other teams willing to overpay.

I don't think he's nearly as good as you folks make him out to be... but keep perpetuating the hysteria, since it plays well to the masses.

Let another team overpay & find out he's a good but not great player at his position, much like Nate Clements, Jonas Jennings, Antoine Winfield etc.

Take the picks and move on with a talent youngster who will sign a 4-5 year deal and show up to work.

This teams biggest concern is it's head coach and gameday decisions. Not the LT with a bloated reputation.

Tatonka
04-07-2009, 06:44 PM
Russ, both of their first round picks and maybe a 3rd...

both their first rounders.. done.

TacklingDummy
04-07-2009, 06:47 PM
:dance:

Second best news this off-season.

Tatonka
04-07-2009, 06:47 PM
Give me their 21st, 5th and Max Jean-Giles. That my friends will be a great trade. Just so everyone remembers, Long, Clady, Albert, Otah and Baker all played great as rookies last year. The myth of rookies suck a tackle is starting to get debunked.

thank you..

X-Era
04-07-2009, 06:49 PM
Give me their 21st, 5th and Max Jean-Giles. That my friends will be a great trade. Just so everyone remembers, Long, Clady, Albert, Otah and Baker all played great as rookies last year. The myth of rookies suck a tackle is starting to get debunked.

Ohh, maybe i was dreaming during the Mike Williams years

Tatonka
04-07-2009, 06:52 PM
The situation is unique to itself, so waving the broad brush of overpaying a supposed stud LT doesn't apply in this instance.

Peters is wanting far more than he's worth, plus he's basically being coached by a difficult agent seeing major $$ signs from other teams willing to overpay.

I don't think he's nearly as good as you folks make him out to be... but keep perpetuating the hysteria, since it plays well to the masses.

Let another team overpay & find out he's a good but not great player at his position, much like Nate Clements, Jonas Jennings, Antoine Winfield etc.

Take the picks and move on with a talent youngster who will sign a 4-5 year deal and show up to work.

This teams biggest concern is it's head coach and gameday decisions. Not the LT with a bloated reputation.

night, one of the best posts i have read in a while.

X-Era
04-07-2009, 06:54 PM
His comment was that they (Bills and Eagles) WERE in serious discussions... not ARE. He then says the talks could heat up on or around draft day.

To me, that means nothing is imminent.

Nighthawk
04-07-2009, 07:02 PM
I've never been in favor of trading a top LT, but this guy is starting to get ridiculous. At some point you have to just agree to disagree and move on. If the Bills can get good value for him, then I'd trade him. If they don't get good value, then keep him for the next two years and let two more years of his football career pass.

casdhf
04-07-2009, 07:04 PM
I think an OT could be the BPA available at 11. It could actually work out.

mayotm
04-07-2009, 07:14 PM
Ohh, maybe i was dreaming during the Mike Williams yearsOK, so you just provided an example from five years ago that didn't work out. How about Jake Long, Ryan Clady and Joe Thomas from the past two years?

psubills62
04-07-2009, 07:29 PM
Per Michael Smith on ESPN NFL Live

Dumb Dumb move if it goes down

Wouldn't you want to wait and see what we get in return before calling it a dumb move?

I'm going to be neutral about this until I see 1) that it actually happens, and isn't just hearsay, and 2) the compensation for Peters.

X-Era
04-07-2009, 08:08 PM
OK, so you just provided an example from five years ago that didn't work out. How about Jake Long, Ryan Clady and Joe Thomas from the past two years?

Did WE draft any of those guys?

I'm not saying that great picks aren't out there, just that we don't seem to make them on the OL.

Nope, we have something proven, we have blown it time and time again on the OL in the draft... whats wrong with doing what you do well? Why dont we just pay up? Ohh yeah, we dont want to.

jimbohastle51
04-07-2009, 08:26 PM
i just hope we dont take one just out of need, because if the 3 LT's that i think are going to be gone before 11 are gone i would rather see us take a linebacker/pass rusher than oher. he is a nice pass blocking LT but we do not throught the ball alot and honestly he is a horrible run blocker, not too mention you cant just spend the whole top end of your draft on a LT and a G and ignore the other glaring needs and fill them with late round picks and a 3rd rounder. we are taking a MAJOR step back thinking trent can stay healthy and get the ball to T.O. and evans with a rookie LT a rookie G and hangartner as our center. not happening.

jpdex12
04-07-2009, 08:51 PM
What about Loadholt? Wasn't he a LT in college and a pretty good one? There's also Beatty from UCONN. There's LT talent in this draft and even into the first two rounds.

We don't necessarily have to grab one in the first round. Especially if we plug them in at RT and move Walker to LT.

DraftBoy
04-07-2009, 09:04 PM
What about Loadholt? Wasn't he a LT in college and a pretty good one? There's also Beatty from UCONN. There's LT talent in this draft and even into the first two rounds.

We don't necessarily have to grab one in the first round. Especially if we plug them in at RT and move Walker to LT.

Loadholt isnt athletic enough imo to play LT in the NFL, he's likely a RT prospect. Beatty is an intriguing Round 2 option.

DraftBoy
04-07-2009, 09:11 PM
I love the examples from recent history like Clady and such but lets be a little more realistic here. Since 2002 here are early OT busts/disappointments;
Ferguson
Justice
Barron
Gallery
Andrews
Foster
Harris
Williams <-Our Favorite
Colombo

Novacane
04-07-2009, 09:13 PM
I don't think he's nearly as good as you folks make him out to be... but keep perpetuating the hysteria, since it plays well to the masses.

.


:bf1: AMEN!!!!

homeslice5484
04-07-2009, 09:58 PM
i wanna see this, is it online?

topher180
04-07-2009, 10:10 PM
None of you know what Jason Peters did or did not accept as a deal.

I'm going to wait until this happens before I worry about it. I love this notion that the Bills will be OK with Chambers and Walker as tackles with no proven depth. Not going to argue. Come talk to me mid season and we'll see how that works out.

WeAreArthurMoates
04-07-2009, 10:33 PM
Ferguson
Justice
Barron
Gallery
Andrews
Foster
Harris
Williams <-Our Favorite
Colombo

Andrews is sick, Colombo is solid, no way D'Brick should be on there.

Since 06 here's the first or second round tackles who have played good.

DBrick
McNeil
Whitworth
Winston Justice Bust
Jeremy Trueblood
Daryn Coolidge Guard


Thomas
Staley
Levi Brown?
Tony Ugho


Long
Clady
Albert
Otah RT
Chelious Not Good
Sam Baker
Duane Brown Sucks major reach in the first yet gave up as many sacks as Peters.

Case in point, you draft your tackles early. Getting one in the first two rounds fares pretty good results.

DraftBoy
04-07-2009, 10:38 PM
Andrews is sick, Colombo is solid, no way D'Brick should be on there.

Since 06 here's the first or second round tackles who have played good.

DBrick
McNeil
Whitworth
Winston Justice Bust
Jeremy Trueblood
Daryn Coolidge Guard


Thomas
Staley
Levi Brown?
Tony Ugho


Long
Clady
Albert
Otah RT
Chelious Not Good
Sam Baker
Duane Brown Sucks major reach in the first yet gave up as many sacks as Peters.

Case in point, you draft your tackles early. Getting one in the first two rounds fares pretty good results.

Andrews taken as an OT moved inside, same with Gallery, not what you want out of a top 2 Round pick who you take to be a corner stone player. Brick has been a disappointment given his lofty draft status as he has struggled.

ddaryl
04-08-2009, 07:28 AM
None of you know what Jason Peters did or did not accept as a deal.

I'm going to wait until this happens before I worry about it. I love this notion that the Bills will be OK with Chambers and Walker as tackles with no proven depth. Not going to argue. Come talk to me mid season and we'll see how that works out.

more then likely its a big step backwards in 2009... but Peters is not worth 12 million per season just because he demands it.

that's the only issue

SABURZFAN
04-08-2009, 08:06 AM
Ha I called that weeks ago!




somebody give him a cookie. :bf1:

Ickybaluky
04-08-2009, 08:31 AM
i wanna see this, is it online?

Here is a note from Philly.com's Eagles blog (http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles/Could_Birds_have_interest_in_Chad_Johnson.html):


ESPN's Michael Smith said on NFL Live tonight that he's hearing the Eagles have interest in Bengals wide receiver Chad Johnson.

Rather than paraphrase what Smith is reporting, here's exactly what he said so you can decide for yourself whether this is just a rumor or something more.

"I am hearing there is interest in Chad Johnson," Smith said. "Now there's been some back and forth as to whether or not he is officially on the market. I think everybody in Cincinnati has signed off on moving Chad Johnson except for owner Mike Brown. The Eagles could be in the picture. They have two first-round picks. They need a receiver."

The other name Smith threw out there was Bills offensive tackle Jason Peters.

Our beat guys have mentioned Peters' name in the past, and according to Smith, the Eagles have "engaged in serious discussions" with the Bills about him. Per Smith, those talks could heat up again as the draft approaches.

Remember, Smith reported earlier this offseason that Donovan McNabb had met with Eagles management and wanted to see what weapons the Eagles would add before looking at a contract extension.

Stay tuned to philly.com to see if the Johnson rumors can be either confirmed or refuted.

Mahdi
04-08-2009, 08:48 AM
Ohh, maybe i was dreaming during the Mike Williams years
No I think it was the Robert Gallery years,,,

Tatonka
04-08-2009, 09:36 AM
i sure am going to miss the 11.5 sacks peter gave up in 13 games.. but im fine with walker being there and loadholt in the 2nd.

OpIv37
04-08-2009, 09:46 AM
I think an OT could be the BPA available at 11. It could actually work out.

how exactly does that work out? In that scenario, what do we do about LB and DE and G?

This team has other needs to be filled with the #11.

Historian
04-08-2009, 10:09 AM
This team has other needs to be filled with the #11.

Yea...like drafting another 5'9" wide receiver.

OpIv37
04-08-2009, 10:14 AM
Yea...like drafting another 5'9" wide receiver.

I think it'll be a 5'9" CB.

kscdogbillsfan1221
04-08-2009, 10:19 AM
I think it'll be a 5'9" CB.

from... let me guess, THE OSU?

justasportsfan
04-08-2009, 10:27 AM
I just hope Modrak drafts well FOR THE NEXT COACH.

OpIv37
04-08-2009, 10:31 AM
I just hope Modrak drafts well FOR THE NEXT COACH.

why? We'll all be talking about Schottenheimer and Holmgren and Reid and Cowher, then cheap-ass Ralph will go hire either someone we've never heard of like a QB coach from Cincinnati, or someone who has proven he can't win in this league like Jauron.

DraftBoy
04-08-2009, 10:43 AM
how exactly does that work out? In that scenario, what do we do about LB and DE and G?

This team has other needs to be filled with the #11.


Who pissed in your cheerios this morning...oh wait...nevermind.

Don't act stupid, you know there are more than one pick in the draft and anytime you rely on DP's to start anyways you are asking to take time to develop them for long term success not short term.

realdealryan
04-08-2009, 10:49 AM
from... let me guess, THE OSU?

The same one that got us the "best corner in the league", YouBUSTy, and a safety so good that we had to switch his position?

OpIv37
04-08-2009, 11:17 AM
Who pissed in your cheerios this morning...oh wait...nevermind.

Don't act stupid, you know there are more than one pick in the draft and anytime you rely on DP's to start anyways you are asking to take time to develop them for long term success not short term.

and therein lies my problem. We are going into the draft in need of 3 starters- 4 if we trade Peters. We've endured 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons under this leadership. At what point do we stop building for the future and start playing to win now?

This team is constantly building for a future that never arrives. They take so long to rebuild that positions that new holes arise before the old ones are ever patched. Example: 2 years ago, we filled a void at G by signing Dockery. In the meantime, holes opened up at OLB and DE. Now, we need an OLB and a DE but we still need a G because they missed with Dockery.

It's always one step forward, two steps backwards.

DraftBoy
04-08-2009, 11:20 AM
and therein lies my problem. We are going into the draft in need of 3 starters- 4 if we trade Peters. We've endured 3 consecutive 7-9 seasons under this leadership. At what point do we stop building for the future and start playing to win now?

This team is constantly building for a future that never arrives. They take so long to rebuild that positions that new holes arise before the old ones are ever patched. Example: 2 years ago, we filled a void at G by signing Dockery. In the meantime, holes opened up at OLB and DE. Now, we need an OLB and a DE but we still need a G because they missed with Dockery.

It's always one step forward, two steps backwards.
What do you want me to tell you? We don't have the pieces in place to win right now, its that simple. I prefer we blow the whole thing up and start over again, hell I said that three years ago before we made this failed effort when we signed Dock and Walker. Now two years later we are in the same ****ing spot. Do you think Im happy about it? No, but Im not going whine, moan, and complain (even though I was right at the time). Im going to work with what we got and hope a new regime change comes sooner rather than later.

raphael120
04-08-2009, 11:24 AM
With a team like the Bills, we don't need a stud LT. And why the hell do we want Peters? It's obvious he's playing for the big contract and whats saying once he gets that big contract, he quits on plays, etc, like he did this past year. He just seems to be that type of personality and quite frankly, you don't need a STUD LT to win in this league. A GOOD LT? Sure. But "top 5" whatever, no. Steelers, Arizona, etc, etc, they dont have top 5 LT's and we went 7-9 with Peters anyways so that just goes to show you how much having a stud LT helps you, really. If Edwards progresses and we have a better, stronger, faster defense and a playmaking TE, it will hide the fact that we have a lesser talent at LT if we trade peters.

Night Train
04-08-2009, 04:19 PM
Give me their 21st, 5th and Max Jean-Giles.
Jean-Giles could be plugged in at Guard for now. That indeed would be a ballpark figure for a trade and fil the guard need. Then draft a OT on Day 1.

Hey, this is Peters & his agent forcing this issue. You make the best deal you can.

X-Era
04-08-2009, 04:25 PM
Who pissed in your cheerios this morning...oh wait...nevermind.

Don't act stupid, you know there are more than one pick in the draft and anytime you rely on DP's to start anyways you are asking to take time to develop them for long term success not short term.

Well, that's great, maybe somewhere down the road we can win enough games for the playoffs.

This much turnover, this little replacements from free agency, and relying this heavily on the draft will lead to perpetual mediocrity... Constant developing of talent, never just having talent or retaining it. Not good for trying to get better soon.

yordad
04-08-2009, 06:37 PM
Again, I think Phillys two first would be a fair deal.

We could get....
Michael Oher
Michael Johnson
Maualuga or Pettigrew or Cushing
All in the first.

Maybe add Duke Robinson or Clint Sintim in the second.

We would also lose a huge headache.