I thought Jauron said they were looking at adding someone?
So we aren't going to add a RT?
Collapse
X
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Kwame Harris would be a solid pick up.. still young, plenty of starting experience, very athletic, has played well in the zone blocking scheme.
He struggled with the Raiders a bit as a LT. He is a better fit as a RT.
-
👍 3
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
I dont know if i am the first person saying this? but how the hell did Kirk Chambers fall so out of grace?
He started at LT for Peters last yr and did a fine job, also spot duty thruout the season he did well
He should be the starter there and Scott the backup
chambers plays nasty and is the same size as Butler
dont understand his fall form grace
weird
he got cut and guys like Corto and Mcyntyre and now Jenkins kept there roster spotsXTRA CRISPY XTRA SAUCEY
-
👍 1
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by bigbub2352I dont know if i am the first person saying this? but how the hell did Kirk Chambers fall so out of grace?
He started at LT for Peters last yr and did a fine job, also spot duty thruout the season he did well
He should be the starter there and Scott the backup
chambers plays nasty and is the same size as Butler
dont understand his fall form grace
weird
he got cut and guys like Corto and Mcyntyre and now Jenkins kept there roster spots
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Dr.LecterWhat makes you think they won't?Should have known, way back in 1960 when we drafted Richie Lucas Number 1, that this would be a long, hard ride. But who could have known it would be THIS bad?
-
👍 4
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Jan ReimersBecause we didn't do it immediately, dammit. Don't you know these things have to be done at the absolute convenience of the fans, before inconvenient details like negotiations, contracts, physicals and all that other minutia are taken care of?
For all the education and practice each of us undergoes, the achievment of mastery is ultimately the outcome of a personal quest for understanding.
-
👍 1
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Jan ReimersBecause we didn't do it immediately, dammit. Don't you know these things have to be done at the absolute convenience of the fans, before inconvenient details like negotiations, contracts, physicals and all that other minutia are taken care of?
that's right. i'm getting impatient. tell the FO to chop chop....Originally posted by yordadChrist, you are the queerest person in the history of Bills fanhood. I swear to god I would stomp you.
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Jan ReimersBecause we didn't do it immediately, dammit. Don't you know these things have to be done at the absolute convenience of the fans, before inconvenient details like negotiations, contracts, physicals and all that other minutia are taken care of?
-
👍 1
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Ebenezerand regardless whether the player actually wants to play for the Bills or not....hard for some Bills fans to believe but there are actually players that would rather stay retired than play for the Bills.
Both players that are availble, Runyan and Walker are 100% signable.
It's really whether the Bills want to take the cheap way out...again and play what they have. If you are telling me that Chambers and Scott are better than Walker or Runyan than I'm not sure what to say at this point.
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by Jan ReimersBecause we didn't do it immediately, dammit. Don't you know these things have to be done at the absolute convenience of the fans, before inconvenient details like negotiations, contracts, physicals and all that other minutia are taken care of?
Wouldn't it make sense to have the player on the field getting ready with the team?
Comment
-
-
Re: So we aren't going to add a RT?
Originally posted by HHURRICANEBoth players that are availble, Runyan and Walker are 100% signable.
It's really whether the Bills want to take the cheap way out...again and play what they have. If you are telling me that Chambers and Scott are better than Walker or Runyan than I'm not sure what to say at this point.
Besides, with you complaints abotu conditioning isn't a tad bit hypocritical to want Walker back?
And if the two players are awesome, why have not the 31 teams with better FOs than the Bills scooped them up?
And are you aware that cost is a logical consideration to take into account for a team's back-ups?Originally posted by mysticsotoLecter is right in everything he said.
-
👍 2
Comment
-
Comment