PDA

View Full Version : Easley already geared for 2011



justasportsfan
12-28-2010, 09:59 AM
“They were real big on me staying around not only to rehab, but to figure out the whole culture of the league and what it’s like,” he said. “It’s unfortunate that I couldn’t participate, but I tried to take full advantage of this time not only physically, but handling the whole mental aspect of the playbook and what it’s like to just grind week in and week out. At this point in time we’ve got a week left and I’m happy to say I’ve definitely moved forward with everything.”



http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3/Easley-already-geared-for-2011/9d7bcd1f-7a06-428e-a716-ce11f2e05d54

Jan Reimers
12-28-2010, 10:03 AM
He is one of the reasons, along with Evans, Parrish, Johnson, Nelson, Jones and Roosevelt, that we don't need to go WR in this draft.

Buffalo Thriller
12-28-2010, 10:35 AM
lol id still take Green if BPA

justasportsfan
12-28-2010, 10:36 AM
lol id still take Green if BPA
only if we can trade Lee away .

HAMMER
12-28-2010, 11:17 AM
lol id still take Green if BPA

Brilliant... then we get crushed in the running game for another year.

Nighthawk
12-28-2010, 11:21 AM
Brilliant... then we get crushed in the running game for another year.

Doesn't matter when you don't have a QB who can win games for you. :snicker2:

HAMMER
12-28-2010, 12:16 PM
Doesn't matter when you don't have a QB who can win games for you. :snicker2:

We have that already.

THATHURMANATOR
12-28-2010, 12:20 PM
lol id still take Green if BPA
I wouldn't NO NEED WHATSOEVER.

Didn't the Spiller pick last year prove to all of you that we can't afford luxery picks?

Luisito23
12-28-2010, 12:34 PM
I still say go Defense the 1st. 3 rounds...Unless someone significantly drops.

Bill Cody
12-28-2010, 12:48 PM
I wouldn't NO NEED WHATSOEVER.

Didn't the Spiller pick last year prove to all of you that we can't afford luxery picks?

I was listening to an interview with Bill Polian on the radio the other day and he said there are 5 positions he focuses on in order to build a winning team. He said if you're missing a good to great player at any of these 5 spots it's going to be hard to win: they are QB, LT, pass rushing DE, pass rushing DT and CB. So you and I are in general agreement about "luxury" picks. There is however one thing that's much much worse than a "luxury" pick and that is something the Bills have gotten down to a science and that is the "bust" pick. So plan A is pick a great player in one of those 5 critical spots. Plan B is pick a player at any position that isn't a ****ing bust.

Nighthawk
12-28-2010, 02:30 PM
We have that already.

Really? What's his win/loss record for his career again?

trapezeus
12-28-2010, 03:41 PM
the bills imploded on offense vs the pats. it was not very characteristic of their last couple efforts. yeah, it's a possible warning sign of this team still sucking for years to come, but the run defense has given up 200+ yard games 8 times this year at least. that's outrageous.

You need to stop that. the Bills offense scored enough to win about 8 games this year, but a defense that gives up 30+ points 8 times needs a fix a lot more.

The bills may not be superbowl ready next year after a good defensive draft, but they'll be a lot closer to managing wins and being able to trade for a QB or trade up in a draft to get a qb if all the other piecs are there.

YardRat
12-28-2010, 04:35 PM
I'd much rather take d-line BPA with this pick, but if we drop below the top 4-5, Luck doesn't declare, and Peterson, Dareus, Bowers and Fairley are all gone I have no problem drafting Green.

NOT THE DUDE...
12-28-2010, 04:56 PM
i wonder if the dolphins are happy about taking long instead of ryan, or what about the rams, would they go back and take suh, instead of bradford...

YardRat
12-28-2010, 04:58 PM
i wonder if the dolphins are happy about taking long instead of ryan, or what about the rams, would they go back and take suh, instead of bradford...

What makes you think things would be any different for either team if they did?

NOT THE DUDE...
12-28-2010, 05:20 PM
What makes you think things would be any different for either team if they did?

because qb is the difference, duh

NOT THE DUDE...
12-28-2010, 05:21 PM
dont be suprised if easley looks good in otas they might trade evans for a 3rd...

Joe Fo Sho
12-28-2010, 05:28 PM
dont be suprised if easley looks good in otas they might trade evans for a 3rd...

Don't tell me not to be surprised, cuz that would shock the **** out of me.

Joe Fo Sho
12-28-2010, 05:31 PM
i wonder if the dolphins are happy about taking long instead of ryan, or what about the rams, would they go back and take suh, instead of bradford...

I wonder if the Browns are happy they took Tim Couch. What about Russell, Quinn, Mirer, Akili, etc.

Your logic works both ways.

Jesus, I'm not even against drafting a QB in the 1st round and I don't agree with your arguments...

ZAZusmc03
12-28-2010, 05:32 PM
Glad I figured out how to put posters on ignore...

NOT THE DUDE...
12-28-2010, 05:34 PM
I wonder if the Browns are happy they took Tim Couch. What about Russell, Quinn, Mirer, Akili, etc.

Your logic works both ways.

Jesus, I'm not even against drafting a QB in the 1st round and I don't agree with your arguments...

no the logic does not work both ways because that can be said about any pick, any position. its even more imperative to take the top rated qb, (if you dont have one), because they make or break a franchise. we will top out at 8-8/7-9 with fitz. he is not the answer. buffalo has a chance to be picking number 2. you take the qb, even if he might bust, becasue even then in 3 years you still need a qb.

NOT THE DUDE...
12-28-2010, 05:35 PM
look at the superbowl winners the past 30 years of modern football. almost all top qbs. you always take the potential franchise qb if he is there..

Joe Fo Sho
12-28-2010, 05:41 PM
no the logic does not work both ways because that can be said about any pick, any position. its even more imperative to take the top rated qb, (if you dont have one), because they make or break a franchise. we will top out at 8-8/7-9 with fitz. he is not the answer. buffalo has a chance to be picking number 2. you take the qb, even if he might bust, becasue even then in 3 years you still need a qb.

Hahaha, I'm gonna go get drunk.

John Doe
12-28-2010, 05:54 PM
So much for a thread about Easley.

Why can't a thread be about something other than Fitz and a franchise QB?

acehole
12-29-2010, 08:48 AM
http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3/Easley-already-geared-for-2011/9d7bcd1f-7a06-428e-a716-ce11f2e05d54


Kid reminds my of Eric Moulds and Johnson reminds me of Reed.

Easley is the perfect physical WR this offense requires.

He will replace Evans in the near future.

DrGraves
12-29-2010, 09:45 AM
namaan > easley

EDS
12-29-2010, 09:57 AM
Kid reminds my of Eric Moulds and Johnson reminds me of Reed.

Easley is the perfect physical WR this offense requires.

He will replace Evans in the near future.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves yet. Easley has not played a down and Johnson has a ways to go to equal Andre Reed (assuming you met Andre and not Josh).

trapezeus
12-29-2010, 10:37 AM
most superbowl teams have had complete teams. they don't go to the superbowl with a QB and nothing else.

most teams don't let 30+pts weekly. they don't give up 200+ yards rushing.

just because it's happened so often this year doesn't take away at how pathetic that is. Teams don't do that. Even mid level Jauron teams didn't do that. This defense is terrible. You can't even ask the 90 bills offense to keep up with that kind of production because you simply don't get time to make a single mistake.

This nonsense of "franchise" position is idiotic. you need players playing at a high level. Whether they come with a signing bonus or not.

justasportsfan
12-29-2010, 10:43 AM
If we can get production from guys like Roosevelt, Nelson and Jones , can't wait to see what Easeley can do. He was having an awsome camp before he got injured

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WhfVcTDNAAE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WhfVcTDNAAE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

JCBills
12-29-2010, 11:17 AM
Doesn't matter when you don't have a QB who can win games for you. :snicker2:

Lol?

Yeah, the D allowing 30+ points all the time never has any impact on whether or not its possible for one player to carry everyone else to a W. Open your eyes dude.