What bout our current WR's? And Some Irony...

[ShadowHawk7]

What do you guyz think bout Reed, Shaw, Aiken, and Coleman? Are you ready to cast them off? I think Reed shud have a great year as #2. Shaw is way underated i think, and was a very good 3rd reciever last year. Aiken showed sum promise be4 the injury. I still like "Mini Moulds" but he may never be more than a #4. I'm totally not against drafting a WR, but unless Mike, or Roy is there in the first, I'd wait till the 2nd, b4 grabbing Evans, Woods, or Henderson.
:feedback: :gossip: :scratch:

O ya! By the way, I noticed how long I've been a member 2day, and it was xactly 365 days! And it was like the first time I had ever seen that ticker on my profile thing in the treads! SO HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!!! :party: Drinks all around on me! :beer: :drunks: BILLS ZONE RULES!!!!!!!! I only wish I wuda started posting earlier, my posts per day is a paltry 0.65!
:nospam:

O ya! Thankx a mill for the :100: :100: :100: Tatonka! I definitley think I'll keep that title now. NOW I CAN AFFORD TO CHANGE TITLES OF OTHERS! Finally, hehehe... :evil:

[Fryin' The Fish]

congrats. i cant wait until ive been here a year. as for the other stuff...i think we should definitly keep reed around because he will be going into his 3rd year and as someone (sorry i cant remember who) said in another post i read it took moulds and price 2 years to get good. i think aiken and coleman will never be good enough to start as 2nd reciever but tehy make pretty good 3rd, 4th or 5th WRs.

[Hermanator21]

To me, Josh seems like a #3(slot reciever), he will never be a typical #2 who can play the other side. We need another body...By the way happy Billszone B-Day ShadowHawk7

[justasportsfan]

I like Coleman . He's shown good hands and has been able to get open in the little time he spent on the field.

As for Aiken, I don't know if he wants to stay. I heard his cd's are selling.

[ShadowHawk7]

Thankx guys, how bout sum presents tho? ahem, cough ZB's cough ZB's.

:jk:

'Cides, T jus gave me a huge amount.

I agree that Aiken and Coleman shan't be more than #3's but where does Shaw play in? Is he the odd man out after we get a WR in the draft, almost inevidably?

[ShadowHawk7]

Geez, Fryin, if u can keep ure 53.19 posts for a year, all give u ALL my ZB's..
Coleman was a stud in the preseason. Ya, I kno it doesn't meen nething, but I'd like to c him get more playing tyme.

[BAM]

Originally posted by justasportsfan


As for Aiken, I don't know if he wants to stay. I heard his cd's are selling.

is he rapper? :scratch:

[Fryin' The Fish]

Originally posted by ShadowHawk7
Geez, Fryin, if u can keep ure 53.19 posts for a year, all give u ALL my ZB's..
Coleman was a stud in the preseason. Ya, I kno it doesn't meen nething, but I'd like to c him get more playing tyme.

agree with coleman getting more playing time. i forgot about shaw. i think he plays as a solid 3rd reciever, but he will never be a stand out WR, especially with his approaching age. i say, keep reed as 2rd, and then shaw, coleman and aiken can fight it out for the others - unless we draft a WR 1st round, which will change everything.

[Tatonka]

the bottom line is this..

tell me one team that has 2 stud wrs like moulds that have had success?

moulds is a premier receiver.. there is no arguing that.. he is a top ten guy in the league.. and he is with us for 3 more years.. all at reasonable salaries.

reed could easily still be every bit as good as hines ward.. who is a number one wr that doesnt have blazing speed, but is a great great receiver. some are ready to write him off as a 3rd wr.. i think that is nuts.. the guy has not even had his 3rd year yet.. moulds was MUCH worse than reed in his first 2 years. he will change alot of peoples opinions this year, and i believe he will show that you dont have to run a 4.3 to be a good number 2.

shaw had 800 friggen yards last season.. he played very well.. and anyone that can knock that signing is out of their mind.. he makes chump change, and is worth every penny.. he is easily a great number 3.

aiken was a 4th round pick who is built just like moulds. he was showing some promise before the season ending injury.. i am in no way ready to give up in this kid. he may still end up being a #1 wr.. you have no idea, nor do i.. but we invested a pick in him, so we will let time time..

then you have coleman, who has done nothing but play well when given the chance in the preseason, and has never really had a chance at all in the regular season..

if we are going to be a running team.. why do we need 6 wrs on the roster? but we have brown who is supposed to run a 4.19.. so there is your speed.

we dont need a wr.. we just dont.. moulds is not going anywhere for the next three years.. reed could still be great.. shaw is above average for a number 3 spot... and we have potential in coleman and aiken.

you guys that are screaming for a wr with our first pick are going to be the same ones that are sorely disappointed when that rookie is sitting on the bench while making #13 draft pick money.. and will finish the season with 300 yards.. and then you guys will be screaming to draft another wr next year..

i just dont get it... someone please explain it to me.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by BAM
is he rapper? :scratch:

he is joking about clay aiken.. the american idol.

[Fryin' The Fish]

:lol:

[mypoorfriendme]

reed has had two years now and will NEVER be a big play reciever. at best he will be a solid possession reciever (once he can learn how to hang on to the ball, which im sure he will) which is great because he will be awesome to move the sticks on 3rd and 7, but still we need someone that can stretch the field and attract coverage. reed dropped a ton of balls this year when he was supposed to break out this season. we DO need another reciever because besides moulds, all we have are a bunch of slot recievers with no real legitament number 2's.

:bravo:

now do you get it?

[toughluck]

When do the contracts on Reed and Shaw end? I would definately let them stay #2/3 this year, and see how it goes. Depending on the length of their contracts, either take a top notch receiver 1st round, or wait until 2nd or 3rd and take one to develop and have ready when Reed or Shaw leaves...

[BAM]

Originally posted by Tatonka


he is joking about clay aiken.. the american idol.

:doh: these blonde highlights are starting to set in

[helmetguy]

Just out of curiosity, what are the criteria that determine a "legitimate" #2 receiver? I mean, maybe I'm just being naive, but I thought #2 meant that he was the second best receiver on the team. Andre Reed was the consummate possession receiver, but was, for a very long time, the #1 receiver. I'm guessing that, for those who are dissatisfied with our corps of receivers, another Peerless Price type receiver would be the "legitimate" #2 receiver. Trust me, with a solid commitment to the run, defenses will have to think twice about overplaying the pass. Case in point: St. Louis. That "Air Martz" offense only works if defenses have to worry about Marshall Faulk.

But I'm just being curious.

[Goobylal]

Who is mini-Moulds? Aiken? Oh and Tatonka, I'm not advocating taking a WR in the 1st, but I think they should look to draft a big, fast, WR in the 2nd. I have doubts about Brown being able to play WR, and I'm even wondering if he'll be a good returnman. I agree with keeping Reed, Shaw, Aiken, and Coleman. One thing that could change things is if the Bills sign Alex Bannister, who is a Pro Bowl ST'er and a guy who is 6'5" and runs in the 4.4's. Then the need for a big, speed WR will have been met.

[ShadowHawk7]

Good point Gooby, and great post Tatonka. There is NO WAY we shud grab a reciever in the 1st, unless Mike slips. Maybe Roy, but I'm starting to think not now. I say, go the safe way, trade down for an xtra 2nd, grab Carrey, then Lavalis in the 2nd. W/ that xtra pick, we could grab a WR...

[BigZ]

Originally posted by ShadowHawk7

O ya! By the way, I noticed how long I've been a member 2day, and it was xactly 365 days! And it was like the first time I had ever seen that ticker on my profile thing in the treads! [SIZE=3]SO HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO ME!!! :party: Drinks all around on me! :beer: :drunks:[

Free drinks? Where? When?

[ShadowHawk7]

rolf.. send a s/h fee of 20 bucks via Paypal, and I'll ship u a couple bottles.

[Goobylal]

I should have added that Mould is getting long in the tooth, and I don't see anyone else on the roster as a bonafide #1 (Aiken has a long ways to go). The WR they draft in the 2nd COULD be that guy. Hopefully the Bills' new WR coach Tyke Tolbert, the guy who unearthed Anquan Boldin for the Cards last year, has targeted another gem in the draft.

[mypoorfriendme]

in order to fill my definition of a legitament number 2 reciever, first off you have to be consistant. shaw doesnt have to raw talent that reed does, but reed doesnt have the hands shaw does. a number two reciver also needs to be good enough to actually do something against the other teams number 1 or 2 corner. number 2 recievers see a lot more man coverage which requires the abiliity to attack the technique of the corner as opposed to finding the hole in the zone. reed and shaw both were able to find holes, but seemed to have trouble when pressed up, man on man. we need a number 2 reciever who will merit help up top on the defensive side, again, reed and shaw fall short. bledsoe needs someone that he can throw the fade and corner route to besides moulds. i believe our second, third and fuorth recievers are all great chain-moving type recievers and help our team a ton, but i still firmly believe we could use someone that can stretch the field and force the defense to lay back a tiny bit

[mypoorfriendme]

of course this is all biased because i really want a WR in the first ruond because lately weve been getting screwed when it comes to first round picks (big mike is an OT, who wants to get excited about that?) and mcgahee was of course hurt. seeing him dressed out is what im looking forward to most this coming season

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
reed has had two years now and will NEVER be a big play reciever. at best he will be a solid possession reciever (once he can learn how to hang on to the ball, which im sure he will) which is great because he will be awesome to move the sticks on 3rd and 7, but still we need someone that can stretch the field and attract coverage. reed dropped a ton of balls this year when he was supposed to break out this season. we DO need another reciever because besides moulds, all we have are a bunch of slot recievers with no real legitament number 2's.

:bravo:

now do you get it?

no.. i dont get it.. you can not tell me that reed will never be a big play receiver.. he was the best receiver that i ever watched in college.. i really dont think that you know how much potential he has.. and you said he "should" have broke out in his second year and dropped a TON of passes.. that is absolute crap.. he dropped some passes early in the year.. i would venture to say (someone look it up) 7 all year.. also, i love how he gets no slack for the fact that most receivers break out in the 3rd year if they are going to, and that he was essentially a number one, since moulds was either out or hurt all year.. its just crap.. josh reed can be a number one receiver just like hines ward is.. and he can dominate the same too.. does that mean he is going to? no.. but for you to say that he CANT be a dominant receiver is just absurd and completely incorrect.

i am sure that you were one who was saying that moulds was **** and price sucked after year 2 as well.


Originally posted by helmetguy
Just out of curiosity, what are the criteria that determine a "legitimate" #2 receiver? I mean, maybe I'm just being naive, but I thought #2 meant that he was the second best receiver on the team. Andre Reed was the consummate possession receiver, but was, for a very long time, the #1 receiver. I'm guessing that, for those who are dissatisfied with our corps of receivers, another Peerless Price type receiver would be the "legitimate" #2 receiver.

god, what a good post.. not every team has 2 terrell owens receivers.. in fact.. NO TEAM has that.. but that is what it seems like tons of fans expect us to get.. and it is only going to be more disappointing when they see that the rookie they draft at number 13 turns out to be **** for the next 2 years and is just a huge waste of cap space in that time..

josh reed has every bit of the ability that andre reed had.. but he could never be a legit number one, right... :rolleyes:


Originally posted by Goobylal
I should have added that Mould is getting long in the tooth, and I don't see anyone else on the roster as a bonafide #1 (Aiken has a long ways to go). The WR they draft in the 2nd COULD be that guy. Hopefully the Bills' new WR coach Tyke Tolbert, the guy who unearthed Anquan Boldin for the Cards last year, has targeted another gem in the draft.

moulds has at least 3 more GOOD years in him.. he has no major injuries.. and has taken very few hard hits.. do you think the eagles expect owens to last 3 years? i would hope so with the huge contract they just gave him.. and he is the same age..

moulds is a physical specimen that will easily be able to play till his contract is up in 3 years.. and possibly a few years beyond that.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
in order to fill my definition of a legitament number 2 reciever, first off you have to be consistant. shaw doesnt have to raw talent that reed does, but reed doesnt have the hands shaw does. a number two reciver also needs to be good enough to actually do something against the other teams number 1 or 2 corner. number 2 recievers see a lot more man coverage which requires the abiliity to attack the technique of the corner as opposed to finding the hole in the zone. reed and shaw both were able to find holes, but seemed to have trouble when pressed up, man on man. we need a number 2 reciever who will merit help up top on the defensive side, again, reed and shaw fall short. bledsoe needs someone that he can throw the fade and corner route to besides moulds. i believe our second, third and fuorth recievers are all great chain-moving type recievers and help our team a ton, but i still firmly believe we could use someone that can stretch the field and force the defense to lay back a tiny bit

so according to your logic.. why wouldnt brown work? he can outrun everyone on the field.. just send him deep and it should accomplish what your saying we need..

i just disagree with you completely on this.. you have moulds to do that.. you dont need TWO wrs that can go deep.. the top three guys we have are fine.. and again you harp on reed having bad hands.. when it is just not true.. not his whole college career.. and not his rookie season.. he had a bad year under the worst offensive coaching that this team has EVER seen.. he will be fine..


Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
of course this is all biased because i really want a WR in the first ruond because lately weve been getting screwed when it comes to first round picks (big mike is an OT, who wants to get excited about that?) and mcgahee was of course hurt. seeing him dressed out is what im looking forward to most this coming season

yeah.. you'll be real excited to see a guy like reggie williams sitting on the bench and looking average for 2 years.. that will be a blast, no? as opposed to having a center that can keep bledsoe off his back.. (or at least make a better attempt too.. bledsoe will just hold the ball UNTIL he gets sacked regardless of how good the protection is.. while he stares at moulds the whole time)

[ShadowHawk7]

Very tru indeed, T. So who would you reccomend TD take in the 1st then? Right now, I'm leaning towards DT, or trade down then OL.

[helmetguy]

Thanks, Tonk! Knew I could count on you!

[mypoorfriendme]

just curious tonk, whats the point of asking someones opinion if youre not giong to listen to it? i am a josh reed fan but realize he wont be the big play threat that i think we need. and sure he may not have dropped 10,000 passes (a ton) but it seemed like hed choke when put on the spot. as far as last year being a dissappointment; all we talked about last off season was how this year was going to be his break out year as the #2. and his career is not at its peak, i dont ever remember saying it was. there is still tons of hope in his career and he might someday be able to dominate as a possession reciever who can consistantly put up 100 catches for 1000 yards. however, i dont think hell ever be a deep threat kinda guy with stats like 100 catches for 1250 yards. there is just no way. he can make the pro bowl for every year here on after but you still wont convince me he is a "big play reciever"

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by ShadowHawk7
Very tru indeed, T. So who would you reccomend TD take in the 1st then? Right now, I'm leaning towards DT, or trade down then OL.

i think that there is a good possibility that we could lose schobel.. i would like to see them lock him up.. but if they have no intention of doing that.. then DE/DT are huge priorities.. bigger than anything else.. because pat and sam are both getting up there... and i believe they are BOTH UFAs after this year.. so maybe we can keep pat, but i cant see sam coming back.. who knows.. and if we lose schobel.. that means that we need a replacement.. and that is assuming that kelsay has come around to be a starter...

I think we really only need one top OLineman.. grove or stepanovich would suit me fine.. i think you trade down and get more picks and see if you cant get rivers, grove, and lavalais or dockett with your picks.. this is assuming we dont get volek of coarse.. if we do get volek.. take a qb later like smoker in the 4th or so.


Originally posted by helmetguy
Thanks, Tonk! Knew I could count on you!

i dont mean to come across as rude about it.. but i do get worked up about it for some reason.. mypoorfriendme.. i dont mean to be offensive or condesending in anyway.. if i was, i apologize..

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
just curious tonk, whats the point of asking someones opinion if youre not giong to listen to it? i am a josh reed fan but realize he wont be the big play threat that i think we need. and sure he may not have dropped 10,000 passes (a ton) but it seemed like hed choke when put on the spot. as far as last year being a dissappointment; all we talked about last off season was how this year was going to be his break out year as the #2. and his career is not at its peak, i dont ever remember saying it was. there is still tons of hope in his career and he might someday be able to dominate as a possession reciever who can consistantly put up 100 catches for 1000 yards. however, i dont think hell ever be a deep threat kinda guy with stats like 100 catches for 1250 yards. there is just no way. he can make the pro bowl for every year here on after but you still wont convince me he is a "big play reciever"

i am listening to your opinion.. i just disagree..

he could have had a break out season last year.. but horrible coaching, the injury to moulds - which consequently put a ton of pressure on reed as a second year guy, and a case of the drops early on.. they all combine to throw that breakout year off track.. but it is not even like he is behind schedule.. we were just expecting more because he had 500 yards as a rookie..

i can see him being a 100 catch guy.. but 1000 yards w/ a 100 catches really doesnt give him any credit for his YAC ability.. he has every bit of the yac ability as moulds or anyone else..

these are wards numbers..

1998 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 0 15 246 16.4 45 0 3 1 12
1999 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 14 61 638 10.5 42 7 6 1 31
2000 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 15 48 672 14.0 77 4 8 2 31
2001 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 16 94 1003 10.7 34 4 13 0 52
2002 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 16 112 1329 11.9 72 12 19 2 66
2003 Pittsburgh Steelers 16 16 95 1163 12.2 50 10 18 2 60


he can put up those numbers.. 1300 yards.. or more.. if given the right situation..

i guess we can just agree to disagree. because i will never be convinced that reed cant put up as good of numbers as anyone else in the league.. and that he cant be a legit number 1 just like andre reed was...

not every team needs two eric moulds receiver to be successful.. especially when your trying to be a run first team.

[mypoorfriendme]

thats a lot more rational, im back to respecting your posts ;)
and keep in mind a lot of the times i argue just to argue. josh reed will be legit next year.

[mypoorfriendme]

but just fyi, i dont consider ward a big play reciever although i do believe he is one of the top 15 overall recievers in the league. i hope reed turns out the same

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
but just fyi, i dont consider ward a big play reciever

do you play fantasy football?

[toughluck]

Since nobody answered the first time i asked, when do the contracts on Reed and Shaw end??

[Goobylal]

Tat: STATS, Inc. says that Reed had 5 dropped passes last year. As for Moulds playing another 3 seasons at a high level, I'd LOVE for that to happen. Just planning for a contingency in case it doesn't, and this is the perfect year to grab a WR.

tough: Shaw and Reed signed through 2005.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Goobylal
Tat: STATS, Inc. says that Reed had 5 dropped passes last year.

that is about 9 less than terrell owens.

[Goobylal]

Originally posted by Tatonka
that is about 9 less than terrell owens. Owens they say dropped 11, however he was "targeted" 146 times, compared to Reed's 104.

[mypoorfriendme]

a.) just because someone scores does NOT mean theyre a playmaker

b.) you dont have to be a playmaker to be hall-of-fame or atleast pro bowl worthy

c.) i have zero problems with reed and am a josh reed fan

d.) there are more things to stats than meets the eye

[mypoorfriendme]

ie. the season before this last one we had one of the best pass defenses in the league. this must have meant we had a legit nickel package right? wrong. both of our safeties were inexperienced and had a lot of growing pains and we needed a lot help with FS and could use some help at SS as far as coverage goes. our nickel corner was terrible and got beat all the time. but we were still top 5 in the league, so why fix anything???

this just shows stats can me manipulative. whos to say whats a drop? there were times when the corner just beat reed to the ball but i guess that wouldnt be considered a drop. or when he makes a bad read or runs a crappy route? are those stats?

[Jan Reimers]

I think what almost everyone wants is a speed receiver like Moulds, because the rest of our current recievers are more possession guys. But Reed might turn out to be very good as a number 2, and I think Aiken has a chance to be good, too.

We might take a speed guy like Johnny Morant in a lower round, figuring him to be a situational/change of pace guy.

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by mypoorfriendme
a.) just because someone scores does NOT mean theyre a playmaker

b.) you dont have to be a playmaker to be hall-of-fame or atleast pro bowl worthy

c.) i have zero problems with reed and am a josh reed fan

d.) there are more things to stats than meets the eye

a) i disagree.. to an extent.. if a guy is getting 10-12 tds a year.. that is making plays.. that is being a consistent playmaker.. i think maybe where we are differing on this is you are thinking big plays.. 60 yard tds.. the ability to make a small run into a 80 td run..

ward doesnt do that as often as moss.. but still does it..

b) again.. i think we just are looking at the word "playmaker" two different ways... but your right.. you dont have to be a big play guy to get to the probowl or hall of fame.. in the same token, you dont need more than one big play receiver to be sucessful.. we have moulds.

c) good to know. :D

d) your right.. and as long as they serve my purpose, i will continue to use them. ;)