PDA

View Full Version : Will Moulds be obsolete in Fairchild's Offense??



Kerr
01-25-2006, 11:18 PM
This is not an anti Moulds thread, but seeing as how Fairchild is practically bringing in a version of what was left of the Rams offense here, does Moulds fit into that offense? Moulds can still play, but he's clearly lost a step. I've you've noticed over the years, their wr's in that offense were all speed guys. The offense requires plenty of speed at the wr position. Lee Evans and Roscoe Parrish will have no problems, but Moulds is no longer out running many cb's these days. This could add another reason for his departure.


Feedback.

bernielivsey_1
01-25-2006, 11:26 PM
:( In the old Rams show on turf O it was Bruce, Holt, Akeim/Phroel and Faulk. Match up Moulds, Evans, Parrish and McGahee and what do you get? Sort of like a Mini Me version. :str8face:

Tatonka
01-25-2006, 11:36 PM
i dont think isac bruce is a whole lot faster these days..

moulds can do fine in this offense if he wants to ... which would require him keeping his pussy ass whining to a minimum and just does his job like he did at seasons end.

Kerr
01-25-2006, 11:53 PM
i dont think isac bruce is a whole lot faster these days..




When you averaged 14.6 yds receiving in a season(Bruce), I don't think it means you're slowing down much.

Devin
01-26-2006, 12:32 AM
Moulds will do well in almost any offense.

Mahdi
01-26-2006, 01:13 AM
i dont think isac bruce is a whole lot faster these days..

moulds can do fine in this offense if he wants to ... which would require him keeping his pussy ass whining to a minimum and just does his job like he did at seasons end.
Agreed. I think Fairchild will actually bring out the best in Moulds. And if Moulds would just have a little more faith in Losman and work with him, they can have an extremely productive relationship. Losman's ability to get out the pocket and extend the length of plays should render Moulds and Evans uncoverable.

The_Philster
01-26-2006, 04:55 AM
I don't think Moulds has really lost that much...it's just hard to get the ball when you're double covered as much as he is and your QB isn't comfortable throwing to a WR under double coverage

ICE74129
01-26-2006, 06:44 AM
Moulds needs to :stfu: and understand Losman is the QB. If he can't deal with that, Trade his ass.

The odd man out is McGahee. He isn't the all around back that even Jackson is. He doesnt' have the kneebend, cutback abilities and he can't catch as well.

Mr. Miyagi
01-26-2006, 11:52 AM
i dont think isac bruce is a whole lot faster these days..

moulds can do fine in this offense if he wants to ... which would require him keeping his pussy ass whining to a minimum and just does his job like he did at seasons end.
Man, you kiss your mother with that mouth? :eek:

RedEyE
01-26-2006, 11:58 AM
I think one of the biggest reasons Fairchild agreed to come to Buffalo was the WRs.

You have Evans that can stretch the field and Moulds across the middle, that gets amazing YAC.

There are two big question marks lingering over Parrish and Reed. Yes Reed showed signs of progression last season, but sill hasn't done much to prove anything to me. Parrish is young and thus far hasn't shown anything to me. It would be a mistake getting rid of Moulds, IMO.

Evans / Moulds AKA Holt / Bruce.

THATHURMANATOR
01-26-2006, 12:05 PM
This is not an anti Moulds thread, but seeing as how Fairchild is practically bringing in a version of what was left of the Rams offense here, does Moulds fit into that offense? Moulds can still play, but he's clearly lost a step. I've you've noticed over the years, their wr's in that offense were all speed guys. The offense requires plenty of speed at the wr position. Lee Evans and Roscoe Parrish will have no problems, but Moulds is no longer out running many cb's these days. This could add another reason for his departure.


Feedback.
Moulds is much better than Bruce who is still good in the Rams offense.

lynobx
01-26-2006, 12:21 PM
Moulds can still play, and play at a pretty high level. I can't see any offensive scheme making a receiver of his caliber obsolete, even if he has lost a step.

patmoran2006
01-26-2006, 05:22 PM
Eric Moulds will FLOURISH.
Playing next year for ANDY REID

G. Host
01-26-2006, 05:48 PM
There are two big question marks lingering over Parrish and Reed. Yes Reed showed signs of progression last season, but sill hasn't done much to prove anything to me. Parrish is young and thus far hasn't shown anything to me. It would be a mistake getting rid of Moulds, IMO.

Reed will be used as a blocking back and for crisscrossing routes over the middle if he is kept. I do not think the Bills offense will attempt to be the greatest show (outside) on turf however; the OL will not be ready and we do not have a RB half as good as St Louis had.

Philagape
01-26-2006, 08:21 PM
Holt ----> Evans
Bruce ----> Moulds
Curtis ----> Parrish

Of course, Moulds' return must depend on his contract. He is NOT worth $11 mil.

G. Host
01-26-2006, 08:52 PM
Moulds is not getting $11 million. Some of that money he is getting whether he plays for Bills or not. It is signing bonuses and salary from previous years converted to bonus.

justasportsfan
01-26-2006, 08:54 PM
Holt ----> Evans
Bruce ----> Moulds
Curtis ----> Parrish

Of course, Moulds' return must depend on his contract. He is NOT worth $11 mil.
:up:

HHURRICANE
01-26-2006, 09:40 PM
i dont think isac bruce is a whole lot faster these days..

moulds can do fine in this offense if he wants to ... which would require him keeping his pussy ass whining to a minimum and just does his job like he did at seasons end.

He did it at the end when his boy started again. I doubt he plays for JP. Cut his old ass!!!