PDA

View Full Version : Does anybody realize that the Bills gave a $10 mil contract to a TE...


Ebenezer
03-13-2006, 03:22 AM
....with 31 career receptions?? unacceptable. :down:
Night Train
03-13-2006, 05:13 AM
If he can block as advertised, then he's worth it. Until he signed, we had ZERO TE's who could block. It's 10 Mil spread out over 4 years, which includes a bonus. In reality, he probably isn't that expensive.

I noticed the year before he only caught 8 passes but 4 were TD's. Butch Rolle Jr.

With him and Everett in the lineup, I now doubt Vernon Davis of Maryland is on the radar anymore...if he ever was.
billsburgh
03-13-2006, 05:39 AM
from what Marv has said, he is really a 6th o-lineman, sort of a Mark Bruener type.
vicmantak
03-13-2006, 05:42 AM
I agree that it's just unacceptable to overpay for a one dimensional TE.
I thought he was brought only as depth until Vernon Davis develop his blocking skills...
I wonder when are Bills going to be an exciting threat on offense...
THE END OF ALL DAYS
03-13-2006, 06:05 AM
....with 31 career receptions?? unacceptable. :down:
It does seem a bit extravagant... I hope the guy blocks like a freight Train... he'll need to in order to justify his pay.
lynobx
03-13-2006, 06:42 AM
He is potentially a good pass receiver as well as a monster blocker, so I think we should reserve judgment until we see how he performs. We wouldn't have given him $10M unless we thought he was going to be a very good player.
THATHURMANATOR
03-13-2006, 07:03 AM
it is over 4 years.
!Papacrunk!
03-13-2006, 07:03 AM
He is potentially a good pass receiver as well as a monster blocker, so I think we should reserve judgment until we see how he performs. We wouldn't have given him $10M unless we thought he was going to be a very good player.
It's not like he's a rookie. I guess his numbers have improved with each season. Also, I think there might be history with some players that got big contracts that never lived up to them, just saying you know.
Kerr
03-13-2006, 07:20 AM
From what i've heard, he's regarded as one of the top blocking TE's in the league. We basically signed another lineman. Even coming out of LSU, he was nothing spectacular as a receiver, but his blocking skills were noticed.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/2002/draft/players/32842.html
Iehoshua
03-13-2006, 07:23 AM
I'd rather pay a guy for what he's going to do than overpay when he's on the downside of his career... That said, hopefully he lives up... Then again if he's too good, he'll hold out or demand a trade.. Ugh...
:ill:

:rofl:
ICE74129
03-13-2006, 07:30 AM
I'd rather pay a guy for what he's going to do than overpay when he's on the downside of his career... That said, hopefully he lives up... Then again if he's too good, he'll hold out or demand a trade.. Ugh...
:ill:

:rofl:

Outstanding post. Agreed. Don't pay a guy for what he has done (Moulds) pay someone for what he can do now and for the next couple of years.

Royal is considered a great blocking TE. Did you guys want to run the damn ball or not? If so quit *****ing. If royal is one of the top 3 blocking TE's in the game today then a 10 mill contract is worth it. Esp. if we are going to a 3 wide formation like I think we are.
Kerr
03-13-2006, 07:35 AM
I believe Marv is trying to get his own McKellar and Metzellars. Not flashy TE's who ever put up big numbers, but servicable and got the job done on the field. I don't think Marv is really into drafting big time TE's who are bigger names or could become bigger names than his receivers.
Mitchy moo
03-13-2006, 07:40 AM
RW won't spend $10M to improve his lines but will spend it for a position we already drafted for, not good.
Ebenezer
03-13-2006, 07:53 AM
again, same trap as before...this team does more to get TE than they do T or G...

then again, if it were TD he would try to make him into a G.
ICE74129
03-13-2006, 08:23 AM
again, same trap as before...this team does more to get TE than they do T or G...

then again, if it were TD he would try to make him into a G.

Name for me who we should have signed? We can't afford Hutchenson and nor should we even try for the stupid amount the Vikes are going to pay him. If it's not there, dont sign guys just to sign them. That is what TD did.
Mitchy moo
03-13-2006, 08:43 AM
Name for me who we should have signed? We can't afford Hutchenson and nor should we even try for the stupid amount the Vikes are going to pay him. If it's not there, dont sign guys just to sign them. That is what TD did.

Ice, it's more a matter of having to many people at one position. We need money thrown towards the lines.
TacklingDummy
03-13-2006, 08:49 AM
....with 31 career receptions?? unacceptable. :down:

It's better then giving a QB 5 years $25 million for playing one good game in Jacksonville.
Philagape
03-13-2006, 08:51 AM
A blocking TE's stats are irrelevant. That's like judging a fullback by his rushing yardage.
LifetimeBillsFan
03-13-2006, 08:54 AM
Ice, it's more a matter of having to many people at one position. We need money thrown towards the lines.

But, who do you throw it at, Eb?

Bentley wasn't going to go anywhere but to Cleveland. The Bills could not afford to throw the kind of money at Hutchinson that would get him out of Seattle--you can see the kind of deal that Minny had to give him just to get him to sign an offer sheet.

So, who do you throw money at? Neal? Ashworth? Dockery? The Bills are talking to Mawae. And, are reportedly trying to talk with Runyan. There's not much quality out there after Bentley and Hutchinson.... Mawae and Runyan are the only really proven offensive linemen out there now and both of them are on the older side--after that, who is there? Besides which, the Bills have thrown some money at their defensive line already in getting Tripplett and they have Pickett coming in today. So, realistically, what do you want them to do? You've got to be realistic about this.
ICE74129
03-13-2006, 08:59 AM
Ice, it's more a matter of having to many people at one position. We need money thrown towards the lines.

Please STFU already.
ICE74129
03-13-2006, 09:01 AM
But, who do you throw it at, Eb?

Bentley wasn't going to go anywhere but to Cleveland. The Bills could not afford to throw the kind of money at Hutchinson that would get him out of Seattle--you can see the kind of deal that Minny had to give him just to get him to sign an offer sheet.

So, who do you throw money at? Neal? Ashworth? Dockery? The Bills are talking to Mawae. And, are reportedly trying to talk with Runyan. There's not much quality out there after Bentley and Hutchinson.... Mawae and Runyan are the only really proven offensive linemen out there now and both of them are on the older side--after that, who is there? Besides which, the Bills have thrown some money at their defensive line already in getting Tripplett and they have Pickett coming in today. So, realistically, what do you want them to do? You've got to be realistic about this.

And to further this point, I want anyone on here to show me Marv and Co's Wish list. So far they have hit it pretty well. You don't just sign an OLMan to sign one. If you do you get Bennie Anderson! Look, this crap will sort it's self out thoughtout FA and the DRAFT! you know...the DRAFT. That thing coming up in just over 40 days?
mysticsoto
03-13-2006, 09:20 AM
There are several things I don't like about this signing.

#1) It was an awful lot to pay a TE that is 1 dimensional. I thought we got rid of Campbell b'cse he was too expensive at $1.5 million. We are paying .5 million to Euhus, and no doubt something like that to Everett also.

#2) Them concentrating on a strictly blocking TE means that our TEs will once again be staying in to block and help the Oline. It means they are probably not confident they are going to fix the Oline to the point that it should be fixed. If they were planning on fixing it with some studs that could actually give JP some time, then they'd be more concerned with having JP some great targets to throw to. Yes, they still have Euhus and Everett as the catching TEs but like I said, to pay a TE $2 million a year just to block - that's ridiculous!

#3) Well, the odds of getting Davis have dropped tremendously now. That's not necessarily a terrible thing, but it does mean they are probably not going to fill holes that we need to fill, and therefore we will have holes come draft time and will have to address those holes rather than try and fill them beforehand to be able to choose the "best available" player instead. When you have to choose to fill holes, you don't always get the top studs. But when you are signing top TEs to long and expensive contracts, where are you going to get the money to pay and bring in more top FAs that could fill holes?