Jump to content


Photo

Bills reportedly interested in acquiring another RB


  • Please log in to reply
165 replies to this topic

#161 It's in My Blood

It's in My Blood

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,657 posts

Posted 14 October 2017 - 10:44 PM

I'm simply not a fan of trading draft choices for a RB. McCoy is aging, but we should look for a replacement in the draft. I think that Jonathan Williams could be almost as productive as anyone who is going to be on the trade block. It's difficult for me to understand why you'd let Gillislee go, only to use draft choices on a RB. The idea of the Sammy and Darby trade was to compile draft choices, I'd rather not lose any for a RB, especially when they refuse to activate Williams.

The only way I'm giving up a draft choice would be for a WR. It's not because I like the idea, it's only because it's a necessity. This team has exceeded expectations thus far. We are in the hunt, but we won't be for long without a legitimate WR. We need someone immediately. I'm aware that WR's take longer to adjust to a new scheme than other positions. However, wouldn't any legit WR immediately be an upgrade over the crap we have now?

Because Gillislee is lighting it up in NE right?

Also, the reason we are compiling draft picks is to add talent, which doesn't necessarily mean just through the draft. It gives the Bills flexibility and ammunition.

Edited by It's in My Blood, 14 October 2017 - 10:46 PM.


#162 Boatdrinks

Boatdrinks

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,739 posts

Posted 14 October 2017 - 10:52 PM

Running plays may be pretty simple but they generally work only as well as your OL blocks and opens up space for them.  OJ didn't do much early on with the Bills until the Electric Company showed up.


That's a fair point, and one that I agree with to a certain extent. The comparison here was to a WR; RBs often can be brought in as rookies and produce. More easily than WRs can, as there isn't any need for chemistry to develop with a QB etc. An instinctive RB can make an average OL look better than they are. It stands to reason that an in season RB acquisition may be able to contribute to an offense more immediately than a WR, which is what was being discussed. It's not a statement on the validity of such a move or if the Bills are currently blocking well or not. The FO making any move that could be considered odd would be in keeping with some of their moves to date.

Edited by Boatdrinks, 14 October 2017 - 10:55 PM.


#163 DriveFor1Outta5

DriveFor1Outta5

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,916 posts

Posted 14 October 2017 - 11:09 PM

Because Gillislee is lighting it up in NE right?

Also, the reason we are compiling draft picks is to add talent, which doesn't necessarily mean just through the draft. It gives the Bills flexibility and ammunition.

I'll never say that "Gillislee is lighting it up", just saying that we could use a competent number two. He would fit that bill.

#164 Marv's Neighbor

Marv's Neighbor

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,656 posts

Posted 14 October 2017 - 11:35 PM

Were they interested last week??  You'd think they would execute a move(s) ASAP during the Bye, to give the new guy a better chance to learn the plays.



#165 machine gun kelly

machine gun kelly

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,348 posts

Posted 15 October 2017 - 03:19 AM

RB addition doesn't make sense when we need WR and pass catching TE's.

#166 CanadianFan

CanadianFan

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,504 posts

Posted 15 October 2017 - 07:07 AM

RB addition doesn't make sense when we need WR and pass catching TE's.

 

It does. there's no backup RB to Shady