TheLongshot Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 I think Buffalo is out. They'd be stupid to not take a QB in the 1st or 2nd. Oakland is still our best shot. What about the 49ers? Maybe the Cardinals? Maybe the Browns? Assuming that there is a guy available to them to select, that is. There is no guarantee that Clausen will drop to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfbovey Posted April 16, 2010 Author Share Posted April 16, 2010 Would be interesting if Buffalo now becomes a trade partner for us to trade down with if they want Clausen. He could be gone by the time they pick and Colt McCoy could be gone before they pick again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anar-k21 Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 i believe buffalo is gonna draft a QB early from what i hear, and the Raiders just signed Boller , i mean with that kind of talent they may not have room for J.C. ( please note the sarcasm on the last part:cool:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dswerdlw Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 If we get very cynical and believe that JC is likely to go for a 5th or 6th round pick, then he could just as likely be taken by a team looking for a quality back-up instead of a starter. Among those teams are the Pats, Bengals, Texans, Colts, Chiefs, and Bears. He could even go to the Rams to start while their grooming Bradford. Right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommDownMan Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 As some have pointed out over there, we may want to keep an eye on what the bills do with their picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the draft. If they don't pick up a QB in those rounds, a possible deal could be in the works for a JC trade by Saturday. I would think a 2nd or 3rd round QB would make JC more useful to them. Give them a cheap starter while they let the new guy learn. Chances aren't too high that a 2nd/3rd rounder is ready to start day 1...and definitely shouldn't be given the job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_Bleed_B&G Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 send his ass to Arizona. They need QB's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THEREALTOR1 Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 I would think a 2nd or 3rd round QB would make JC more useful to them. Give them a cheap starter while they let the new guy learn. Chances aren't too high that a 2nd/3rd rounder is ready to start day 1...and definitely shouldn't be given the job. I agree. I guess the question is, do the bills believe that JC is an upgrade over Edwards/Fitzpatrick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Edds Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 we'll be lucky to get a 5th rounder for him ... just my gut feeling. The entire world knows that we over-valued him ... and then we couldn't get rid of him for 2 straight years. if i were the rest of the NFL GM's I'd wait till draft day also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seriously Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 It's entertaining how some of you actually believe you have any idea as to what will happen, to speak with such certainty is rediculous. Especially after what has taken place thus far.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angel2 Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Boller signing in Oakland doesnt really impact Campbells value at all. Boller was only signed because Gradowski or whatever his name is got hurt and wont be able to play for a month. And its not like Boller signed a multi-year contract with any garaunteed money. he'll probably be cut in a month or two. Campbell would be an immense upgrade over either guy in Oakland. so the bills fans on that message board are retards. Campbell never had much of a market anyway, but the Boller signing hasnt hurt his market at all. Can't buy into your theory. Why didn't the Raiders take Campbell instead of Boller? I don't think Jason is in their plans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLongshot Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 Can't buy into your theory. Why didn't the Raiders take Campbell instead of Boller? I don't think Jason is in their plans. It could all be a negotiating ploy, something to show that, no, we don't need to trade for your guy to lower his price. The Skins are doing it the other way, saying that they'd be willing to keep him and the fact that the playbook was sent to him to back up that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrJL Posted April 16, 2010 Share Posted April 16, 2010 It would appear that with the raiders signing KB yesterday, that some of the bills fan on their message board have picked up on the fact that JC's value is on the decline. Buffalo could steal Campbell from Washington I recall checking in on their board a few weeks ago and most of the inmates there were not on board the JC train. However, now with the idea that they may be able to pick him up on the cheap (4th or 5th pick), it would seem alot more the membership have warmed up to the idea (except for some poster named "TheProphet", who insists on referring to himself in the 3rd person, he's not a big fan of our once fearless leader). As some have pointed out over there, we may want to keep an eye on what the bills do with their picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds of the draft. If they don't pick up a QB in those rounds, a possible deal could be in the works for a JC trade by Saturday. I think JC goes off the market for this years draft at least at the end of the third round. Unless they off to throw in a second pick. Personally I think even if the Skins decide they'd take a fourth they'd want it by the end of the second round so they could package it with their fourth rounder to get a third round pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.