PDA

View Full Version : Moulds Trade Official


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

O.G.
03-26-2006, 11:19 PM
Just watched Sports Sunday on Fox 26 and The Texans are one of the teams Moulds either would like to be traded with or would like to sign with once released.

O.G.
03-26-2006, 11:24 PM
And we're signin' DE Kaluae from the eagles thats so awesome:yahoo:

Thanks, I did fail to mention that. If we happen to pick up Moulds, I think that would be it for our free agency and we would address all other needs in the draft. I must say this has been our busiest offseason.

TEXANS84
03-26-2006, 11:27 PM
Kalu went to Rice, so I can see his reasons coming here.

Moulds would definitley make a perfect addition, but he's going to be really expensive.

TEXANS84
03-26-2006, 11:35 PM
Wait for him to be released. His contract this year is in the 8 million dollar range. Plus, he's also indicated he definitley wants out of Buffalo.

Ibar_Harry
03-26-2006, 11:40 PM
Wait for him to be released. His contract this year is in the 8 million dollar range. Plus, he's also indicated he definitley wants out of Buffalo.

I was looking at the same thing. I can't see us assuming his contract given his lenght of time in the league. He looks like he is on the down hill side. We are not cash and cap space rich at the present time. Again, besides beating us Buffalo didn't do much, so may be still has some left in the tank.

I kind of like what we already have and would only want to sign some one who is clearly heads and shoulders above everyone else at the present time. We are going to need quite a bit of money for the draft. If we can pick some one up just because they want to be a Texan, then we might get them at a better price.

TEXANS84
03-26-2006, 11:41 PM
What would he probably go for any ways?

I'm sure we could get him for our 2nd or 3rd.

O.G.
03-26-2006, 11:41 PM
Wait for him to be released. His contract this year is in the 8 million dollar range. Plus, he's also indicated he definitley wants out of Buffalo.

My thought is to give up a second day pick for him. They know he can't be coveted for too much and if they want something out of the deal, most won't offer too much. Or the people that would, wouldn't be the teams he would be interested in. IMO

kiwitexansfan
03-26-2006, 11:41 PM
Does anyone have any evidence to support the ND Kalu rumour that is starting up??

HOOK'EM
03-26-2006, 11:43 PM
We could trade DD for him and resign Wells who would be a better complement to Bush anyway.:fans:

tiger06
03-26-2006, 11:45 PM
any links would be nice

TEXANS84
03-26-2006, 11:47 PM
any links would be nice

No links, just hearsay. I saw it on FOX if that's good enough for you.

Kaiser Toro
03-26-2006, 11:53 PM
Do not see any, probably because it really is not newsworthy. Aside from him going to Rice, what is there to be excited about? 8 sacks in 2002 were nice.

Trapped
03-26-2006, 11:55 PM
Moulds is on the decline, he's 32 will be 33 when season starts. Teams will not throw money at him.

He will get Isaac Bruce money, 3 yr 15 million. No where near what Burleson got, Randel El, Givens, etc.

He will be a solid veteren number 2 receiver for us if he come at around that price. 55 receptions 700 yard type wr. But don't expect the Eric Moulds of old. If he come and shows longevity like Rod Smith in Denver, we would be getting a major steal. But i would offer him 3yr 15 million, anything more than that, i wouldn't take him.

ND Kalu would just add depth, nothing fancy, Depth is good. That mean for the Super Mario Fans, we will not be drafting him, sorry to burst your bubble, we simply would be carrying too many DE's.

stevo3883
03-26-2006, 11:59 PM
Moulds is on the decline, he's 32 will be 33 when season starts. Teams will not throw money at him.

He will get Isaac Bruce money, 3 yr 15 million. No where near what Burleson got, Randel El, Givens, etc.

He will be a solid veteren number 2 receiver for us if he come at around that price. 55 receptions 700 yard type wr. But don't expect the Eric Moulds of old.

ND Kalu would just add depth, nothing fancy, Depth is good. That mean for the Super Mario Fans, we will not be drafting him, sorry to burst your bubble, we simply would be carrying too many DE's.


hmm, hes still better than 55 for 700 those are gaffney type numbers. moulds can still put up 1100+ easy.

Rovator
03-27-2006, 12:00 AM
Getting Eric Moulds would be great for the 2006 season since he seems to be great in even-numbered years. ;)

HOOK'EM
03-27-2006, 12:03 AM
...battlered......call it hype!:twocents:

Trapped
03-27-2006, 12:04 AM
hmm, hes still better than 55 for 700 those are gaffney type numbers. moulds can still put up 1100+ easy.
i don't know about 1100+ easily, somewhere between 700 and 1100. Happy now?

TexansTrueFan
03-27-2006, 12:08 AM
i wouldnt mind having moulds, he is a solid reciever. and would compliment A.J

F-minus67
03-27-2006, 12:10 AM
I don't know about Moulds, but N.D. Kalu is a solid player who will provide some excelent depth.

stevo3883
03-27-2006, 12:13 AM
i don't know about 1100+ easily, somewhere between 700 and 1100. Happy now?

not really, barring an injury.

1998- 67 for 1368
1999- 65 for 994
2000- 94 for 1326
2001- 67 for 904
2002- 100 for 1292
2003- 64 for 780
2004- 88 for 1043
2005- 81 for 816

if hes healthy, you can see he is a pro-bowl caliber WR. he missed time last year, and had arguably one of the worst qbs in the league throwing the ball, and still managed 80 grabs.

healthy + our offense should get him 80 catches and 1000+ yards easy

Trapped
03-27-2006, 12:23 AM
not really, barring an injury.

1998- 67 for 1368
1999- 65 for 994
2000- 94 for 1326
2001- 67 for 904
2002- 100 for 1292
2003- 64 for 780
2004- 88 for 1043
2005- 81 for 816

if hes healthy, you can see he is a pro-bowl caliber WR. he missed time last year, and had arguably one of the worst qbs in the league throwing the ball, and still managed 80 grabs.

healthy + our offense should get him 80 catches and 1000+ yards easy
we can argue all day, but we will simply have too many playmakers too distrubute the ball, Andre, the president, Davis, Putzier, i see Moulds realistically getting 800 if he were to come here. Which is solid, but not all-pro.

beerlover
03-27-2006, 12:58 AM
don't you guys get it yet, for once, well let me restate that, the new team in charge namely Kubiac is addressing the Texans most critical needs one player at a time. I know its a shock, really unexpected after four years of doing the wrong things, the Texans have turned the corner, call it maturity. Moulds would be an excellent addition and clearly the #2 WR needed.

look at how Kubiac has addressed the needs with a strong side DE, former all-pro center with Super Bowl experience, a profiecent experienced TE, #3 possession, ball control WR, blocking/pass protection/receiving FB, a solid MLB & now in the hunt for a true #2 WR, although I think it will cost the Texans a 3rd rd. draft pick.

bottom line I really like the aggressive approach they are taking, this is a C/O on the fly. :redtowel:

bdiddy
03-27-2006, 01:05 AM
What about DD and a 5th round pick? I know the Bills do really need a running back, but this would clear some cap room signing Moulds. Just a thought.

TMac48
03-27-2006, 01:10 AM
What about DD and a 5th round pick? I know the Bills do really need a running back, but this would clear some cap room signing Moulds. Just a thought.
If we're going to trade DD for a player, I'd rather trade him for a younger one.

dirty steve
03-27-2006, 01:24 AM
What about DD and a 5th round pick? I know the Bills do really need a running back, but this would clear some cap room signing Moulds. Just a thought.


did they trade willis mcgahee?

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:28 AM
eh, just wait and you don't have to give up DD.

mexican_texan
03-27-2006, 01:35 AM
DD will not be traded. He is 33% of our offense. As we learned last year, we need veteran leaders. Moulds could be one for the WR corps.

ThaShark316
03-27-2006, 02:04 AM
People, people, people...if anything's gonna get traded, it's that 66th pick.

TMac48
03-27-2006, 03:48 AM
Here's your proof of both the Moulds info and the Kalu signing.

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/fb/texansfront/3749828.html
Meanwhile, the Texans are expected to sign another free agent today. Philadelphia defensive end N.D. Kalu agreed to a one-year, $750,000 contract during the weekend.

TexanFanInCC
03-27-2006, 03:56 AM
i havent really looked hard, but i checked the eagles site and espn.com and couldnt come up with career stats, so tell me...is kalu some great pass rusher or more of a run stuffer? will he be a starter or reserve behind babin/peek? i understand he has been in the league for 10 seasons.

aj.
03-27-2006, 07:15 AM
A league official familiar with the negotiations said Sunday night that the Bills are asking for a fourth-round pick

Bills want a 4th rounder. They would probably take that 7 million he's due this year and turn it into a Flanagan-like three year deal. I don't know.... he's been very productive but he'll be 33 in July and most likely has only a year or two left.

Kalu opened the season as RDE starter opposite Kearse last year but he had some shoulder issues and eventually lost his spot to Trent Cole. In the offseason the Eagles picked up Darren Howard from the Saints to take over that position making Kalu expendable. I would expect Kalu to be Weaver's backup, but he could get a spot start now and then or even become a regular starter on the other side if the Peek/Babin experiment doesn't work. He's not a quick and explosive pass rusher but he does an adequate job defending the run.

texman8
03-27-2006, 07:58 AM
These are Kalu's stats:

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/3762

He had a couple good seasons in 2002/2003.

texman8
03-27-2006, 08:03 AM
Moulds' Stats:

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1196

Wow, he'll be 33 in July.

O.G.
03-27-2006, 08:12 AM
A second Day pick as figured, 4th rounder and the contract should be restructured somewhere in the calibur of 3 years 15.5 million with a 3-5 million Dollar Signing Bonus. Again IMO.

thunderkyss
03-27-2006, 08:27 AM
I'm sure we could get him for our 2nd or 3rd.
According to the chronicle, they're talking a 4th round pick.......

Does anyone have any evidence to support the ND Kalu rumour that is starting up??


ND Kalu (http://www.houstontexans.com/fan_zone/messageboards/showthread.php?t=20316)

|The.Brand0n|
03-27-2006, 08:50 AM
Ehhh.. Why not Javon Walker? :confused:

scarsdale
03-27-2006, 08:50 AM
Moulds is a fitness nut and stays in great shape. I think he'd be worth a 4th if he restructures his contract. I wouldn't let the 33 scare you too much.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 09:10 AM
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/sports/14195503.htm

Eric Moulds has a wish list of five teams he'd like to play for, and guess who's at the tippy-top of it?

That's right. The Eagles.

"Every time I mention Philadelphia, Eric's ears perk up," said Greg Johnson, who represents the 32-year-old Bills wide receiver along with his partner, Harry Henderson. "He wants to go to Philadelphia. He really feels he could help them. He loves the idea of being an Eagle and playing with Donovan [McNabb]."

Moulds wants out of Buffalo, and the Bills, who will have to pay him $7.1 million in salary and bonuses this year if he's on the team, are only too happy to oblige him. They have put the word out that he can be had for a second-day pick in next month's draft.

But don't start visualizing him in an Eagles uniform quite yet.
Johnson said he talked to Eagles president Joe Banner last week. He said there is "some interest" in Moulds by the Eagles, which an organization source also acknowledged.

But as much as Moulds would love to catch passes from McNabb, he is not interested in doing it for free, or anything close to free.

According to a source from one of the five teams on Moulds' wish list, which also includes New England, Seattle, Kansas City and Denver, the wide receiver is looking for a contract similar to the one Isaac Bruce signed with the St. Louis Rams 2 weeks ago.

cap1
03-27-2006, 09:27 AM
http://www.philly.com/mld/dailynews/sports/14195503.htm

But as much as Moulds would love to catch passes from McNabb, he is not interested in doing it for free, or anything close to free.

According to a source from one of the five teams on Moulds' wish list, which also includes New England, Seattle, Kansas City and Denver, the wide receiver is looking for a contract similar to the one Isaac Bruce signed with the St. Louis Rams 2 weeks ago.

Looks like he is just using the Texans to get a higher payday somewhere else.

The Preacher
03-27-2006, 09:29 AM
If I remember correctly he's made some pretty selfish comments in the past when things haven't gone well. The new look Texans are bringing in high character guys and though Moulds hasn't exactly gotten headline news about it, he's caused some headaches for the Bills. I wouldn't give up anything for him or pay him more than 2 mil a year but that's just me. I would even go as far to say I think Walters will produce as much this year as Moulds will as Walters is on the verge of breaking out and will prove himself a steal of this offseason while Moulds will simply be average wherever he lands. When Henry went down against Pitt Walters was Kitna's go-to guy and showed he was more than capable of playing a large role. Yeah it was just one game but the guy can definitely play at a high level. I simply don't think that's a direction we should take if it means giving up a pick. I would much rather take a flier on Colston or Jennings in the fourth.

Sportsfan
03-27-2006, 09:32 AM
This morning on 610, McClain seemed pretty confident they'd be getting a trade done w/Bufallo for Moulds. As of late, i don't put a lot of stock into what McClain says though...

Errant Hothy
03-27-2006, 09:33 AM
If any trade for Moulds involves draft picks..."Just say No!"

We're still to far away from decency to be trading potential depth/starters for over 30, whining, money hungry veterans; no mater what position they play.

Besides we've actually had alot of succes with fourth round picks, why waste one on a guy who'll be gone before we challenge for a playoff spot?

jacquescas
03-27-2006, 09:39 AM
If any trade for Moulds involves draft picks..."Just say No!"

We're still to far away from decency to be trading potential depth/starters for over 30, whining, money hungry veterans; no mater what position they play.

Besides we've actually had alot of succes with fourth round picks, why waste one on a guy who'll be gone before we challenge for a playoff spot?

I might say that for someone without a proven track record but he has over 9000 career yards, is looking for a 3 year 15 million contract. We pick up Moulds for our 4th rounder and we have nothing to do but sit back and wait for the draft.

Mailman04
03-27-2006, 09:42 AM
They can't get a WR like Moulds in the fourth round of this draft. Do it right now, trade for Moulds and get your WR group set and then spend the first day of the draft getting Bush, an OT and some defensive help in my opinion.

beerlover
03-27-2006, 09:43 AM
I might say that for someone without a proven track record but he has over 9000 career yards, is looking for a 3 year 15 million contract. We pick up Moulds for our 4th rounder and we have nothing to do but sit back and wait for the draft.

how about trade Phillip Buchanon for Moulds thats like a 2nd & 3rd rounder :brickwall

Bsacamano
03-27-2006, 10:16 AM
Why in the !@#$ would you give up the 1st pick in the fourth round for a guy on the downside of his career and at best has 3 years left?

If we give up the 1st pick in the 4th round I am going to be pissed.

Mark my words.....Moulds, although great in his day, will not be in the league 3 years from now

texansfan1974
03-27-2006, 10:16 AM
If any trade for Moulds involves draft picks..."Just say No!"

We're still to far away from decency to be trading potential depth/starters for over 30, whining, money hungry veterans; no mater what position they play.

Besides we've actually had alot of succes with fourth round picks, why waste one on a guy who'll be gone before we challenge for a playoff spot?

If we get Moulds we really are not that far from being a playoff contender.:redtowel:

O.G.
03-27-2006, 10:21 AM
Why in the !@#$ would you give up the 1st pick in the fourth round for a guy on the downside of his career and at best has 3 years left?

If we give up the 1st pick in the 4th round I am going to be pissed.

Mark my words.....Moulds, although great in his day, will not be in the league 3 years from now

The Texans will probably give up a 5th. And not defending Moulds, but even last year, he was more productive that all of our 2nd receivers. 827 yrds if I remember correctly. Late round pick and a reasonable restructed contract for a few years of service, I can deal with.

el toro
03-27-2006, 10:25 AM
Moulds would give you a #2 WR for a couple of seasons. His production last season wasn't exactly that bad. AJ/Moulds/Walter is a pretty good top 3 to start the season with and you'll have Mathis in the rotation as well as Bush to see time in the slot. Not bad.

O.G.
03-27-2006, 10:28 AM
Moulds would give you a #2 WR for a couple of seasons. His production last season wasn't exactly that bad. AJ/Moulds/Walter is a pretty good top 3 to start the season with and you'll have Mathis in the rotation as well as Bush to see time in the slot. Not bad.

Don't forget Putzier in the mix as well.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 10:30 AM
There is no question that Moulds' numbers have been better than what our offense could produce. The question is much like we ask about our QB position, would Manning and Brady been able to perform while under center for the Texans? Will Moulds be able to do so and moreover will he be content as a #2? We need value, not overpaying for players who are on the downward side of their career. At the right price and the right expectations this would be good signing, but not at the expense of the future.

Is anyone else alarmed that his avg yards per catch has gone down seven consecutive years?

http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1196

el toro
03-27-2006, 10:33 AM
Don't forget Putzier in the mix as well.


Indeed. A nice corps of receivers to complement the running game.

Trenches
03-27-2006, 10:43 AM
drafting a guy in round 4 to play WR doesnt get you very far. Most rookies, no matter how great, dont make huge contributions in year 1 (at WR) and you have to actually pick one that is not a bust. Then they have to learn the system adjust to the speed of the game, etc. If you are lucky you have a good player in a year or two.

We can have one NOW with Moulds and not have to throw one into the fire like we've always done.

This is what this team has lacked and why they SUCKED last year. NO VETS. Look what happened to our defense when they got rid of guys like Sharper. Its not just a players physical ability, but his experience in the league that really helps out a poor team.

nunusguy
03-27-2006, 10:46 AM
Most rookies, no matter how great, dont make huge contributions in year 1 (at WR) and you have to actually pick one that is not a bust. Then they have to learn the system adjust to the speed of the game, etc. If you are lucky you have a good player in a year or two.
We can have one NOW with Moulds and not have to throw one into the fire like we've always done.

We are starting from scratch again, we are rebuilding. I can wait a year or two, but Eric Moulds only has a year or two left. He's 32 going on 33 this season.

el toro
03-27-2006, 10:55 AM
Maybe the front office isn't content to wait.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 10:57 AM
Maybe the front office isn't content to wait.

They friggin better be, we just signed Carr to a 3 year extension and we have no defense.

jerek
03-27-2006, 10:58 AM
Moulds is on the decline, he's 32 will be 33 when season starts. Teams will not throw money at him.

He will get Isaac Bruce money, 3 yr 15 million. No where near what Burleson got, Randel El, Givens, etc.

He will be a solid veteren number 2 receiver for us if he come at around that price. 55 receptions 700 yard type wr. But don't expect the Eric Moulds of old. If he come and shows longevity like Rod Smith in Denver, we would be getting a major steal. But i would offer him 3yr 15 million, anything more than that, i wouldn't take him.

ND Kalu would just add depth, nothing fancy, Depth is good. That mean for the Super Mario Fans, we will not be drafting him, sorry to burst your bubble, we simply would be carrying too many DE's.

Agree on Moulds, if we get him it needs to be for cheap or for short time period, one or the other. Not sure about his durability in this case as I really only have his numbers to work with.

Do not need Kalu.

Trenches
03-27-2006, 10:59 AM
We are starting from scratch again, we are rebuilding. I can wait a year or two, but Eric Moulds only has a year or two left. He's 32 going on 33 this season.


If we are rebuilding then why are we signing 10 year vets like Flanigan and Kalu?

Rebuilding in the NFL now is done via FA AND the draft. We have proven we cant do it ourselves with the draft so we have to take players that have been developed for us.

Hey, Im fine with that. Admit your shortcomings and move on.

Porky
03-27-2006, 11:03 AM
Since when did 32 become over the hill? This guy has at least 3-5 years left. Ask Rod Smith if he is over the hill? I don't know what the deal is, but it seems there is just no pleasing a certain segment of people out there. Last year, when we let go of our veteran leaders like Sharper, people raved about how could they let the great Jamie Sharper go. Sure, he was getting up there a bit, and lost a step, but you need a veteran leader who knows his way around the game, and the Texans were crazy to let him go. You know what, y'all were probably right. Yet, now, we have a chance to pick up a PROVEN very solid WR, who has consistently produced, and all the sudden the guy might as well be Methuselah, and have a cane and long white beard. I don't get it. :brickwall

el toro
03-27-2006, 11:07 AM
Seems like we need to get back to the reason why we want a solid #2 WR, to open up things for AJ. It's almost like we're holding Moulds to a #1 standard. I would say that with Moulds plus the receivers the team had added at other spots (Walter & Putzier) and will be adding (Bush) that they will have accomplished the mission of helping AJ out for the next few seasons and also giving Carr a significantly better group of receivers to work with. All things considered, that's not a bad outcome.

texanfan2002114
03-27-2006, 11:08 AM
The Texans have a great chance in picking up a #2 receiver and I can't believe how many people on here are complaining about it. When it was rumored that I. Bruce had interest people loved the idea of bringing him in, but now hatethe idea of bring in an older receiver. There was a poll on this site that asked for peoples top 3 receivers if they had their choice and Bruce was in a lot of peoples top three. I just don't understand whats the difference.

I for one would love for Moulds to be the Texans #2 and would think that AJ would love as well!! GO TEXANS!!!!!!!!!

Bruce #'s last year - 36 rec 525yards 3td 14.6 yards per catch 33 turn 34 in November

Moulds #'s last year - 81 rec 816 yards 4 td 10.1 yards per catch 32 turn 33 in July

el toro
03-27-2006, 11:09 AM
You are not going to be able to make perfect moves. So far the only knock on this potential addition is that the guy is not a spring chicken. Well, that's life. Don't give up the farm to get him, but don't look a gift horse in the mouth. I guess I've used up my allotment of cliches with this post.

jacquescas
03-27-2006, 11:10 AM
i dont see all the stuff about Moulds being old. Yes he is 32. but Wide Reciever is not running back. There is a world of difference between a 32 year old running back with 9000 career yards and a 32 year old wide reciever with 9000 career yards.

Moulds still has probably about 2-3 years left at a high level. At that point Mathis or whomever should be ready to take over. I like it. I would rather give them the 5th round pick but, i'd do it for a 4th rounder. i'd try and get him to accept a 3 year 12 million contract.

el toro
03-27-2006, 11:16 AM
They friggin better be, we just signed Carr to a 3 year extension and we have no defense.

It's not like the D has been totally ignored this offseason thusfar. And there's still the draft.

In addition, an offense which can move the chains, stay on the field, and score points has significant value for the defense. If we were looking at an offense that does not have the potential to be that next season then the D would be more of an issue. If the offense can control the ball and clock like that, then all you need is an average defense. An extraordinary defense is a need if your offense is going to be abyssmal (ala the Ravens). Otherwise an average defense will work quite well. So the delta between offensive spending versus defensive spending doesn't matter as much to that end.

Texans32
03-27-2006, 11:25 AM
T.O and Marvin Harrison and Issac Bruce are all 31 or 32.....are they too old to produce????

David's Busted Carr
03-27-2006, 11:45 AM
If we can get Moulds for a 4th round pick and sign him for 3 years it would be PERFECT! A good veteran WR to take pressure off of AJ and mentor our younger WRs. And 32 is NOT too old to play WR at a very high level. WRs can play into their later 30s. And don't need him to be a #1 anyway. Just his presence will demand a defense's respect.

I just have a hard time believing he'd rather play here over Philly or NE where he would be the #1 WR and has a chance to win a ring. But hey, if it happens more power to our front office...

blockhead83
03-27-2006, 11:50 AM
How in the world does signing a guy like Moulds' hinder our process of building through the draft? Signing a proven, pro bowl caliber receiver (albeit on the downside of his career) does in no way preclude us from still building in the draft. We won't be signing a player of his caliber in the 4th round, and we can't afford to keep signing young players and watching for 3 years to see if they develop with no other viable starters. Trade a 4th for Moulds, let him play for 3 years or however long, that'll give us time to find a young player who can step in for him when he retires/is relegated to the #3 position or the bench. Having a solid #2 to take some heat off AJ for 3 years is not a bad thing. Those are three years we don't have to reach for a WR in the draft, and 3 years Carr will have an enhanced passing attack. I don't see the downside to bringing in Moulds for a 4th, as long as we don't break the bank.

Ibar_Harry
03-27-2006, 11:58 AM
The problem the last few years has been, because of the astonomical number of injuries in the 2nd year, to try to fix both sides of the ball at the same time. There have been just too many needs on both sides of the ball to get it done. As a result nothing has been fixed. I believe they have decided the offensive side should be the easiest to fix and that it would be productive. You have to have success somewhere or you simply drive the team into the ground. We have seen that scenario.

This would keep us in games and we could win a lot of them. Remember, Indy had a great offense and then began to fix the defense. If you only need 1 or 2 people its one thing, but when you need quite a few people on each side its another story.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 12:03 PM
The problem the last few years has been, because of the astonomical number of injuries in the 2nd year, to try to fix both sides of the ball at the same time. There have been just too many needs on both sides of the ball to get it done. As a result nothing has been fixed. I believe they have decided the offensive side should be the easiest to fix and that it would be productive. You have to have success somewhere or you simply drive the team into the ground. We have seen that scenario.

This would keep us in games and we could win a lot of them. Remember, Indy had a great offense and then began to fix the defense. If you only need 1 or 2 people its one thing, but when you need quite a few people on each side its another story.

But why the need for more offensive skill players? Everyone and their mother says it was only the offensive pass protection and the playbook. Did we not extend DD, did we not extend DC, have we not resigned McKinney, signed Flanagan, Putzier, Wlater and Cook? Is that not enough? I do not understand how so many people point to the fact that Carr is an amazing talent and we have top notch WR in AJ, but we will still need more?

News flash: The NFL and NFLPA extended the CBA, there will continue to be a salary cap.

jacquescas
03-27-2006, 12:06 PM
THink of Moulds asa 2 year stop gap until our younger talent is ready to step up. Someone for the younger guys to learn from. Our offense is very young, some vetrans will help.

rockabilly
03-27-2006, 12:08 PM
I look at Moulds as a giant upgrade from Bradford. Although I wish we would get ourselves a CB.

I am not even going to recognize this offense next year.

Ibar_Harry
03-27-2006, 12:09 PM
But why the need for more offensive skill players? Everyone and their mother says it was only the offensive pass protection and the playbook. Did we not extend DD, did we not extend DC, have we not resigned McKinney, signed Flanagan, Putzier, Wlater and Cook? Is that not enough? I do not understand how so many people point to the fact that Carr is an amazing talent and we have top notch WR in AJ, but we will still need more?

News flash: The NFL and NFLPA extended the CBA, there will continue to be a salary cap.

I'm probably one of the few that does not call AJ a number 1 receiver. At the present time I believe that is the case. He has a lot of talent, but he is not a guy like Moss or TO who you can go to despite the defense that surrounds him. AJ needs help to be open. They are trying to put together and Indy type of offense, not just an average one. Ours will probably feature the running game more than the passing game, but we do want a potent passing game. Again, I trust where are coaches are going we will just have to wait and see.

thunderkyss
03-27-2006, 12:14 PM
I'm probably one of the few that does not call AJ a number 1 receiver. At the present time I believe that is the case. He has a lot of talent, but he is not a guy like Moss or TO who you can go to despite the defense that surrounds him. AJ needs help to be open. They are trying to put together and Indy type of offense, not just an average one. Ours will probably feature the running game more than the passing game, but we do want a potent passing game. Again, I trust where are coaches are going we will just have to wait and see.

Man, we have got to get Moss off that list. He has been dismal the last 2 years. He's not who he used to be, and definitely not who he can be. I was a big fan, but I've been disappointed with him lately, more often than not.

O.G.
03-27-2006, 12:15 PM
i dont see all the stuff about Moulds being old. Yes he is 32. but Wide Reciever is not running back. There is a world of difference between a 32 year old running back with 9000 career yards and a 32 year old wide reciever with 9000 career yards.

Moulds still has probably about 2-3 years left at a high level. At that point Mathis or whomever should be ready to take over. I like it. I would rather give them the 5th round pick but, i'd do it for a 4th rounder. i'd try and get him to accept a 3 year 12 million contract.

That is exactly what the Texans should and probably will give Moulds. He's only going to get that money thru a sign and trade because on open market, he will get less, but then again I've seen crazier things happen this offseason.....like Nate Burleson.

Ibar_Harry
03-27-2006, 12:17 PM
Man, we have got to get Moss off that list. He has been dismal the last 2 years. He's not who he used to be, and definitely not who he can be. I was a big fan, but I've been disappointed with him lately, more often than not.

My point is AJ has yet to show he can do it all by himself and the team has constantly stated they need someone to take the pressure off of AJ. Again, AJ has a lot of talent, he's just not elite as yet.

bigTEXan8
03-27-2006, 12:18 PM
kaulu is a nice sing...JMO. I'm excited to see Moulds possible come here, and could be very worth it...teach the youngin' WRs tricks of the trade.

el toro
03-27-2006, 12:21 PM
But why the need for more offensive skill players? Everyone and their mother says it was only the offensive pass protection and the playbook. Did we not extend DD, did we not extend DC, have we not resigned McKinney, signed Flanagan, Putzier, Wlater and Cook? Is that not enough? I do not understand how so many people point to the fact that Carr is an amazing talent and we have top notch WR in AJ, but we will still need more?

News flash: The NFL and NFLPA extended the CBA, there will continue to be a salary cap.


Are we seeking to be average on both sides of the ball? You need one side of the ball to be well above average. So what if you spend more jack on that side? Reggie Bush has just fallen into your lap. Don't overthink this.

tulexan
03-27-2006, 12:21 PM
But why the need for more offensive skill players? Everyone and their mother says it was only the offensive pass protection and the playbook. Did we not extend DD, did we not extend DC, have we not resigned McKinney, signed Flanagan, Putzier, Wlater and Cook? Is that not enough? I do not understand how so many people point to the fact that Carr is an amazing talent and we have top notch WR in AJ, but we will still need more?

News flash: The NFL and NFLPA extended the CBA, there will continue to be a salary cap.


Maybe when Reeves and the coaching staff evaluated the talent, they came to the conclusion that the players on the offensive side were significantly worse than the players on the defensive side and the defensive problems had a lot more to do with the lack of coaching.

I'm not saying this is the reason for their one sided approach, but it could be a reason.

Hawg
03-27-2006, 12:25 PM
How in the world does signing a guy like Moulds' hinder our process of building through the draft? Signing a proven, pro bowl caliber receiver (albeit on the downside of his career) does in no way preclude us from still building in the draft. We won't be signing a player of his caliber in the 4th round, and we can't afford to keep signing young players and watching for 3 years to see if they develop with no other viable starters. Trade a 4th for Moulds, let him play for 3 years or however long, that'll give us time to find a young player who can step in for him when he retires/is relegated to the #3 position or the bench. Having a solid #2 to take some heat off AJ for 3 years is not a bad thing. Those are three years we don't have to reach for a WR in the draft, and 3 years Carr will have an enhanced passing attack. I don't see the downside to bringing in Moulds for a 4th, as long as we don't break the bank.

I agree with you one hundred percent. If we dont put a legitimate #2 on the other side of AJ then how can we expect him to produce at the high level that we know he can. I think that Moulds gives us that #2. This offense would be very exciting if we got him, escpecially since we will have Bush. GO TEXANS. (Draft Bush)

el toro
03-27-2006, 12:32 PM
Maybe when Reeves and the coaching staff evaluated the talent, they came to the conclusion that the players on the offensive side were significantly worse than the players on the defensive side and the defensive problems had a lot more to do with the lack of coaching.

I'm not saying this is the reason for their one sided approach, but it could be a reason.

Well, obviously they felt like some offensive players were worth keeping around. The HC's experience and talent lies in putting together proficient offenses. The front office has obviously made moves in free agency to add players who fit his style of offense.

It's not like improving the offense comes at the expense of the defense. If the defense finds itself on the field less during games due to the ability of the offense to put together sustained drives, that's a plus defensively. You don't need a spectacular defense in this scenario, you need an average one who can get the job done. With a great offense, you'll have a well-rested defense when it's their turn to take the field. You'll also have opposing offenses that are forced to wait on the sidelines while yours is on the field, thereby disrupting their chance to develop a rhythm.

I'm not sure why the team must clip their efforts to build a potent offense in order to add a defensive player or two. Why regress to the mean on both sides? Become exemplary on one side and use that to your advantage on the other side.

TexanFanInCC
03-27-2006, 12:38 PM
Why in the !@#$ would you give up the 1st pick in the fourth round for a guy on the downside of his career and at best has 3 years left?

If we give up the 1st pick in the 4th round I am going to be pissed.

Mark my words.....Moulds, although great in his day, will not be in the league 3 years from now

im actually satisfied with our WR core as it is. i dont see a need for moulds. i am willing to take my chances to see what kind of hidden gem kevin walter and derrick armstrong is. both have massive potential that went unrecognized due to a few reasons. in arm's case, small school (arkansas monticello) and walter's case: playing behind an already good WR core in cincy (behind chad and tj). these guys, if given a chance, could be a perfect scenario. u can keep ur picks, stay young, and be set for years to come. who'da thunk that eric parker and reche caldwell would be extremely productive WR's?? when they got their chance in SD, they rose up.

Hawg
03-27-2006, 12:45 PM
im actually satisfied with our WR core as it is. i dont see a need for moulds. i am willing to take my chances to see what kind of hidden gem kevin walter and derrick armstrong is. both have massive potential that went unrecognized due to a few reasons. in arm's case, small school (arkansas monticello) and walter's case: playing behind an already good WR core in cincy (behind chad and tj). these guys, if given a chance, could be a perfect scenario. u can keep ur picks, stay young, and be set for years to come. who'da thunk that eric parker and reche caldwell would be extremely productive WR's?? when they got their chance in SD, they rose up.


Who do yo see being the number two if you are satisfied with our recieving core. Kevin Walter is talented but will not be a strong number two. You need a number two that defenses are scared of to take some pressure off of AJ. And D. Armstrong is also unproven as someone who can attract some attention from opposing defenses.

TexanFanInCC
03-27-2006, 12:59 PM
if they double AJ, then just find arm or walter. if that happens successfully, walter and arms will earn their respect. it takes time. how do u think the chargers WR core got so good in 2004 when everyone thought their WR's were cruddy (their #1 at the time was kevin dyson...ooooh) sure they had antonio gates, but nobody in the league heard about him until he murdered the texans, and its safe to say that capers and staff did NOT prepare the defense to stop him. teams wont prepare their defenses to defend arms and walter. thats when they need to make their mark and establish themselves. we also have putzier...dont forget.

Trenches
03-27-2006, 01:06 PM
if they double AJ, then just find arm or walter. if that happens successfully, walter and arms will earn their respect. it takes time.


If it were that easy we wouldnt have let Jabar Gaffney go.

whiskeyrbl
03-27-2006, 01:09 PM
not sure if this is posted already or not

Texans | Team agrees with Kalu
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:52:24 -0800

John McClain, of the Houston Chronicle, reports the Houston Texans have agreed to a one-year, $750,000 contract with free agent DE N.D. Kalu (Eagles).


Texans | More on Moulds situation
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:48:45 -0800

John McClain, of the Houston Chronicle, reports the Houston Texans are indeed interested in trading for Buffalo Bills WR Eric Moulds. Before the Texans can work out the trade with Buffalo, they have to negotiate a new contract with Moulds. A league official familiar with the negotiations said Sunday night, March 26, that the Bills are asking for a fourth-round pick.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:11 PM
Texans | More on Moulds situation
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:48:45 -0800

John McClain, of the Houston Chronicle, reports the Houston Texans are indeed interested in trading for Buffalo Bills WR Eric Moulds. Before the Texans can work out the trade with Buffalo, they have to negotiate a new contract with Moulds. A league official familiar with the negotiations said Sunday night, March 26, that the Bills are asking for a fourth-round pick.

Hopefully it will work out.

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:14 PM
If we are rebuilding then why are we signing 10 year vets like Flanigan and Kalu?

Rebuilding in the NFL now is done via FA AND the draft. We have proven we cant do it ourselves with the draft so we have to take players that have been developed for us.

Hey, Im fine with that. Admit your shortcomings and move on.

that makes no sense- yes the OLD coaches proved they couldn't draft very well but if you look at their history- they were just as bad at FA. now with kubiak, we've had a good FA, why not let him do a draft before saying we'll never ever be a good drafting team??

Hawg
03-27-2006, 01:16 PM
if they double AJ, then just find arm or walter. if that happens successfully, walter and arms will earn their respect. it takes time. how do u think the chargers WR core got so good in 2004 when everyone thought their WR's were cruddy (their #1 at the time was kevin dyson...ooooh) sure they had antonio gates, but nobody in the league heard about him until he murdered the texans, and its safe to say that capers and staff did NOT prepare the defense to stop him. teams wont prepare their defenses to defend arms and walter. thats when they need to make their mark and establish themselves. we also have putzier...dont forget.

Understood, but dont you think that it would be nice have Moulds, a guy hat demands immediate respect. Then when teams devote all their tme to those guys then Walters will be waiting in the wings. I just think that it gives us more options, and makes us more explosive. Maybe im just getting to excited about the whole deal.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:18 PM
Get a vet who knows what they are doing as your #2. The moves they have made do not point to a long rebuilding term.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:19 PM
Signing Moulds devalues Bush at #1 in my opinion.

TexanFan881
03-27-2006, 01:20 PM
You don't have to be young to be good...

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:20 PM
Maybe when Reeves and the coaching staff evaluated the talent, they came to the conclusion that the players on the offensive side were significantly worse than the players on the defensive side and the defensive problems had a lot more to do with the lack of coaching.

I'm not saying this is the reason for their one sided approach, but it could be a reason.

or maybe, bar reggie and 1 or 2 linemen, we're going to have a defensive draft. plus it hasnt been all 1 sided- we signed weaver and cowart- looking at our defence, while it isnt great, doesnt look to have to many obvious holes- we need more secondary from the draft though

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:21 PM
Signing Moulds devalues Bush at #1 in my opinion.

Not really. You're drafting him to be a back plus line up in the slot.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:22 PM
or maybe, bar reggie and 1 or 2 linemen, we're going to have a defensive draft. plus it hasnt been all 1 sided- we signed weaver and cowart- looking at our defence, while it isnt great, doesnt look to have to many obvious holes- we need more secondary from the draft though


...and you'll have high picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds to address the secondary.

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:23 PM
Signing Moulds devalues Bush at #1 in my opinion.

EXPLAIN....we'll have players who can step up if a team tries to take our playmakers out of the game..therefore reggie will have more space/ better matchups so he can do his thing:redtowel:

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:24 PM
EXPLAIN....we'll have players who can step up if a team tries to take our playmakers out of the game..therefore reggie will have more space/ better matchups so he can do his thing:redtowel:

Exactly.

run-david-run
03-27-2006, 01:26 PM
The Texans will probably give up a 5th. And not defending Moulds, but even last year, he was more productive that all of our 2nd receivers. 827 yrds if I remember correctly. Late round pick and a reasonable restructed contract for a few years of service, I can deal with.
What about a 5th round pick and Vernand Morency, since he has alrady said he wants out if we draft Reggie? I know the Bills have Willis McGahee, but Morency is a young player with potential who could help them, ater all, everyone gets hurt, esspecially a running back who has already had serious knee surgery.

TexanFanInCC
03-27-2006, 01:26 PM
Understood, but dont you think that it would be nice have Moulds, a guy hat demands immediate respect. Then when teams devote all their tme to those guys then Walters will be waiting in the wings. I just think that it gives us more options, and makes us more explosive. Maybe im just getting to excited about the whole deal.

someone posted that we shouldt worry that he is 33, but i would be hesitant to give up a draft pick. domanick davis was a 4th rounder. ya never know if u can strike gold or not with a 4th rounder. moulds is a great player, but i think that the teams that can sustain winning seasons over a period of 5+ years are the ones that can develop their own talent from scratch and build chemistry by keeping what they have. why do u think the astros didnt make midseason trades last year? the players didnt want the chemistry to be jeopardized. personally, i am not a guy in favor of renting players because of what they used to be/what they can be. im the kind of guy that would rather have a bunch of unknowns that play well as a team for more than 5 years together as opposed to renting had-been players for 3 yrs or less. yankees for example, havent won a series since 2000 when they still had pretty much the same personnel that made them a great team in the late 90's (chuck knob, paul o'neil, derek jeter, scott brosius, tino martinez, mariano rivera, david cone, andy pettitte, joe girardi, jorge posada, chili davis, etc) ever since they went out buying players and recycling them year in and yr out, they havent won a title.

TexanFanInCC
03-27-2006, 01:28 PM
basically get them while their young and develop them to fit ur scheme. an older player like moulds with an established reputation is least likely to adapt to a new system.

kcwilson
03-27-2006, 01:29 PM
Getting a vet at #2 also brings with it the advantage of being able to teach a very young receiving corps. AJ has #1 talent, but at this point hasn't made the #2 receiver better by making the coverage over-compensate (i.e. Burleson to Moss in Minn for a few years).

Signing Moulds devalues Bush at #1 in my opinion.

Out of curiousity, what is the reasoning behind it? Could you explain your thought a little further?

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:29 PM
EXPLAIN....we'll have players who can step up if a team tries to take our playmakers out of the game..therefore reggie will have more space/ better matchups so he can do his thing:redtowel:

Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:30 PM
Well there is not too many 25 year old star FAs out there. We finaly got some guys in here and pretty much all of them will start, we have not even got into the draft yet.
If Kubes drafts well we could be a 10-11 win team next year.

Your right "some" of these guys "probably" will not be here very long, but, they are going to help us out a lot this year.


That's not a bad deal at all, IMO. Those guys could be here longer than just the next 2 years. My point is that the front office has not showed signs of looking to build a team to win in 2010, but rather in 2006.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:32 PM
Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.


Bush was never a candidate to be the #2. His value lies in his backfield play as well as his ability to line up in the slot as a 3rd receiver. Getting a capable #2 does not change the lure of Bush nor the rationale for his selection.

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:33 PM
Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

still can be used at wr (not to mention we all expected him to be a slot wr), and still your point makes no sense....despite your attempt to be a smug prick

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:36 PM
Bush was never a candidate to be the #2. His value lies in his backfield play as well as his ability to line up in the slot as a 3rd receiver. Getting a capable #2 does not change the lure of Bush nor the rationale for his selection.

You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.

kcwilson
03-27-2006, 01:37 PM
Reggie Bush is a prospect for the NFL draft. The Houston Texans are an NFL team. The Texans are in a period like the other 31 teams that are working on free agent acquisitions, attritions and extensions. Over the course of the last 3 weeks we have shored up some depth and have acquired some players that we can pencil in as starters. What makes Bush the most attractive player for us at the moment is that he is multi dimensional and one of our needs is at WR.

To be fair, I would say there is a difference when you break the huddle about lining up Bush in motion out of the backfield as a flanker as opposed to lining him up as a #2.

I would much rather have a LB try to matchup with him or S vs. a CB. The value to Bush in my mind is that his dimension creates the odd matchups. I can't see signing a solid #2 as anything except taking more defensive attention away from other weapons... I wouldn't be sacred of Walter beating my deep. Moulds, a little more scary, although not what he used to be.

Hawg
03-27-2006, 01:38 PM
basically get them while their young and develop them to fit ur scheme. an older player like moulds with an established reputation is least likely to adapt to a new system.


Your probably right. Thanks for shedding some light.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:38 PM
You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.


Um, I've offered more than that. With respect to "needs", it's not hard to talk yourself out of taking a great player following that logic. Anyways, it's not like Davis hasn't had injury issues nor that Kubiak has not demonstrated that you can use more than one back in his offensive schemes. Why clip your ability to build a potent offense simply to become average at one other spot when you have other methods (other 1st day picks, for example) to address that "need"?

Every player in the draft has a rep based on what they were in college. That's not exactly the best response to those arguments.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:39 PM
still can be used at wr (not to mention we all expected him to be a slot wr), and still your point makes no sense....despite your attempt to be a smug prick

SInce you requested me to explain, which you put in capital letters mind you. I figured you wanted a more thorough explanation. Little did I realize that it was a smug reply.

Congratulations you are the first poster I have ever given a negative post, you did not deserve it, but you certainly earned it.

TexanFan881
03-27-2006, 01:39 PM
In a trade does the player have to approve of it?

run-david-run
03-27-2006, 01:39 PM
Umm, the whole team is adapting to a new system, I would not be too worried about how Moulds would fit in...

kcwilson
03-27-2006, 01:39 PM
You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.

When was the last time a Pro athlete ws in the draft? Doesn't make sense at all.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 01:40 PM
You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.

Sure that was in college, but isn't that the same rationale one could use for VY or Mario?

DRAMA
03-27-2006, 01:40 PM
...that was in college

As opposed to...?

:stirpot:

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:41 PM
Um, I've offered more than that.

Every player in the draft has a rep based on what they were in college. That's not exactly the best response to those arguments.

I am waiting to see it. Critiquing someone else's posts is not rationalizing, that is called manufacturing doubt.

The Preacher
03-27-2006, 01:43 PM
Wow this is a busy thread for what is most likely a moot point. An article posted earlier on here didn't even put the Texans in MOulds' top five. I would think with only a couple years left he would want to go somewhere his chances of winning a championship were greater. The Texans are probably a year or two away from getting a guy like that willing to take a chance on us during his last few years.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:43 PM
Sure that was in college, but isn't that the same rationale one could use for VY or Mario?

We do not need VY. Mario would be a good pick at #1, and even better in a trade down scenario.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:44 PM
To be fair, I would say there is a difference when you break the huddle about lining up Bush in motion out of the backfield as a flanker as opposed to lining him up as a #2.

I would much rather have a LB try to matchup with him or S vs. a CB. The value to Bush in my mind is that his dimension creates the odd matchups. I can't see signing a solid #2 as anything except taking more defensive attention away from other weapons... I wouldn't be sacred of Walter beating my deep. Moulds, a little more scary, although not what he used to be.


Exactly. With AJ, Moulds and Putzier you have 3 capable receivers that a defense has to worry about already. Throw Bush in as the wildcard, a guy who's a threat to run or line up in the slot on any down. Then you'll still have Davis, Morency or Cook to line up in the backfield and be a threat to run or go into the flat as a receiver. Teams will have to respect the run and pass on every down. Now why give this up?

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:44 PM
I am waiting to see it. Critiquing someone else's posts is not rationalizing, that is called manufacturing doubt.


eh? You can critique others' points but they cannot critique yours? Whatever.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:45 PM
As opposed to...?

:stirpot:

Paying for proven talent in the NFL. We have Carr and AJ at high priced contracts base upon their draft staus and performance in college. We do not need a third on offense. If we truly needed a multi dimensional back we should have gone after Edgerrin.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:45 PM
We do not need VY. Mario would be a good pick at #1, and even better in a trade down scenario.

You already have an end that you just gave a fat contract to. If that argument is good enough to dismiss a Bush selection, well, it would seem to work to knock down that suggestion.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:46 PM
Paying for proven talent in the NFL. We have Carr and AJ at high priced contracts base upon their draft staus and performance in college. We do not need a third on offense. If we truly needed a multi dimensional back we should have gone after Edgerrin.


Difference is, James could go wherever he wanted to. With Bush, he doesn't have that much of a choice.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 01:46 PM
I am waiting to see it. Critiquing someone else's posts is not rationalizing, that is called manufacturing doubt.

How else are you to explain why you should draft a certain player? Mario Williams looks like a great DE. Reggie Bush looks like a great RB. We can sit here all day and discuss the merits of each player, but I don't want to spend that kind of time. We all know what each player will bring to the table. If Kubiak and Co. think Bush is the way to go, so be it, and vice versa to Williams/Young/Ferguson. But to come up with reasons as to why a certain player should be picked is fruitless. People will come up with 100's of reasons as to why and why not a player will be selected. Which is why we sit here and debate it for free while Texans officials get paid to make that decision.

Porky
03-27-2006, 01:46 PM
You and your cohorts only rationale for selecting Bush comes down to these four rationales:

Best back in a generation - that was in college
He is a game breaker - that was in college
He fills needs - not sure where that is
Post link to highlight film - love bright and shiny things

I have seen no rationale in any post on why we should take him.

And Mario Williams is on which NFL team again? Or did NC State somehow just move into the NFC East and I didn't see the headline. Dude, we all realize you have a man crush on Williams, but you are sinking to new lows everyday trying to rationalize this obsession in your mind. Your logic has sunk to the depths of the Titanic, and you are on it. There is plenty of rationale to draft Bush, much of it discussed on this board. Ignoring it doesn't count.

KT to Mario Williams - I wish I knew how to quit you. :ok:

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:47 PM
SInce you requested me to explain, which you put in capital letters mind you. I figured you wanted a more thorough explanation. Little did I realize that it was a smug reply.

Congratulations you are the first poster I have ever given a negative post, you did not deserve it, but you certainly earned it.

am i bothered?
nice job changing the focus of everything so you dont have to explain your earlier ridiculous comment.
anyway the reason i think we should take reggie is he is a playmaker, a weapon we do badly need. at the moment we have 2 rb's, with DD being injury-prone so it fills a need.
who should we take instead..mario or d'brick..thats about it. ive no problem with either, but we dont need mario now and d'brick is joined by a deep o-line this year

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:47 PM
eh? You can critique others' points but they cannot critique yours? Whatever.

I have been putting out not only cirtiques but also my own thinking and reserach based on the cap and where we are invested. If that has not come across then please tell me so I do not have to respond to any of your psts moving forward. Moreover, you still have not offered a rationale on why Bush must be picked other than what I listed before.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 01:48 PM
Paying for proven talent in the NFL. We have Carr and AJ at high priced contracts base upon their draft staus and performance in college. We do not need a third on offense. If we truly needed a multi dimensional back we should have gone after Edgerrin.

We do not need a 3rd on offense? Look at the Colts Offense last year. How many Weapons did they have.
Manning,
Harrison,
Wayne,
James,
Dallas Clark,
Stokley

We need more talent on offense. Putzier will make a difference but he is by no means our offensive passing savior.

Trenches
03-27-2006, 01:49 PM
that makes no sense- yes the OLD coaches proved they couldn't draft very well but if you look at their history- they were just as bad at FA. now with kubiak, we've had a good FA, why not let him do a draft before saying we'll never ever be a good drafting team??


too early to say we've had a good FA period. Weaver could turn out to be a Greenwood etc. Not to mention Casserly is still the GM.

All I'm saying is that in this day and age of the NFL, you signs FA's to fill holes. If you are constatly playing rookies (muchless starting them) then you are destined to be a below .500 team.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 01:50 PM
By the by, does anyone know how much of a contract Bush will earn as the 1st pick in respect to Williams/Young?

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 01:52 PM
too early to say we've had a good FA period. Weaver could turn out to be a Greenwood etc. Not to mention Casserly is still the GM.

All I'm saying is that in this day and age of the NFL, you signs FA's to fill holes. If you are constatly playing rookies (muchless starting them) then you are destined to be a below .500 team.

true..but you know what i mean..it looks to have been a good FA:)

ThaShark316
03-27-2006, 01:52 PM
LOL @ people who still use the "he did that, but it was in college" bs. Isn't every potential draftee coming out of college?

About E.Moulds....I would love to bring Eric here. I hope we can get a deal done and it doesn't cost us "break the bank" type money. Should be an interesting next couple of days, that's if things should progress.

About the Philly thing...notice in that article they tried to put down the Texans a bit so the Eagle fan readers can disregard us and think that "oh, well he wont go there, they're a bad team"...sorry, don't work like that. the writer of that article also said 5 teams, and mentions the Texans once, for a very short time, no less. Moulds isn't using the Texans, seeing as the Eagles wont break the bank either.

el toro
03-27-2006, 01:52 PM
I have been putting out not only cirtiques but also my own thinking and reserach based on the cap and where we are invested. If that has not come across then please tell me so I do not have to respond to any of your psts moving forward. Moreover, you still have not offered a rationale on why Bush must be picked other than what I listed before.


I have and did above in this thread. I have responded to your points about the "needs" on defense as well as why it isn't the end of times to have a difference in weighting between the offense and defense in the cap. It's not like the two are mutually exclusive. If you have an offense that can move the chains, run the clock and put up points then that is worth plenty defensively. You don't need to attain some mythical balance between both sides of the ball on the cap. Also, offensive talent does end up being priced more so it's not surprising if a team's cap is weighted to the offense.

So I disagree with you. I've proffered my own original points and critiques of your arguments. If you don't like that, well, this is the internets, I'm sure you can find a place where everyone nods in agreement with your opinion.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:53 PM
And Mario Williams is on which NFL team again? Or did NC State somehow just move into the NFC East and I didn't see the headline. Dude, we all realize you have a man crush on Williams, but you are sinking to new lows everyday trying to rationalize this obsession in your mind. Your logic has sunk to the depths of the Titanic, and you are on it. There is plenty of rationale to draft Bush, much of it discussed on this board. Ignoring it doesn't count.

KT to Mario Williams - I wish I knew how to quit you. :ok:

I dig swine so obviously this would illict a comment. You know where I stand on how we are spending our cap dollars Porky. If we were top heavy on the defensive side of the ball I would be clamoring for Bush.

Bush is the pick at the moment and I will not be angered if we take him. I just do not see the defense being taken care of with the current lot of players and trying to grow organically thorugh the draft by using our late first day picks and next year's picks. We will not have cap space to be players in the FA market for defense until 2008 due to dead cap money. Yes we will see a cap good guy every year, but we also must assume that there will other cuts.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:55 PM
am i bothered?
nice job changing the focus of everything so you dont have to explain your earlier ridiculous comment.
anyway the reason i think we should take reggie is he is a playmaker, a weapon we do badly need. at the moment we have 2 rb's, with DD being injury-prone so it fills a need.
who should we take instead..mario or d'brick..thats about it. ive no problem with either, but we dont need mario now and d'brick is joined by a deep o-line this year

I do not really care if you are bothered or happy. If taking the time to EXPLAIN, per your question, is changing focus then we have nothing left to discuss.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 01:58 PM
I am trying to keep up with everyone as I have the gas can out and matches are flying everywhere. If I miss one of your posts please remind me. :cool:

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 02:04 PM
I do not really care if you are bothered or happy. If taking the time to EXPLAIN, per your question, is changing focus then we have nothing left to discuss.

you see you didnt explain it...you said picking up moulds devalues reggie @ #1 because we'd have some depth at wr #2..
which i said wouldnt make a difference because reggie would've been motioned out to, or lined up in the slot receiver when used there anyway
then you started going on about how only reggie has done well against college teams:rolleyes:

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 02:12 PM
you see you didnt explain it...you said picking up moulds devalues reggie @ #1 because we'd have some depth at wr #2..
which i said wouldnt make a difference because reggie would've been motioned out to, or lined up in the slot receiver when used there anyway
then you started going on about how only reggie has done well against college teams:rolleyes:

How many WR's do you think we will carry? We have six signed at the moment and Moulds would be a seventh and Bush would come into a backfield that already has DD, Morency, Norris and Cook. So with a signing of Moulds we would have 11 of our 53 players for our offensive skill positions not inlcuding QB and TE. That number does not include Jason Anderson or Jonathan Wells.

Many of you would like to turn this into a you hate Bush debate. My debate focuses on numbers, need and dollars.

wags
03-27-2006, 02:13 PM
Moreover, you still have not offered a rationale on why Bush must be picked other than what I listed before.

He will create matchup problems and take double teams away from AJ. When Carr dumps it off to him he can do more with it than DD. I believe he is also good at picking up a blitz, something DD sucks at.

Even if we get Moulds I don't think he takes double teams away from AJ. He would just serve as an upgrade at #2 receiver.

Hawg
03-27-2006, 02:16 PM
He will create matchup problems and take double teams away from AJ. When Carr dumps it off to him he can do more with it than DD. I believe he is also good at picking up a blitz, something DD sucks at.

Even if we get Moulds I don't think he takes double teams away from AJ. He would just serve as an upgrade at #2 receiver.

I agree with you o everything except the comment aout Moulds not taking double teams away from AJ. I think that Moulds demands respect and will draw away the double team.

wags
03-27-2006, 02:17 PM
How many WR's do you think we will carry? We have six signed at the moment and Moulds would be a seventh and Bush would come into a backfield that already has DD, Morency, Norris and Cook.

You know teams load up on players before camp and then cut them before the season. Starling and Morgan probably aren't making the team. That's not exactly going out on a limb either. That leaves us with 4 WR's and no legit #2.

Maddict5
03-27-2006, 02:27 PM
How many WR's do you think we will carry? We have six signed at the moment and Moulds would be a seventh and Bush would come into a backfield that already has DD, Morency, Norris and Cook. So with a signing of Moulds we would have 11 of our 53 players for our offensive skill positions not inlcuding QB and TE. That number does not include Jason Anderson or Jonathan Wells.

Many of you would like to turn this into a you hate Bush debate. My debate focuses on numbers, need and dollars.

how many quality wr's do we have? bush should be more explosive than any of our rbs- if DD goes down who would you rather have-morency or reggie?
we've alot of d-line also- that doesnt mean we shouldn't take mario:ok:

PokerStar
03-27-2006, 02:27 PM
KT likes reggie from what I have read, he just does not like the fact that we will essentally have 70M in total money tied up in the RB position. Yes that is 22 for DD and 50+ for Reggie not to mention the Morency factor. Yeah if we got Mario Williams it means we spent alot for a penetrating DT. But if at DT Weaver can produce 6-10 sacks then we got him for cheap because he just became a pro-bowler. The Defense was horrid, and to truly build champions you need to spend on defense, to look at throwing money at offense while the defense is just getting a sub-par DT/DE an injury prone DE, and a couple of set shifts does not inspire me to handle the teams that we will face this year. There will not be another DE that comes out with Mario's measurables for a while, there will be another 50+ worth RB that comes out that has homerun speed. Spend money on a weakness, dont spend it on something the HC knows tons about, that is what got Dom in trouble.

el toro
03-27-2006, 02:45 PM
Nah, you spend it on something the HC knows about. The danger lies in taking a top pick whose talents won't be maximized in your system. You still have the rest of the draft plus next offseason to address what issues remain.

It's also not like the defense has been neglected this offseason.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 02:54 PM
KT likes reggie from what I have read, he just does not like the fact that we will essentally have 70M in total money tied up in the RB position. Yes that is 22 for DD and 50+ for Reggie not to mention the Morency factor. Yeah if we got Mario Williams it means we spent alot for a penetrating DT. But if at DT Weaver can produce 6-10 sacks then we got him for cheap because he just became a pro-bowler. The Defense was horrid, and to truly build champions you need to spend on defense, to look at throwing money at offense while the defense is just getting a sub-par DT/DE an injury prone DE, and a couple of set shifts does not inspire me to handle the teams that we will face this year. There will not be another DE that comes out with Mario's measurables for a while, there will be another 50+ worth RB that comes out that has homerun speed. Spend money on a weakness, dont spend it on something the HC knows tons about, that is what got Dom in trouble.

Thank you for captruing my thoughts on this wide canvas we call building a team.

thunderkyss
03-27-2006, 03:03 PM
He will create matchup problems and take double teams away from AJ. When Carr dumps it off to him he can do more with it than DD. I believe he is also good at picking up a blitz, something DD sucks at.

Even if we get Moulds I don't think he takes double teams away from AJ. He would just serve as an upgrade at #2 receiver.

We think he'll create matchup problems. Until he beats an NFL defense, I doubt many coaches will start scheming against him. NFL defenders are much better than College defenders. They tackle better, anticipate better, pursue better, take better angles.

I'd also like to see him pick-up a 260lb lineman on a blitze, before I say he's better than DD....... was this one of the cons against DD on his scouting report??

Wow, Reggie will command more attention than Moulds........ Wow.

O.G.
03-27-2006, 03:08 PM
So when do you think we will hear anything new? I am hoping by tonight. Wishful thinking......

Probably Wednesday. Maybe tomorrow evening.

TexanSam
03-27-2006, 03:42 PM
Eric Moulds would be a great fit here in Houston. I personally think he has about 5 good years left in him. With him and Andre Johnson, they can't give all their focus to AJ. Add Putzier and Reggie Bush to the mix and you have a pretty good offense. Not dynamic, there aren't many dynamic offenses in the NFL, but certainly above-average. I believe our offense alone will have us compete next year. I do believe we will select Reggie Bush and most of the rest of the draft will be spent on defense. Shore up the offense through free agency and shore up defense through the draft. Hopefully the defense will work out.

thunderkyss
03-27-2006, 04:01 PM
Eric Moulds would be a great fit here in Houston. I personally think he has about 5 good years left in him. With him and Andre Johnson, they can't give all their focus to AJ. Add Putzier and Reggie Bush to the mix and you have a pretty good offense. Not dynamic, there aren't many dynamic offenses in the NFL, but certainly above-average. I believe our offense alone will have us compete next year. I do believe we will select Reggie Bush and most of the rest of the draft will be spent on defense. Shore up the offense through free agency and shore up defense through the draft. Hopefully the defense will work out.

ohh, I hate to disagree. If David plays like he did the first half of 2004, we can be dynamic, very dynamic.

JAXwithanX
03-27-2006, 04:17 PM
Latest ESPN Insider Report

The Texans are aggressively pursuing a trade for Moulds, the Houston Chronicle reports. Moulds, unwilling to accept a pay cut to stay in Buffalo, has been given permission by the Bills to seek a trade.
"We're exploring an opportunity for Eric to play for the Texans," said Greg Johnson, one of Moulds' representatives. "If all sides can see eye to eye, we'll make it happen.

"But everyone has to see eye to eye."

Before Moulds can be moved, a team would have to negotiate a new contract with the wide receiver. Moulds' destination of choice appears to be Philadelphia, but it's doubtful the Eagles would be willing to meet his financial demands, according to the Philadelphia Daily News. Moulds, who is scheduled to make $7.1 million this season, is seeking a deal similar to the one Isaac Bruce received from the Rams (3 years, $15 million).

"Every time I mention Philadelphia, Eric's ears perk up," Johnson told the Daily News. "He wants to go to Philadelphia. He really feels he could help them. He loves the idea of being an Eagle and playing with Donovan [McNabb]."

The Patriots and Broncos are also believed to be in the mix for Moulds.


i know this isn't groundbreaking or anything but i figured it might actually pull this topic back onto Moulds.

BrianC
03-27-2006, 04:18 PM
They didnt give any details but ESPNEWS said Eric Moulds is talking w/ the Texans trying to get a deal done.

Eric Moulds for a 4th rd pick wow that would be so great.

scarsdale
03-27-2006, 04:22 PM
I heard it on the radio, but I heard 5th round pick, which would be even better.

If we can sign Moulds. I'd love the day 1 to pan out like this.

1. Bush
2. Winston
3. best OL available
3. best DB on board
4. BPA

Texans34Life
03-27-2006, 04:34 PM
Updated on Globe and Mail - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060327.wmoulds27/BNStory/Sports/

Just saw some quotes in this article that were different in this thread:

Texans emerge as team most interested in Moulds
Associated Press

Buffalo — The Houston Texans have emerged as the team most interested in trading for disgruntled Bills receiver Eric Moulds, who has vowed he won't return to Buffalo.

"I've had a great conversation with Charley Casserly, and it's intriguing," Moulds's personal adviser Greg Johnson said Monday, referring to the Texans general manager. "I'm not saying he's definitely going to Houston, but I'm saying that Houston is definitely a player."

Johnson, who said "things are heating up," said he's already discussed reworking his client's contract with Casserly should a trade be made. Texans spokesman Tony Wyllie declined comment.

Moulds, who has two years left on his contract, has the Bills' permission to seek a trade after he twice rejected the team's request to take a pay cut. A 10-year veteran, Moulds is the Bills senior player and ranks second on the team in numerous career receiving categories. He's scheduled to make $7.1 million next season, but because of bonuses count about $10.85 million against the salary cap, a figure Buffalo deems too expensive.

Releasing or trading Moulds would save the Bills at least $5.5 million in cap space. Buffalo would likely settle for a fourth-round pick or higher in a deal for Moulds.

Johnson said he's also had conversations with Philadelphia Eagles president Joe Banner and New England Patriots personnel director Scott Pioli. However, the Patriots, who have lost three receivers to free agency this month, are considered an unlikely trade candidate because they play in the same division as Buffalo.

Johnson added others who've expressed interest include Kansas City, San Francisco, Denver and Seattle.

Johnson said Moulds would be interested in playing for Houston, even though the Texans are coming off an NFL-worst 2-14 finish and have not had a winning record in their five seasons.

Houston is close to Moulds's native Mississippi, which would allow his family to see him play more often. Johnson added Moulds would complement a Texans offence that already has a solid receiver in Andre Johnson and has the opportunity to draft USC running back and Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush with the No. 1 pick in next month's draft.

Johnson said he plans to continue discussions with interested teams before Moulds begins comparing offers.

DRAMA
03-27-2006, 04:39 PM
I heard it on the radio, but I heard 5th round pick, which would be even better.

If we can sign Moulds. I'd love the day 1 to pan out like this.

1. Bush
2. Winston
3. best OL available
3. best DB on board
4. BPA

I like Winston too but don't know much about his footwork. I'd almost be tempted to go Mangold there and play him at G/C combo. If Flanagan DOES get hurt, Mangold can move to Center and Weary or (Draftpick) can move to guard. Otherwise, I'm willing to bet out of the guards and centers, Mangold would get the call.

I like Moulds for a 4th and REALLY for a 5th. Remember, they want that cap space more than our 4th rounder. I would assume that this deal gets done fairly quickly.

The Preacher
03-27-2006, 04:49 PM
I like Winston too but don't know much about his footwork. I'd almost be tempted to go Mangold there and play him at G/C combo. If Flanagan DOES get hurt, Mangold can move to Center and Weary or (Draftpick) can move to guard. Otherwise, I'm willing to bet out of the guards and centers, Mangold would get the call.

I like Moulds for a 4th and REALLY for a 5th. Remember, they want that cap space more than our 4th rounder. I would assume that this deal gets done fairly quickly.

If possible I really hope they don't give up the first pick of the second day because you know someone will slip through the cracks who they never thought would. That or someone else does and yo upick up an extra 5th in the process. Our 5th is almost like a 4th anyways so I think the Bills would settle for that. This does smell a little like the Pace deal except the Bills aren't desperate to get him back. Other teams know they'll have to pony up if we're involved so it's no surprise his people are in talks with the FO.

titan hater
03-27-2006, 04:51 PM
This does smell a little like the Pace deal .

Agreed... It has me a little worried....

scarsdale
03-27-2006, 04:57 PM
I like Winston assuming Mangold is gone, but I definitely would take Mangold over Winston if both were on the board

Mike Kerns
03-27-2006, 05:30 PM
Johnson added Moulds would complement a Texans offence that already has a solid receiver in Andre Johnson and has the opportunity to draft USC running back and Heisman Trophy winner Reggie Bush with the No. 1 pick in next month's draft.
:drool:

TexanAddict
03-27-2006, 06:05 PM
Updated on Globe and Mail - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060327.wmoulds27/BNStory/Sports/

Just saw some quotes in this article that were different in this thread:

Texans emerge as team most interested in Moulds
Associated Press

Buffalo — ...Buffalo would likely settle for a fourth-round pick or higher in a deal for Moulds....

I bet we could probably give our 5th this year and maybe our 5th next year and still meet what the Bills are after, with or pick being the first of the 5th round and therefore basically a 4th. I'd rather hang on to our 4th this year.

adrianshrev
03-27-2006, 06:28 PM
well i like the deal i think it would help the offense out a lot and keep the defense fresher than it has been... but it also sets up a trade down possibility that no one has said here we would have fixed or addressed every offense concern except tackle and tennessee wants that first pick to get lineart.. what to do?? what do ya think?:redtowel:

the wonger need food
03-27-2006, 06:32 PM
Don't the Bills need a tackle? Too bad Capers (and/or some of his clowns) didn't go to Buffalo or we could discuss a Wade for Moulds trade.

Kaiser Toro
03-27-2006, 06:34 PM
Don't the Bills need a tackle? Too bad Capers (and/or some of his clowns) didn't go to Buffalo or we could discuss a Wade for Moulds trade.

Not a bad point as the hits on the cap seem similar, would need to look at that much closer. But that would be huge.

TEXANS84
03-27-2006, 06:40 PM
This does smell a little like the Pace deal

Agreed. We've been burned too many times like this.

TexanFan881
03-27-2006, 06:43 PM
Nobody would be able to stop us with Carr at QB, DD and Bush in the backfield with Cook at FB, AJ and Moulds lined up at WR and Putzier at TE.

texman8
03-27-2006, 06:43 PM
Pace was just using us; he really wanted to stay with Rams

Moulds really wants to leave the Bills.

TexanFan881
03-27-2006, 06:47 PM
Pace was just using us; he really wanted to stay with Rams

Moulds really wants to leave the Bills.

I really hope your right about that. I want Moulds to come to Houston :drool:

rmartin65
03-27-2006, 06:48 PM
I really hate giving up picks though.

the wonger need food
03-27-2006, 06:52 PM
Why would the Texans not want to sign an almost guaranteed Hall of Famer with several good years left in him? Unless it's strictly a money issue, of course.

D-ReK
03-27-2006, 06:52 PM
I really hate giving up picks though.

I do too, but Moulds is better at this stage in his career than any WR available in the draft...This won't be the case in a few years after Jackson and Holmes get acclomated to playing in the league, but it's true for now...A bone fide number two receiver who would bring much needed experience to a young WR core for a 4th rounder is a steal, IMO...

swtbound07
03-27-2006, 06:53 PM
I really hate giving up picks though.


I'll take moulds as our #2 over whatever we could get in the 4th or the 5th. The draft is a crapshoot, and while i dont think you should do it with your early picks, trading your later picks for players that have proven themselves as nfl talent isnt a bad thing. If we have a standard offense, show me a lineup with andre and moulds on the outside, walter and mathis coming in, putzier as our tight end, and dominack davis as our rb. With our upgraded offensive line, Carr would be flat out of excuses IMO

Carr Bombed
03-27-2006, 06:58 PM
Carr would be flat out of excuses IMO

Yep, it would definitely be a put up or shut up year, especially if we have better line play.

keyfro
03-27-2006, 06:58 PM
if we were able to work out a deal to get eric moulds for a day two pick this would be a huge addition for us...you put him and andre together with walter in the slot and putzier at TE with DD and bush splitting carries this offense has the making of a high powered offense...comm'on casserly get this done quickly before the eagles land him :redtowel:

rmartin65
03-27-2006, 07:05 PM
Oh yea, a Day 2 pick wold be great. I'm just talking about trading the 2nd or 3rd rounders like last year.

Wolf
03-27-2006, 08:20 PM
Yep, it would definitely be a put up or shut up year, especially if we have better line play.

i'd say 2 years.. 1st year with all the changes.. team will still be trying to get used to each other

el toro
03-27-2006, 08:22 PM
He might crap his pants, this time with the time in the pocket he has and the options he has to throw to.

Señor Stan
03-27-2006, 08:33 PM
Agreed. We've been burned too many times like this.

This is nothing like the Pace deal. We would have given up TWO first rounders for Pace. The Rams ended up signing him for more than we offered. I don't think the Bills have any intention of resigning him, it will be trade or cut. The Rams were never going to just cut Pace.

I think the Pats, Eagles, Broncos, etc. will wait for him to be cut. Trading for him gives the Texans the chance to get him before he hits the open market. I think if no one gives the Bills a 4th, they would take our 5th rather than let Moulds go for nothing.

Remember, we got exactly squat for Sharper and Glenn last year.

Buzz
03-27-2006, 08:45 PM
If I remember correctly, one of Moulds biggest gripes was the play calling of the Bills coach. If Kubiak can convince him somehow that he's going to be happy with what the team does, then that would help a lot in my opinion. Also, I don't see how waiting for a younger player to develop or step up helps Carr in the short run. Would you want him to be wondering if a guy with limited experience as a starter might make a mistake, or would you want him to be confident that the chances of something bad happening are slim? I prefer the second.

el toro
03-27-2006, 09:08 PM
If I remember correctly, one of Moulds biggest gripes was the play calling of the Bills coach. If Kubiak can convince him somehow that he's going to be happy with what the team does, then that would help a lot in my opinion. Also, I don't see how waiting for a younger player to develop or step up helps Carr in the short run. Would you want him to be wondering if a guy with limited experience as a starter might make a mistake, or would you want him to be confident that the chances of something bad happening are slim? I prefer the second.

Yep. Then you give Walter time to develop into the #2.

Señor Stan
03-27-2006, 09:30 PM
Imagine if we ended up 2-14 even with Pace. Ugh, we wouldn't have the #1 pick to show all of our hard work during the 2005 season.:) Maybe we would have won a few more games with Pace but I doubt it as bad as our defense was last year.

And we would lost our first rounder last year. That would mean no trade with the Saints and no second 3rd rounder this year.

That would leave us without the #1 and #66 picks this year.

outofhnd
03-27-2006, 10:04 PM
Man A 4th round pick for a receiver tha can do what bradford could not and thats catch the friggin ball. Andre is an all pro #1 but when you have butterfingers bradford opposite him, how can he beat the defense? if we sign moulds I dunno if there would be a #1 or 2 reciever it would just be whoever is open. Plus next year we play the Bills in our house, Id Love to see Moulds scorch them with a 7 for 100yd day and a score. Moulds is an amazing wideout who is frustrated. Wouldnt you be if every season you had a different QB and 0 chance of making the playoffs? Buffalo for the last 10 years has 2 bad seasons then they have a season where you think they have turned the corner, then its 2 bad seasons again. if we get moulds that would rock now we just need to see how the protection holds, and the playaction bootleg passes work for DC and the rest of our offense.

TEXANS84
03-27-2006, 10:20 PM
A very reliable source from Philly just said that Greg Johnson (agent) is on the local radio station up there indicating that the only reason that he's not signed with the Eagles yet is that he has strong ties to Houston. Johnson also indicated that the decision will be made very soon.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 10:21 PM
A very reliable source from Philly just said that Greg Johnson (agent) is on the local radio station up there indicating that the only reason that he's not signed with the Eagles yet is that he has strong ties to Houston. Johnson also indicated that the decision will be made very soon.

I'm in no way doubting that, but what ties does he have to Houston? He's from Mississippi, which is kind of close, but did he play for any of these coaches, have a house here or anything?

old football fan
03-27-2006, 10:24 PM
Why in the !@#$ would you give up the 1st pick in the fourth round for a guy on the downside of his career and at best has 3 years left?

If we give up the 1st pick in the 4th round I am going to be pissed.

Mark my words.....Moulds, although great in his day, will not be in the league 3 years from now
Remember that about only 50% of 4th rounders ever make it in the NFL.

HoustonTexans
03-27-2006, 10:24 PM
^^ i live kinda close to rhode island... does that mean i have strong ties there? Well, i hope thats the way moulds feels because we need him.

bdiddy
03-27-2006, 10:25 PM
A very reliable source from Philly just said that Greg Johnson (agent) is on the local radio station up there indicating that the only reason that he's not signed with the Eagles yet is that he has strong ties to Houston. Johnson also indicated that the decision will be made very soon.

Pure Speculation

The Eagles are only offering a 6th round choice and less money than the Texans are willing to give Moulds. This is the delay. For what I have heard he is leaning towards the Texans, and the Bills are much more comfortable dealing him to the Texans than the Eagles.

barzilla
03-27-2006, 10:38 PM
Originally Posted by Bsacamano
Why in the !@#$ would you give up the 1st pick in the fourth round for a guy on the downside of his career and at best has 3 years left?

If we give up the 1st pick in the 4th round I am going to be pissed.

Mark my words.....Moulds, although great in his day, will not be in the league 3 years from now

All of these might be correct, but I would still make the deal. I think all of us know those first four picks are important and this deal allows you to pick the best available player. Even if Moulds turns into a 60 catch, 750 yard reciever that is still better than anything we have had at that spot. If he does it for two seasons then you can delay picking a WR for another season.

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 10:42 PM
With the addition of Moulds and Bush from the draft we could have a lineup at one point of...

Johnson Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan-Wiegert-Wade-Putzier Moulds
Carr
(2 Back Set)
Bush Davis

That would pose some serious problems for all teams. (If they can work on that protection)

Porky
03-27-2006, 10:51 PM
With the addition of Moulds and Bush from the draft we could have a lineup at one point of...

Johnson Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan-Wiegert-Wade-Putzier Moulds
Carr
(2 Back Set)
Bush Davis

That would pose some serious problems for all teams. (If they can work on that protection)

I don't think Wade starts. He just doesn't fit the scheme. I am hoping we draft a RG or RT to start, maybe even as a rookie. If not, we might be looking at Wand, or potentially sliding Weigert out to RT and figuring out who could play RG...Weary perhaps. Not ideal, so I hope we draft a guy. If we pick up Moulds, I have to believe we are just about finished picking up any other significant pieces prior to the draft.

Come on CC and Kubes, let's get Moulds! :fans: :gotexans1

The Dude Abides
03-27-2006, 10:56 PM
I don't think Wade starts. He just doesn't fit the scheme. I am hoping we draft a RG or RT to start, maybe even as a rookie. If not, we might be looking at Wand, or potentially sliding Weigert out to RT and figuring out who could play RG...Weary perhaps. Not ideal, so I hope we draft a guy. If we pick up Moulds, I have to believe we are just about finished picking up any other significant pieces prior to the draft.

Come on CC and Kubes, let's get Moulds! :fans: :gotexans1

Ok, well for offensive weapons he would have a lot of options to look at:yahoo:

TEXANRED
03-27-2006, 11:10 PM
Do you know what has been missing from our receiving core the last four years? Veteran leadership. Who have we had? Bradford? Yea right. Moulds is a solid #1 receiver, he can catch, he can get open, (which none of the receiving core has done in four years) he brings a swagger. I don't care how old he is cause he is in great shape and I am willing to bet he still runs the 40 in the 4.5's.

He is a tremendous upgrade to our receiving core. He is better than Gaffney is or ever will be, and Gaffney cost us the #33 overall. Moulds is going to be a second day draft pick. May even bring a little competition between him and AJ.

Carr, AJ, Moulds, Putzier, DD, Bush.....
If this D could be a middle of the pack, say 14/15, we could make a serious run at the playoffs.

HOOK'EM
03-27-2006, 11:43 PM
...........GET R DONE! :bowdown:

texanfan2002114
03-27-2006, 11:44 PM
Mark Berman said on Fox 26 tonight, that Greg Johnson (agent) said the talks with the Texans are going smoothly and all they need to do is, and I quote "Dot the I's and cross the T's".

From the sounds of it, Moulds will be a Texan by the end of the week!!

:redtowel: :redtowel: :redtowel: :redtowel:

kiwitexansfan
03-27-2006, 11:48 PM
Do you know what has been missing from our receiving core the last four years? Veteran leadership. Who have we had? Bradford? Yea right. Moulds is a solid #1 receiver, he can catch, he can get open, (which none of the receiving core has done in four years) he brings a swagger. I don't care how old he is cause he is in great shape and I am willing to bet he still runs the 40 in the 4.5's.

He is a tremendous upgrade to our receiving core. He is better than Gaffney is or ever will be, and Gaffney cost us the #33 overall. Moulds is going to be a second day draft pick. May even bring a little competition between him and AJ.

Carr, AJ, Moulds, Putzier, DD, Bush.....
If this D could be a middle of the pack, say 14/15, we could make a serious run at the playoffs.

Can I just ask something here... isn't Moulds bellyaching and demanding a trade.... is that asny sort of veteran leadership that you would want??

TexanFan881
03-27-2006, 11:53 PM
Mark Berman said on Fox 26 tonight, that Greg Johnson (agent) said the talks with the Texans are going smoothly and all they need to do is, and I quote "Dot the I's and cross the T's".

From the sounds of it, Moulds will be a Texan by the end of the week!!

:yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo:

Carr Bombed
03-27-2006, 11:55 PM
Damn, when Mcnair said he wanted to win NOW, he wasn't kidding.

We have been one of the most active teams during this offseason.

If we hit on our first 4 picks in the draft, we can be a very DANGEROUS team this season.

el toro
03-27-2006, 11:57 PM
To hell with waiting.

Texans Pride
03-27-2006, 11:58 PM
Mark Berman said on Fox 26 tonight, that Greg Johnson (agent) said the talks with the Texans are going smoothly and all they need to do is, and I quote "Dot the I's and cross the T's".

From the sounds of it, Moulds will be a Texan by the end of the week!!

:redtowel: :redtowel: :redtowel: :redtowel:



Nice post Steve. . . I keep searching for news, but can't find anything.

Hey, I am giving you some verbal reputation points. . . I keep trying to give you some, but it says I need to "spread the love around" before giving you anymore. . . Even though the last time I gave you some rep points was during the War of 1812!

You've been providing some good info the last few weeks. . .way to go bud!

texanfan2002114
03-28-2006, 12:01 AM
Nice post Steve. . . I keep searching for news, but can't find anything.

Hey, I am giving you some verbal reputation points. . . I keep trying to give you some, but it says I need to "spread the love around" before giving you anymore. . . Even though the last time I gave you some rep points was during the War of 1812!

You've been providing some good info the last few weeks. . .way to go bud!


Thanks Brother!! Its good to know that I'm not making people mad anymore!!:)

Texans Pride
03-28-2006, 12:03 AM
I think you stopped that when you quit whining about when you were getting your Seattle tickets. . .Whoops, did I say that lol

:yahoo:

MasterC25
03-28-2006, 12:05 AM
With the addition of Moulds and Bush from the draft we could have a lineup at one point of...

Johnson Pitts-McKinney-Flanagan-Wiegert-Wade-Putzier Moulds
Carr
(2 Back Set)
Bush Davis

That would pose some serious problems for all teams. (If they can work on that protection)

Don't forget Mathis in the slot. The Texans offensive skill players would be one of the tops of the league. Just Imagine the speed on that field. I hope Coach Kubes doesn't hold any plays back, he better open that playbook of his so open that it nearly rips.

The Dude Abides
03-28-2006, 12:05 AM
Don't forget Mathis in the slot. The Texans offensive skill players would be one of the tops of the league. Just Imagine the speed on that field. I hope Coach Kubes doesn't hold any plays back, he better open that playbook of his so open that it nearly rips.

Yeah, but I had to only put 11 people on the field. If you're going for more speed you could take either Davis or Putzier out.

MasterC25
03-28-2006, 12:13 AM
Yeah, but I had to only put 11 people on the field. If you're going for more speed you could take either Davis or Putzier out.

With AJ, Moulds, Mathis and Bush. I pray defenses try to take someone away cause any of these guys can take it to the house at anytime. I can even bet if the NFL had a 4x100 team the Texans would easily run away with it.

TEXANS84
03-28-2006, 12:14 AM
Looks as if Kubiak is going for the Rod Smith/Ashley Lelie combo...worked pretty well for them last year:

Rod Smith: 1105 yards recieving
Ashley Lelie: 770 yards recieving

Now those kind of stats can really open up your running game. It would be nice not to see a saftey tackling the runningback within 3 seconds.

2 CENTS
03-28-2006, 12:17 AM
I'd take that in a HEART BEAT!!! If you ever watched him Play he is not just any 32 year old WR. He is still one of the BEST in the League. Buffalo had QB problems and Lee EVANS was great at the end of 2004. What Happened (J.P. Lossman). When Lossman did find a target it was (31 yo MOULDS) not (24 yo Evans) that should say something for Moulds. I know CARR has his own problems but Moulds can do nothing but help our inexperienced WR's especially by TEACHING them how to play the POSITION!!!

tulexan
03-28-2006, 12:24 AM
Actually Losman throwing primarily to Evans is what caused the Moulds meltdown. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Moulds refuse to go back in the game because he wasn't getting the ball at all during a game?

HOOK'EM
03-28-2006, 12:27 AM
:redtowel: :drool: :redtowel: :drool:

TexanFan881
03-28-2006, 12:27 AM
Actually Losman throwing primarily to Evans is what caused the Moulds meltdown. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Moulds refuse to go back in the game because he wasn't getting the ball at all during a game?

Losman heavily favored Evans and Holcomb favored Moulds. If Holcomb was in the whole year Moulds would have had a better year.

2 CENTS
03-28-2006, 12:53 AM
LOSSMAN may have favored EVANS but he COMPLETED more PASSES to MOULDS for more TD's. DUDE I know I played Fantasy Football last year and EVANS didn't do anything at the first of the SEASON. Everything was to MOULDS!!!! Evans wasn't even on the RAIDAR until the last 3 games of the SEASON when I think MOULDS was UNHAPPY and Suspended for a GAME. By that time I think Holcomb was Benched and LOSSMAN was back in so maybe YOU REMEMBER the LAST 3 or 4 GAMES but You don't REMEMBER the whole SEASON!!!!! SHOW me the STATS for BUFFALO's first 13 Games and i would be very Surprised if EVANS was ahead of MOULDS in any Categories except maybe attempts thrown to ( that is not the same as Catches and TD's)!!! I can run around and say hey throw me the ball but if it doesn't land in hands it's just a wasted play!!!!!

The Dude Abides
03-28-2006, 12:58 AM
LOSSMAN may have favored EVANS but he COMPLETED more PASSES to MOULDS for more TD's. DUDE I know I played Fantasy Football last year and EVANS didn't do anything at the first of the SEASON. Everything was to MOULDS!!!! Evans wasn't even on the RAIDAR until the last 3 games of the SEASON when I think MOULDS was UNHAPPY and Suspended for a GAME. By that time I think Holcomb was Benched and LOSSMAN was back in so maybe YOU REMEMBER the LAST 3 or 4 GAMES but You don't REMEMBER the whole SEASON!!!!! SHOW me the STATS for BUFFALO's first 13 Games and i would be very Surprised if EVANS was ahead of MOULDS in any Categories except maybe attempts thrown to ( that is not the same as Catches and TD's)!!! I can run around and say hey throw me the ball but if it doesn't land in hands it's just a wasted play!!!!!

Lee Evans had 7 touchdowns compared to Moulds 4. Evans only had one good game in the last 3. In 2 of those games he had 22 yards total. He had 1 touchdown in the last 3 games.

mexican_texan
03-28-2006, 01:01 AM
LOSSMAN may have favored EVANS but he COMPLETED more PASSES to MOULDS for more TD's. DUDE I know I played Fantasy Football last year and EVANS didn't do anything at the first of the SEASON. Everything was to MOULDS!!!! Evans wasn't even on the RAIDAR until the last 3 games of the SEASON when I think MOULDS was UNHAPPY and Suspended for a GAME. By that time I think Holcomb was Benched and LOSSMAN was back in so maybe YOU REMEMBER the LAST 3 or 4 GAMES but You don't REMEMBER the whole SEASON!!!!! SHOW me the STATS for BUFFALO's first 13 Games and i would be very Surprised if EVANS was ahead of MOULDS in any Categories except maybe attempts thrown to ( that is not the same as Catches and TD's)!!! I can run around and say hey throw me the ball but if it doesn't land in hands it's just a wasted play!!!!!
Are you emphasizing or is your ALL CAPS key broken? He was benched because he went off on Mularkey for not getting the ball.

Speaking of FF, I traded Evans and Julius Jones for DD and AJ. :).

Trapped
03-28-2006, 01:08 AM
Looks as if Kubiak is going for the Rod Smith/Ashley Lelie combo...worked pretty well for them last year:

Rod Smith: 1105 yards recieving
Ashley Lelie: 770 yards recieving

Now those kind of stats can really open up your running game. It would be nice not to see a saftey tackling the runningback within 3 seconds.

Yes, we are going for that Young/Veteran combination. If we get Moulds for the right price, i would be very optimistic about us making the playoffs next season ala CHargers. From number 1 pick to Playoffs.

dtran04
03-28-2006, 01:18 AM
According to a member of HPF, Mark Berman reported that the deal was done.

Texans Pride
03-28-2006, 01:24 AM
According to a member of HPF, Mark Berman reported that the deal was done.


Where did you hear this? Who is the memeber?

dtran04
03-28-2006, 01:26 AM
Where did you hear this? Who is the memeber?

TexanFan007 claimed that he/she saw it on the sports segment of FOX. Can anyone confirm? I don't know if its BS or not.

SnakeOilTanker
03-28-2006, 01:33 AM
this could be exciting:yahoo:

Texans Pride
03-28-2006, 01:34 AM
TexanFan007 claimed that he/she saw it on the sports segment of FOX. Can anyone confirm? I don't know if its BS or not.


I think you might be mistaken. . .We don't have a TexanFan007 on this board, but we do have a texanfan2002114, and he reported:

"Mark Berman said on Fox 26 tonight, that Greg Johnson (agent) said the talks with the Texans are going smoothly and all they need to do is, and I quote "Dot the I's and cross the T's".

From the sounds of it, Moulds will be a Texan by the end of the week!!"

See post 205 of this thread

So we may be close, but nothing is done yet.

SnakeOilTanker
03-28-2006, 01:37 AM
he's talking about houstonprofootball.com

but i couldnt find it at first glance

bummer

dirty steve
03-28-2006, 01:43 AM
I think you might be mistaken. . .We don't have a TexanFan007 on this board, but we do have a texanfan2002114, and he reported:

"Mark Berman said on Fox 26 tonight, that Greg Johnson (agent) said the talks with the Texans are going smoothly and all they need to do is, and I quote "Dot the I's and cross the T's".

From the sounds of it, Moulds will be a Texan by the end of the week!!"

See post 205 of this thread

So we may be close, but nothing is done yet.

there's a handle (texansfan007) on HFP that blurbed something about the moulds deal being done. didn't have much else to say, though.

SnakeOilTanker
03-28-2006, 01:48 AM
Berman would be the guy to break it before everyone else, so if he's faking atleast he's smart lol

Texans Pride
03-28-2006, 01:50 AM
Ok, found what you were talking about dtran04, looks like I was confused as to which board you were talking about; thanks dirty steve.

I did find this too from the Chronicle:

Meanwhile, the Texans remained interested in trading for Buffalo Bills receiver Eric Moulds but reported no progress in their attempt to work out a new contract. The Bills have given Moulds permission to negotiate with teams interested in trading for him.

A deal wasn't imminent Monday. Philadelphia and New England appear to be the Texans' primary competition for Moulds. The Bills are asking for a fourth-round pick in exchange for the 32-year-old receiver.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/sports/3752421.html



Go to bed guys.....Looks like there will be no news tonight.

jacquescas
03-28-2006, 01:51 AM
lastest from kffl

Patriots | Team not moving fast enough for Moulds
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:33:01 -0800

Tom E. Curran, of the Providence Journal, reports Buffalo Bills WR Eric Moulds' advisor, Gerg Johnson, said the Philadelphia Eagles and the Houston Texans are moving faster than the New England Patriots to try to land Moulds. Johnson said, "It's not going to work out [with New England]. The timing's not right. The only way it would get done now is if it falls apart with these other teams, and I don't see that happening." He believes everything will be settled in the next 48 hours.

Section 620
03-28-2006, 01:53 AM
Patriots | Team not moving fast enough for Moulds
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 22:33:01 -0800

Tom E. Curran, of the Providence Journal, reports Buffalo Bills WR Eric Moulds' advisor, Gerg Johnson, said the Philadelphia Eagles and the Houston Texans are moving faster than the New England Patriots to try to land Moulds. Johnson said, "It's not going to work out [with New England]. The timing's not right. The only way it would get done now is if it falls apart with these other teams, and I don't see that happening." He believes everything will be settled in the next 48 hours.
:drool: ***Missed it by THAT much!!

flappst
03-28-2006, 03:40 AM
Not sure if this has been posted...

"NFL Network's Adam Shefter believes the Bills will be forced to release Eric Moulds.
Like the Terrell Owens situation with the Eagles, the Bills lost all their leverage when they made it clear Moulds was facing release. Buffalo is asking for a fourth-round pick, but Shefter reports no one will give it up. Houston and Philadelphia are reportedly the favorites to go after Moulds. Mar. 27 - 8:20 pm et"

From rotoworld.com

ledzeppelin229
03-28-2006, 03:42 AM
If he's released...I get the feeling he will be going to Philly. Texas isn't so much closer to Mississippi that it would make him risk the former 2-14 team.

flappst
03-28-2006, 03:47 AM
If he's released...I get the feeling he will be going to Philly. Texas isn't so much closer to Mississippi that it would make him risk the former 2-14 team.
I agree, I am hoping something will get done within the next few days, and hopefully it will only cost us our 5th round pick

ledzeppelin229
03-28-2006, 03:49 AM
I agree, I am hoping something will get done within the next few days, and hopefully it will only cost us our 5th round pick

Yea I would like to avoid using our 4th rounder this year as well simply because it's the 1st pick on the 2nd day. Maybe our 4th rounder next year if they don't bite on a 5th this year.

beerlover
03-28-2006, 04:26 AM
Philly is his first choice so if they already have the contract hammered out once the deadline passes odds favour the Eagles. Texans will have to pay more and/or get the early jump by giving up the pick if they really want Moulds :cool:

myself I could go either way, leave this one in Kubes hands, whatever he thinks :twocents:

Maddict5
03-28-2006, 06:34 AM
id love it to happen but i feel we're being used to make philly pay up..but you never know, people assummed NO was being used to jack up brees' price and we all know what happened there....

if i had to bet id say philly but they have alot of wrs- maybe gaffney will do us a good turn with the eagles deciding his addition means they've enough wrs

O.G.
03-28-2006, 07:29 AM
id love it to happen but i feel we're being used to make philly pay up..but you never know, people assummed NO was being used to jack up brees' price and we all know what happened there....

if i had to bet id say philly but they have alot of wrs- maybe gaffney will do us a good turn with the eagles deciding his addition means they've enough wrs

True and Philly isn't going to bang out the big bucks for Moulds like Issac Bruce. Bruce Resigned with his orginal to team simply because the offered him the most. Moulds isn't going to get 3 years, 5 million a year. Moulds is a solid receiver, but his no N.O., selfish or not.

thunderkyss
03-28-2006, 07:56 AM
Not sure if this has been posted...

"NFL Network's Adam Shefter believes the Bills will be forced to release Eric Moulds.
Like the Terrell Owens situation with the Eagles, the Bills lost all their leverage when they made it clear Moulds was facing release. Buffalo is asking for a fourth-round pick, but Shefter reports no one will give it up. Houston and Philadelphia are reportedly the favorites to go after Moulds. Mar. 27 - 8:20 pm et"

From rotoworld.com

Philadelphia, & New England........... Buffalo still has plenty of leverage, as it looks like we could get stuck in the middle of a bidding-war.


id love it to happen but i feel we're being used to make philly pay up..but you never know, people assummed NO was being used to jack up brees' price and we all know what happened there....

if i had to bet id say philly but they have alot of wrs- maybe gaffney will do us a good turn with the eagles deciding his addition means they've enough wrs

N.O. was being used to jack up the price on Brees.............. Miami just wasn't playing that game.

True and Philly isn't going to bang out the big bucks for Moulds like Issac Bruce. Bruce Resigned with his orginal to team simply because the offered him the most. Moulds isn't going to get 3 years, 5 million a year. Moulds is a solid receiver, but his no N.O., selfish or not.

I disagree..... Philly has a lot of nothing....Gaffney may very well be their best WR right now. I think they realize that they've been shooting themselves in the foot all this time, by not getting McNabb legit targets.......... I was under the impression that they'll be scraping the bottom of the NFC East again in 2006, but if they land some real playmakers, they may have a chance in the NFC EAst........ man, they are going to be tough this year, just like days of old.

Big B Texan Fan
03-28-2006, 09:11 AM
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/football/14195503.htm

This is either an attempt to drive up the asking price or he doesn't wanna play second fiddle to AJ. He could wind up being the #1 receiver in Philly. And they're more suited to "win now" than us. I guess I'd wanna go there too. Plus Philly seems to be a pass first team w/out a strong running game. W/Kubes we're gonna run the ball til our eyes bleed.

Kaiser Toro
03-28-2006, 09:20 AM
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/football/14195503.htm

This is either an attempt to drive up the asking price or he doesn't wanna play second fiddle to AJ. He could wind up being the #1 receiver in Philly. And they're more suited to "win now" than us. I guess I'd wanna go there too. Plus Philly seems to be a pass first team w/out a strong running game. W/Kubes we're gonna run the ball til our eyes bleed.

I just do not see him coming here especially if he is not traded and released. Does anyone think that Gaffney is helping the situation being in Philly from an intangible standpoint?

O.G.
03-28-2006, 10:01 AM
I just do not see him coming here especially if he is not traded and released. Does anyone think that Gaffney is helping the situation being in Philly from an intangible standpoint?

Not that Philly won't be a good situation, I just don't believe Philly will offer the money Mould wants. I think when it's all said and done, he will end up in Houston. They (The Texans) have made an aggressive attempt to get him. Also just heard on 610, that New England isn't as big of a player in the Mould sweepstakes as once said and everyone will have a clearer picture on where Moulds will land in the next 48 Hours.

coachdent
03-28-2006, 10:02 AM
I just do not see him coming here especially if he is not traded and released. Does anyone think that Gaffney is helping the situation being in Philly from an intangible standpoint?

What kind of intangibles would Gaffney bring to Philly?

I would say no. He was signed for a one year deal. It is a wait and see situation in which they want to see if he can compete for the #1 with Pinkston, Brown and whoever else they throw into the mix.

Kaiser Toro
03-28-2006, 10:04 AM
What kind of intangibles would Gaffney bring to Philly?

I would say no. He was signed for a one year deal. It is a wait and see situation in which they want to see if he can compete for the #1 with Pinkston, Brown and whoever else they throw into the mix.

In that Moulds' agent or Moulds would be speaking to Gaff about Houston. I am not speaking to Gaff on the field next year.

jacquescas
03-28-2006, 10:13 AM
i doubt Moulds is going to take Gaff's word for it. Even if they ever spoke which i doubt.

el toro
03-28-2006, 10:13 AM
It depends on what Gaffney has to say. If it's gripes about the old regime, well...

coachdent
03-28-2006, 10:18 AM
In that Moulds' agent or Moulds would be speaking to Gaff about Houston. I am not speaking to Gaff on the field next year.

Moulds wants to be shown the money. I don't think he would contact Gaffney to get his take on the situation in Houston. Moulds considers himself on a different level than Gaffney so I don't think he's comparing his apples to Gaffneys oranges.

Moulds wants money and Philly tends to be very dialed in to specific numbers which they give to certain positions. T.O. was the anomally. They normally don't go overboard paying for wide receivers.

Moulds agent is playing Houston in much the same way that Orlando Pace did. Driving th eprice up. He'll say everyone is interested to help his client. Looks like he will be released and a free agent. Tough to put numbers on it, but my gut feeling is that the Texans have a 30-40% chance at Moulds. It is this high because I think Philly may not pony up the cash. They still are looking at the Green Bay receiver Javon Walker.

TexanFan881
03-28-2006, 10:22 AM
Why can't we just give them the 4th round pick and get Moulds. A 4th round pick will not be able to do what Moulds can this year. Just give them the pick so we don't have to have an auction trying to get him among other teams. I thought in the Chron article it said the problem wasn't the pick, but signing him...

nunusguy
03-28-2006, 10:24 AM
Looks like he will be released and a free agent.
I hope so, because I mind less overpaying for his services than giving up a
Draft pick to Buffalo for him. If they really want him and think he's that important, let them get into a bidding war over him with Philly. Let's just keep
our draft picks.

Kaiser Toro
03-28-2006, 10:25 AM
Moulds wants to be shown the money. I don't think he would contact Gaffney to get his take on the situation in Houston. Moulds considers himself on a different level than Gaffney so I don't think he's comparing his apples to Gaffneys oranges.

Moulds wants money and Philly tends to be very dialed in to specific numbers which they give to certain positions. T.O. was the anomally. They normally don't go overboard paying for wide receivers.

Moulds agent is playing Houston in much the same way that Orlando Pace did. Driving th eprice up. He'll say everyone is interested to help his client. Looks like he will be released and a free agent. Tough to put numbers on it, but my gut feeling is that the Texans have a 30-40% chance at Moulds. It is this high because I think Philly may not pony up the cash. They still are looking at the Green Bay receiver Javon Walker.

Yes that is the same approach I would take in uprooting my family and taking a new job. :rolleyes: Moreover, as a former agent I would ping all resources in framing any move for a client.

TexanFan881
03-28-2006, 10:26 AM
Seahawks | Team enters Moulds' race
Tue, 28 Mar 2006 07:04:40 -0800

Leo Roth, of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, reports the Seattle Seahawks entered the race for Buffalo Bills WR Eric Moulds Monday, March 27. The addition of Seattle makes six teams either interested in Moulds or drawing interest from Moulds.

Why would they want him? So he can play for 3rd WR with Bobby Engram?

coachdent
03-28-2006, 10:26 AM
Less than 48 hours and he'll be a free agent I think is what they are saying.

el toro
03-28-2006, 10:27 AM
With that much interest why agree to a deal before being released?

Marcus
03-28-2006, 10:30 AM
Why can't we just give them the 4th round pick and get Moulds. A 4th round pick will not be able to do what Moulds can this year.

I dunno bout that. Casserly's 4th round picks haven't been too shabby. The 2nds and 3rds are where he needs some work.

TexanFan881
03-28-2006, 10:32 AM
From kffl
Patriots | Bills would trade them Moulds – for the right price
Tue, 28 Mar 2006 07:11:46 -0800

John Tomase, of the Boston Herald, reports Buffalo Bills general manager Marv Levy said he would be willing to trade WR Eric Moulds to the New England Patriots – for the right price. "It depends on what the compensation would be," Levy said at the NFL owners' meetings Monday, March 27. "We would talk to them, of course. We'd talk about it. We wouldn't rule them out." The Bills are believed to be seeking a fourth-round pick or higher, but Levy said that had yet to be determined. "We don't have a hard and fast price," Levy said. "We're still talking. I'll treat that situation as it develops, because it's a big decision."

All of a sudden they aren't too slow :rolleyes:

O.G.
03-28-2006, 10:35 AM
610 Morning show just got thru interview Philly Beat Writer Gary Cobb. He had alot to say about the T.O. situation. He also touched on how the Eagles plan on using Gaff. He said Gaffney could easily if D. McNabb gains confidence in him have between 75-80 catches and he is bidding for the 2nd receiver position. Cobb said that they like the fact that Gaffney didn't drop anything and was able to get 55 catches from a QB that was running for his life all game every game. He said Philly wasn't going to throw the ball as much as they did last year. He touched on our DE signing of Kalu. Said that if he could stay healthy, he would be a great addition. Last thing before he left and bringing it up on his own was the Moulds situation. He said, he would love to see him in Philly but Philly is not going to pay close to what he was asking and if the Texans have the better offer, the will get him.

Kaiser Toro
03-28-2006, 10:36 AM
610 Morning show just got thru interview Philly Beat Writer Gary Cobb. He had alot to say about the T.O. situation. He also touched on how the Eagles plan on using Gaff. He said Gaffney could easily if D. McNabb gains confidence in him have between 75-80 catches and he is bidding for the 2nd receiver position. Cobb said that they like the fact that Gaffney didn't drop anything and was able to get 55 catches from a QB that was running for his life all game every game. He said Philly wasn't going to throw the ball as much as they did last year. He touched on our DE signing of Kalu. Said that if he could stay healthy, he would be a great addition. Last thing before he left and bringing it up on his own was the Moulds situation. He said, he would love to see him in Philly but Philly is not going to pay close to what he was asking and if the Texans have the better offer, the will get him.

Thanks for sharing.

TexanFan881
03-28-2006, 10:39 AM
If it is still only a race between us and the Eagles I think we will win it, I'm just not sure if he goes into free agency if we can get him, since there are a lot of teams interested. The Eagles from the beginning were only somewhat interested and that's probably because Moulds wanted to go there.

keyfro
03-28-2006, 10:41 AM
IMO getting moulds will have us ready to win next year...it gives us a ligit number 2 receiver opposite andre and it might actually start some competition for the number 1 spot...not saying that andre isn't all that but his ability to gain seperation from double teams like randy moss, to, and chad johnson might be because lack of competition...moulds would present a challenge to him one i think he would welcome...also getting moulds would finally give us a veteran presence in our receiving corp...one i think has been badly needed...along with those two receivers we would have a nfl caliber TE, two great runningbacks (given we take bush)...and a system that will actually work...you put all that together and we might be averaging more than 13.5 pts a game...probably more like 21pts a game

powerfuldragon
03-28-2006, 10:45 AM
after thinking about this last night, i decided it'd be good to have him on the team. It'll give some time for players like mathis or armstrong to fully develop.