DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Sammy Watkins

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...-watkins-option

Long story, short...

Bills didn't pick up Watkins' 5th year option. They are scared he's going to get hurt again, and the injury-guarantee in that option would bite them in the butt.

Opinions?

Vikings doing the same with Bridgewater. Will be a UFA next offseason if he makes it off of PUP this year. My guess is Minnesota keeps him on it all season regardless of injury / recovery status to keep him one more season.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...ddy-bridgewater


Other guys whose 5th year option was declined:

#2 overall Greg Robinson (OT, Rams)
#14 overall Kyle Fuller (CB, Bears)
#18 overall Calvin Pryor (S, Jets)
#26 overall Marcus Smith (DE, Eagles)

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000...irstround-picks

Watkins is still only 23? 1000 yards once, but when he was out for 3 games season before last. Been a victim of QB play in Buffalo? Given he's in the last year of his deal, would a 4th round or later pick secure him? Then work a deal ala Collins? I think any talent that improves the team should be considered. I don't know too much about him in all honesty. Still, he is a talent. If we can get him cheaply, why not?

I think he'll always be injury ridden. No thanks.

seems like he should be a little older than that ... but yeah, he's always injured

I remember a lot of people complaining about trading down in 2014 instead of picking Watkins. It's looks like it was the right thing to do (assuming Watkins was the only pick there).

I suppose you get be upset for passing on Khalil Mack, Mike Evans, Odell Beckham, Anthony Barr, Aaron Donald, Ryan Shazier, Derek Carr, etc.

I'm more interested in Kyle Fuller. They talked about moving him to FS, but never did. I think he would be good at that job.

Watch Watkins have a huge season and then the Bills franchise him for more than the fifth year option would have been.

I'm sure that's a problem they'd love to have, and that option part of the decision they made.

coincidentally, players who are on their last year of a contract can often have good years

I'd like to see him play some again first after he spent all of last season on IR after knee surgery.

Can they legally do that?

If I'm Bridgewater and I'm healthy, I'd fight that in court. You can deactivate a guy or whatever, but you can't just put a healthy guy on PUP so that the guy doesn't acrew a season of eligibility

The poor kid is probably not healthy. If he was, Minni would ensure that he is their starter.

That's what I'd figure. It was an awful injury.

But if some unusual happening occurred and he is healthy, there's no way that Teddy would just allow them to PUP him. Not only is he a competitive guy but financially it makes no sense

He could probably have an independent doctor clear him and then they would probably have to activate him or release him.

I'd kick the tires and be interested if Gordon is released\banned\extended or whatever. But injuries make him less of a premium player IMO. Might be a good flyer though.

I expect us to look at UDFA for more receivers, safeties.

That's what I would figure. That's all done in the CBA. No way would players allow a team to have free reign of just putting them on the PUP if their healthy, so they can effectively redshirt a season on a rookie payscale

His knee is obviously still injured right now, and probably into training camp. But I bet when faced with activating him week 8 and letting his contract toll and have both Bridgewater AND Bradford's contracts expire at the end of the season, I bet they "make sure he's 100% ready" before activating him so he's around for next year.

Oh, absolutely.

But if he's given a clean physical before Week 8, I wouldn't be surprised if he sort of forces their hand.

It's a lot of money, and i'm sure there's procedures for this when a player doesn't trust that the team's doctor has anyone's interest but the team's

If there is a way to get him without great expense, (meaning risk) I'd have no problem with bring him here.

His injuries make him risky enough. Foot, hip, ankle... I'm probably missing something lol.

but what would you consider "risk" or "expense"?

Like if the Bills said "give us a ___ rounder" and you'd have to sign him to an extension too?

Why would anybody want Sammy Watkins? What has he done to earn or warrant anything special. He has been hurt, unreliable and clearly does not want to be in Buffalo. He never wanted to play there to begin with. During the draft his step-dad was wearing a Raiders hat, and Sammy stated he hoped he would get drafted by a team where the weather was warm. Well that ain't Buffalo, they have had enough and are gonna move on. He has a ton of talent, just does not want to be in Buffalo.

I agree, why would anyone want to sign an injury prone WR despite his talent?

like him if we can get him for a low round pick.
point two if he is healthy and playing then you could package him in a trade up.

If he can be had prior to the trade deadline for a fourth round pick, I feel it would be a low risk high reward move.

Obviously, he has had injurie issues, but it looks to be worth a flyer given our WR corps.

The guy I would be interested in, if he would come here and we could work out a deal, would be Malcolm Butler. If we could work out a 4 year deal, I'd give up our 2018 3rd, or maybe even one of our 2018 2nd rounders, I think that he would really help stabilize our secondary. Combined with what should be a very much improved pass rush, we could have the makings of a formidable pass defense.

Edit to add: As far as Watkins, I can't see us giving up a 4th rounder for a guy who is oft injured, and who is not signed beyond the year, and who we are not sure we would want signed beyond a year. This front office values draft picks. Butler is healthy, and a high quality player. If he could be signed to a long term deal, I could see us trying for him. Maybe. But I just don't see the same with Watkins.