All Activity

Homolander/BillSlime, or whatever the fvvck that clowns name is, is beyond help. It even makes enemies of the folks that agree with it on here. Sad indeed. I don’t know what its end goal is with tweet after useless fvvvck tweet that doesn’t mean shyt to anyone. Another sad fact indeed.

The majority. Someone downtown told me...It's illegal to call out the national guard on American soil...Never been done before. Since I ignore this cult propaganda I remained silent. All I could think about .... In 1963, the Alabama National Guard was used to enforce the desegregation of the University of Alabama, a move initiated by President John F. Kennedy. Specifically, the guard was deployed to allow Black students Vivian Malone and James Hood to enroll in classes after then-Governor George Wallace attempted to block their admission. This action followed Kennedy's federalization of the Guard under the Insurrection Act of 1807. Later in the year, Kennedy again used the National Guard to ensure the integration of Tuskegee High School.

...talk about twisted..so it's ok to make memes, threats and videos actually inciting and wishing death on a president but OMFG clutch pearls when he makes a gag video hitting a golf ball at a dumb ass who tripped on his own? LO ***** L @ homeKarenLander....take your meds

I'd rather be American than a trump supporter.

RIP America. We had a good run.

Aww. That's a shame. Wait ....OMFG Isn't that trump with the facist helmet on ????

Right wing populism always leads to rioting because your left policies, unchecked, are inhumane. fixed it for ya

The point about Shakir is the efficiency would continue to fall because he isn't versatile (or you might say 'complete') enough to be used in the range of ways you would need to use him to get him 160 targets. You'd end up trying to force feed the ball to him in situations where he is not best suited to a) get open and b) make the catch and so the likelihood is the efficiency would drop again. The more you get away from using the particular skillset he has and towards trying to use him as a "do it all" receiver the less efficient he will ultimately be. I actually think there is a case to be made that the way to get greater production out of Shakir would be to dial his targets back slightly.... not massively... but about a target per game compared to 2024 and to focus those targets better on optimising his skillset. I don't think the Bills are in the position to do that without having a better situation on the boundary, but I am open to the possibility that Shakir ends up having a 1,000 yard season at some stage on fewer targets than the 100 he had in 2024. You can't exact league discipline on a player based on gut feel about what it was. The NFLPA would have a field day with it.

First of all, no one is arguing for him to get 160 targets (which I just told you as well in the previous post too). Someone said there was “no chance” he could reach “1200-1400 yards” on 60 more targets and mathematically it’s simply not true and that is all that was said. So I don’t know why you want to drag this in all these other directions. And as for the bold, because he’s a good football player. His efficiency in 2023 was an outlier on minimal targets, no one expected that not to drop, I mean of course it did. But it doesn’t drop perpetually either, he’s still a good football player, his efficiency is going to have a floor and to just imply it will forever drop at the same rate is just a ridiculous premise. And when you have 100 targets, you’ve got a pretty reliable sample size to know pretty much what would be expected at that point. Lmao, no I never once projected that, not even close lol. That’s a false premise a certain someone likes to pretend I said by twisting something out of context to pretend I did. That reference was made when I pointed out the difference in efficiency between Shakir and Diggs during Diggs final season. My actual projection for him was around 90-110 targets and 900-1100 yards which is pretty much what he did when he was healthy.

He has been a great draft pick. I don't think too many would argue. Worth $15M? Pay him what he wants? Yeah, no thanks. Not unless he plays a whole lot better this year anyway. Well, yeah, 4.9 is very good for a career average. James hasn't been through a career yet. In career stats, things generally go down very significantly indeed by the end. 6th in yards from scrimmage in 2023? Yup. About 27th in yards from scrimmage in 2024? Yup. Not even in the top 100 in 2002? Yeah. And yeah people mention the OL when they talk about Cook. We've got a damn good OL. They mention the OL when they talk about Allen too. For good reason in both cases. Cook will be here this year, as has been very obvious all along. Next year? Yeah, assuming he's gone, which I do, they'll bring in someone else, in the draft or as an FA, or both. And likely Davis will improve after his very good rookie year. Again, I like him. If he'd sign for around $10 to $11M a year, I'd be very much in favor of bringing him back. Doesn't appear he will, though. Give him, say $11M AAV and he'd be 7th highest in the league, behind Barkley, McCaffrey, Henry, Taylor, Kamara and Jacobs. IMO he does belong behind those guys, with the possible exception of post-injuries McCaffrey. That's about where he belongs, I say. Klos, I don't think many are dismissing it. We're contextualizing it. That's different. And reasonable. Again, two rushing TDs his first year, two his second year and sixteen his third and many are saying he's a 16 a year guy. He's not. He's a 16 in 2024 guy.

That explains a lot.

Sunday Ticket renewal is $420, but they’re letting you pay it $35/month. Also included a snippet about buying individual months of ST, which is new.

I think $10M-$11M/year would put him in the top 7th-8th overall as far as the top RBs are concerned.. I would pay him at that price..

Um, I think many have effectively said this. When you say that we have to get Cook back because he's really good, you're saying that price shouldn't be a factor. My argument here points out what should be obvious but is being ignored by an awful lot of people and posts here that walk around with their fingers in their ears saying "Not listening," when you try to mention price. Many many many posts on here are trying to pretend that this is a yes/no argument, that yes we need to keep him no matter what, period. This proves that there absolutely is a point at which he would not be worth it. Many want to ignore this because it's convenient to their narrative. There is absolutely a point at which we'd be paying too much. And frankly $15M is past that line for most on here, which is why money doesn't get mentioned in many of these posts that say, "Just get him."

I'm not reducing James Cook to just the touchdowns. Answering every single argument made in one post isn't practical. So I'm responding to one that is constently made, that we can't live without him because he had 16 TDs, which shows he's one of the absolute best in the league, and that we can't just throw away those 16 TDs next year. 4.9 YPC is darn good, 7th best among RBs with 100 carries or more, and 8.1 YPR is 17th among RBs. Both good. Neither worth $15M or particularly close. You're putting words into my mouth. I didn't say any fast RB could do what he did. Speed is a lot of his value, but certainly not all. But in those 16 TDs, other than the three or four long ones where his speed was mostly what resulted in those TDs, and the short one that I mentioned where he just beautifully bounced off a head-on hit, I do in fact think most of the rest were TDs even if the RB were a JAG. None of them required brilliant work. They required work at the level that most NFL starters are at. Disagree if you like, but that's what that video showed, in my opinion. Really well-executed NFL plays. Three or so where nobody was there on defense and the rest requiring workmanlike performance by the back.

That's early for Oscar season. Lol. Recency bias is a hell of a drug.

Why is his last name being censored???? Is he supposed to call him Dick Van Lesbian?????😂😂😂

It's a stupid argument then because if he gets 160 targets we're screwed. Even in your projections you're assuming his catch rate and yards per catch would remain stagnant with 60 more targets. His yards per catch went from 15.7 yards to 10.8 yards with more than double the targets. His catch percentage went from 86.7% in 2023 to 76% in 2024. His total yardage only increased by about 34% despite more than double the targets. Why would 60 more targets not have the same downward trajectory? Also, weren't you the one that predicted Shakir would have over 1300 yards receiving with 100 targets before last year or something like that with the idiotic assumption he'd be able to maintain the same yards per catch with the increased role?

As I recall it was released in September, not too early, oh well. Denis Villenueve's movies have all been home runs, from what I've seen.

Halliburton and Siakum played great, but big props to Mathurin and McConnell off the bench.....we have ourselves a series, folks!!

Exactly. Pretty sure last year he told me Curtis Samuel would have a better season than Stefon Diggs... I said no way that's happening unless Diggs gets injured, but even with an injury, he STILL had a better season 😂 Maybe it was someone else, but I'm almost certain it was him arguing with me.

You are completely missing the question and the point though. One of the posters said "no chance" he could amass "1200-1400" yards on the same targets we fed Diggs (160). So the only thing being discussed right now is if he got 60 more targets last year, what would his yards have been. What you think his strengths and weaknesses are is irrelevant to the math question of how many more yards above the 821 yards would he have had if he received 60 additional targets. Unless you think he is going to add 0 yards and 0 receptions with those 60 more targets in his role last year, then how many yards he would have on 160 targets is clearly bigger than the 821 yards he got on his first 100 targets. And based on his actual production last year, that would have been 1313 yards with 60 more targets...and if you used his career averages it would be even higher. Its not an advocation to give him 160 targets, but for anyone to say there is "no chance" he could get to "1200-1400" yards with 160 targets is pretty silly because he clearly could on that many targets and its honestly not really even debatable.