Thurman#1

We absolutely need a lot of developmental players and depth. Beane said they're doing this for contributions this year, more for the long-term than the short. Next year or two there'll be plenty of guys who they have to let go for cap reasons or age. If the replacements are on the roster, on rookie contracts and have a year in the system, that will be huge.

That's not 50 points the Raiders would be giving up. More like 857 to 695, so on the order of 162 points. Next year's 3rd is valued as a 4th this year, and a mid-4th-rounder would be around 50 points. Don't see the Bills giving up a next year's 3rd either. Not unless they then are confident they can turn one of those 3rds this year into a 3rd next year mid-draft.

In the first? More likely back than forward. And if he goes forward it certainly won't be into the teens. That would essentially mean giving up a 2nd or a 3rd or a high pick from next year. He's not going to do that. I mean, if you go from #30 to #18, that's 280 points, which is equivalent to a later 2nd rounder. He's not going to give up that kind of bounty. He has zero history of doing that kind of thing excepting the year when they'd spent the year before accumulating extra picks to go up and get a QB in the 1st. Going up to 23, particularly 25, 27 .. yeah, I can ima

Looks to me like a simple contract disagreement. I think they downgraded a bit at punter, but probably saved some money for use on other positions and players. Hope that works out. Hard to know when we don't know what Bojo was asking for.

When I look at his highlights, I just don't see a guy who looks like he has elite traits. He looks like a good player, but not a freak. I trust Beane, and if he likes the guy I'll try to be open-minded, but I don't see it - with very little real study, admittedly - myself.

"Past Championship teams were aggressive in attaining Pro Bowl caliber running backs and then were rewarded for doing so," he says. Is that how he sees the Clyde Edwards-Helaire situation? Fournette's never been a Pro Bowler. Does anyone think he's pro bowl caliber at this point? Ronald Jones was a second rounder. He had a good year but his first two years were far from great. I don't particularly see great RBs on SB champions till you go back at least to Seattle's championship. EDIT: Ah, I see I'm far from the first to notice this was nonsense. Since the li

Oh, hey, that's great news. Good for him.

This wasn't an average defense. It was average or a bit below for the first six games and then quite good, top ten probably, as the season rolled on.

Fair enough. First, a quick look at Beane's opinion, which he's expressed again and again at various times: “Our run defense wasn't always the greatest,” general manager Brandon Beane said after the season. “We lost a little bit of beef inside. We lost Jordan (Phillips) to free agency, but when that happened, we were thinking Star is coming back, and then Star opted out and I think we all saw – you know, I know he's not a 10-sack guy and things like that, but what he provides, not only the run game, but just the ability for our linebackers to roam free, I think took tho

Could you just real quick find a quotation from Edmunds or Oliver blaming problems on anything? We can wait. If you find a quotation like that, your post will have a tiny little something behind it. But you won't. And it doesn't. It isn't Edmunds or Oliver making excuses. It's sensible football people, none of whom play for the Bills. And noting that teams are way way more complex than you're pretending here is only acknowledging reality and understanding what happens on the field. Would you make the same argument about how badly Mahomes played in the Super Bowl? I mean

No, not particularly. It's more about motivation. A reason doesn't have a motivation. It's just an explanation or cause. Whereas the purpose of an excuse is to justify a mistake or problem or fault. People without much of an argument generally refer to reasons as excuses. Not about themselves, of course, but about people they don't like.

Edmunds played quite well against Baltimore. 9 tackles, 2 QB hits and a pass defensed, but it was fairly obvious to people who watched the film. Just as one example, Buscaglia had him with a B+, the 7th best player on the team in that game. https://theathletic.com/2335118/2021/01/20/bills-ravens-josh-allen-dion-dawkins-matt-milano/ He played poorly against KC, no question. But how many LBs playing in zone coverage against Pat Mahomes when he's getting a ton of time to throw have played all that well?

Which is one of many many reasons why you're not an NFL GM. It's certainly not a sure thing, but he is indeed quite likely to get the 5th year option. They like him, and for good reason.

This is absolute nonsense. They're one of the better drafting teams over the past four years, as various league-wide surveys have established. Here's one: https://twitter.com/Colts/status/1367876148793913345/photo/1 The Allen pick isn't luck. Or at least not more luck than any pick successful pick. It was a terrific pick. Calling it lucky shows more about how desperately you're trying to spin things than it does about the pick. Picking Allen was an excellent move, and they get full credit for it. And even if you leave Allen out of it, the whole r

This is mostly overstated. Once healthy, Edmunds and Oliver played really well. Epenesa once he began to get it, really started to play pretty well. Those three played up to expectations Phillips too, though it's fairer to question his season. I'd say he lived up to expectations, in that reasonable expectations did indeed factor in the fact that his injury does take time to recover from. Having said that, all need to step up this season, as does every player, really. That's the nature of pro football in the growth phase that comes at