Thurman#1

You have a point. I should reconsider!!

In your world, 4.3 and 4.4 YPC the last two years is paltry? You live in kind of a weird world. When given a chance to run, he's been very productive. And what makes him a "limited third down type guy"? The fact that he's a very successful third down guy? Who has been quite productive when asked to run and is an excellent pass blocker? "5 years of non production from the backs under Mcd / Beane seems like it' should be time to try something a little different," you say? Good lord, that is a misguided take. The running game has had a lot of production in five years. Singletary's never had a year where he averaged less than 4.4 yards a carry. And the offense has been top three the last two years. And you figuret that's time for a change? Yeah, well first, bringing in McKissic is a change, and as for larger changes, we have other far more urgent priorities. Oh, and yeah, the Steelers really benefitted from drafting an RB early. They benefitted so much they vaulted down to become the 23rd best offense in the league!! Yeah, baby, our offense really has to learn to be more like that 23rd best Steelers group!!

And yet Terry McLaurin did just fine with that lame quarterbacking. You don't catch passes because of lame quarterbacking. You catch passes because the quarterback did his job. Very true the QBs there aren't great, but that doesn't make what the receivers there did less impressive. More impressive, if anything. They brought him here because there will be plenty of the same kind of opportunities, when the rush gets there fast, when everyone's covered, when they're going on rhythm, etc. The question is whether he was productive, whether he made life easier for the QB. McKissic did, and he'll do the same thing an awful lot for Allen most likely. This is a really nice little move.

SEA 18 YSCRM (Yards from Scrimmage) SEA 453 YSCRM SEA 8 YSCRM DET 438 YSCRM WAS 954 YSCRM WAS 609 YSCRM (in 11 games) Of course he got more money in this contract. Seattle didn't use him. In his 4th year, Detroit used him a bit. Washington finally showed how to use him. He's really productive and seems likely to fit in beautifully here.

Total nonsense. If that's what it took to win Super Bowls nobody would every have won one. Nobody has high end talent at all positions. Nobody.

Me likey. And the stats aren't bad at all. 2020 85 carries for 365 yards, 4.3 YPC, plus 80 receptions for 589 yards. That's 954 yards from scrimmage. 3 TDs 2021 (11 games) 48 carries for 212 yards, 4.4 YPC, plus 43 receptions for 397 yards. That's 609 yards from scrimmage in 11 games. 4 TDs. This guy is a really good 3rd down back type.

It really isn't. The team that won the most championships recently, the Pats, have never given especially big bonuses. The Bills had a terrific roster the last two years. They have a good enough group to compete right now. It's fair enough that you want to go that way. But the Pegulas don't have any requirement to do so. And it wouldn't go any further to show they wanted a championship if they did. Their consistent improvement the last 3 or 4 years has already showed it. I'm no hockey fan, but even the Sabres look like they might be starting to come around.

Yup. Can't answer a single one of my points. We all see what you're doing here. "Wah! Wah! I hate Tremaine Edmunds! And I hate the mean mean wewentwess person! Wah!" Sad, but understandable for an argumentless person. And folks, I guess we have the answer to my question in red. He couldn't answer it, so he just ignored it.

It's a legit concern. Jones missed all but five games of the 2020 season. And his sacks total in 2021, while very good, was his lowest since 2014. Worth worrying about. And the money is another real concern. If they want him, I wouldn't mind at all, but I would feel a bit of concern about it.

I see. So, I can stop my crusade. But you can't stop yours. But it's me who's relentless? Aw, oo poow widdle boy. Yup. Yet more of your complete abdication of responsibility. It's everyone's fault but yours. If only the mean mean poster would leave poor widdle innocent oo alone. Yes, I think we all feel so sorry for you. Did the wewentwess mean poster hurt oo iddle feewings? The discussion was about Edmunds, you say? Was it? Well, no, you're wrong as usual. Take a look at the title. The discussion was about Chandler Jones. That doesn't mean that everything said in the discussion after that was about Chandler Jones and that every other person mentioned was thus being compared to Chandler Jones. It doesn't mean that any more than because you our overall discussion. I wasn't comparing Deion Sanders to Chandler Jones anymore than I was comparing Deion Sanders to Edmunds. By the way apples are delicious. And right there, by mentioning apples in a discussion of Chandler Jones I've compared apples to Chandler Jones by your magnificently clueless argument. I was using Sanders to destroy your utterly block-headed argument that prevented actions couldn't be used to help evaluate performance. Sanders is indeed a very obvious example, showing why your argument there was pure dumbage. That's why I used him. Of course I used a good example. That's actully kind of the point of using examples to destroy pathetic arguments. So, one more time, where are the words, the words I used to compare Deion and Tremaine. That's all you have to do. Just show the words. "Like," maybe? "Similar to," possibly? That's all you have to do to prove me wrong. Show the place where I compared Deion and Tremaine? Folks, how do you think he's going to answer this? Ya think more insistence that anything in the same discussion is automatically a comparison? That's my guess. Oh, and yes, it is indeed thread-napping to join a thread about a DE which the original poster was interested in discussing, and to then leave exactly one sentence within which feel the desperate compulsion to further scapegoat a guy which a certain group of sad folks are constantly grabbing the pitchforks for. One sentence and you felt the need again to work on changing the subject with your usual "Wah, wah, wah, mommy I don't like him."

I would have zero interest in saying anything that was purely to him, honestly. The fun for me is in pointing out ridiculousness for everyone to see. Perfectly willing, though, to honor the Chandler Jones focus of this thread. It ain't me who threadnaps so relentlessly on this subject [EDIT: nor just him, but it's constant overall with one group of folks]. As for continuation, though, there are two of us responsible, despite the belief of one of us that it's only me.

No. That is simply bull#### you're talking there. Flat-out, pure 100% crap. Yes, I did use Deion as an example of a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren't visible. No, I did not "comparing Sanders' impact to Edmunds," and you know it. Pure crap there. To repeat, you said, " “Ignoring all the impact plays that don’t happen” is quite possibly the most baseless argument I’ve ever heard one use to defend a player. It’s an argument built on supposition and assumption." I used the example of Deion to show that your argument wasn't just wrong, but stupid. Deion is probably the single most obvious example of a guy who proves that plays that don't happen can be huge. There were a lot of times when nobody threw near Deion, and yet all those plays that never happened were huge. No mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same sentence. Not even any mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same paragraph. Only use of Deion to attack your argument. Again, the first person to compare the two was you, when you created your sad little straw man argument there. You said it, then were so happy about the idea that you'd created that you didn't just use it talking to me that you boasted about your kindness in not using my name in an early post about it, and then said I must be old not to remember that I'd made an argument I'd never made, an argument created entirely by you. And I do have to crack up with you. I'm the one who "cracks at you," apparently? You're just an innocent little sweet thing, not insulting me for possibly being old, not consistently ? Yeah, again, dumb argument. Both of us are involved here. And it ain't a coincidence that that poster told you to drop it, but not me. You're the one who leapt in with the first post of the thread, so desperate to insult Edmunds that you felt it was worth the rudeness of thread-napping. Oh, and yet more classic stuff in your post here. "This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post." Yeah, um, that's not how thread-napping works, dude. Nor any form of rudeness in conversation. The first guy who changes the subject doesn't to say the guy who answered his rudeness is the one at fault. You brought the whole thing up. And it's something you and yours do with tremendous consistency. Some guy posts a thread on something he wants to talk about, and you or someone like you immediately darts in to change the subject to moan and whinge about Edmunds. Just like you did here. With such desperate eagerness that you were in whining and moaning about your feelings about Edmunds 6 minutes after the OP thought he'd start a conversation about Chandler Jones. You won't accept responsibility for thread-napping. And you say it's only me and apparently not you who's cracking back. Two posts and we can see an absolute inability to accept even partial responsibility, from the guy who first thread-napped. Pitiful.

The guy has played four years and only made about $5M. Before taxes. Of course he's in it for the money. Nearly everyone is for the second contract. And being with Trevor is not a bad idea moving forward. They'll probably be awful this year. Looking forward, though, who knows.

Amusing. They already paid him $13.2M.

Lotta rumors that he might retire. Tompsett on Cover 1, for one. Not that he is retiring, but that he's rumored to be considering it. I doubt they are absolutely counting on him.

Because other factors in the deal might fall into place better. There are a lot of other factors. Money, guaranteed money, whether or not they are rebuilding, length of contract, which guy would be easier/harder to trade and which would bring in more trade capital if they're going to draft a QB next year. On and on, really. You're certainly right that Cousins is better, but most decisions are a lot more complex than that. Doesn't that just show that his team is more often behind than most others?

Yeah, my guess is that this contract makes the most likely scenario another mid-range FA slot guy, but not an expensive one, and draft another. I also wonder how much of this contract is guaranteed.

He has them so trapped and ensnared. I really liked him with the Skins and thought he'd be a franchise guy somewhere. He is, I think, but the contract he got them to sign, with all the guarantees, left them all in on him from instant one. They've no real way out. At some point, someone will have to bite the bullet on getting rid of him, but if this GM does, he's completely admitting Cousins fleeced him. Glad I'm not a Vikes fan.

I do barely remember mentioning Deion Sanders. What I said was of course completely different from what you claim. You're pulling the classic "he mentioned Guy B in the same sentence as Guy A and therefore I can claim that he thinks they're the same" move. Folks who have to resort to pretending a guy said something he didn't, are very very sad indeed. And that's what you did here. So, let's review so we can all look and see what a cloddish straw man argument you're making here. You said this: I replied with this: That's the only mention of Sanders in the post. That's the whole paragraph. (Please, anyone reading, this, check me. I'll post the link right here.) https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/238355-bills-2021-rookie-class-ranked-27th-in-league/page/5/ My post is at 2/7/2022 7:14 PM I don't even mention Edmunds in the same paragraph. And yet you're so utterly desperate here that you throw up one of the all-time dumbest straw man arguments ever, right in the post I'm replying to. In fact, you're so happy with this sad little straw man you referred to it above somewhere as if you'd made some point. But back to the post I'm replying to: See what he did there, folks? I did not compare them. He did. That comes out of whole cloth, directly from his own mind. I did use Sanders as an example of a guy doing something he said never happened. His argument there is nuclear-level dumb, and I pointed it out with reference to Deion as one example of a common phenomena. Never mentioned him together with Edmunds, though. Never compared them. That's entirely out of his own fecund mind.

I'd argue that might be twisting it a bit. I do see your point, but right tackle is only one roster spot. Meaning when you get down to #16, you're at the middle of the league's starters. Guard is two roster spots, left and right, so when you get down to #16, you're still in the top 25% of starters. Comparing RTs with your choice of RG or LG would be fairer. But a pain in the butt as I don't know how anyone would find guards listed in those categories without going person by person, which would be take a lot of time. EDIT: Ah, already mentioned above. As for Williams, you could certainly be right. I'm not convinced. I don't think he's playing up to his contract, and I think this could go either way. I could see them keeping him, or asking him to take a cut or take off. If you save $6.75M by cutting him, which is what it seemed to me, and if $4.35M of this year's salary guarantees on 3/20, it's something they'll probably consider. We should know what they do very soon. If he's on the roster on the 21st, he'll likely be here for the year.

I don't care when we get guys. I care that they do what the FO wants done at a good to excellent level. Morse, Beasley, Brown, Matakevich were solid contracts. Morse has been a good pass-blocker and helped keep Allen healthy. Not completing a contract doesn't mean it was a bad contract. Some contracts that don't get completed are good. Some are bad. Beasley's first two years he was a crucial piece, helping Allen stay safe and learn the game. He's apparently lost some athleticism and at this point is overvalued, but he sure wasn't before. Jefferson could easily have been a really good contract but injuries and Lotulelei's output meant they couldn't use him the way he should've been used, as a chess piece outside and at 3-tech. Instead he was a consistent DT. That's not how he would have been best used. The Raiders used him this was in 2021 and he's been really good. It's too bad couldn't, but it wasn't so much the contract that hurt as it was how bad luck elsewhere forced us to use him. Addison may have been a bit overpaid but no so badly. His contract Murphy wasn't worth the money. Neither was Butler. Klein has been a good player, perhaps a bit overpaid. Matakevich also. Lotulelei has been better than most want to admit. He's been a very solid space-eater, a role that McDermott needs filled on this defense and it's visible that when out this team has allowed teams to run quite a bit more efficiently. Overpaid, though, particularly as he was unavailable so much last year. Overall, probably overpaid. But that's what you have to do on the first day or two. It's how it works. Players work like dogs their whole careers to get to a point where teams feel they need to get them the first day or two or not at all. If signed there they'll get a really good second contract.

Yes, we've seen the caps manipulated by teams like New Orleans. And we've seen that far fewer teams that manipulate the cap wildly like New Orleans win Super Bowls. The Saints had a top three QB and a top five coach for about a decade and could only come up with one SB. And a lot of that was that they were wrestling with the cap every eyar. Yes, we're in a Super Bowl window now, but also for the next fifteen years or so. Making the future more difficult is NOT a smart move when you're in a window as long as this one. I do agree with you that we will probably have to pick up a DE somewhere, in the draft or a FA less expensive than Hunter is my guess. Nobody doubts that the cap can be manipulated. It absolutely can. The question is whether it should. The cap can be manipulated, and Beane does that every single year. Everyone does, really. The cap can also be manipulated ruthlessly by kicking lots of cans down the road. Beane does not do that. Nor should he. Hell, no. This was covered extensively earlier in the thread but hasn't been mentioned much lately. (Edit: I didn't see much on P. 8, but on P. 9 it's back at the forefront, as it should be. But Hunter has played in seven games in the last two years. Though very talented, he's an injury risk.

I think many are. I'm pretty hopeful myself, because I expect maybe one biggish guy, not genuinely big, but biggish, and then a bunch of low- to medium-level pickups. I think that's reasonably likely. I'm really confident overall, though. Beane has been absolutely excellent. He's put together absolutely excellent rosters two years in a row.

Yes, we all have opinions. No problem. What's stupid is saying "It's just reality" about your opinion. More, you say I don't have to go on a crusade when someone has an opposing opinion? Yeah, guess what, when somebody starts a thread about someone like Chandler Jones or somebody, you don't have to leap in with your usual "Wah, wah, wah, I hate Edmunds" crap in the first post either. You folks threadnap relentlessly with your sad little Edmunds hatred. At least when I point out how ridiculous some of this Edmunds hate is, I wait till somebody says something about Edmunds. I don't run around thread-napping like you did here and like you folks do constantly. And while gospel is far overdoing it, Beane has shown that outside of draft smoke, he answers honestly. I'm sure you know that. He's not one of those guys who simply lies anytime he feels like it. When he doesn't want to answer something, he doesn't need to lie, He's very adept, as is McDermott at throwing out a few Crash Davisisms that say nothing. When he goes out of his way to go into great detail about something, he's telling the truth. He could've heard the question and said, "Well, you know Tremaine Edmunds, I want him beside me in a street fight. He gives 110% every time. He's an NFL player right to the core. Next question." He could've said that, but he didn't. He specifically said Edmunds will "definitely" be "a core building block moving forward." You may not want to hear that, but he said it and he's shown himself to be a guy who doesn't find it necessary to lie. And you had to throw in a straw man in this dumb post too, hunh? Could you just point out where I compared Edmunds to Deion Sanders? Just quick link to it. I'll wait. But nobody should hold their breath, because that's a total straw man. The reason I talk about the fact that he changes a lot of QB minds about a lot of throws over the middle is because the evidence shows that that's what happens. Teams throw less over the middle to intermediate range and deeper against us than against nearly anyone else. Edmunds has a whole ton to do with that.

Because they save $350K this year on the cap, getting him to sign this and adding a void year? Because he's not the worst punter around, he was just - by that particular measure - the worst starter, and bringing in a guy who couldn't even start would be even worse? Because bringing in someone better would likely mean giving some guaranteed money for a team that may well draft a guy and get someone cheap in that way, requiring paying a guarantee to a guy you think you'll probably cut in camp? Nah, couldn't be any of those. Because ... stuff This is a remarkably tiny little issue. People getting upset about it says far more about them than it does about Beane.