Thurman#1

Really? "Both entirely true statements in the context of the NFL regular season"? Wow!! I had no idea that was true, Badol!! I guess you should then contact the NFL, Pro-Football-Reference.com, and every single other historical organization out there. Because they say you are ... what 's the word, again ... oh, yeah, "DEAD WRONG"!! That's it. As I've told you again and again, you are simply wrong about that. The word "never" doesn't have a lot of alternative meanings. You won't find a dictionary where "never" is defined as "outside of the NFL playoffs." And you also won't find one where "hasn't" is defined as " has not except for in the regular season where he has had two." Folks, do you see how sad this is? He's utterly wrong about forced fumbles, by any measure, in any way of looking at it. And while he's right that the thread is about the Defensive Player of the Year, he didn't say anything about that. He simply stated it as a fact: "never" - BADOLBILZ "hasn't" - BADOLBILZ Both simply factually wrong. He's wiggled, squirmed, justified and writhed. The way to handle that was always to say something along the lines of, "OK, OK, I was wrong about that, but ..." and continuing on. It's still the way to go. I won't hold my breath, though. It's been fifteen days, probably double-digit posts, and counting.

Dude, having an opinion like that would be fine. Bizarre, but fine. Again, weird to even think that you could have a good idea who will not even play. But again, you didn't give it as an opinion. You gave it as a fact. For those who weren't watching, here it is, the whole post: It's not real difficult to indicate something is an opinion. You managed it in your both the first sentence, and the last clause of the post. On the contrary, you stated that as a fact and haven't backed off of it all the way through the five or six posts you've left since. You knew what you said, as recently as a page ago: If you're now backing off ... hey, fine. A little late, but always glad to see someone revising an argument so it makes a bit more sense. I'm always trying to look back and see where I could do better, myself. It's why I so often go back and edit my posts. Always trying to say things better.

No, and the idea is ridiculous. Coleman isn't his biggest blunder. Kelvin Benjamin was. $8.5M in dead cap if I remember correctly, because Carolina had picked up his 5th year option. As for Star, though, there's no particular reason to think we will cut him after the 2021 season. It's possible, but even if you don't like him, they clearly do. The odds would have gone up if they had drafted a potential replacement this year. They didn't.

No, it's not possible, Richard. Go listen to the podcast I linked to. Talbot made it very clear that they thought he was the opposite of a weakness that they could exploit, that the reason they were concentrating on him was that they were seriously worried about him. The Ravens were trying to game plan around him rather than attack him as a weakness. It really is in the podcast, and the whole podcast is a good listen as well. He only brought it up when the hosts said that some Bills fans didn't have a high opinion of Tremaine. He thought that was ridiculous. Have a good day.

I would show you where very few people agree with you, but I already did. I posted a list of four links where he's listed as among the best LBs in the league: Weirdly, you only mentioned the one where he was listed as 24th, even though I also have one where he's listed as 11th, one where he's listed as 15th, one where he's listed as 16th and PFF, where he's listed as 24th. How surprising that you only picked the one where he's listed as 24th. Again, I just linked to the first four lists on google. You were welcome to come up with other lists that didn't rank him high. Strangely, you haven't come back with any. Yeah, thing is, it really is a small group who agree with you. Oh, and those lists are linebackers. Yeah, they separated out the EDGE guys, but that still leaves most of the linebackers in the league. So yeah, being ranked between 11th and 24th, and mostly between 11th and 16th really does indeed show that Tremaine is very respected around the league. No, as I've said, not elite. But yes, absolutely very respected.

I've piled up BS? That's a laugh!!! Hey, Badol, aren't you the guy who said this about Edmunds: Two provably wrong statements in quick succession. Wasn't that you? And then simply refused again and again and again to admit how wrong you are? And now you accuse me of BS? For those who would appreciate a laugh, it's in this thread: https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/232971-dpoy-tremaine-edmunds/

Fair enough that you misread my post. I make enough mistakes for ten people, myself. Equally fair that you don't expect much of him. It seems pretty misguided, though, as when last here he was a crucial part of an elite defense that then wasn't nearly as good, in very predictable ways, without him. However, I find it immensely difficult to understand how you are still puzzled about what you said that says more about you than Star. I believe I've gone over that three times now. Perhaps I didn't express it clearly enough. I'll try yet one more time, but this will be it. You said, "Star won't be playing." That's wacko. It's taking your own quite unlikely opinion for fact. Says more about you than it does about Star. You said, "I said that if he plays, he’ll get hurt." Also quite wacko to think that you can be sure of something that is so very unpredictable. I could throw in a couple of more things, but there are two things that you said that show far more about you than they do about Star.

Heh heh. Did you see him run through that drill? Like it or not, the man's a rival to Marquez Stevenson now.

Someone likes Tremaine? Nearly everyone does.

Here's where you're factually wrong: You said, "After they lost to the Chiefs they said they needed to get bigger, were lacking at the TE position and needed more team speed. The only one of those weaknesses they even addressed with a blue chip pick or above minimum FA deal was getting bigger at the LOS." And then implied they hadn't done anything to address those concerns. Remind me, did they say, "we needed to get bigger," or did they say, "We need to get bigger using what some guy on the internet would call a blue chip pick or above minimum FA deal?" Did they say, "we are lacking at TE" at all? Or did they say that nobody feared them at TE? Did they anywhere say, "We need to bring in a TE with a blue chip pick or above minimum FA deal"? Same with team speed. They addressed it with Rousseau, with Breida, with Wildgoose, with Marquez Stevenson, by bringing McKenzie back ... if we're very lucky, Christian Wade may even turn out to be useable team speed. Yeah, Rousseau and Basham are big. But Rousseau in particular is also sudden. And while he's tall, he's 266 and athletic. And remind me, didn't they bring in an extremely big "Shaq-type" DE last year, in Epenesa? What happened with him and weight again? I can't remember, did they tell him to stay big and muscular? They didn't change what they're looking for in the slightest. They've always wanted long DEs. Rousseau and Basham are long. Epenesa is long. They've always wanted tough DEs, and the new guys are tough, as are the old ones. They had a problem, not enough talented pass rushers last year, and they worked hard towards solving that problem with their first two picks. They addressed all three of the concerns you bring up. Not least by just sitting back with a smile and watching Star Lotulelei come back to make DE size more impressive on early downs. That itself addressed that need. They didn't promise to address things in a way that you would approve of. By your record on the Bills, very little would clear that bar anyway. But did the FO address those needs? Yeah. Not least by welcoming back Star Lotulelei. So, no, there is zero evidence "they aren't putting much stock into the position." They brought back Star, a guy who is under contract for three more years. They may well feel that he's enough, or that other options they liked for backups were either picked before they were good value, or would cost too much in FA to bring in, though the offseason is as yet far from over.

It would indeed be puzzling if he were average. He's not. He's very good at what he does. What he does, being a space eater, isn't flashy, but it is crucial for this defense. It greatly affects the efficiency and ability of several other players to do their job. And as has been said a million times before, for the simple reason that it's correct on the face of it, just because it's positive about a teammate does not at all mean it can be ignored. Anyone with a minimal fraction of a clue can pick out the things that teammates and coaches are forced to say when asked about teammates. When you don't have much positive to say, the thing to do is to go with the Crash Davis book of interview fluff: "He gives 110%. I would want him beside me in an alley fight. He's a guy you want as a teammate. He always gives it his all. Always brings his 'A' Game. He takes it one game at a time. He always acts like he's got something to prove. Always puts the team first. A pro's pro." There are a billion of them and athletes can spew them by the hour. When you hear those, chances are certainly decent that there's nothing behind them. On the other hand, though, when guys skip out of that framework and start to comment specifically and thoughtfully, ignoring it with the usual, "It's just a teammate talking about his teammate," thing is simply nonsense. It's akin to saying, "I'm just not willing to believe that, as it's not congruent with what I believe." Yeah, they can't say the guy sucks. But there are a million things you can say that won't get you in trouble for negativity and yet you don't have to commit to specifics. When a guy does, it means something.

Heh heh heh.

Disagree. That defense played well enough - late in the year - to win a championship. Not that I'm saying they were elite as they were the year before. Clearly in 2020 they weren't, but you don't need to be elite on both sides of the ball to cop a Lombardi. Hell, being elite on both sides is spectacularly rare. The D didn't play well in the Chiefs game, but neither did the offense. Both are good enough to win a championship. I agree that there are good reasons for him to be getting attention. But for whatever reason, fans here love to pick scapegoats and pick pick pick at them regardless of whether they're actually playing well or not. And Lotulelei is one of the small group of guys who receive this type of attention consistently.

Are you arguing that when height stops increasing that bone growth also stops? Because that's wrong. Bones absolutely can grow from weight-lifting and other types of stress, and they grow more or less depending on the type of lifting or stress. This is one of the main reasons why old people are told to lift weights. It certainly also helps with muscle growth, but lifting can stop the weakening of bones that often happens in old people and in fact turn it around and make them stronger, lower the chances of broken hips, etc. I'm a fan of John Wood's Bone Strength Project myself, but just google "lift weights strengthen bones" and you'll get about a million hits. Muscle is what strengthens most quickly, most observably and by the largest factor, but you can strengthen bones, ligaments, tendons, even cartilage.

On the contrary, that video has aged perfectly. He's doing here just what they want him to do, and what he has done, in Buffalo, eat blocks and create space and openings for the LBs. Again, the defense with Star in 2019 allowed 4.3 yards per attempt, to 4.7 YPA in 2020 without him. In the first play, Star is indeed singled as the whole OL runs hard right. And that backfires for the offense. Because he's singled, Star blasts his guy back a good yard or two into the backfield, prevents him from getting out ahead of the play as he clearly wanted to do, and creates a gap for Kuechly to run through. Kuechly gets a ton of space and room to run forward and towards the ball since Star has knocked his guy back. Just what he does in Buffalo. Just what we missed last year. In the second play he does a nice job getting into the guy who might otherwise have helped double Peppers on the play. It's for good reason that Star isn't known for his pass rush. But he does push the pocket a bit and he does occupy guys. Clearly he's not going to often occupy three guys as he does here, that's obviously exceptional, but yeah, occupying guys and pushing the pocket a bit is what he does here and what he does for the Bills when he is on the field for a pass play.

Oliver is a 3-tech, and yeah, I'm sure he's the vision there. But it seems likely that the reason they didn't bring in another big space-eater is two-fold. 1) They are happier with Star than many fans are, and 2) They draft BPA factoring in positions of need a bit, but not enough to ever reach, and maybe they simply didn't find a good non-reach situation to draft a big guy this year. Wouldn't be surprised to see them thinking about it next year as Star's contract approaches its end.

Their actions have indeed spoken loudly. But there is no particular reason to think your interpretation of what they're saying is correct. None. There are many alternate explanations that explain what happened just as well or better. For instance, there's no reason to think they're focusing on pass rush impact over stay-at-home types like Star (at DT). I mean, they are at DE, of course, but beyond that there's no evidence that they're looking to phase out a big space-eater type, particularly on early downs. They brought in a guy last year who could do play both DT and DE, to possibly try to ramp up the pass rush on passing downs. That was Quinton Jefferson, and that didn't work out, precisely because Lotulelei opted out and they had to try to use small guys to fill big guy spots and it didn't work out all that well. Then after the season they very publicly pointed out that the DL was too small (without Lotulelei and with a hampered Harry). They're not going to say, "We were too small," and try to get smaller. Now - on passing downs - do they seem like they might bring Basham or Rousseau in to play DT for occasionally? Sure. But they were planning to do that last year with Jefferson, even before Star opted out. There's no reason whatsoever to think they don't want a big ol' space eater at 1-tech in running situations and early downs. And it's true that sometimes Star was single-blocked. But not that often on runs through the middle. He was generally doubled in that situation. Yeah, it would be ideal if Star could get off blocks and make tackles. But having a space eater who doesn't need to make tackles really is in fact the McDermott design with Star as their 1-tech. You can say some things about McDermott, but you can't say he's a dummy. He brought in Star. Star had played on his team at Carolina. McDermott knew what he was and brought him in. They didn't think Lotulelei would suddenly in the cold Buffalo winds become a guy who could magically and unexplainably get off blocks he'd never gotten off of before. They brought him in knowing what he was because he fit the plan. It really does appear to be that simple.

Please. The club can fire him as long as they're willing to face the consequences. He can hold out as long as he's also willing to face the consequences.

You're not right. You're indulging your prejudices. You didn't say that the odds that Star might get injured are higher than for most Bills. That's true. You said you don't expect much of him and you said ... Yeah, you did say that, which pretty much proves my point. That's indulging your prejudices and pretending a wild-ass guess is a likelihood. Do 300 pound football players get injured more than, say 250 pound LBs or 220 pound RBs? Where's your evidence? Yeah, guys in their 30s get injured more than younger guys, but I don't see you talking about Hughes or Hyde or Addison or Taiwan Jones. And I'd love to see your evidence that guys who take a year off get injured more often. Pretty sure guys like Harrison Phillips would love to see that evidence too. What says more about you than Star? What you said. That you think following your biases rather than the probabilities will get you closer to a better guess. Generally it will not. And here's an idea. You seem to be a poor summarizer, so if you want to respond to something I said, why don't you quote me? That way we won't have to go through the whole, "Um, no I did not say that," thing again and again. For example, you said, "You said that harrison is probably the better 1T…..and Harrison isn’t THAT good." Yeah, um, no, I did not say that. Can you show me where I said that Harrison is probably the better 1T? Can you show me where I said Harrison isn't that good"? No, you can't, those are poor paraphrases. I didn't say those things. Nor would I, as I am not convinced of either one.

Wait, football players get hurt sometimes? Holy cow, this is a whole new fact that I'd never noticed before. Of course he could get hurt. So could anyone. Any player. As for what you apparently said, I answered one post. And that's the only one I read. And no, you didn't say that. If you had, I'd have responded differently. It's fine you're not expecting much from him. But that says more about you than about Star. I'm looking forward to Star's press conference with Josh tomorrow.

Nonsense. Star will almost certainly be playing, barring injury of course. Most likely Harry will be competing with Star to be the #1 1-tech. When healthy his first year, Harry was pretty close, quicker, a better penetrator, but not quite as good at just eating space and holding blocks as Star. I'm hopeful that he can mean as much to this defense as he did to the very good 2018 group.

It's neither a miss nor a success. It's bits of both, depending on what you're talking about. At seeing his possibilities, it's a success. At being able to develop him to his full potential on the team, it's a miss. At the development process, we don't really know, but with how well they've developed so many players here, it's probably somewhere around 80:20 success. People are saying the Teller thing was a failure. Not really. Parts of it certainly were. Drafting him was a success. He developed well under our coaches. But our GM has brought in a ton of OLs to compete every year, ensuring we'll have to get rid of a guy or two who can really play. With hindsight, was trading him a mistake? Sure. Clearly. The bottom line, though, is that you can't see the future. What every team does is to do their best to play the percentages and try to guess what each guy's future will be. There will be some missed predictions. That's just the way the process works. And if the process doesn't work and you're producing a bad team or OL or whatever you're looking at, then yeah, failure is happening and changes need to be made. But this team has gotten better each year. So has the OL, though their run blocking last year was not good, but the pass blocking was very very fine. The process is working. But it will never work perfectly. Everyone should get the possibility out of your mind. Humans don't work that way, and certainly large-scale complex human endeavors don't.

You certainly could be right. I think Wentz will be a lot better in a situation where he doesn't feel a disconnect with the coaching staff as he did in Philly.

$3M salary, half guaranteed. Oh, geez, you're talking about a trade here, not a cut. OK, my fault, all $3M will be saved. Roster bonus already paid. $1M of his signing bonus not yet accounted for, but must be. So, they'd save $3M. Sorry, my bone-headed mistake. $2.2M would be dead cap if they trade him, the roster bonus and the unamortized signing bonus. Cutting him would only save $1.5M. Trading him saves $3M plus whatever part of his workout bonus ($100K total) remained unpaid.

Trading Butler would only save us $1.5M, though some of the dead money could be delayed till next year. Both Ertz and Nelson is a very unlikely possibility, IMO.