Thurman#1

Yeah, Brady and Belichick, but it's precisely Belichick who uses that draft system. I hate Belichick but he's smart and he drafts that way for a reason. And again, Brady was a comp pick. Extra picks mean extra chances.

Yeah, but you are leaving out the other part of what Donald Jones said. Which was that as the two of them learn to play with each other, that Zay will learn to head more up the field and Tyrod will learn to make the quick adjustment and throw to where Zay is heading. He actually said that both guys could have done better on the play, and that if Tyrod had made the quick adjustment they would have had the ball on the one rather than a TD. Interesting how you only mentioned the part about Zay.

He did throw into tight windows. The skinny on Foles has been that with time to throw he will be excellent, but if he gets disrupted he has major problems. Nobody likes disruptions but Foles has bad problems with it. The Philly OL did a terrific job there, terrific. The Pats couldn't rush him.

QBs don't have win-loss records. Teams do. That stat is called "TEAM record in games started by this QB (Regular Season)" Foles' third year in Philly - his second year under Shurmur - he was much worse than he'd been in his second year. Look at his TD/INT ratios, his yards per attempt, his yards per game, his INT percentages (insanely good 0.6% to bad 3.2%) No question he played well the last three weeks. How well would he have played if teams had seen him all year? Dunno, but I'd guess not nearly as well. It'll be interesting going forward to see what he becomes.

His floor is very good backup, IMHO. I'm still not convinced that's not what he is. Great game tonight, but the Eagles really used him well. They then switched how they used him as the playoffs began. Very smart as defenses can't count on tendencies to help them predict opponent moves. Very smart. It'll be interesting to see what he does in the future.

Didn't know the Eagles were big on analytics. But it isn't a big surprise. The best teams take an advantage where they can get one. Exactly how you use this stuff is up in the air, it should be a bit different for each team. But every team ought to look carefully at where analytics can fit into their plans and help them achieve their goals.

I don't see it as being about stubbornness. It's about having principles and living with them. Not just living with them when it's convenient. And yeah, I can see it bothering players. Belichick's never worried about that, and for good reason. Yup. Hope one of them calls it quits, but if neither does, this won't even be remembered.

I just don't see what either of you two do. The whole foot has to get down inbounds. He's not sliding that foot, he's stepping. If any part of the foot hits out, it's out. And it's out. As for "moving the ball," yeah, you can move the ball but when he initially catches it he appears to have control but not be sure of it. More than half of the ball is out but he's got what appears to be a good grip and both feet down. But then his left foot comes off the ground and he lets go with both hands to move them to a surer grip. He gets the better grip but his left foot having been in the air lands half in and half out. Incompletion. A virtually impossible play to call at game speed but if there was a conspiracy, they'd have gone the Pats way initially and that might have been tough or even impossible to overturn. Yeah, or guys in motion coming to a stop but not holding it for the second they're supposed to. The play starts milliseconds after they were moving. Never gets called.

Come on, that's not three yards. The WR's foot is slightly inside the three yard-line and the LOS is the one and a half. As folks say, it wasn't a worry if he confirmed it with the ref, but that's no three yards. There was another play much earlier where it was clear a play went against the Pats. Can't remember what it was. But it happened. Oh, yeah, the Philly TD that was out of the end zone and the guy never had possession. That was pretty clear. But the "it's a conspiracy for the Pats group will conveniently ignore that, as it doesn't fit their preconceptions. Nice.

That was Wade's papa, talking about Shula. And the Pats draft extremely well for the fact that they draft late with great regularity. They have a system ... collect comp picks, trade down and collect more picks, trade a 3rd this year and get a 2nd next year, get higher value. They don't convert picks to great players any more than anyone else. Maybe less, as they're drafting so very low. It's harder down there. But they have more chances because of their system and that has brought them a lot of terrific drafted players over the years. Including Brady, a comp pick. That's really stretching it. They didn't put in a new system when Roman was fired in week three. They basically simplified Roman's system under Lynn. You can hardly call that a new system.

Agreed. If nothing else, this should be a very interesting offseason with so many guys in play.

I suppose it's possible, but yeah, you're right, do both and you radically cut your chances of success. Good point.

Highly agree with you here. Never been a big Grigson fan at all.

Well, of course it's for their benefit. But me, if I'm asked to take a pay cut, I coldly look at the situation and take the best option for me at the time. Which sometimes might be accepting the pay cut. If the lower salary is still likely to be higher than you get elsewhere, or as high, I might be better off staying. I'd have to look at it from all angles. IMHO for Tyrod the key angle is less the money than finding the right situation. I think turning down a pay cut might well put him in a situation that's better for his long-term interests than accepting it, even if it does mean less money in the short term. I'm not sure it would mean less money, but even if it does it might be better for him to give up on the team that doesn't want him enough to pay his contract. But on the other hand, a $23.6 mill cap hit for the Bills for one year of Tyrod is really more than market value. A cold look would show him that, but if I were him, I wouldn't care. I'd be more interested in getting into a good situation as quickly as possible. McDermott has shown what he thinks.

You're welcome. The problem for people on your side is that after seeing that headline people can watch the video which shows Zay open by five yards or more and Tyrod putting the ball in an absolutely horrible position. And if Zay was supposed to run to the pylon then the ball was thrown poorly because the ball was thrown three or four yards inside the pylon. Jones' route was closer to the pylon on the right than Tyrod's throw was to the left of it. You only have to see where Zay is laying on the ground after the play. He's not in line with the pylon, he's well inside of it. You're right, it would have hit him in the bread basket if the bread basket were held far above his head and behind him. With that huge cushion, Tyrod should have thrown the ball to the outside. Which he didn't. The drive you copied there isn't the winning drive. Winning drives are what people have - correctly - noted that Tyrod seems able to provide only extremely rarely. Did the actual final drive, from the Carolina 32 to the Carolina 11, contribute to the win? In one way, it burnt clock and forced Carolina to burn timeouts. But no, it didn't contribute to the points. You could say it made the field goal a bit easier but Hauschka was money this year. He'd have nailed it. The Bills would have gone ahead without the offense running a single play. And yeah a seven point difference there would have made a huge difference in terms of making things much more difficult for Carolina. The Panthers got the ball back with 0:46 left. They still had a pretty decent shot at getting into field goal territory, though the defense - again - proved too good. But if Tyrod and the offense had scored a touchdown, Carolina would have been forced to do the same for the tie. It would have been a huge impact. But the offense couldn't do it. Just weren't good enough. The defense had the crucial last-minute impact. Not the offense. Unlikely to happen till the league year opens and they try to trade him. His roster bonus is due 3/16. That's the key day.

I doubt anybody pays anything like two firsts for the "chance" to sign him for a long-term deal. Without an actual agreement, not even close. And you can bet Cousins would make it clear he wouldn't be signing any agreements, even if down the road with the right team he actually might. But he'd say he wouldn't, and then nobody would give the two firsts.

Yeah, they could consider it, but if I'm Cousins, I make it clear ... do it. I'll sign the tag, take your $34 mill, turn down any trades and spend the season getting in shape and preparing for everything to start next year. I signed the tag the last two years, and I'll do it again. But I won't do it till as late as possible so you won't be able to plan or actually work the trade. "Considering" is the right word. They might think about it, but they won't do it.

Smart. Seems like he's got people skills problems, but he's really good.

The problem is that you can only say that he did his job in two of them by twisting what actually happened. He threw a pass to a wide open receiver - I mean open by five yards - so far behind him that it forced him to have to totally turn his body around in the air to try to make the play. Then you find the one interpretation of that that fits your preconceptions and unsurprisingly go with it. Horrible throw. For those who forget, look how open he is. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2017091701/2017/REG2/bills@panthers#menu=gameinfo|contentId%3A0ap3000000846523&tab=videos And then you ignore that in the one game of these that they actually did win, the group that brought them the win was the defense. Tied up against the Panthers with less than two minutes left and the Panthers have the ball. Defense forces a turnover and the offense gets the ball inside field goal range. And manages to get ... wait for it ... a field goal. So that final game-winning drive drove all the way from field goal territory to field goal territory. That isn't a real big accomplishment there, it just isn't. They got the ball on the Panthers 32 and drove all the way to the 11, 21 yards all inside field goal range, before kicking a field goal on 4th down. The main purpose of that drive was to drain the Panthers of their timeouts. They didn't have to gain a yard to get into field goal range. That's what is being referred to here as the game-winning drivve.

Great find. It's frustrating. There's more and more good writing out there. It's already too much and now there's more. Of course, the bad and mediocre writing absolutely dwarfs the good stuff, but even so there's too much good stuff out there to read. And now the Players Tribune comes in. Sigh. Anyway, loved this part: "Like … are you one of those people who gets mad because it feels like the Patriots get every call? "Well, regardless of what the Internet says, it’s not because the refs are helping them out. "It’s because people do dumb stuff when they play the Patriots. "I’m telling you, most guys’ intensity meter goes way up when they play against Tom Brady and the Patriots. And when you’re overexcited or just trying too hard to make a play, that’s when you make mistakes. "I want to sack every quarterback I play against. But do I want to sack Tom Brady any more than the other guys? Of course, I do. I like to compete against the best, and let’s face it: Tom Brady’s the G.O.A.T. That’s why when I sack him, it just feels … better. It’s not just another sack. "So if you’re a defensive back, don’t tell me that when the ball’s in the air and you have a beat on it that you’re not out there thinking, Im’ma get me a pick off Tom Brady! "I know that’s what you’re thinking. "And Tom knows that, too. "So what he’ll do is, he’ll try to draw the pass interference penalty. He won’t just put the ball where only his receiver can get it. He’ll put the ball where the DB has to go through the receiver to get it. Because Tom knows how bad the DB wants that pick, and that he’s gonna be overexcited, and he’s gonna go balls to the wall to try to make a big play instead of making the smart play. "And that’s when the flags come out." Not that this will actually end the conspiracy theories. But it should. But the conspiracy guys are too nuts to listen to reason. Anyway, good find.

For the year ahead, looking at cap space makes sense. For two years ahead, it makes much less sense, as different teams will have different numbers of guys under contract for that length of time, and some will have most of their key guys already contracted while others will have very few. Three years out it tells you little or nothing. Look at who's under contract for the Bills (according to Spotrac) for 2020, three years out: Cordy Glenn. We don't know if he'll be on the team MIcah Hyde Jordan Poyer Tre'Davious White Patrick DiMarco Zay Jones Tyrod Taylor (or rather the amortized portion of his signing bonus) If Tyrod is on the team it will be because he has signed a new contract Dion Dawkins Matt Milano Nathan Peterman Tanner Vallejo Conor McDermott Shaq Lawson And that's it. How many of those guys will still be on the team? Who's the RB? The pass rusher? The OL outside of Cordy? Means nothing, though it's an interesting thought. Even two years out is really cloudy. Combining the three years makes it a pretty wacky measurement. The reason the Eagles have so little for the three years simply means they have a lot of their key guys already under contract. We have no idea who our key guys will be.

It'll be hard for me to get very interested this year, as I expect them to trade up and not have picks left for other guys, so I won't worry about it too much this year. It's an interesting question, and not a sure thing that they trade up. But I won't spend much thought on the first outside QB this year.

You may be right. But this year, he was better than 10th. And that's a lot of the reason he's getting the 5th best contract.

Neither of those is a given. Drafting someone higher than the 5th is an excellent guess and bringing in a vet a very good guess, IMHO, but they are not givens. And there's plenty of reason to keep three guys around when none of the guys you have has proven himself. And yeah, roster spots are valuable but let's not pretend we'd have to get rid of Shady or Kyle Williams or something to keep a third QB. Was Reid Ferguson so wildly valuable last year? Or Deon Lacey or Tanner Vallejo? And you DON'T know the second young guy doesn't have the potential of your other draft pick. You think so but you don't know, anymore than Dallas knew Tony Romo had more potential when they kept three guys or any more than St. Louis knew that Kurt Warner had more potential than the other two guys on their roster. When you don't know what you've got ... and we won't ... keeping a third guy is not at all a bad idea if he's still developing. If he hits a ceiling, fine, give him the boot. If they just don't like him that much, great, see ya. If they become convinced that one of the guys they bring in is a sure thing, then yeah, the calculus changes. Right now they can't be sure of anything. Ask the coaches and the players, who have been saying they see it constantly.

As usual, Tyrod handles himself very well in interviews. This is certainly no exception. That's more your opinion than anything he actually said. The next week Philly runs a run-pass option from inside the five and converts it and they're brilliant. It wasn't the call. It was the execution. Nobody would expect OPI. You'd think the worst result would probably be 2nd down at the same LOS. If they'd called a run, it might have ended up a six yard loss or a fumble. I probably would have called a run there, but I don't think it was an awful call. And Tyrod doesn't appear to think so either.