Thurman#1

You're right, because when they signed Ninkovich to an extension in 2016, he was in his 11th year, not his 9th like Wood. Signed the extension in 2016, in Feb. extending through the 2017 season and then retired in July before the season, costing them a bunch of dead money. It's not a mistake. It's a cost of playing the game. And the Pats do it same as everyone else. They've ended up with dead money from Jerod Mayo (re-structured him in April 2015 and cut him in Feb. 2016) , from Scott Chandler, and it would be easy to go on and on with guys like Revis, Mankins and Kyle Arrington who cost them $12.5 mill in dead money in one year between them. Ouch. Hang in there, and good luck. So far, the Gillislee contract hasn't proved a good one for them, but it wasn't $30 mill. $6.4 mill over 2 years. Was that a typo? Did you mean $3+ mill per year? In any case, hasn't worked out for them.

This is just not a good post. It implies that they saw the problem earlier - utterly ridiculous to assume they saw anything dangerous and let him play - or alternately that giving a 9th year guy an extension is never a good idea - just flat-out dumb. The extension was reasonable. And poor Wood was unlucky, as were the Bills.

Zierlein's one of the better evaluators around. Predicting the draft order is impossible, but he gives good and interesting evaluations.

Here's the 55th to 63rd picks this last year: Giants Dalvin Tomlinson (16 starts) Raiders Obi Melifonwu (1 start, 5 games played) Texans Zach Cunningham (13 starts, 16 games played) Seahawks Ethan Pocic (11 starts, 16 played) Chiefs Tanoh Kpassagnon (1 start, 16 played) Cowboys Chidobe Awuzie (6 starts, 10 played) Packers Josh Jones (7 starts) Steelers JuJu Smith-Schuster (7 starts, 14 played) Bills Dion Dawkins (11 starts, 16 played) That's only one guy who started all sixteen. And only three with over seven starts. It's certainly possible, but third rounders often need a bit of seasoning.

If they trade back, it ought to be for a higher pick next year, maybe this year's 2nd for a 1st from another team. This year, they ought to get a QB, a really good one, and if that means trading up then do it. After that, trading down for more picks is almost always a great idea, but they ought to start a conveyor belt for 1st rounders. If we have one of our 1sts left (and honestly I hope we don't after trading up and getting a QB, but if we do), we should trade for maybe a 3rd or 4th this year and a 1st next year.

Please. There wasn't a single mention of this problem till people had had a chance to watch it in super slo-mo twenty-three times and notice that there's no way to tell. The whole controversy did not start till hours after the game. In real time on TV it wasn't just close it was indistinguishable.

All else being equal, yeah. The more shots you take the better your chances. But who do you mean by "a good veteran"? Cousins? I just don't see them paying for him, though I'd love it, myself. Alex Smith? Yeah, I would like to see them get Alex and at the same time draft someone high. Teddy Bridgewater? Again, I'd love to see them get him and draft someone high and let the two of them fight it out for a few years. The "good veterans" take a drop in quality after that, IMHO. Yeah, I can see Tyrod still being here next year. If he takes another pay cut in a renegotiation. And if McDermott becomes ill and misses the season. Kinda kidding about the last bit there, but there's a chance and it's really small. 5%, maybe? That twitter nonsense there cracked me up. How do you "neutralize" for "precipitation"? Take a guess and shove in a somewhat random multiplier to the actual numbers, basically. Same with an awful lot of the other stuff he's "neutralizing" for. They want someone who plays in a different style from Tyrod. And since it would cost us $15 mill more against the cap to keep him ($10 mill this year nad $5 mill dead money in 2019) it just simply isn't likely they keep a guy they actively tried to replace. I don't think it's as simple as you're saying here, Shaw. Smith sure didn't play like a bridge this year. But agreed that Cousins is not a bridge, and should and will cost more money.

That's just not true. "Bad accuracy" is greatly overstating it. If his accuracy were actually bad, he wouldn't be being mentioned as a possible first rounder, or even as draftable. He has issues at times and is certainly not consistently highly accurate. Completion percentage does not equal accuracy. There is no stat for accuracy anymore than there is for football smarts or for And at the Senior Bowl what's being said about him is that sometimes he's very accurate and other times not so much so. Same as what's generally said about him. Quick example from Joe Buscaglia today: "This is the ‘arm talent’ from Wyoming QB Josh Allen that has these teams intrigued by his potential. In between three defenders for a TD." Has a GIF of a beautiful throw. And there's plenty of those kinds of throws being shown by him at the Senior Bowl. But yeah, not with enough consistency. I'm not pulling for or against the guy but there's a great deal of exaggeration particularly of his negatives these days.

QB and pass rusher.

Nobody is on the depth chart, not a single name. It says, "To be announced later." http://www.buffalobills.com/team/depth-chart.html Shaq is on the roster. But he's on the part at the bottom headlined "Reserve/Injured." http://www.buffalobills.com/team/roster.html And not all 4-3s are created equal. He fitted Rex's D (not a 3-4, the 46 is a bit wackier than the 3-4) very well, which is why Rex jumped up and down on the table for him. As for being outplayed, the evidence belies that. He was placed on IR in early December after an ankle injury against the Pats. At that time, his snaps per game were well above anyone else they had at that position, well above. He might be gone soon, but if so it'll be because he didn't fit well so waiting for him to develop didn't make sense.

T.O.'s un-retiring. He and Anquan Boldin are coming!!!

This early in his career it wouldn't be a bust. It'd be another casualty of the scheme switch.

Conferences don't matter. They just don't. Was a Delaware Blue Hen going to win the Super Bowl? Or a Northern Iowa Panther? Not until they did. Those trends last only till they're broken. Don't sit, for God's sakes!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If we don't trade up and there's nobody we like there, please, please, please, trade this year's first for a next year's first and some extra booty. Hopefully with a team likely to suck next year.

It isn't a sure thing. People said the same thing about Aaron Rodgers. We don't know what's going to happen. We just don't. We can make educated guesses and some things are near certain, like that Darnold and Rosen are unlikely to make it out of the top eight. But stuff could happen.

No. Letting the play go on affects the outcome. If they had let the play continue that would have been the same as making the call that the player had not been touched down. Whereas the ref actually believed and saw the opposite. The replays were totally inconclusive, so NY couldn't overturn, so you would have had an official who believes the play had ended and yet the TD would have counted. A bad result when the guy with the best view believed the opposite. As I pointed out earlier in the thread, the refs are NOT told to let the play continue. They are told to call it as they see it. If they believe the guy is down they should blow the whistle. If they believe he isn't down they shouldn't. And that makes sense. "The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/22/quick-whistle-may-have-robbed-myles-jack-of-a-fumble-recovery-touchdown/

Yeah, he addressed that with Joe B. Said he wasn't hired in time to deal with this in a way he'd have preferred. So maybe he'd have brought in other guys at the positions involved, in the draft or keeping bills FAs or bringing in lower level guys. Didn't have time to do that last year. But - and this is what I love - he will be concerned with this in the future. Comp picks aren't a huge deal. But when you make good decisions on a lot of smaller issues, that's when teams improve. This is an issue that affects bot the talent pool and the salary cap - drafted guys are cheaper. And they're finally going to start doing things the way the smart teams do. I love it.

Newton doesn't have top-notch accuracy. And he was the MVP one year. So that's not reality, it's a slanted view. Roethlisberger's pretty accurate but not really highly accurate. That's not what his game is built around. He's accurate enough. You can't be inaccurate, but there's really only one Drew Brees. Allen isn't inaccurate. He's also not highly accurate. Is he accurate enough? Can he improve? Nobody knows for sure. Certainly not me. But equally, certainly not you. I agree with you this far, I'd much rather have a guy with elite decision-making and accuracy than elite arm strength. If we can get one, I'm all for it, but those guys don't grow on trees.

https://www.wkbw.com/sports/bills/joe-b-7-senior-bowl-takeaways-from-buffalo-bills-hc-sean-mcdermott-and-gm-brandon-beane?page=2 "6) The Bills will be in on the compensatory picks in 2019- For the first time since the subject was broached over and over again this year, Bills GM Brandon Beane finally admitted that he couldn’t do anything about getting the compensatory selections for Stephon Gilmore and Robert Woods in 2018 because “it was too far to do anything about it” when he walked in the door after the 2017 NFL Draft. But make no mistake — that will not be repeated by the Bills this offseason if Beane has any say about it. The Bills GM is a big believer in taking advantage of the compensatory picks when his team has a chance for them and admitted that they will be very cognizant of the moves they make with respect to that formula. That, along with Beane still being hesitant about their cap situation being where he wants it, leads me to believe that the Bills won’t be swinging big on free agency, and will likely sign players below the compensatory pick threshold." At last, somebody gets it. Extra picks are extra chances. They're important, the smart teams value them, and Beane understands this. Excellent!! And this tells us something about which FAs we'll try to pursue, as well.

No, they don't let it play out, not if they think it was down. Doing so - not calling it down even if you think it is - is actually making a call on the field that it was not down, which means that incontrovertible evidence of the opposite is necessary to overturn it. They're taught that if they think it's down they should whistle it dead. In other words, not whistling the play dead is in effect making the call that the player was not down. "The official who blew the play dead may have had a better view than the TV cameras of where Jack and Lewis were at the time Jack recovered the fumble, or he may have just assumed Jack was touched down because he saw Jack and Lewis going to the ground right next to each other. If the officials would err on the side of letting a play go, it would allow replay to fix any mistakes. But when asked about the play, the league office told PFT that officials are supposed to call what they see, and not let a play go just because they might get corrected on replay." http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/01/22/quick-whistle-may-have-robbed-myles-jack-of-a-fumble-recovery-touchdown/ -------- Wouldn't be a bit surprised if there had been serious conclusive evidence on those tapes they destroyed. I think that's why they got the big punishment for DeflateGate when the evidence was strong but absolutely left room for reasonable doubt. I think they did it in both cases, myself. But again, I don't doubt the Pats try to cheat. But the idea that the league cheats to favor them is absolutely ridiculous.

Certainly that happens with some, but plenty of other men with outstanding careers walk away just fine. Agreed that a major adjustment is coming for him, and for anyone who retires, really. IMHO Cosell didn't lose much near the end, he just went out of fashion.

It's an idea that has always sounded great, but the owners weren't willing to pay for it in NFL Europe or anywhere else.

Tyrod refused a contract extension to remain a backup? In Baltimore, you're saying? LINK? What I've seen is the exact opposite, that they didn't offer him a contract, instead just letting him walk. As for guys extended beyond their rookie contract when they haven't been proven to be a worthwhile contributor, Jeff Hostetler, for one. 29 passes thrown in his first five years. Recent guys? How about Garoppolo? Had he "proven" himself in the two games he started in NE? Half the boards here didn't want him last off-season when getting him was discussed. I wanted him, but the doubt about his abilities was legit. But the Pats offered him several second contracts which he refused.

Smith was in his sixth year of play, not his seventh when he had that great season. Seven years in the league and one completely lost to injury from a failed previous surgery. There's a lot of evidence that he had been held back as successfully as if they'd been actually trying to screw him. Six new OCs (Mike McCarthy, Norv Turner, Jim Hostler, Mike Martz -Smith missed the whole season- Jimmy Raye, Mike Johnson) in his first six years on the roster and five years of play? That's insane!!! But Smith still had to take a pay cut in a restructure to stay on the roster after the first four years. Bradford was out of STL after four years.

Keenum's season was not an example of GMs being right, it was him playing like a top ten guy. One bad game when under a lot of pressure doesn't mean he's not a very good QB. We'll find out next year. My guess is that he's arrived and it wasn't a freak year.

That's nonsense. There's no proof whatsoever that that blown whistle was in error. No camera angle shows where the hands were when he got possession. And if there's no conclusive evidence from all the cameras going over it in super slo-mo, there's no reason to think it was a bad call. Yeah, the tapes were destroyed in Spygate, probably to end the controversy. And then came Deflategate which appears to have been a makeup call for Spygate with the evidence not supporting the penalty. I thought the Pats were guilty there too but there is no conclusive evidence. A makeup call. Which made sense to me, personally, the Pats deserved it. But there is no conspiracy except the conspiracy to imagine a conspiracy.