Thurman#1

What this is typical of is the worst of the media. There's plenty of excellent journalism out there and plenty of the mediocre too. And plenty of bad. Same as any other industry, hell any other area of life. Did this actually go in the magazine, or was it just internet fodder? Doesn't really matter I guess. More so when the team they're playing is 3-9. And you can't even go to see Luck play.

His last game, he went 6 for 15 for 50 yards, with 0 TDs and 0 INTs. I would assume that's what he's comparing it to. As everyone should be at this point. If you're only going to look at Peterman's worst game, you ought to look only at Tyrod's worst game as well. If you're more interested in making sense, you ought to look at the body of work of each.

Nah, the NFL isn't a now league. If it were, picking Wentz was a terrible decision because he wasn't very good as a rookie. If it were a now league, maybe half of all new coaching hires would lose their jobs after a year. An As soon as possible league maybe. I have to say your "not one team hired them for the positions they are in now," line cracked me up. That's just a plain old dumb argument. Some first-time guys are awful. Some are great. Nobody had hired Tomlin before the Steelers did either. Both Beane and McDermott are very young, it's no surprise nobody'd hired them before. Agreed they might be failures. Or successes. As usual we'll just have to see. You're wrong about Sammy's injury history. It's been only one injury since May of 2016, but he had a very large assortment of other injuries before that. http://sportsinjurypredictor.com/player/sammy-watkins/6937 I like Sammy and would've loved to keep him but we simply need a QB more. Good trade, IMHO.

Look at what both QBs are doing with their excellent play to make the players around them look really good. Last year both guys looked like they might not be franchise guys. Wentz had a terrific start but tailed off and looked like he might've been figured out. Goff looked like he just might not be good enough. The Eagles had the same OL both years. Agholor, Celek and Ertz both years. Yup, they brought in some new guys, and that surely helped. But most of the people around Wentz were there last year. Of course, the article is right that they brought him along correctly and brought in good people to support him. But an awful lot of the reason he's playing better and the people around him are too is simply that Wentz got an awful lot better. The Rams brought in two new guys on the line with Whitworth and Sullivan. One guy who'd been a Ram last year took over as starter at RG, Jamon Brown. Gurley looks a ton better this year as the passing offense has improved a ton to take the pressure off him. They brought in Watkins and Woods. Woods looks a lot better with Goff throwing to him than he did previously. Watkins hasn't. I'd thought if he stayed healthy he was going to be terrific. He hasn't looked better than decent. The new system probably helped a lot, but I'd argue that though the team again did a good job of bringing in guys around him, that as big a difference as that is simply that Goff got a lot better in his second year. I agree that the teams have done a good job supporting them. But a lot of the reason both guys are doing well is that they both improved a great deal. Particularly Wentz. Wentz was in much the same system last year. IMHO he meant he's playing in that same class right now. Which I agree with. Wasn't saying he'd proven he'll have a similar career as those guys.

Here's another question ... WHY are they often in 3rd and long? Doesn't an awful lot of that have to do with how bad the offense (including Tyrod) are on 1st and 2nd downs? He didn't throw long much or well last year either. People are remembering how well he threw long in 2015. He really hasn't done it that well since. Most of the big plays last year were running plays. And I guess you could call a guy generally considered somewhere around 20 - 22nd best in passing as "middle of the league." But it's actually a bit below average.

Ranked by percentage of completions? So if it's third-and-eight and a QB completes a pass that goes for a 2 yard gain, it's OK by this standard?

Yeah, I loved what they were doing with the draft and accumulating picks. Just smart. I guess he and Hue didn't get along and they chose Hue. And yeah, as you say, not picking Wentz has hung around his neck like an anvil. They're likely to have a shot at one of the top two guys this year, though. I think the Browns' future is bright, though the owner seems dead-set on sabotaging himself and the organization.

He was hired in January of 2016 and is often held accountable for not picking Wentz. So, two, I think.

If they like Allen or Mayfield a lot and think he might be gone by their pick ... sure, go ahead and trade up a bit. Not to #3 or anything crazy, but yeah, go up a few spots. You probably wouldn't have to give up a ton in that case. I was really disappointed to see Garoppolo go to SF. I was hoping we'd have a shot at him or Cousins. Now, maybe Cousins but it's not a sure thing he'll even be available. Oh, and Bridgewater is being really undervalued here. He looked to be rounding into shape in 2015 before the injury. He was playing pretty well and it was only his second year. Wouldn't mind them taking a shot at him if he's available. Not sure he will be.

Oh, man, that's what I get for posting when I have no time and should be working. I totally ignored the Dead Cap numbers. What a dolt!! Missed the un-prorated signing bonus for the years of 2019 - 2021. Interesting case because you think of it as a two year contract but of course, it's actually good though 2021 unless they void it after the 2017 or 2018 season. More than $9 mill savings is still a lot, but not nearly as much as I said.

People think he isn't living up to his draft position, which is true. But you don't necessarily have to do that to be a useful player. What you should live up to is your salary. And at $2.5 mill per year, he probably just about does that. And when you do that, you generally stay around till they get somebody better or as good but cheaper.

From what I can tell just looking quickly, that's real time. In other words if you cut Tyrod TODAY that's what you'd save on the 2018 cap. Nobody wants to cut him today. If you do, a bunch of his 2017 guaranteed money hits the cap next year.

$15 million. Last year they paid him $14.5 mill (base salary plus signing bonus) and $15.5 mill was guaranteed. So $1 mill is guaranteed this year, from his roster bonus. In 2018, his base is $10 mill and roster bonus is $6 mill. So he would cost $16 mill, of which $1 mill is guaranteed. This is from Spotrac and I believe I've interpreted it all correctly, but if I haven't, please somebody correct me. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/tyrod-taylor-7899/ It looked all along like it would be very easy to cut him this offseason - if they want to - once he signed the new deal last offseason. That's a lot of cash to save.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2747404-2018-nfl-mock-draft-post-week-13-breakdown http://draftwire.usatoday.com/2017/11/29/2018-nfl-mock-draft-updated-4-round-projections-after-week-12/3/ https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2018-nfl-mock-draft-cowboys-falcons-add-wr-speed-with-ridley-burnett/ Three mocks with Mayfield in the first round, all among the first few mocks on a google search for "2018 mock draft". Mayfield's in plenty of first round mocks. And I know what's coming next from some people on here: "That guy's an idiot and that guy's never right and the third guy has him in the mid-twenties and he could easily fall." All justifications, no good arguments. He might easily make the first. Might not but it could easily happen. McShay thinks Mayfield will go in the first. Kiper is not sure, says he's on the fringe. http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2018/story/_/id/21665021/2018-nfl-draft-primer-mel-kiper-todd-mcshay-answer-25-questions-prospects-rankings-mock-draft

This. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, but pretending that your opinion is objective ... and then acting as if the number represents anything but your opinion ... yeah, doesn't make sense. They write up these formal sounding descriptions of what the numbers represent, but they're still just guys standing around saying, "I give him a six for play-calling, how bout you? Eight? Mmmmm. Say 6.8? Sound OK? Aaiiiiiiiight." As it is, it's just their shot at making a splash and sounding analytic. It's an interesting idea, and thanks, OP for bringing it to our attention, but basically it can't mean much. If a coach with better players makes the same decisions a coach with worse players makes, guess who looks better? It'll just turn out to reward coaches whose teams win and coaches who are famous and thus get the benefit of the doubt that others don't yet deserve.

No, the Bills offense was 16th in 2016. 1st in rushing. 30th in passing. With 17 receiving TDs and 29 rushing. Which is unbelievable when you consider there wasn't a single other team in the league with more rushing TDs than passing TDs. Thanks, run game. And by the way, there were five teams that had fewer passing TDs than us that year. The primary QBs for those teams were Fitzy for the Jets, Kessler/McCown/Griffin for the Browns, Osweiler for the Texans and two rookies for Philly and the Rams. And while Watkins is still not doing all that well, Woods is having a career high year in TDs/target and yards/catch, and has already passed his career high for yards/season with four games left. He's got a pretty good shot at a 1000 yard season.

Goodwin has already gotten 70 targets this year. His highest in Buffalo was 68 last year and with Tyrod throwing the ball his 68 targets resulted in 29 catches for 431 yards. This year 70 targets for 35 catches and 677 yards. Again, that's on two more targets. As for Benjamin, come on, the guy had 45 snaps in Buffalo. Not targets. Snaps. Shouldn't be a surprise he hasn't been productive yet. And he's a very fine WR. Not a speed guy but he moves the chains. Zay seems improved but hasn't shown me a lot yet. He needs to either work on his route running or work on getting more explosive. While I suspect that we'll be bringing in a QB - as you do too obviously - I think they'll consider OL a bigger need and defense a bigger priority than offense outside of QB. Now that they've brought our cap situation into much better shape, I wouldn't be surprised to see them bringing in a mid-level FA WR. Don't see them following any of your ideas there in the last paragraph. Your FAs are too expensive and I don't see them going WR in the first couple of rounds. I've been wrong a time or two before, though.

This is a horrible take. This incident, like it or not, is a flea on the bison that is Kyle's career.

No thanks to Eli. Too old to build around. Wish we'd had a shot at the young Eli, though. The rest of your list looks pretty reasonable to me.

There's no reason to believe Nix was on his way out that year at that time beyond wanting to believe it. Not a stitch of evidence. Yup, Whaley was the heir apparent, but no reason to think that Nix was forced out at that time. But yeah, we absolutely know that Whaley wanted Manuel. Nix has said he started a little QB committee to focus on getting the right QB, and that Whaley was in charge of it, and that Whaley wanted Manuel. More, Whaley had a million chances to back away from his belief in Manuel after Nix left. He never did. Just the opposite, again and again he stated and showed his support. As for your contention about Orton, there's no reason to believe - whoever wanted to bring him in - that he was brought in to start. If Manuel had worked out, Orton would have been a terrific pickup as a backup and QB mentor. Orton's contract was $11M over two years, high but not outrageous for a backup. You're dead right about Cassel, though. That was yet another show of Whaley's belief in at the very least getting Manuel on the field for a chance to play. Mayfield appears to have a terrific control of the passing game. How many 6' QBs with small hands have had success in the NFL? Well, assuming that he's 6' rather than his official height, here's another question: how many 6' QBs with small hands have been drafted as early as Mayfield appears likely to be taken? Most guys built like him don't have games or skillsets like him, they're runners who do a bit of passing on the side. You're right that his stature matters. But you know what they say, exceptions happen. Not that I've decided on him. But I'm at least intrigued.

Wouldn't be a Whaley type of deal. The general rule for successful GMs is this: Never ever trade up in the first if you have to give away another first ... EXCEPT if it's for a QB who you think will be a franchise guy. Whaley broke that rule. If Beane trades up, he won't be breaking that rule. If there's a QB available that I can trade up for that I believe stands a good chance to be a franchise guy, a guy who I think will be gone by the time our first pick rolls around, I do that deal in a second. I think it's a good part of the reason we traded for those extra picks in the first place.

Or ... you know ... not. Decent chance next year will be significantly better. The system will have been installed and they will have started to assemble players who fit the player needs of the system. Heh heh. Exactly. If he is tanking this is one of the poorest attempts ever. If they'd done a complete rebuild they simply would have gotten rid of Tyrod, Kyle Williams and Shady. Williams and Shady are likely to be gone by the time a team doing a complete rebuild would be any good whatsoever, and they could have replaced Tyrod with a much cheaper alternative who wouldn't have been quite as good, a Glennon or someone like him. First, it's not written just for Bills fans, it's written for all NFL fans, plenty of whom might not know this stuff. And secondly as many have observed, there have been a ton of posts on this board from people who are apparently non-trolls who earnestly believe McD's job is in jeopardy this year. I'm not a big Rodak fan, but this article is completely reasonable.

Disagree. Sometimes you cut your best guy. It's not ideal, but sometimes you do it based on other factors such as salary cap impact, a belief that a guy has no long-term future with the team, a belief that a guy doesn't fit the system they're trying to implement ... on and on and on. Plenty of reason to cut the best guy if he's not really all that good anyway. Quick example: Jim Harbaugh put up a QB Rating of 86.2 in 1997. The Colts dumped him, drafted and played Peyton Manning, who responded with a QB Rating of 71.2 his first year. Still, dumping the better (at that time) Harbaugh was the move to make. Not to say they'll absolutely let Tyrod go, but it seems the most likely course. He'll absolutely be wanted. The question will be for what and how much they'll pay. He's instantly one of the best backups in the league, but probably some desperate team will give him money to start, though less than some people here think. If so, we'll see the same thing that happened here play out in another city, IMHO.

This is pretty much completely impenetrable. Seriously, not understandable. I did get a few things, though. First, I didn't put in that the figures from the article were a week or two old. Fair enough. My mistake. Second, I keep saying that he's better ranked at shorter range on third downs, and you keep saying, "No, look at the Washington Post things," and when you look they show exactly that he's better ranked at short and medium than he is at long ones. Third, you're admitting that Tyrod's 24th in Alex and apparently this thrills you. You're like "Yeeeeeeeehaw, my guy's #24 in the league at throwing as far as the sticks on third down. #24 of 32!!! Yeah, baby!!" You do know that 24th sucks, right? The guy's ALEX plummeted from his first year to his second year in Buffalo, and plunged again from his second to this year. And again, that doesn't seem like a surprise when you look at what happened on drive-ending third downs in the KC game. Four were on called runs, and seven were on called passes. On the seven called passes, there were three incompletions, an eleven yard sack on a 3rd-and-one, and three completed passes that didn't make first downs. That includes a 3rd-and-nine completed for seven yards and a 3rd-and-four completed for three yards.