Thurman#1

Nonsense. Anyone who thinks the situations of those teams are very similar doesn't get it. The Chiefs have $18M available under the cap right now, most of which will roll over onto the $11.98M they have available in 2023. And those figures include Toney. The Eagles have $10.1M available this year, which will roll over onto the $11.987M they have available for 2023. That's after picking up Quinn, not before. Whereas the Bills have $1.6M under the cap right now, which will probably mostly roll over onto next year's figure of -$7.555, leaving us a total, post-maximum possible rollover, of about -$4.95M. That's a big difference, as is the fact that the Bills don't have any areas of weakness as obvious as those teams did. It was a good move for both of those teams, but a lot of that is because they had bigger needs and more resources. Quinn is older and while he appears solid he's not having an especially effective year, and Toney has been very injury-prone. Both of those moves could turn out to be good for those teams. Or not.

It won't lower next year's figures any. The available cap figures for next year on Spotrac ( - $7.555M ) and OverTheCap already include the fact that so far next year's dead cap is only $1.339M. This year's dead cap figures mean nothing to next year that hasn't already been calculated.

No, he was a real Bills fan. Yes, the way he became a Bills fan had to do with his Madden introduction, but he became a legit fan throughout his young life. "Thanks to his unstoppable virtual offense, Watkins started cheering for the Bills in real life." https://archive.naplesnews.com/news/nfl-draft-souths-sammy-watkins-goes-to-buffalo-bills-his-favorite-team-growing-up-ep-458949796-341274191.html/

I think he was referring specifically to people who were attacking him. "To all the people who have problems with me being injured ..." Not a big Sammy fan, but he wasn't speaking to all of Buffalo, rude as that statement was.

Yeah, they certainly value the other stuff, as it's a ton of very specific information. But your guesswork about whether teams value the individual subjective player grading is just that, pure guesswork. In several articles coaches have been quoted as saying that the PFF player grades tend to be pretty close, but that if there's a difference on a guy that's enough for the interviewed coaches to go back and take another look at that guy and see if they've maybe missed something. There's an element of subjectivity to any grading system based on film study of anything. And yet film study is part of the constant study and feedback done on nearly everything profitable or interesting and is industry standard nearly everywhere. For the simple reason that subjectivity can be minimized, not eliminated but minimized, with consistent standards and yes, consistent feedback on their output in much the same way the players are being studied. And yes they don't know what the coaches know, so their feedback isn't quite as accurate. But it can still be very accurate. If it weren't, nobody would study film. And yet they do.

Beane and McD aren't in it for the short term only. Even if they were, barring injury (and in case of injury we'll have needs anywhere it happens) a #3 WR is going to get how many more catches than Shakir, Crowder, Kumerow or whoever plays #3 this particular drive? It's not a big differential and the effect it would have would most likely just be taking catches away from Diggs, Knox, and Davis. The FO made it clear from their first press conferences that they want to be competitive every year. Which means they won't be trading away the long-term interests of this team. Which means they might trade for someone, again, most likely OG, I'd guess, but it won't be for someone who requires a ton of draft, cap or human capital to bring in or keep.

You can generally tell most of that stuff with thoughtful film study. Not with 100% accuracy of course, but with quite good accuracy. If you couldn't do that, teams wouldn't bother studying tape. It's hindsight and every single instant of the play is on tape. If a guy comes unblocked and an unengaged lineman lunges at him but misses and all the other linemen are engaged, it's not difficult to figure out what goes on, for instance. Most times looking at elimination, you can get a very good idea. Not always. The coaches of that team do certainly know better than anyone else. I wonder why guys were listening to anyone else in the first place, with access to the coaches?

He's saying that the players have access to better grading, in that they can find out from their coaches how well they think they're doing. Duh. Of course they should focus more on what the coaches think. Thing is, while those players have access to their coaches' grades, we don't. Nor do even the other teams. Again, every team in the NFL subscribes to PFF for their info. If you can't find out what a guy's coaches think, you have to rely on film study and those who do it. PFF does it pretty well, or the teams wouldn't subscribe. Does that mean you have to believe every single thing they put out? Hell, no. Some of their pundit commentary in particular is pretty weird stuff. But their grades are pretty good, basically.

Nah, very few good posts start with an insult. But some posts are so bad there's not really another reasonable way to start. Yours have been consistently awful. A two-year $19M extension? With $15M of the $19M guaranteed? For a safety? A 30 year-old safety? Duh! Of course this is a major commitment. "$7M in dead cap is not a lot," you say. Again, just stupid. $7m dead money for a safety ... in the LAST year of his contract ... is really big. Minkah Fitzpatrick's dead money in the last year of his contract is $3.5M. Derwin James, the highest-paid safety in the league by AAV has $7.1M dead money in the last year of his contract, and he'll be 31, younger than Hyde would be in the last year of his. Jamal Adams in his last year has $7.1M and he'll be 30. Harrison Smith is $3.9M. Justin Smith is $3.7M. And those are the five highest-paid safeties in the league. Again, just purely block-headed to argue $7M isn't an awful lot of dead money in the last year of a safety's contract. It absolutely is. And no, it's not called an "'out' clause," as you claim. It's not a clause, Einstein. Yes, it's called an out. And you seem to completely misunderstand it. Every team has an out on every player every year. The question is how punitive it would be for the team to exercise the out. And Hyde's out is really punitive. A player having a dead cap figure more than twice as high as the amount the team would save under the cap is painful. For the team. Yeah, this is an out. But some are more painful than others for the team to swallow. This would be very painful for the Bills. They'd essentially be paying $7M for the privilege of saving $3M. That's not something a team looks to do. Compare that to how painful it would be for those five players I noted above, arguably the best safeties in the league. It'd be much less painful for their teams to cut them before the last year of the contract. Last year of Derwin James' contract, age 30: Dead cap $7.1 M, but they'd save $17.5M. Paying $7.1M for the privilege of saving $17.5M. Last year of Minkah Pitzpatrick's contract, age 30: $3.5M dead cap, but they'd save $17.6M. Paying $3.5M dead cap for the privilege of saving $17.6M. Last year of Jamal Adams' contract, age 30: $7.1M dead cap, but they'd save $17.5M salary and a $3.1M option bonus. See how this works? They cut these guys before the last year of their contract and the team gets a massive benefit. Same for Harrison Smith. Justin Simmons' contract is slightly less so. His dead cap would be $3.7M and the team would only save $14.5M. Get it? These are the five highest-paid safeties, and it would be much less painful to cut them in their last year than it would be for the Bills to cut Hyde at age 32, older than any of these others. They love the guy. And yes they gave him a two-year deal for a reason, Einstein. The reason being he's getting older and they didn't want to get too far ahead of themselves for an older guy. As for the last but problably not quite the most pathetic of your paragraphs, you say, "I ignored it just like I “ignore” the fact that Hyde’s middle name is Richmond. It’s irrelevant to the discussion for all the reasons I listed above." Funny how you didn't include any of what I said or what you said, so nobody could judge it's irrelevance. So let me do so, so people can actually look at it and see. You said: I said this: That's not irrelevant. Just inconvenient for your dumb argument. What a maroon!

Great point that since he's been out our defense has given up 16 points per game. Weirdly, though, you forgot to include the fact that before he was out, our defense had given up 8.5 points per game. Meaning scoring against the defense has nearly doubled since Hyde is out. What a bizarre coincidence that you only mentioned the numbers afterwards. Can't think of any reason you might have left out those numbers from when he was playing.

There are two types of people who go on and on about groupthink. The first group are those who have dumb arguments and refuse to understand that that's the reason everyone disagrees with them. And that's your group.

Loved watching him play. He is what football is all about. Best wishes to him. Hope he stays healthy and has a long and happy life.

It might have been worth watching but the evidence is increasingly in. Despite a much better pass rush, the Bills are allowing long passes at a higher rate. Hyde's injury has been compared to that of Eric Wood. There's a chance he may not ever play again. But sour grapes thinking isn't encompassed in clear thought. Losing him hurts a lot. The guys who are replacing him are doing so at replacement value, which is a good thing, but we're losing a lot here. A lot. If he can return next year, and return at the same level, the Bills will likely be thrilled and keep him. 1st two games, with Hyde: 10 and 7 points allowed, 191 and 107 yards passing allowed, and 5 INTs filched by the Bills Next four games, without him: 21, 20, 3 and 20 points allowed, 171, 134, 310 and 319 pass yards allowed, and 5 more INTs, in twice as many games Is all that down to Hyde? No, of course not. But is he surely a factor? Hell, yeah.

Nonsense. The worst part of sports discussion forums isn't groupthink. It's the sad individuals suffering from cancerous confirmation bias, dead wrong and totally incapable of understanding why, who think they're battling groupthink when they're actually just making an ass of themselves. Those people you're talking about didn't change their mind because they were intimidated by groupthink. They looked at both sides, realized they'd originally been wrong, and adjusted their position. This is something people who think well and productively do. They noticed that your argument had virtually no merit.

Wrong, which is habitual for you. They targeted him five years ago by bringing him in. Then they again targeted him before the 2021 season by giving him a big new contract extension through 2023. At age 30, they made it very clear that they wanted him through 2023 in the most obvious and public way, by giving him a contract that even in the last year, 2023, would have cost $7M in dead cap money to get rid of him. You ignore this because it doesn't suit your dumb argument. But it's obvious as the headlight of an oncoming train in a dark tunnel to anyone looking to see what is rather than to advance a pathetic pre-conception.

An awful lot. That is the answer, whether or not you want to hear it. A great deal. If you instead have someone at replacement value, you won't notice a massive lack, because the guy will be doing what needs to be done. The stuff you will never see because it doesn't happen can't be seen. But it is missed.

I hear you, but I don't really agree. There are usually just a few really good teams. Seems to me there's more mediocrity. The middle 60%, the center of the bell curve, is just wider, now more like the middle 80%. No absolutely horrible teams or great ones outside the Chiefs and Bills. It's parity squared. Teams like the Giants, Vikes and Cowboys and such aren't up with the Bills but they're playing good ball.

Yup. This.

How are you going to trade a guy who may never play again due to injury? And he's very very valuable at safety, though the replacements are doing a very solid job. This defense as a whole is doing a terrific job. They're getting by without Hyde because the rest of them are so terrific, particularly the front seven this year. And they're getting by without White for the same reason. Both White and Hyde are terrific, both very valuable. 5 INTs in 2021. Tied with Poyer for the lead among all safeties. Ridiculous question.

I really doubt it. They gave him a five-year $90M extension in July, after the surgery. There would have been zero reason to do that if they were tanking. They thought he was going to get better.

Nothing happening with the Bills right now.

He says he does everything that makes sense to upgrade the roster. He also says his goal is to be in contention every year. Not to do everything possible for this year and screw the future. The Rams did indeed get lucky enough to win last year and wouldn't have without Miller and OBJ. But they also put themselves in the position they're in now. They are not good enough to be in contention this year, IMO, and the reason has a lot to do with valuing the short-term over the long-term.

No, I think Burns is worth a 1st. A very talented guy who could still be growing, I think. I like him and he's really young. But that it would put us into serious cap problems. Force us into much more uncomfortable decisions down the road. Maybe we're talking past each other a bit, here. Anyway, best of luck to you, and see you round the boards. Go Bills!

What? Where did I say "keeping our own would be wildly reckless"? Or anything like it. Spending a ton of extra on Burns, a complementary piece but nothing even close to a need ... that is what I think would be reckless.

You're damn right I don't want to move on from Edmunds, Oliver or Singletary. Edmunds and Oliver in particular would leave massive holes. Oliver and Edmunds particularly. And yet they may have to say goodbye to one next year, already. Possibly even two, though my guess is only one. But we've got no backups for Edmunds or Oliver (they don't see Bernard at MLB, I believe) and would have to bring in high-priced FA replacements or use a high pick to switch in and suffer the mistakes a young guy makes and the lack of veteran savvy. It would be creating holes that would then have to be filled. Burns - assuming we could get him, and I know you've already said you're aware they don't want to let him go - or someone like him amounts to putting ourselves into a situation where we get more and more cap squeeze and have to create more and more holes. Burns would help, but he's not needed. And there are guys who would help but are not needed at every position on the field outside starting QB and Von's position. We're already the #1 defense, a scary group, because they are getting pressure with the front four without having to blitz. If you can get someone who could help for cheap, great. No need to start spending like a sailor. Beane is conservative and yet still able to field a terrific roster with significant future flexibility. That's a very very good thing.