thebandit27

If Dareus were the only example of getting rid of a 1st rounder and creating a hole, then I think the buy-in would be greater...the problem is that he's part of a huge trend in lowering the overall talent on the team without replacing it adequately (or, in the very least, efficiently). As to Woods, if they truly underestimated his market value then they're grotesquely unfit to run the football operations. Woods' value was squarely between that of deals signed by Marvin Jones and Mo Sanu in the previous offseason, which put him right at $7M AAV (precisely what he signed for)...now, you may still be right that they undervalued him, but what does that say? Now I'm not wholly down on McDermott and Beane, but I do think that they've significantly lowered the talent base and don't seem to have a great plan for what to do on the offensive side of the ball...and that's very concerning. You're not wrong...see my response to @GG above

A few items of note: - Darby doesn't have a 5th-year option; he was a 2nd round pick and is a UFA this spring - Revisionist history on Dareus; he may never have been an all-time high-effort guy, but his effect on the run D was huge. Moreover, @BADOLBILZ's point is that they were quick to jettison Dareus just so that they could spend $50M in FA on his replacement, who isn't as good a player. - Goodwin had just begun to focus solely on football in 2016, and the change in both health and on-field productivity was evident then. I don't often beat them "Badol is usually right" drum (since it's pretty well established that he's often on-target), but he was the first guy to say that Goodwin would be a true NFL WR threat if/when he gave up track and focused on football and taking care of his body. - I have seen nothing that would indicate that Woods wouldn't have re-signed here; not even sure he got an offer from Buffalo

What you say is correct, though in defense of those that get on Allen for that play I'll say that his #1 problem in college was that he was constantly trying to do too much, and plays like the above really stick out to people that watched him at Wyoming as a continuation of a trend.

Pretty sure that Gunner was telling you that it would be wise to pay attention to who you choose to sass

This post is exactly why you get mocked mercilessly You continue to act like you had some groundbreaking take that everyone dissed, when in fact it was your personality that caught you the flack. There were so many Mahomes threads that the mods had to merge them into a thread that was called "The only Mahomes thread you need", but yeah, your thinking was revolutionary But keep on with that you-against-the-world facade, because it sure beats your iambic pentameter posts of yore for pure entertainment value

This has zero to do with getting any kind of credit; I've only ever taken exception to your claim that you were so mercilessly mocked for claiming Mahomes would be good. You weren't You got chided because of your delivery, not the opinion on its merits. You keep claiming this you-against-the-world position when it was quite different--even at the time. Many folks kept telling you even then that it wasn't you vs everyone on Mahomes, but you kept claiming it for some reason. That's why you got mocked.

Nope The Colts came right out and said that they had other offers but didn't want to move down past 6.

You came along after @Blokestradamus and I had posted about Mahomes for over 10 months. Evidence: Nice of you to come along 9 whole months later and claim to be The Mahomes Guy though

I doubt that's the case; it's either that he (a) didn't have confidence in his receiver, (b) didn't see his receiver, or (c) thought he could make an even better play on his own. Probably a combination of the above.

You were laughed at and ridiculed because (a) you came along months after many folks were already onto Mahomes, and (b) the tone of your posts was mock-worthy. Again, all you did was jump on the bandwagon an incredibly long time after other folks did the legwork and laid out the case for Mahomes, which several of us have posted publicly about, and you never bother to acknowledge or even deny.

That, and being surrounded by the best supporting cast of pass catchers in the NFL (or perhaps 2nd-best if you favor the Rams' group) versus the worst.

You probably know this already, but there's an enormous difference between year 1 and year 2 in the NFL; I wrote at length about it yesterday. One guy had 4 months off to train in an NFL program, recover, and get better; the other guy has been in "season mode" for over 14 months. As to supporting casts, I would gladly swap our group of pass catchers for Goodwin, Garcon, Kittle, and Trent Taylor, and I'm guessing 32/32 head coaches would too.

I thought he'd be special, but not at this level this early

I've never had PRP, but I can say from personal experience that ARPwave therapy is completely legit Excruciating to endure, but unmatched in pain relief IMO

I would bet he gets ARPwave too Underwhelming at this point

Sprain = partial tear

Sounds like a grade 2 sprain then 3-6 weeks if that's the case

Only 1 of the 10 QBs in the study needed surgery--it's very, very rare for a QB. "Nine of the ten UCL injuries in Dodson’s series [28] were managed non-operatively, including three athletes who had complete tears. "

No problemo--it's worth noting that the sample size is very small though. Only 10 QBs from 1994-2010

Funny, I looked at current NFL QBs to see if any of them made dramatic improvements in their accuracy from college to the NFL, which is literally exactly what I said about 5 posts ago. I give up...either you can follow the point or you can't (or won't, which is probably more likely since you don't read like someone that lacks logic). Oh well, sometimes two people talk past each other without getting on the same page. Maybe in the next topic.

Per the study I posted, which looked at QBs with UCL injuries: Grade 1 could be a week or two; Grade 2 could be anywhere from 3-6 weeks; Grade 3 usually 8-10 weeks

The bigger issue with Goodwin was health and dedication to football prior to getting to SF

Look purely at his numbers from his rookie season...they are eerily similar to Allen's. Not surprising considering he was a rookie playing on a bad team (of course, I'd take the 2017 49ers' non-QB offensive personnel 10 times out of 10 over the 2018 Bills' non-QB personnel)

3-5 current NFL starters out of 32 isn't exactly "3-5 out of hundreds", which is the point. Also, I've heard that if you have to tell someone how smart/rich/successful you are, then maybe you should ask yourself why they can't see it without being told.

I don't really think I've said anything all that complicated to have you this lost in the discussion. Take a breath, slow down, and consider what argument you're trying to make. Furthermore, consider what I actually said in response. Or don't...I won't lose sleep either way. Ok, now I'm relieved...for a second there, Bull had me questioning whether the point was clear.