Hapless Bills Fan
-
Posts
48,720 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Hapless Bills Fan
-
-
geno is a dream
But is he a "sweet dream, or a beautiful nightmare?"
-
Fitz either has actual interest from somewhere other than Jets, or his agent and Jets are getting close.
-
Rushing the QB doesn't have the same learning curve as reading defenses as a QB. He'll probably be a situational rusher at first and work his way up from there.
Who knows? This might be the opening Eric Striker can exploit.
Wait, Shaq Lawson 6'4" 260 lb defensive end, how does that leave an opening for a 6'0" (when he stretches) 218 lb linebacker?
This is rational logical and positive thinking and I applaud it.
I was considering the very same !!!
It's "rational logical and positive" to suggest a 6'4" 260 lb 1st round defensive end on PUP leaves an opening an undrafted LB considered "undersized" (but fast) can fill in some way?
I doan get it. And I really like Striker and hope he makes the team, as a ST or a hybrid DB/LB or something. I think he's one of those "can't measure heart" players. But that's if he's properly used, and using him in a DE/OLB role is Not That Thing
-
There are all kinds of new faces on the Bills' offensive line depth chart, but you'd better get to know them in a hurry.
By the time the season begins, and even sooner than that, most will be elsewhere.
The potential bad news is the Bills' decision to basically ignore the right side of their line, where questions linger at tackle and guard.
Here's the breakdown at offensive line:
Returning: Cordy Glenn, Richie Incognito, Eric Wood, John Miller, Seantrel Henderson, Jordan Mills, Cyrus Kouandjio, Cyril Richardson and Ryan Groy.
Newcomers: Fernando Velasco (FA), Robert Kugler (UDFA, Purdue), Jamison Lalk (UDFA, Iowa State), Marquis Lucas (UDFA, West Virginia) and Keith Lumpkin (UDFA, Rutgers).
Better, worse or the same?: The Bills clearly avoided getting a whole lot worse here by making sure they retained Glenn -- who first received a $13.7-million franchise tag -- and Incognito.
But did they actually get better? No, and they might, in fact, be even slightly worse."
I read the article. I don't understand his argument for why the Bills line might be worse. Before I read it, I thought he was going to make an argument that Wood and Incognito are getting older and might fall off and that Glenn might lose an edge now he got paid, but no, he's all In with the three of them. He acknowledges Henderson was ill and should be back with his condition under control, and that Miller was a rookie (rookies usually are considered to take a step their 2nd year). So that would argue about the same or better? But we're going to be worse?
I mean, we might be worse, I dunno, I just thought there'd be a coherent rationale presented.
Anyway thanks for sharing?
-
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
Sir Winston ChurchillBritish politician (1874 - 1965)
How do I put a post into a tag or sig file? This is It.
-
Bill, a big part of the problem is that the vast majority of posters don't do what you're describing here, yet more than a few folks want to paint it that way.
That rankles me far, far more than most criticisms leveled at the organization
You will rarely, if ever, see a poster taken to task for having doubts about Rex/Whaley/etc and stating so in a reasonable fashion
You will, however, see an opinion questioned if it appears unjustified or is presented in an obnoxious or combative manner
I agree, bandit and will add one other thing - I think the posters who are generally respected whether positive or negative and can generally find some discussion, are the ones who are willing to acknowledge another point of view when evidence is presented, or at least acknowledge the evidence then add their 2 cents "OK, good point, but does that really take into account....".
The problem is, if I can borrow the term from religion, fundamentalism on both sides - when someone expresses a viewpoint (positive or negative) which appears to be essentially an article of faith and therefore unchangeable despite any evidence or logical argument or unable to be challenged by any evidence or argument. This crops up from time to time in contributors who are generally reasonable and make good points, but on 1 or 2 topics they are fundamentalist and evangelical about it.
-
Lawson will be able to walk and do some things to prevent atrophy to his legs, but his injured shoulder will be immobilized for about 2 months. I had a brace, not a cast. I was not allowed to lift anything heavier than a gallon of milk with my other arm. After he is allowed to move his injured shoulder he will be in physical therapy to regain range of motion. I could not believe how difficult that was. Strength comes along slowly because of danger of reinjury. I had one anchor put into my shoulder and I'd guess he had the same, although in a different spot on the labrum. The one bit of good news is that the damaged part of his labrum seems (based on the swim move injury) to be the part that is used with a lifting motion rather than pushing out (like mine was). He is a lot more likely to require strong, violent pushing motions when engaging OLmen than lifting up so it seems that he dodged that bullet. He should be fine as long as he doesn't rush back and gets healthy and strong. He just can't rip that anchor out or tear the labrum again. It'll be a lot worse next time if he does. My doc was very clear about that.
Yeah, I get the immobilization thing and the need to regain range of motion. I had a little taste of that needing to regain range of motion in my right thumb after ligament repair and immobilization.
I didn't know about the restriction on lifting with the non-injured shoulder. I was wondering about whether they can do electronic muscle stimulation or something to keep up strength. Thinking it through more, if the muscle is contracting it is probably pulling against the anchor points and not a good thing. Just hoping.
-
I understand temps at my workplace not showing up for minimum wage but why would you just not show up to your dream job?
Maybe playing football is no longer his dream job.
-
4-5 games per team source. Bell doesn't know anything because it's too early to tell how the player will respond and recover. She said that's why they always give a range. The range on the surgery recovery time is 4-6 months. 4-5 games would clear him to practice at about the 4 month mark. Her familiarity with this particular surgery is that 90 percent of the time it is one to which players respond very well.
Well, let's hope Lawson is in the 90% commonality on healing then. And can study his playbook and film like mad in the meantime.
Do they have "virtual reality" for defensive players yet?
-
I heard that Jaguars 1st round pick Jalen Ramsey injured his knee in non-contact drills. How could Jackosville's medical staff have missed the obvious potential for his meniscus to tear? That is 2 years in a row that their 1st pick was injured even before the season started! Heads must roll! (Heavy sarcasm)
Do you know that Gronkowski was considered a medical risk after missing much of his last year in college with a back injury?
Old Timer, you have some good points, but surely you can see the difference between a "sh** happens" kind of injury and a known medical risk, touted with glee by the FO as "cleared to play by the medical staff" "not concerned about his shoulder" "Day 1 Starter", who had a known injury history, and who turns out to need surgery for that very injury.
We know that Gronkowski was considered a medical risk and that's why he fell to the 2nd round. It makes it all the more bitter that the Bills drafted Troup (who actually was a medical risk and missed 1 1/2 seasons on IR before being cut when he no longer fit the scheme) 1 pick ahead of him. If it were just Shaq's shoulder I wouldn't be worried about the medical staff/trainers. It's actually the aggregate concern about the way Troup's fractured vertebra was handled, the way Aaron Williams neck injury was handled, the way McCoy's hamstring injury was handled, a few others that slip my mind at the moment - Hogan playing with torn ligaments in his hands so severe he had horrible pain with each catch - now this. We all know playing with injury and pain is part of football, but there are still limits where you have to say "that guy could be paralyzed for life, he shouldn't be out there" or "since his job is to catch, why don't we have an effective backup, because he can't".
Maybe it's not the medical staff, maybe it's the way the GM and coaches use the information the medical staff provides them, but it sure seems there's a missing link somewhere.
Whaley is part politician so he tells us all is well when they know things are not.
I think the medical staff is fine and that Whaley picks damaged goods hoping that he will get a great player at a lower pick.
I suppose that's part of my current beef, Barbarian. I haven't thought that of Whaley. I've thought he was a straight shooter, within the bounds of competitive advantage, who would actually tell it like it is.
I agree with you and OldTimer1960 that if the pick was presented as an opportunity to grab a top-of-the-1st talent in a high reward/some risk scenario, many fewer people would be upset.
It's not nice to "play" the fans, which is what you hypothesize Whaley is doing. After so many years of futility, we don't take it kindly.
So. Maybe the medical staff is fine and the FO is trying to bullgaffle the fans, I grant that's a possibility.
-
IMO, players always trump scheme and I think the theme of drafting players to fit schemes is over done anyway. For instance, Pete Carroll uses personnel in his D that would normally be best suited for 34 concepts and has no problem using them in his 43 fronts. He places the premium on athletic "football" players. It really makes little sense to do anything else.
GO BILLS!!!
Wade Phillips made the point re Denver's D, something to the effect that if you've got great football players and you can't use them effectively in your scheme, maybe it's your scheme that's the problem. Still, there are few players who can play at their highest level in any role or situation. Even great all-around players have strengths and weaknesses.
I've been mostly staying out of this thread, but I have to comment that I think "The Nattering Nabobs of Negativity" and to a lesser degree the "Obnoxiously Obtuse Optimists" would be great names for a band.
The thing is, while some posters are whining about how horrid it is to have so much negativity or so much unfounded optimism, some of us here are just going about our business, discussing various positive and negative viewpoints with a good degree of respect and some reasoned points or data or logic behind each point of view.
The Shaq Lawson surgery has drawn so much criticism precisely because of the way the Bills, spearheaded by Whaley, presented the draft and the Lawson pick in particular. If they had presented it as "Our medical staff think he can play out the season and have surgery afterwards. We know there's a worst case where he might need surgery and miss part of the season, but we think he's a game changing talent and the chance to draft a game-changing talent at #19 was too good to pass up," few people would be fussing now.
Instead the draft was introduced with glee as "three Day 1 starters" and a speech about how Whaley has complete faith in our medical staff and they cleared Lawson to play. That's what makes the reversal draw criticism, because it sounds as though they really don't know what's o'clock. They sound either incompetent, or "playing" the long-suffering fans.
The FO deserves some criticism for how this was handled, even if Shaq's surgery is a smashing success and he's back to smashing people by October.
-
The part we don't know is if they graded players medical 1-4, from a green light to a red light. What did the front office do with the info? It could be the medical staff is incompetent, or is it DW and RR reaching thinking they are the smartest guys in the room. Going back to Troup, did we reach because we needed a DT?
It just seems more likely we have a front office so desperate to win, they make bad decisions, vs. morons for a medical staff.
Bottom line is none of us know, but just speculation.
Fair point, Machine Gun. I'm fingering the medical staff based on Whaley's words about Lawson being completely cleared, day 1 starter blahblah but maybe Whaley was spinning what the staff actually told him.
I have felt that the drafting has improved since we took Troup - there was a lot of turnover in the scouting and pro-personnel departments and it seems we've had better drafts since.
But your bottom line is spot on.
-
His brother certainly has a better resume of solid defenses. But he's inherited some teams lacking major talent, and got a lot out of them. Dallas and NO both had cap problems in his times there, and lost lots of solid players. His big issue recently appears to be disagreeing with the head coaches.
The main thing that gives me pause about Rob Ryan was the report that 2 years ago, there were problems with late defensive play calls and late defensive substitutions, and that last year expectations for change were laid out and not met. This is per Payton, of course, so one could call it "disagreeing with the head coach", but it sounds like the sort of thing that could be fact-checked pretty readily.
So last year, we had a dose of the same problems. Therefore, taking the Payton comments on Rob Ryan's firing at face value, bringing him in did not sound like a wise strategy to address these problems.
-
the season hangs on the QB play/health. Like every other team's season, IMO. All-pro Mario in 2013-14 didn't take the place of that, and neither will a rookie pass rusher stepping into take his place.
My understanding on the preventative nature is because he doesn't need it now, he can play without it and use a brace. His shoulder condition from college makes him more likely than someone without the condition to fully tear his labrum if he plays without a brace. During the predraft process, the medicals showed he could delay surgery until the 2017 offseason. Bills made the decision to do it now, since he tweaked it in drills. I don't know the result of the tweak, it has been "diagnosed" by a WGR caller as a SLAP tear, but I haven't seen anything official other than the Bills saying it was a labrum and that he could continue to play but the goal was to have him 100% for the last 3/4 of the year vs. playing with a brace. Basically, they are doing it because he's at increased risk to damage his shoulder with the current condition. Had he not been doing the drill without the brace the other day and aggravated it, I'd guess they wouldn't have moved forward with the surgery.
I wonder why he wasn't wearing the brace. I'm sure it's been discussed and I missed it.
QB play: part of me says "I understand your viewpoint" and part of me says "but but...Denver!". Any optimism I have for this coming season was based on the premise that we might get approximately the same or slightly better offense, but an improved D would tip the scales and take us to the playoffs. And improvement on D depended upon our draft class contributing. So from that point of view, the season might not hang on Shaq Lawson exactly, but we were expecting his contributions to be part of what raised the level of the D.
Preventive: with all respect, I think that's a misuse of the word, Yolo. If the surgery is treating a known injury condition, it is not, by definition, preventative. A better word choice might be "elective". The surgery may be elective in the sense that he could continue as a football player at some level and with some risk, without surgery now.
That's a really good question on why he wasn't wearing the brace. I've missed any discussion that has occurred on that myself.
"“His shoulder was so bad it would have dislocated tying his shoes,” one league source told PFT."
This is the beauty for the media citing the anonymous source. They relieve themselves of responsibility for saying whatever, but have no accountability to back this up.
Thanks. I was wondering if it was a labrum. I tore mine almost 20 years ago (bench press), but waited about 8 years to get it fixed. I can understand why people thought he could get away with waiting for surgery. I was fine except when I made that specific motion. But that exact motion was excruciating. It felt like my shoulder was popping out of place (which, I was later told, was exactly what was happening).
The good news is that Lawson is going to get the best care. I was very lucky in that regard, too. I went to the Cleveland Clinic and got an Ortho who was known for being a go-to guy for MLB pitchers. But he is going to have a long road back. His arm will be immobilized for a couple months. The atrophy in my chest and arm was unreal after that. He's a lot younger and in better shape than I was - which is great - but he's playing in the NFL now. Lawson not only has to heal, he has to get strong enough to make sure he doesn't re-injure himself. The prudent course of action is to err on the side of caution and make sure he gets healthy and back in shape. The Bills need to prepare as if he will not play in 2016 and consider anything he gives the team this season a bonus.
Is it possible that Lawson may have some techniques available to him that might prevent some of the atrophy? I know for lower body injuries, equipment such as gravity-neutral treadmills and pool walking/running makes a difference. But I agree that it makes most sense to prepare as if he won't play and if he does recover to the point where he's felt to be 100% go, Bonus.
At one point I had my thumb immobilized with a pin for 6 weeks and it took about a month just to retrain my muscles to get the full range of motion back and about 6 weeks to rebuild any degree of strength.
-
I don't understand why some think he needs to sit the whole season. If he's cleared to play, he's cleared to play. He will be cleared to practice weeks before he plays in a game. It's football, not brain surgery. He's played his whole life. Maybe they ease him in with 50% snaps early in his return. I'm sure he will rotate initially like a lot of rookies. As a rookie he's here to help but the season doesn't hang on him.
Where to start. OK, here. With the "If he's cleared to play he's cleared to play" thing.
I was refreshing my memory on Torrell Troup last night (you know, one pick ahead of Gronkowski?). In the linked article, Ty Dunne describes how Troup actually fractured a disc in his back during the final preseason game, sat out 3 weeks, then was "medically cleared" and returned to play 6 games - with a fractured disc, doped up on Toradol - until he simply couldn't bend at the waist and was in constant agony the needle couldn't touch. As reported by Dunne, when asked who wanted him to play, Troup responded: "“The position coach, the head coach, the general manager, everybody but the other players.” Troup wound up needing the following season to continue the recovery from his back surgery and was cut in 2013, now retired.
Dunne reports "An interview request with the Bills’ training staff was turned down by the team. But fresh off the golf course, Nix is asked this question. Troup was in pain. Nobody on the Bills stepped in. Why?
“Everybody has different thresholds of pain,” Nix said, “and nobody knows what kind of pain you’re in except you. Medically, he was cleared to play."
Another poster commented that it's probably a misapprehension that the medical staff "clears" potential draftees medically. Rather, they comment on the severity, prognosis, and risk of the injury and then the GM and coaches take that info and digest it somehow and make a call. When the player is on the team already, that's a call that may or may not be in a player's best long term career interest, that may be influenced by the career trajectory of the GM and coach with or without that player. If it's left to the player, he may want to play because there's always someone behind him.
"If he's cleared to play he's cleared to play." Aaron Williams was cleared to play - and reinjured himself, and needed neck surgery. His playing future is up in the air until he gives and receives hits. Torrell Troup was cleared to play. It ended his career, requiring surgery and a year of extreme pain and disability.
I know, I know, anecdotes. But the judgement is looking questionable somewhere along the lines, at times.
Then let's move on to "As a rookie he's here to help but the season doesn't hang on him". Serious question: Why? We lost Mario, amidst questions about how hard he tried last season, but we clearly need someone at DE going hard to make the D work. Wasn't Shaq Lawson supposed to be the answer? Whaley made strong statements extolling our draft as giving us "Three Day One Starters." Pre-draft, it was explained that the Bills would fill gaps through the draft since our cap doesn't permit shopping during free agency. So how do you reach "he's here to help but the season doesn't hang on him" from those statements?
i know I haven't kept up on all the threads and maybe I'm missing something but this isn't the first rookie to start the season injured. I'm not sure it is as outrageous as some are making it out to be. It's preventative surgery.
Of course, players with no injury history at all do get injured in training camp and start the rookie season injured. But I'm having trouble wrapping my mind around your "preventative surgery" concept. If the guy has a known injury he's been playing through with a brace, and if he did something that exacerbated it, there's an existing injury. So how can the surgery be "preventative"?
-
1) A pitch fork was used to hunt witches as an effective tool to keep the witch a distance away from you whilst simultaneously impaling said witch. This then made it easier to tie the witch to a stake and burn.
2) A pitch fork is not like a tuning fork. It does not help you stay on pitch.
3) A pitch fork is an agricultural tool with a long handle tines used to lift and pitch or throw loose material, such as hay, straw or leaves.
Although I've always found a duck more useful when witch hunting.
Now Wiz, you got to think of the physics of the situation logically. If the witch is impaled at the end of an agricultural tool with a long handle and tines and you impale her, how are you going to get close enough to tie the knots to the stake? And wouldn't the weight of the tines and handle interfere with the test to see if she weighs the same as a duck, and is therefore made of wood?
-
I heard there was a witch hunt. Where do I get my pitchfork?
I've always been puzzled by this.
1) why is a pitch fork needed to hunt a witch?
2) what is a pitch fork exactly is it anything like a tuning fork? does it help you stay on pitch?
3) if it actually has to do with pitch, why use a fork? wouldn't a spatula or a knife or a board or something be a more effective means to apply it?
-
I'd sit him until 2017. He will be in this year with a recent injury and recovery, go against a 325# lineman coming at him full speed and blow it out again, maybe some permanent damage
That's a concern: how good is our medical staff really in judging when recovery has progressed enough to let the player return to full contact? Yeah, yeah, anecdotes, but the track record of recent years seems a little tenuous.
-
I thought the post you responded to was sufficiently absurd enough to read clearly as sarcasm but apparently not. I thought we had met before.
The Len Bias reference was extra-salty in the sar chasm department.
-
#Bills Overhaul Medical Staff After Lawson Gaffe (satire) #Satire #BuffaloBills...
This is pretty funny, especially the part about engaging the services of Dr Phil to counsel hordes of Bills fans hurling themselves over Niagara Falls at the news of the injuries.
-
so he will be back vs Rams in LA or Niners at home
it might be his agent who is the source. Rapaport tweeted same time frame this morning.
If it's Shaq's agent, would you expect him to be optimistic or pessimistic about his return?
The good news I suppose is that it's easier to maintain leg and core muscle and cardio conditioning while rehabbing a shoulder
-
Translation of article in Buffalo News from chief fiction writer Bucky Gleason.
http://bills.buffalonews.com/2016/05/17/power-take-three-simple-rules-for-following-the-bills/
Here are three simple rules for people who keep an eye on the Buffalo News coverage of Bills whether they’re being over paid to write for them (Bucky's case), parroting them (in most pathetic case) or laughing at them (in most cases).
Rule No. 1: Stop listening to them. What they say means nothing and often isn’t the truth, so it would be wise to disregard whatever comes from their mouths. It’s not just ignoring Bucky Gleason, which is a given. It’s muting anyone in the news organization who claims insider knowledge before providing evidence.
Rule No. 2: Watch what spins they do. After the writer says their inside source tells him something watch how it takes off on its own with it being cited as a source by other writers at News with the source inside being batted back and forth like a barely alive mouse between two cats.
Rule No. 3. Expect the worst. Does this really need to be said in Buffalo news? If something can go wrong, it usually does. I’m expecting the Buffalo News to write entire quota of falsified stories by first game, Next year, their forgiving readers will be back to breaking the first two rules.
With the pleasant exceptions of Ty Dunne and the feature articles by Tim Graham, the BN coverage of the Bills is opinion-ridden and frequently lazy, true.
But frankly, I had an epiphany when reading the article you linked: Bucky Gleason is a jaded, jerked-around fan who wants more than anything for the Bills to win and succeed, just like us joes.
I think where he's coming from is the news about Shaq Lawson's shoulder surgery and uncertain return timeline, so shortly following on the euphoria about drafting 3 starters and Whaley's quotes about how the medical staff cleared him and said he could play so he's not worried about the shoulder. I did predict Whaley would live, deservedly, in a falling credibility zone for that.
-
If this is about Lawson I'm quite sure when Lawson was drafted they knew he'd need the surgery this season. The team just didn't want to immediately sell their first round pick as a guy who might have to sit out a while. So no, I don't think we need a new medical staff.
You could be correct. But in that case, Whaley is deservedly living in a falling credibility zone:
'Immediately after the Bills picked Lawson, Whaley told reporters, "Medical staff cleared him, said he can play. Now, if something happens, it’s going to happen, but it’s nothing that we’re real worried about or we wouldn’t have taken him. We got complete faith in our medical staff and they signed off on him, so we’re excited to have him."'
It's about Lawson, but also about the way the McCoy and Aaron Williams injuries were handled last year among others.
Is our turf a problem with injuries? I haven't played on the field house turf, but i assume its the same as the ralphs turf.
I've played on the ralphs field, and i don't care for it TBH. A little too spongy and sticky.
I have wondered this myself. In general, I consider artificial turf an abomination, but I've heard that the Ralphs turf is worse than most.
All good points. But I'm not sure there's a better way to quantify the work of the trainers than by looking at AGL (adjusted games lost) like BringBackFergy and PFF did.
I'm sure all the doctors and trainers on the Bills staff are highly trained people who take pride in their work. If we're going to question their competency, I think we owe it to them to back up the criticisms with good solid analysis, not just a few anecdotes and general impressions.
I gotta admit though that the Shaq case is a little weird. Schefter seemed to have a clearer understanding of the severity of the shoulder injury than our medical staff and even Shaq himself did.
I'm sure there is a better way
but I'm not sure anyone has collated the data and made it public. I think the # of injuries in training camp needs to be taken into account, as well as injuries to non-starters and somehow whether injured players come back and go out again (sign that they're being rushed back?). Sometimes statistics can give a very misleading impression, and anecdotes (eg individual cases) should not be totally dismissed.The Shaq case is very weird especially in view of the Whaley quote I cited
-
I'll never understand why people insist on bringing facts into the conversation.
Facts are cool, but with Football Outsiders it's always fair to ask what's under the hood and what are their metrics, because they don't always pass the "sniff test". For example, how are they handling players who are PUP or IR at the start of the season? How are they defining a "starter"? How are they handling injuries to depth players? And how are they handling situations where a player is managing a long term injury which arguably hampers their effectiveness, but isn't missing any practice or listed on the injury report?
Baylor fires Art Briles
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
It's OK if you drink and smoke and assault wimmens, just show up on time for practice and grind.