Mr. WEO
-
Posts
44,472 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mr. WEO
-
-
Is this what it has come to?
-
OK Mr smart @$$, maybe you are missing the point! I never said that he would be great but you never know as he hasn't really played much whether it be due to injury or coaches decision. But as someone pointed out (you know the reason why this topic got started in the first place!) is that he did show flashes the year before when given the opportunity to play! How do you that the reason he hasn't played has more to do with politics (his grudge with Koller), injuries, than his actual play? That is why I said that he MAY be a good player on a different team that utilizes his strengths PLUS give him PLAYING TIME! Then you come back with some comment acting like he can never be any good; do you have any inside information or watch any game tape? All i know is that the guy has shown flashes when he is in the game but has hardly played. You say he can't beat out Tripplett, Anderson; maybe they were using him in the wrong way; we don't know? Just like the person who wrote this tread pointed out they wanted to see how he would play next to a true stoud DT like Stroud but it never happened; maybe his back injury had something to do with it; YOU and I don't know! There are those who want to throw Hardy under the bus after one season. Maybe he isn't up to speed with reading the D and finding soft spots in the zone but I'll bet you that better coaching staffs would have found a way to simplify the game for him and put him in better positions to make plays. I know for damn sure they'd have a 6'5 WR in on goaline situations a lot more! I know somebody you will point out all the times he mistimed his jump or dropped balls; he didn't make much of the few opportunities that he had but he should have had a lot more and guess what: players can get better you know!
It's fans like you who like to bash players but can't take it in return. Like I said earlier: if you don't think scheme or change of scenery can make a difference in a players performance then you don't know the game. If you didn't notice any of the good plays McCargo made at the end of the 2007 season then you don't know the Bills as good as you think you do.
Maybe we aren't using McCargo correctly. Perhaps he can be the guy who holds the ball for kickoffs on really windy days.
I would like to throw Hardy under the bus.
-
Rogers visiting Buffalo.
-
Different team doctors prioritize different injuries, the bills staff didn't the injury as serious to his playing as the colts did. they didn't deny the injury both teams agreed it was there.
I don't remember the Bills mentioning the existence of the problem before or after the voided trade. Obviously the Bills were itching to unload this bust and someone (not Slow Tony Dungy) on the next team that would be laying out for his salary smelled something funky. They went right for the MRI. Busted.
-
Didn't the Bills deny he had a back problem when the Colts tossed him back?
-
Shouldn't these guys be studying for mid-terms?
-
I have to disagree. With still an unproven starter in Trent (and yes, after his jekyll and hyde perfomances last year) he is still a mystery, Fitzpatrick is nothing more than a journeyman and a disaster QB at best and Hamden who is the best at the position for carrying a clipboard. QB is a very needed position this year. Not top pick unless Stafford were to fall but something to look at in rounds 3-5. There are some pretty decent QB's out there and not a lot of teams have the need there. Still, drafting one ahead of a TE is likely.
TE is key this year.
At least with Fitz, if he has to come in, there is chance we may be pleasantly surprised. Last season there was no chance we be surprised--pleasant or otherwise.
-
"My hobbies are fast cars and fast women. That's why guys in my car club call me The Cruiser."
-
Then how come these guys are significantly stronger and faster than the 275 pounders from yesteryear?
Don't know if they are faster. As for stronger, 30-40 years ago, most college athletes stayed all 4 years (they didn't have many options). College for them wasn't spending 8 months a year being catered to by a craven, sport-revenue dependent administration coddling them with state of the art training facilities, all the nutrition they can consume, specialty coaches and trainers, high tech conditioning methods, etc.....
This continues, an order of magnitude higher in the NFL. Way back in the day, these guys had to work for a living outside of football.
-
People (not you) need to wake up and smell the coffee. There's a reason why big time colleges have 300 pound sophomores on the offensive and defensive lines, and it ain't because they were eating their vitamins and drinking protein shakes in high school. 300 pounds is not natural. Lest anyone has forgotten, there were no 300 pounders in the NFL until juice became widely accessible in the 1980s. Now practically every offensive lineman and DT tips in at over 300 pounds. The NFL sweeps it under the rug because exposing it would mean that the whole house of cards would come crashing down. It's worth noting that HGH also speeds healing (it's what Andy Pettite was nabbed for), and given the chronic injuries that all players in the NFL deal with, I suspect that HGH use is rife. One way to think about it is that if everyone can use it, at least the playing field is equal.
America is much larger than it was back than. Obesity is epidemic. Not true a geeration ago. These O-linemen are not musclebound---most are simply strong but morbidly obese athletes, like Peters, with abnormally high body fat composition.
HGH will not add muscle bulk.
-
I think the trick here is that there isn't really a big enough set of teams at the top to make a whole conference. The league isn't 50:50 - it's 27 teams that are more or less on par with the Bills, then the Patriots, Redskins, Cowboys, Jets, and Giants.
The top 16 teams by revenue go from Washington ($327M) to Seattle ($215) while the bottom is the Giants ($214M: I'm as surprised as you) to the Vikings ($125M). In a free spending conference, it'd essentially be the AL East, with few big-time teams and a lot of mild ones who really don't play by the same rules. Sure, it wouldn't be automatic for the big guys, but it wouldn't really be fair, if that's the goal.
Additionally, I think, once this is set up, it will be difficult to keep revenue sharing fair, and TV contracts equitable. The Money Conference is going to take up almost all the airtime, while the Other Guys will make up a minor league. It makes it too simple for the Jerry Jones/Bob Kraft wing to just try to sell their own games' TV rights, since they need so much less from the other owners in terms of weekly opponents.
Teams cannot sell their own games' TV rights. The games are the property of the NFL. Unless there is no cap, there is no free-spending conference.
How about shirts vs. blouses?
-
I don't know why you feel its necessary to be condescending and insulting to those who simply think Peters is worth keeping on the roster, hardly an extreme view given his two trips to the pro bowl and the teams efforts to try and keep him around.
I thought to respond in kind but instead I am hoping maybe you will reconsider that attitude and join in a more constructive discussion.
His two trips to the Pro Bowl? Maybe we should go after Favre--he just went to the Pro Bowl, too!
Anyway, I've played in as many Pro Bowls as Peters.
This guy has trouble finishing the season. Maybe the team's "efforts to keep him around" (do you see something we do not?) are somewhat influenced by this.
-
What you said initially (obviously unwittingly), was right. No DA in his right mind would have ever charged "a guy with no such record in the state and not on probation" with a felony for possessing an unlicensed, loaded gun in his trunk, i.e. a totally victimless crime. So the starting charges would have been misdemeanors for each charge relating to having an unlicensed, concealed, and loaded weapon. It's what you also would have been charged with, if you decided to "go ghetto" and put a loaded glock in your trunk (assuming you have no criminal record). And it was common knowledge that he was ultimately only going to be charged with one misdemeanor, since all the charges were related to that one incident, and lo and behold, that's what happened! Therefore there was no plea deal and no reason to plea deal since he got what he was going to get anyway. Moreover we never heard a single report that he agreed to a plea deal.
As for the pot allegations, they're moot, if not totally bogus. He wasn't charged and obviously the blunts weren't seized along with the gun, so the DA couldn't use this against Lynch, to get him to accept a plea deal. What, was he magically going to produce them and then add those charges? LOL! And Lynch has never tested positive for drugs in the past, and that's the only fact we have as far as this is concerned.
I suggest you just be happy that Lynch will possibly face a 1 game suspension. Consider it payback for last year's "terrible accident."
Look, the guy was arrested and charged with felony possession of a concealed weapon. Are you now disputing this too??
What I said was that it was easy to predict that the DA would ultimately charge him with less, given his record. That's how it goes, sonny boy. The charge is a felony. The DA and the defense attorney chat. An offer is made to the perp, accept a guilty plea to the reduced charge or exercise your right to trial--and take your chances. It's called a "plea bargain". It probably took them 10 minutes, max, to hash this one out. It usually doesn't need to be pointed out and you may not understand it, but that's how it's done---every day in every urban and suburban courtroom. The DA can't spend a lot of time with a BS case like this, so he spends the vast majority of his time making deals to dispo his caseload.
His attorney was positively elated that he was ultimately being charged with a midemeanor. Which means, of course, that he's guilty of legal malpractice as he should NEVER agreed to accept the reduced charge, right? Still waiting to hear back from you on this one. Come on, stick to your guns, bro---why didn't ML demand his day in court to get his case tossed and to expose once and for all the notoriously crooked Culver City Police force?
-
I agree totally. For that matter, a lot of positions are more of a need than tight end.
A starting QB we have. A solid starting TE we do not.
Agrre that Trent is still a bit of a mystery, but our depth at QB is no worse than last year. JP's gone, so we won't have to cringe as much when Trent goes down.
-
Can he wrap up?
They named a penalty after him!
-
One year contract.
It's all gonna happen in 2009, men.
-
What other priority? Umm, the annual league meetings start Sunday and run through most of next week in Dana Point, Ca.
Lori's right.
You guys have got to turn down the drama a bit. "Manipulating our every emotion"??
Just toss on your TO Bills throwback jersey and you'll be fine.
-
TO filled all holes.
-
Leif Larsen? I dont remember him too much.? Did he have a very good career in college. As far as Raji pushing him around. If i rember correctly Mack looked a lot better in team drills then he did one on one. This is usually the case becasue very seldom is a center not recieving some form of help from a gaurd. Whether it is a chip block or a straight up double team. I am by no means suggesting the Bills take Mack late in the first or with their second pick. I would rather see a true gaurd in the second like Duke Robinson(who the Bills had the Oline coach scout at his proday last week).
Larson was picked simply because of his bench pressing skills.
Totally useless metric.
-
A man weighing less than 250 pounds cannot add25 pounds of muscle in 3 months..naturally.
We already have a Penn St. LB. That's plenty for now.
-
He has a "target on his back" because "he's in the NFL"???
Yup, that's a guy who is taking full responsibility for his serial bad judgement.
3 years is a long time.....
-
Its still too early to declare his assessment of the market and work at Peters' direction a done deal yet (it ain't over 'til its over) but given some of the vitriol spewed last year about how stupid Peters and his agent were in how they played this negotiating exercise, I think a rational assessment of the current situation in negotiation is almost all in Peters' favor.
I know there is no requirement and I do not expect any hardcore Bills partisan to be rational, but it is no surprise to me that even with the Bills and Peters reported to be about $3 million apart, I think one needs to realize that this is far closer to Peters' outrageous demand of the top OL contract in the market (which is now over $11.5 million a year that Jake Long signed for) than where the Bills started out which is wanting Peters to honor his existing (RT pay scale) contract.
The Bills have moved from the $4 mill a year (which by far is the largest paycheck Peters ever saw but that does not seem to matter in the modern NFL where both teams and players seem happy to get every one of our dimes they can) apparently to 8 and given the situation I think its a pretty safe bet that Peters is gonna get a lot more than $8 million a year.
Maybe Peters and his agent got to the current position through their intelligent gauging of the market, or through dumb luck, or through getting a couple of things to go their way and they took advantage of these opportunities, but whatever the reason (my guess is opportunism rather than Peters and his posse anticipating just how this would go) I think it takes real blinders not to see the superior negotiating position Peters is in.
The 3 big events in this negotiation IMHO were:
A. Peters aimed high and stuck to his guns for the most part last off-season-
As with most games of chicken (which in essence what last year's juvenile multi-million dollar face off between the Bills and Peters was) no one really won and both sides should count their blessings they survived this dispute to live again. Peters missed camp by holding out until the last minute (the last minute was he crawled back before being docked a game check which would have been serious money. There was a noticeable effect in terms of his performance in the first half of last year as he got off to a slow start. However, this slow start had no real impact on the important stat of W/L as the Bills won despite the initial inconsistent play of Peters. In the more imaginary world of the media (radio and the web being the loudest) Peters was labeled as lousy.
However, since the Bills got off to a fast start without Peters hitting the ground running, and many of his teammates rooting for the Bills to set a precedent of caving into player demands, and since Edwards was not killed due to lame LT play both Peters and the Bills escaped his holdout with their lives.
B. Peters made the Pro Bowl-
This accomplishment really put Peters in the driver's seat. Many Bills fans made leery of the validity of Pro Bowl selection after watching Ruben Brown get in year after year despite having some not very good years sometimes really devalue Pro Bowl picks. However, the critical issue here is market value and whether he deserved it or not Peters scored a big plus by getting voted in by a mixed and balanced opinions of coaches, peers, and fans.
One has to give props to Peters for winning this nod as from a marketing/negotiating standpoint this validated his decision to hold out as even with the slow start he still got the nod from this mixed panel. Even for those who want to claim all they care about is play and not popularity, they actually are ignoring play to claim Peters is a bad player as part of his winning this was that his on field performance seemed to this viewer (and is born out by some statistical analysis that looks at which opposing DL player got a sack) improved in the second half of the season probably as he improved from his selfish holdout.
C. Dockery was let go-
This created a dual advantage for Peters in that this move not only made some cap room for Peters as the Bills cut him rather than pay him a roster bonus, but it also put the Bills in a situation where they already were replacing their starting center and several back-ups on the OL. While some seem to have their panties all up in a wad over Peters not honoring his contract (hello real world are you surprised) it looks really doubtful the Bills will want to replace the majority of their OL in one off-season which they would have to do if they cut Peters.
An even greater departure from reality is that some fans are vocal about wanting to trade Peters for draft choices. This is simply a departure from reality in that actual NFL GMs realize that even though the conventional wisdom is a 1st round pick should be a starter (many Bills fans have been fooled by good picks like Nate Clements becoming a star after the Bills traded down to the last third of the 1st round to get him). It does happen a lot that a later pick becomes a starter, but the actual real world occurrence is that its only a little over 50/50 most years for a first round pick to be a starter at the beginning of the next season.
Even if the Bills got 2 1st rounders for Peters (could happen but like franchise player Cassel and others a top vet may only bring later round choices in reality) they are likely writing off 09 in terms of OL play as these rookies learn to become vets. When Dockery got cut the cash registers started going off in Peters and his agents head.
The bottomline here appears to me that despite the whines of many fans and media types like Ed Kilgore who have instant stories he would not have to work hard to do his job if the Bills stupidly drew a line in the sand, the Bills will likely wait until after the April draft to ink Peters. As the rookie cap is separate from the vet cap who they pick makes little fiscal difference (our decision to do our accounting based on cap to cash may to some extent link rookie contracts to existing contracts but not by a huge amount) and the Bills can roll over and sign Peters when they choose. However, by leaving the situation unclear they also send misinformation to our opponents so outside clarity probably waits until after the draft.
However, in the big picture I give my props to Peters and his agent. They appear to have played this well and even in the worse case the Bills ship Peters and he probably really cashes in as his new team would almost certainly want to sign him for his career.
Well played Peters.
I disagree. If he didn't hold out and arrived in great shape and played as well as he did in '07, he would be spending his new huge contract money RIGHT NOW.
Other than holding out again (and losing gamechecks) there is nothing Peters can do--he is under contract. Very simply, the Bills may decide to give him a new contract, but they do not have to.
-
I can't even come close to how you've made yourself look in a few weeks' tiume, especially considering what you wrote above and comparing it to what you previously wrote:
So you first said that this was obviously (as any first year law student could tell you) never going to be a felony gun charge, which meant it was going to be a misdemeanor charge, period. Yet NOW it was a plea deal because he was obviously smoking pot, which was never retrieved and thus never tested, for which he was never charged, and for which he's never tested positive in the past, and when no news source has reported it as a plea deal, unlike last year's incident?
Come back to me when you get your stories straight. Or get a coherent story. And ultimately, whether the search was legal or not, he was still caught with a gun in his trunk.
Wow. This is work! Actually that's not what I said.
OK, one more time boys. The DA, any DA, is going to start with the most consequential charge--in this case a felony. He is free, on behalf of the people, and considering the record of the criminal, to offer a reduced charge to which the perp can plea to (a "plea bargain") in order to get a conviction. When you get arrested on a felony charge and you plead guilty to a misdemeanor, a plea bargain has been made and accepted between you and the State. "News sources" don't usually have to explain that part.
The pot is YOUR fixation, not mine. The plea deal had nothing to do with the drugs. The DA is basically ignoring the weed because it is, at MOST, a misdemeanor---a fine. He has Lynch on a felony charge, why would he add what amounts to a parking ticket?? The only significance of the drug is that it provided cause for the car search.
But tell us this, let's assume your from-another-planet contention that the cops fabricated the weed part (did they "plant it" or did they simply pencil it into the report?), why on earth would Lynch's hardball legal counsel allow him to accept ANY plea? NO judge would allow such a bogus search and the case would be tossed.
Come on, you must have worked this all out (your "coherent story") before you blurted it out---let's hear it.
-
We traded for Stroud.
They were happy to get rid of him (injuries, suspensions). We probably didn't need to give 3, 5s. It's interesting, the same year the Jags picked up Florence. Del Rio said "Drayton is entering the prime of his career. This is a move that will significantly strengthen our secondary." Despite offering up to 12 million in bonus incentives, Dra Flo didn't quite work out as JDR had hoped.
Now he's a Bill.
Stallworth was slightly over the legal limit
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I don't think there was any BAL. I think the cops should do a DNA analysis on the blood AND the alcohol.