Jump to content

john wawrow

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

381 Excellent


About john wawrow

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Buffalo, N.Y.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,564 profile views
  1. Now at all what The AP reported. Or ESPN for that matter. jw I disagree. jw
  2. And that’s the plan they laid out upon their arrivals. The Bills were a team of unmatched parts based on the various needs of previous coaches and GMs. i see Tyrod and Dareus and Watkins have gone on to become perennial NFL All-Pros in their own rights. and we’re all mourning the loss of Zach Brown and well, whomever else was left over from the powerhouse Rex and Whaley left behind. After all the coaching carousels, the only plan forward was to go with a clean slate. That time has arrived. I otherwise have no clue as to what grand solution you had in mind unless it was extend the more of the same run of fitting high-priced players with left overs and turning this average stew that was accustomed to losing into a winner. But sure I’m a ball-washer after all. jw
  3. Ah, yes, ScottLaw is one to take the narrowest view approach to support his wonderful theory of how teams go from being non-contenders to contenders virtually overnight. of course, this effort requires ScottLaw -- who has accused me of being a "ball-washer" -- to take some convenient shortcuts in his mathamaticing by ignoring the 10 previous seasons in which the Rams won no more than seven games. somehow, this doesn't fit the equation of overnight success, so why even make note of it, ScottLaw believes. no different than the Bears, this team that has been a juggernaut for lo all these many seasons. all the way back to, well, 2018 to be exact. let's omit the fact Chicago won a grand total of 19 games in its previous four years, and simply note they made this jump from just one season to the next. hey, by your math, if the Bills win their opener, next season, they'll be 100, nay, 1000 percent better than, they were a year ago. of course, the narrow view is ScottLaw's final chance to make his point, because otherwise, he'd have to finally admit, he has none to make. sad, ScottLaw. sad. jw
  4. Keep in mind, Beane wasn't making a majority of the decisions in 2017 free agency. And neither was Whaley. McDermott was essentially serving in a stop-gap role and wasn't, at that point, going to gum up the works before the next GM arrived. And the decision was made early on that the Bills weren't going to get into a bidding war early to tie up too much money in Woods. Of all the players McDermott didn't want to lose, it was Woods. And yet, circumstances helped dictate his departure. Don't shoot the messenger on this one. I'm merely stating what I know of the Bills state of mind at that time. jw
  5. Oh, so that's what you think I'm doing. Sorrrr-eeee. I guess it's my job to always be negative, which I'm not. And heaven forbid the few times i'm actually positive, otherwise, i will bear the wrath of ScottLaw. however, shall i now sleep now that ScottLaw has called me out as a homer. aside from that, ScottLaw, still has difficulty explaining exactly how this "teams turn things around all the time" thing goes in light of the other indisputable facts presented. but that would be asking way too much, because ScottLaw is more into name-calling and zigging and zagging around his own neat and compact narrative to ever suggest another just may exist. but yes, ScottLaw now suggests Year 3 is big for them, as if he conveniently failed to read what I wrote, and instead interpreted my posts as, how did he put it? oh, right, "ball-washing" as if i somehow failed to point out this team still has to prove itself. well, done, ScottLaw. well done. jw
  6. As I've noted here and/or on the tweeter before. The Bills, a year ago, were handcuffed in their plans to upgrade the offense for several reasons. 1. They never anticipated losing Wood and Incognito. Once both were gone, they couldn't afford spending much money on their replacements. As Beane told me, simply signing Bodine, meant the Bills had something like $11 million committed to the center position Wood/Bodine. 2. They did take a run at several receivers, including John Brown. The uncertainty at QB -- remember Bills only had Peterman and McCarron under contract at start of free agency -- led the receivers they desired to go elsewhere. 3. Redoing Incognito was part of the plan. That he went sideways after agreeing to the deal is not the Bills' fault. 4. And they were committed to only spending only so much in free agency, because the objective was to free up as much room under the cap as possible. 5. If you go all the way back to Woods, Bills were very much interested in re-signing him. The trouble began when they looked at the price-tag and determined there was no way they would be able to afford what he was going to get on the market. 6. This of course led them to acquire Jordan Matthews and Kelvin Benjamin on essential trial deals. They would've been ahead of the game had one or both worked out. Neither did and the Bills didn't give up much in acquiring either. I agree, the WRs this year have some question marks. Fewer, however, than in years past. We'll see. jw
  7. what about them, a prog-rock band that produced uninteresting and now overly dated self-indulgent crud for the ear-wax-infested crowd of bell-bottom shoppers. jw
  8. geez, no one has ever noted this for an easy laugh.
  9. It’s quite evident that you missed the 17-year playoff drought in your “it’s so easy” equation. Or did I somehow miss that in all your zigging and zagging around my points. Admit it, this hole you’ve dug is pretty deep. I’ll patiently await your illogical response. jw
  10. For what it’s worth, the closest the Bills previously came to ending the drought, and in its early stages, was under Donahue, who followed the same path. He purged a number of high-prices players and veterans and built through youth before complimenting roster with free agents. It took him four seasons to get close: 2004. jw they didn’t bring in CJ Anderson. jw
  11. Again, the thinking in a vacuum thing. They weren't going to carry four quarterbacks. To do so would've been ludicrous. Difficult enough to have a fair three-way competition for the starting job, while also making sure Josh Allen gets time to develop. But of course, you want to add a fourth QB in the mix. Why not a fifth? Who, this side of Jon Gruden, wants to make it six? my gawd. jw Sorry, is it me, or do people here not follow football? Asking for a friend. 🤨
  12. Sonofagun. Do you live in a vacuum in which every moment fails to follow the next, and nothing is ever connected. They had no cap money to replace Wood and Incognito last year. And the goal was to get out of cap jail, thus the reason they traded Glenn, in which they actually swapped first-round draft picks, which allowed them the opportunity to move up to draft Josh Allen. They created the dead cap strategy because the players under high-priced contracts weren't performing to the value of those contracts. You don't give them a pass, you judge them on what they did. Sure seems like they accomplished a lot. smfh. jw
  • Create New...