billsfan89

Shady gave the Bills 3 good to very good seasons while Kiko went on to have a middling career as a mid-level starting caliber LB for Miami. Whereas Hughes has given the Bills a lot of highly productive seasons for the Bills (and is still a starting caliber DE) while Sheppard went onto have a fairly nothing career.

I don't understand how anyone here is rating this LB core as anything less than a B. Edumonds was named rightfully so for the Pro-Bowl and was playing at a borderline All-Pro level the back half of the season. Milano has been playing at a borderline Pro-Bowl level for back to back seasons. In the handful of games he missed in 2019 the defense definitely missed him significantly. Both of these young players could easily be named to the Pro-Bowl and one could be all Pro but you look at this core (which also added a mid-level at worst player in Klein to round it out) and go eh its a C or C+? The depth might be lacking but if having one possible All-Pro, One possible Pro-Bowl player and another average player makes you a C then point to another LB unit in the league that is an A?

I think fans in the stands is a pipe dream at this point. I think if the NFL hopes to start a new season it will be without fans

Some of the grades people are giving in this thread are insane. The D-Line had 7-9 starting caliber players on it and the 1-2 players you could argue aren't starting caliber players are high end rotation players. The linebacking core has 2 potential young pro-bowlers and a solid veteran in Klein. The front 7 arguably is one of the best in the league and people are giving it a C or C+? Do people really think Milano and Edumonds are just average players? Even Klein the weakest link is still a decent player.

Let's say C+ is average for a good reference point. QB - C Plus - I put Josh right at the average mark, he played about a mid-level QB last season and yes there is a ton of room for Josh to improve and progress but there is room for regression too. The risk is there in both directions. I like Josh but I can't put him above average until he actually proves it. The backup QB situation is OK Barkley and Fromm aren't tragic but nothing to write home about. O-Line B Plus - I know a lot of posters on here will look at the O-line and think it isn't an impressive unit. However I know that despite the lack of an All-Pro type talent along the unit I see a unit that returns all 5 starters (a key factor for o-line performance is continuity, has the best depth in the league (3-4 starting caliber players coming off the bench), and has no blatant weak link. All 5 O-line starters in my opinion are at least average starting caliber players at the position (I think Ford ended the year playing decent and I think progression is likely from him.) I like this unit as they have both continuity and depth. RB - B Plus - Singletary had a good rookie year and I think he is due for a breakout. Moss was drafted high up for a RB and I think he plays a good role as a complement. TJ Yeldon is a good backup as I think if Moss or Singletary goes down he is a decent third down back. I would give them an A but Singletary has to prove it, Moss is just a rookie third rounder and Yeldon is a nice but not spectacular backup. WR - A Minus - Diggs adds a capable WR1, I think Diggs is at worst a bordeilne top 10 receiver (He was 17th in receiving yards despite being 46th in targets and sharing targets with another top receiver.) Brown is a good to very good WR2, and Beasley is one of the top 10 slot guys in the league. I would give them an A or A plus but while I liked the drafting of Hodges and Mackenzie as a gadget WR 5 I am not too sure they have good depth beyond their first three WR's. TE - D Plus - By Far the worst unit on the team. I like Knox but he is a raw player who I think is a year away from being a starting caliber TE. Kroft is often injured and nothing special, I see Sweeney as a good backup at best and Lee Smith as an overpaid specialist. If Knox develops faster than I think this unit is at least a C Plus but right now that is only an optimistic scenario. Realistically I would say they are a significantly below average group whose potential is a lot higher. D-Line - A Minus - Easily one of the deepest units in the league. Nine starting caliber players on the unit. AJ adds some good depth to the edge which was lacking. They do lack a front line edge player as while I like Addision and Hughes both are older and more secondary edge rushers. Hopefully Ed Oliver develops as a beast on the interior rush and sets the tone for the team. Deep and talented across the board. A bit older but they just spent their highest draft pick the past two seasons on the unit so they aren’t tragically older. Linebackers – A Minus – Edumonds was emerging as a Pro-Bowl and even All-Pro type player last season, Milano to me is tragically underrated as he is a Pro-Bowl caliber LB. AJ Klein offers a solid third LB in the non-nickel situations and is decent depth to flex into the MLB position. I could also see Addison flexing out to play LB if needed. However the depth behind them is lacking. V.Joseph is an interesting depth option but there isn’t much depth if Milano or Edumonds got hurt. Safety – B Plus – Hyde and Poyer are one of the top 5 starting safety tandems in the league. However I am not sure what depth they have behind them and Poyer did have some bumps in the road last season. Still I am very confident in the tandeum to deliver at least above average safety play. This unit is a bit concerning as this is a relatively older unit. Hyde will be 30 by seasons end and Poyer 29, while not ancient by secondaries standards it is a bit concerning. Corner Back – B Flat – One of the best in the game in White but then a lot of uncertainty behind him. I think T. Johnson is a good slot corner but he has shown a propensity to be banged up. They signed Josh Norman coming off of a down year and still have Levi Wallace who is decent but nothing special. Neal is also still on the roster and could develop. They also kicked the tires again on EJ Gaines and drafted Dane Johnson late. It’s a very weird unit. White is a stud and I like T. Johnson out the slot when healthy but outside of that it is a lot of uncertainty. Special Teams – B Plus – The ST unit last year was a fairly average unit. The return game was good as I think Roberts is a top 5 return man in the game (no worries about a muffed kick and a solid returner), the coverage unit last year was decent, but the kicker lost his range and the punter was inconsistent as hell. Well this year they sured up the coverage unit with two top notch specialists and they drafted a kicker with a big leg to compete with Haush. They also signed a punter to compete with Bojo. I think given the fact that the unit last year was a C Plus B Minus unit it is easy to project significant improvement from the pieces they added. Overall you look at this team and you see a lot riding on just how good Josh can be. Yes there are some other questions like can Knox develop and how will the corners behind White play, but overall this is Josh’s team to navigate. He has the players to throw to, a good RB combo and an effective O-line. The defense should be at the worst a top 10 unit in the league and could easily be top 5 again. The ST unit should be above average at worst. The questions will always be can Josh take that next step?

He reached the playoff with the Bears in 2005 and 2006.

I would agree it is risky, it is much more likely to be outdated than a throwback. However if you are going to buy one go with a guy like Tre White who has proven himself over 3 seasons and is still young.

The union would defend him unless the rules say specifically otherwise. So it mostly is going to come down to the letter of the law.

If you are going to hold out you also need to have more than 1 good season. If Cook was coming off of back to back very good to great seasons and had one more year left on his deal I would say you could at least hold out under the idea of "I have proven what I am." Cook hasn't proven he is able to stay on the field consistently and produce yet he wants a new deal? The gaul to say you want a deal after one good season at a less than premium position is just laughable. If you were a QB who had one really good season a team would want to see you sustain success, a RB hoping for a big deal after one good season is just barking up the wrong tree.

Steve Hutchinson is also in the HOF. I would say that Faneca (the other guard on the NFL's 2000's All-Decade Team) definitely deserves to be in ahead of Ruben Brown. I think Brown is in the range of a guy like Jahari Evans (1 more All-Pro selections a few less Pro-Bowls) instead of All-Time guards like Hutchinson and Faneca.

Was Ruben Brown ever in the conversation for the best guard in the league at any point in his career? Genuinely asking, because I was just getting into football when Ruben was at his peak. I know guys like Hutchinson and Faneca were routinely among the top guards in the league in the 2000's. Now in the past 10 years Marshal Yanda, Zach Martin, and Quinton Nelson (albeit recently on Nelson) have been the top guards year in and year out. I don't know if Ruben was the dominant guard for as long as others who have been in the HOF were? Would 1-2 more All-Pro Teams made the difference? I don't know it is all arbitrary but I think with a position like guard it is often times hard to tell.

Cook might be an upgrade over what we have he might not. But I am not paying him a sizable deal and giving up a draft pick for him. Moss and Singletary will do just fine. With one coming of a productive rookie year

I think a lot of what makes Tom Brady so impactful is that he avoids sacks and turnovers so well and he rarely wastes a down. The Pats under Brady would rarely find themselves in third and long situations. Part of what makes Brady so efficient is the fact that he is almost always getting production out of a down even if it is just a 2-4 yard dump off. Brady also prefers a safe 8-9 yard throw that would produce a first or a 2nd or 3rd and short to a riskier 25 yard gain. Which results in less turnovers and incomplete passes and still moves the ball forward productively even if it cuts down on the bigger plays. I think Josh and Daboll need to learn how to make each other more efficient. Josh as 2019 went on learned to avoid the turnovers a bit more but he still took a lot of sacks which tend to be drive killers. If Daboll can put Josh in a game script that allows Josh easy plays on first and second down I think Josh can get more comfortable and feel the need to “make something happen.” I think that it is good that Josh can make some plays here and there but if he is asked to do that too often he will make mistakes and develop poor habits. Whereas if he is in a position to make good decisions often he will develop that. I have no problem with a run heavy offense but the short pass should be a big early down component to any offense.

Faneca was an absolute beast, he was an All-Pro First Team player 6 times and a Second team All-Pro twice. He was a key reason why the Steelers had one of the best rushing attacks year in and year out in the early to mid-2000's. He also was a Pro-Bowl player from 2001-2009. Even in his two years with the Jets he was still a dominant player and one of the reasons they had a good rushing attack those seasons. I think Faneca being arguably the second best guard of the decade behind Hutchinson puts him in the HOF for me. Ruben Brown on the other hand I think falls into the category of a guy who isn't HOF worthy (although WOF worthy for sure in my book.) Ruben Brown was never a first team All-Pro his two career accolades are 4 Second Team All-Pro selections (1998-2000 and 2002) and a gaudy 9 Pro-Bowl selections(1996-2003 and in 2006) at a time when the Pro-Bowl still somewhat relevant as a bonafide. So while Brown was always near the best at his position for a long period of time I never considered him to be among the best 2-3 guards in the league at least not for a long period of time. He was a very good player for a long time and at his peak flirted with being great. Even factoring in his good run with the Bears in 2005 and 2006 where he returned to being a very good player I can't say that he cracks the HOF for me.

WR 1-3 The Bills have a complement that is as good or close to any team in the league. While having Mac a decent gadget WR and some interesting depth. TE - The Bills lack here unless they can get a big leap in production from Knox. O-Line - Upper Mid-Level O-line at worst in my opinion with depth to sustain more injuries than most O-lines in the league. RB - A good up and coming RB in Singletary being paired with a high draft pick in Moss. Overall around Josh I say he has a top 10 supporting cast, and if Knox can be an above average TE this season than look out because then the Bills could be looking at having all the pieces in place.

I love the aggressiveness Josh shows on third down. However I think on first and second down he needs to take a check down a bit more. The easiest way to get in third and long situations is to not take the 3-4 yard or even 2 yard dump off on an early down. So yes be aggressive but not stupid on third down but be smart on first and second down so you don't have to be aggressive as much on third down.

Adding Diggs will help Josh a lot, it gives Josh 3 legitimate high quality professional passing outlets while using Knox, Singletary and other receivers as complementary options. But Josh has to have a lot of growth in his game if the Bills want to go from a good playoff team in the 10-11 win range to a 12+ win team that is seriously contending.

18 is a fair ranking, I would say that anywhere from 15-20 is fair for him.

I do feel like Kapernick was an at least decent starting caliber QB from 2012-2014 but I don't know if it was NFL defenses catching up to him or the 49ers steep drop in talent in those years. In 2012-2013 the 49ers were one of the deepest most talented teams in the league and Kapernick was able to get them deep into the playoffs. In 2014 the 49ers talent declined but they were still decent in Harbaugh's last year. In 2014 Kapernick had arguably his best season even as the team's talent declined. But in 2015 and 2016 the team got old, lost a lot of talent, and lost one of the best coaches in the league. It wasn't a coincidence that Kapernick's play fell rapidly when the 49ers became one of the worst teams in the league. I am not saying that had Kapernick not had any of this political drama that he would have gone onto play for another team in 2017 and beyond and revived his career. I think for that to happen Kapernick would have had to have found himself in a perfect situation where he could have been on a good team and backed up an established vet for a year or two before taking over long term or simply been a backup on a great team and taken over for an injured starter. More than likely Kapernick would have found himself on a bad or mid-level team keeping the seat warm for a rookie or up and coming QB, he would have started on and off. I think most likely he would have had a very Ryan Fitzpatrick like career where he has 6-7 good games in a row and then reverts back to bad play. A fringe starter high end backup caliber player. But I do wonder had he been able to redshirt for a year (so to speak) and come back on a good team would he have had some good seasons?

If Kapernick is going to come back he is going to have to find a situation where he can sit for a season unless catastrophic injuries hit. I think Kap has to look for a situation similar to what Michael Vick had after his two year absence stemming from his legal issues. The Eagles had McNabb as the bonafide starter in 2008 and a high draft pick as the backup in Kevin Klob. Vick wasn't going to have to be forced into action that year unless multiple injuries hit. Vick basically redshirted in 2009 before coming back in 2010 and having his best season arguably of his pro-career. I don't know what situation would make sense for Kapernick as I don't know what team has an established QB and a solid backup that would want to take on Kapernick as a project at 32 years old?

I agree that the costs of a new stadium aren't worth the "upgrades" (most upgrades are things they charge you to experience) but MetLife is a better stadium not necessarily worth the extra money but it is better. Mainly because the Giants Stadium concourses were so small and the bathrooms so rundown. Getting out onto the concourse was always a traffic jam while the bathrooms were smelly and always clogging due to the run down plumbing of the stadium. MetLife has wider concourses and better facilities. I do agree that renovations are a better avenue for the Bill's. Cheaper and more sensible.

I go back and forth on things. On one hand literally almost everything in life is political and black people in America have very few large platforms outside of sports and entertainment to get their message across. On the other hand it is nice to have something that is just there for pure entertainment value and is relatively apolitical. I think in the end I am fine with political statements in various areas of entertainment as it doesn't hamper my enjoyment at all. But I get why people just want somethings to say politically neutral.

From talking to a lot of Rugby players they say the reason there is less traumatic injuries is mostly due to the fact the game is less territorial than the NFL. In Rugby you just don’t have many situations where a yard or two is make or break. Rugby also has no forward passing or blocking which creates less exposure to awkward body positioning. In Rugby you are also almost consistently moving which creates a lack of momentum down to down. Whereas in the NFL you are constantly resetting yourself in a manner that is conducive to having more collisions and building momentum. As much as people want to say that Rugby is a similar game to the NFL the differences are massive. I don't think the lack of equipment actually serves as much of a deterrent for big hits and the like as much as the nature of the game in and of its self. At least that is what others who play the game have told me.

From my understanding Rugby has less concussions and serious injuries like torn ACL's and other various muscle/bone breaks due to the different nature of the game. I think what really wears down NFL players are the big time collisions and injuries. How many times do you see a player get a serious injury and they are never the same? Especially if that injury occurs later in their NFL career. So while I don't doubt Wade has some wear and tear on his body I would argue that it is less than that of a typical 29 year old NFL player. I don't think Wade could have a long NFL career but I think he could play into his 30's.

It's a different level of wear and tear. Rugby has less high speed collisions and is just a different type of game. I think at age 30 he could realistically have 2ish years in the NFL before his body gives out. I think 7 years of pro rugby is a lot less wear and tear than 7 years of NFL football.