Ronin

Feliciano's been a career backup on a team with a poor OL. So now he's gonna start here? I'd be concerned if that ends up happening. Great, then start him at DT or DE then. We desperately need DEs. Good ones anyway. Lawson and Murphy ain't cuttin' it.

As to what Jones did at EC in his first three seasons, but you have to consider that he was at EC. At OSU, Miami, Bama, Clemson, ND, etc., those numbers would have been great. But contrasted with what Hardy did it's relatively insignificant. Here are Hardy's numbers, as I've said, three of Hardy's seasons were all better, individually, than all three of Jones' first seasons. This is entirely relevant when you consider how Hardy's played in the NFL coupled with the things I've pointed out that we've been discussing. <a href="https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/justin-hardy-1.html"> One also has to be highly concerned, and it has ramifications, that Jones simply didn't convert yards and catches to points. I mean you would think that his record-breaking season wouldn't have ranked near the bottom in terms of point production, namely the goal in football. And why it didn't definitely should be/have-been looked at. His senior season, only one game w/ more than 1 TD, a 2 TD performance against Navy. Hardly impressive. In five games, three of which were against the only power-5 teams he played, a combined 57 catches for 508 yards and 0 TDs. That's not good. As to the three years, yes, everyone is different, but my point was that it obviously does not take, as a rule, as a narrative has been formed here, 3 years for a WR to develop, at least not to the extent that he's a viable contributing WR and #1. Hell, even last year's draft produced 9 WRs that produced more yards in their rookies season than Jones did, 7 of whom were drafted after where Jones was, three of which were on day 3. 11 posted equal to or more TDs than Jones did in his rookie season. Even more than that, three from last year's draft, the one after Jones, had more yards in their rookie seasons than Jones had in his second season. Three more came within 100-yards of him. Of those 6, four were drafted after where Jones was. Let's face it, he wasn't worth the 37th overall. The team botched. I can't tell you what our team's people watched and saw or didn't see. I can tell you that I don't think that too many people analyze things like I do, much of which you aren't even aware of. Regarding Mike Williams, do you remember Deandre Hopkins? Why wouldn't I remember him? He's still in the league. I see absolutely no comparison however. Hopkins put up more yards in his rookie season than Williams has in both of his first two seasons combined. Williams will have to put up over 2,700 receiving yards this season if he's going to match Hopkins' first-three-year total. There's no serious person out there that will tell you that Williams was worth the 7th overall pick. No one can argue that Hopkins had a better QB either. Rivers is far more seasoned than Watson. In fact, Houston would have been better off having taken McCaffrey, taken the pick after Williams. He's got exactly twice as many receiving yards, as a RB, than Williams has, and one more receiving TD on top of nearly just as many rushing TDs and just as many yards rushing. Hell, Jones has outperformed Williams.

What is his level of signing? I see a pretty average/average-plus OT here, and an aging one well into his back-9 who turns 34 this season. He has a two-year $10 M contract. I've read a few comments about him being highly-paid or the like. He currently ranks 40th among NFL tackles in per-year NFL contract, and 89th among all linemen. That's hardly a "gotta play him" contract. As well, I simply don't understand the narrative on him. PFF has him ranked as "above-average," nothing more with three categories above that. He ain't gettin' any younger, he's started a mere 16 games in five seasons, every season on teams with poor offenses, which if we poll here had nothing to do with him I'm sure. LOL I hardly think that he's a shoe-in for anything, with the exception that I really don't see this stable full of "upgraded" OL-men that everyone else has been seeing. I see Morse as a significant upgrade, but he came with a significant injury risk, and the season and contact haven't even started and that risk is already playing out. For the others brought on I see a marginal improvement at best. Point being, if he can't start, as the second-best OL-man brought on by our FO, what would that say? We have like 20 OL-men on the roster now, a handful of which everyone here says sucked last season. Nearly half of them won't be around come September. I see our starting five, not necessarily in particular order, being Dawkins, Morse, Nsecke, Ford, and Spain. I simply don't see any starting talent after them, only depth-caliber talent. With the possible exception of Morse, and Ford pending, I rate the others as average to above-average. PFF seems to agree. But if Morse can't go, then what's the big delta between this year and last. And again, if Morse can't go then we're looking at Bodine again, which is why I would have drafted Risner instead of Ford, because he's played C. Not on that he had a better record of pass protection. So again, not seeing any kind of strategy here.

Well, you're putting words in my mouth. Those actually weren't my points exactly. As to Bama players, they have a history of LBs playing lights-out at Bama but sucking in the NFL. They have placed some great DL-men. RBs have been a similar issue to LBs. You have to look at the positions, history, etc. A lot of work goes into it, this isn't something you glean after a few moments of googling. Also, a historical knowledge builds up if you do it long enough. As to the small school, again, this is merely one thing to look at and consider, but I'll say it again and use Oliver as an example. It's a big mistake to look at how great he was against a team like Rice without any linemen on the team that even remotely have a legitimate shot in the NFL while ignoring what I call the "lowlight" reels. For example, against Texas Tech, and I've pointed this out already, Oliver went up against a lineman named Stawarz, who's finished now, he won't play in the NFL and never had a legitimate shot at it. On numerous plays in that game Stawarz held Oliver up one-on-one easily. No need to get into a prolonged discussion of that, and that's hardly the single example. But what I'm saying, is that upon seeing that and reviewing that, as any good draft analyst should have (did our team?), it should at least cause a little pause from the narrative, I mean wouldn't you think. So point being, obviously in a vacuum the "small school" element shouldn't be considered as the end-all-to-be-all indicator, but when, as in Oliver's case, he didn't face a single OL-man that was going to the NFL it should certainly be considered, and I would have looked at all the plays, not just highlights, as I always do. If others, including the professional draft guys and scouts, don't do so, then it's at their and their team's own risk. Similarly, when Jones does nothing significant for three seasons at EC, unlike his predecessor Justin Hardy (on Atlanta), but then in his Sr. season lights up crap teams, usually in garbage time, often in 4/5 WR sets in systems that simply aren't used in the NFL, but on top of that merely amasses production against the worst DBs in college ball, and just like the OL-men that Oliver has faced, then one should consider that. There are a gazillion receivers from small schools, even more from less-than FCS teams, that light up their stats but simply aren't NFL caliber. Despite people paying lipservice to the notion that the leap from college to pro ball is huge, I'm not sure that they realize exactly how great that leap is. When you funnel thousands of football players from college down to a couple hundred in the draft, then factor in that most of those won't succeed in the NFL, it should paint a pretty clear picture of that leap. Also, this narrative, now convenient for Jones, that it takes three seasons for a WR to develop, is nonsense. Look at Jones' draft peers, most of whom were behind him. 6 WRs drafted that season have more yards than he has and five of those players were drafted after him, three in the 3rd-round and one in the 4th. And remember Mike Williams from Clemson, drafted in the top-10? He's been a bust. Which reminds me, Clemson's offensive skill-position players typically don't step up either. I'm not sure that as Bills fans we really need to be reminded of that.

Hey, 5th round, if he ends up a good depth player it was a good pick, eh.

I'm sure different scouts come up with different things, eh. I guess we'll see. Just not sure it's wise to pencil in a 5th-rounder with glaring issues into the mix of a discussion as to one of three LBs for optimal fit in the modern NFL, eh.

But you see him starting then, right?

Google Vosean Joseph Draft Profile First link; https://www.nfl.com/prospects/vosean-joseph?id=32194a4f-5327-9094-dac1-97c8315d8803 Instincts are below average He has a couple of other difficult if not impossible things to coach. Seems way premature putting a 5th-round LB on this list. Also from that link; "His tape has no middle ground, it's either really impressive or really ugly. Now go look at his production this year and you realize you can coach some ugly out of his play. He's a '5' right now but we can turn him into a '9.'" - AFC defensive coach That sounds like it could easily be one of our coaches overstating how easy it'll be. They seem to be like that, the "smarter by half" methodology. We'll see either way. Seems a little small and lanky to me, kind of like Vallejo. Their draft profiles have enough similarities. Vallejo's college numbers were notably better.

They didn't perform exceptionally for the teams that they've been on. In fact, other than for Morse, who again, is an injury risk, the others all played on bottom-dwelling offensive units. Don't you see Nsecke at RT tho? Perhaps LT if Dawkins continues to struggle? I mean we really don't have any great Ts on the team besides those two, and I wouldn't call either great. I'd say that they're both above average, but not by much. Either way, Ford's more likely to start at G, dont' you think? But look at whom your starting 5 would be. There really aren't many choices before you get into average or worse OL-men.

Who though, that he has to beat out? I see Bodine and Long, two average linemen at best and on a good day. I mean if he can't beat them out, I have to say, the pick then needs to be questioned. But who's your starting five then? I see Nsecke starting at RT, Morse has C as long as he can play, I guess Bodine if not, Dawkins likely at LT again, I'd guess Spain at one G and Cody at the other. I honestly, and contrary to the narrative here, don't see much after them that are starting material. Who?

What do you say about Trent Murphy? Good signing? ... 3 years at $22+ M

Maybe, but who's he gotta beat out to start, Bodine? Long? Not exactly Jim Ritcher there.

Tough to argue, eh. Some of the best if not the best outright tailgating and tailgating atmosphere in the league. They're crazy if they put a stadium downtown, it'll completely ruin the tailgating ambience & chemistry.

Players that likely won't be on the team next season, 2020: Shady (age ineffectiveness) Lorax (age) Gore (age ineffectiveness) Lawson (ineffectiveness) Jones (ineffectiveness) Lotulolei (contract cut, ineffectiveness)

It's pretty unlikely that Ford doesn't end up starting any games he's healthy for. To start, our OL-men otherwise really aren't much better than average. Secondly, of the 6 OL-men drafted last season, four started all 16 games, one started 10, Price on Cincy, but I think he missed those 6 due to injury, and Isaiah Wynn, whom I would have drafted last year, was injured before the season began. I didn't like the pick only because Risner was still there, with experience playing C, but otherwise he seems like a solid OL-man. IMO Ford's going to have a better career than Oliver. We could have had Wynn, Hilliard, Risner, and Lock. IMO that OL along with Dawkins and Morse (assuming he could stay healthy) would have benefitted Allen something fierce.

Zay Jones: Offseason Champion! At least he wasn't trying to leap out of a high-rise naked.

Makes perfect sense. Unlikely Ford's ready or capable of starting there and none of the newbies are better than Dawkins.

People have to remember that he was the youngest player in the entire league last year. Even this year he's among the youngest. He just turned 21 in May. I see Edmunds being among the best ever in two seasons. We'll see. Starting LB-ing and Secondary (starting and depth) on our team are strong, otherwise, not so much.

That's a valid point on the field position where we were worst in that regard. But the time of the D on the field or the number of plays is not valid. We were ranked 16th in time-of-possession, dead-center average. In plays run offensively we were ranked 19th, all but exactly average and a mere 3 plays on the season away from average exactly. Defensively we were ranked 5th in plays run, meaning that 27 teams allowed more plays on defense than we did. So any "lack of good DL play" had nothing to do with being on the field a lot, we were on the field less than all but four other teams. In fact, 15 teams that allowed fewer points than we did were on the field for more plays defensively. So that wasn't it.

Agree completely. We were ranked 30th - 32nd in a number of statistical categories, 30th in Red Zone D. 18th in scoring, 2nd in yardage, but keep in mind, we ranked DFL in opponent starting field-position, so that at least partially explains that disparity between the yardage D and the scoring D. Unfortunately the name of the game isn't keep them from logging yards, it's keep them out of the end zone which we didn't do well at all, being 30th in Red Zone D makes that clear.

I don't think I gave you a googly eyes, did I? Otherwise, don't care about being right, not my gig. Care about having a good team, just don't see them doing it right at present. We'll know for sure this season, season 3 for them. Otherwise, you seem to be missing my points. I'm trying to explain methodologies in relation to your questions.

I'll restate the point; People that get paid to analyze draftees do an incomplete job. Narratives rule despite their veracity. People getting paid to rate players said that all of the above would be great. None, Oliver pending, were. Why not? Again, my reasoning is in the post that you cited. Why did everyone have them rated so high? I didn't, but again, I explained why. If you are asking for MO on why, I would say that I would have taken a WR like Sills over a WR like Jones any day of the week. I went thru why. I said at the time that Jones was a 4th/5th round prospect, not what the analysts said. I can't speak for anyone else, only myself. That's why I thought that not taking Smith-Shuster at that time was a mistake. Do I think that Sills is going to light things up in the NFL, no. But much like I criticized the pick of James Hardy back then (round 2) and stated that I expected Stevie Johnson (round 7) to be better, while stating that Hardy would be a bust, which he was, and got laughed at I might as well add, so too, I think that Sills will probably perform better as well as over a longer period of time than Jones will. Not to the same delta extent as Hardy/Stevie, just sayin', in general. I don't think that Jones will be on the team next season and it wouldn't surprise me if he gets cut if a WR like Sills comes on. The top reasons on my list as to why he was not drafted, which is a bit surprising, are probably because of what I already mentioned about him, and per his draft-profile at nfl.com, which states; Disappointing amount of drops this year Fastballs ate him up and he had issues with contested catches Just 55 percent of throws his way were completed Those are pretty important things to have as negatives, especially considering that Allen's a fastball QB. As well, did you see his 40-time? ... compare it to other WRs in his class? I mean if you don't look at these things than you cannot really criticize others that don't. He's a bit slow. Big WR with good hands apparently, but not the fastest and not the best in traffic. Still, I have absolutely no idea why he went undrafted. I'd rate him as a 3rd or 4th round prospect. He was Grier's top target and led the team in yards, catches, and TDs, and in 2017 he again led the team in TDs. I pointed out elsewhere that he scored a TD every 4 catches or so. Jones was closer to one every 20 in college and was one nearly every 10 here. He was a great pick-up and frankly, I would have drafted him over any of the players we drafted on day 3, especially since we were in dire need of WRs. I'm a big Miami (Canes) fan and I don't see Jaquan Johnson making that much of an impact. Not to mention that we really didn't need another S. I can see Sills being a consistent 700-800 yard/8 TD WR on the right team, not sure that's us tho. He's a big target for sure, just has dropsies. He also faced Big-12 competition, which while power-5 competition still isn't noted for being a defensive conference. Not as bad as the PAC-12, but probably the next worst. Otherwise I can't explain it to you, those are only my thoughts. I will say that it fits right in line with what I said above.

That's a great question that needs to be looked at. Think about it, draft "experts," say the Kipers, etc., and there are a handful of nationally known ones, write stuff up about hundreds of prospects. I spend about 3-4 hours immediately following our drafts to initially gather a minimum amount of info on a player, the absolutely minimum that I would gather if I were a scout responsible for drafting a player. Keep in mind, that different people also see different things in players. I'll use Oliver as an example. Some people sparring with me on Oliver have openly stated that he's a monster of sorts against double and triple teams. I don't see it, but forget me, use NFL.com's own profile, which says; Gets mauled by down blocks and double teams The narrative here is contrary to that. So where did it come from? Certainly not the draft profiles. Other draft reviews on him say similarly. Why? Because it's true. So simply speaking contrarily here, or anywhere, doesn't change that. But the point is that if I were to conduct what I consider to be the bare minimum amount of research on a single player, for say even a mere 100 players, it would take me 50 days, which is two months, and assuming that I do little else in life. Frankly, if I were charged with analyzing for a team I'd spend significantly more than that even. It would take me months for a mere hundred players, far more for 200+. So regarding your question, "didn't any of these scouts read anything?", whether it was meant sarcastically or not, assuming not, is a very good question. The short answer, or at least part of it, is that they trust to some extent, which can be debated, the established opinions and narratives of others. They have to unless they have no other life the entire year. It's always best to do one's own research and not rely on the opinions of others that routinely get an enormous part of what they do wrong annually, and w/o any consequences whatsoever except for the teams FO people that trusted them. I mean think about what everyone back then said about Spiller and Watkins as merely two examples. They were "special," once in a lifetime type of players. Nonsense as it turned out. Neither has been even average and Spiller was finished after 8 seasons of averaging just over 400 yards rushing and 1.5 TDs per season. Watkins too, in five seasons he's averaged about 700 yards and fewer than 6 TDs/season. Both players have had a mere one 100-yard season in 13 total seasons. Yet, all of the experts said they'd both be great and were special. How/why did I come up with a contrary opinion on an island as it were, back then, immediately following the draft. Even now, look at what people are looking at. I read that Oliver lit it up against a sled and against Teller. Is Teller for some unbeknownst reason a good indicator as to future stardom if a player can dominate him? If so, a lot of stars were created last year on his watch, eh. Frankly, I don't think that Teller will even be on the team next season, quite possibly not even this one, particularly if all of these newly acquired OL-men are really as good as everyone's saying. I also just looked at some Oliver highlights that I hadn't seen before while looking at a few draft profiles. One guys had a string of videos asking, "would you want to go up against this guy?," referring to Oliver. The opponent was East Carolina, so let's add some additional perspective to that tremendously superficial analysis. All of the videos were in one game against EC, the game in which Oliver had the most TFLs and 2 of his 3 season sacks. EC ranked 123rd (out of 130) in Compl. %, 120th YPA, and 124th in Rating. To start, this was East Carolina, a 3-9 team with the 57th ranked yardage offense, the 109th scoring offense, "led" by an absolutely horrific sophomore QB who was replaced by a rookie QB in that game. But here's the big thing. The videos that the guy showed had Oliver going up against an OL-man named Cortez Herrin, a 3-star recruit that unlike Oliver had offers from three teams, none good. EC, North Carolina Central, and South Carolina State, the latter two being a pair of FBS scrimmage punching bags in the same MEAC conference that Bethune Cookman is in. Otherwise, I looked at several draft listings for next year and didn't see Herrin even on the lists for G or OL otherwise, not even mentioned, meaning that it's highly unlikely that he'll ever play in the NFL period, much less be any good. In fact, EC has never placed an OL of significant in the NFL. So let's consider this. Aside from what you or I think about Oliver, do you think that that is a good measure for use in projecting how he'll play in the NFL? i.e., is that methodology sound? In the same way, is reacting to how well he handled Teller much of a comp? He won't regularly be going up against the likes of either player starting in September. But the thing that makes it more difficult and complicating to evaluate Oliver is that he really didn't go up against a single OL-man that will end up starting on Sundays. Presumably you can see the illogic and fallibility of much of what those same scouts that you question actually do. But they do this with just about all players. Granted, it's hardly an exact science, but honestly, that's like watching someone play flag football and projecting how good they'll be at Alabama. Garbage in, garbage out. I don't care how he does vs. a sled, Teller, Herrin, or even Paul Stawarz, a Sr. G at Texas Tech. It's pretty meaningless, except of course on the litany of plays where he doesn't even beat Stawarz. Someone here challenged my analysis of Oliver in that game and cited four plays while leap-frogging 7 or 8 where Oliver got all but entirely stood up by Stawarz. Again, people tend to see what they want to see, scouts too. Anyway, just using Oliver as an example here, but this lack of in-depth analysis and overreliance on the established narratives of just a couple of people that simply haven't done that extent of research on most players. Having said all of that, you asked whether or not they've "read" anything. I'd extend that to whether or not they've A, actually watched the games/highlights of the games, B, considered whom the primary man opponent is and what that man's credentials are, or C, considered the success rate as such. Anything they've read is likely at least partially problematic straight out of the gate for the reasons above. So how is it that so few other people see that side of him? Again, you can do this for many players. I did it for Spiller, whose highlights as I recall were based largely on a few receiving plays OOTB that went for bookoo yards, but his average 3-down play was nothing special. His ability as a simple rusher was overrated and therefore overstated. Same for Watkins, he excelled in bubble screens as I recall. Those are plays that simply don't work in the NFL and therefore are rarely even used. One had to look past those to project Watkins, yet no one but me did so. Jones too, a garbage time expert often in 5-WR spread formations. How often do we use a 5 spread? All but never. Granted, we have often played from behind. Anyway those are the things that scouts should be digging for but don't. I honestly think that most simply want to keep their jobs so instead of offering contrary opinions they stick to the status quo so if/when they're wrong they can always fall back onto the "well, everyone thought that ...." thing. At least that way they've hedged against being wrong. Our FO needs someone to offer then straight forward takes on players given our modern draft history.

If Oliver's this immense talent it also seems quite unfair. Imagine of the Bills' OL from the '90s had to run laps because Bruce got the best of 'em.

Hopefully taking advantage of "the sled" and Teller will translate to taking advantage of everyone else come fall.