hondo in seattle

Otto Graham. All League: 9 of 10 seasons. Got his team into the championship game 9 of 10 seasons. Won the AAFC championship game 4 times. Won the NFL championship 3 times. In other words, won the biggest championship game he could get his team into 7 of 10 seasons. Still holds NFL record for most yards per attempt: 8.98. Best career win percentage of any QB ever: .814. Graham was a good runner and tough: he never missed a game.

From NFL.com One acquisition that might be overlooked is Marquise Goodwin, the speedy receiver formerly of the Bills, or so says 49ers leading wideout Jeremy Kerley. "He's a guy that's been overshadowed in the past a little bit," Kerley said of his new teammate on Friday's edition of NFL Total Access. "A lot of guys just think he's just a deep threat. Working with him for the last two or three months, he's an all-around receiver and he knows what he's doing. "He's got a lot of passion in the game and he puts in a lot of work at it. So he's definitely a guy that I think everyone could look forward to and he'll have a takeoff season." http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000821299/article/kerley-marquise-goodwin-ready-for-takeoff-season

Just don't buy this. There's got to be a misunderstanding or misrepresentation somewhere. The Bills O is clearly better and more 'open' when Sammy's healthy and on the field. Let's hope he's not gone soon. He is injury prone but he's by far the best WR on the roster.

I think this is an interesting stat because some folks out there seem to think we have a popgun offense. We don't. Our offense has been producing both big plays and points.

Maybe because I don't live in Buffalo anymore, I just don't get the indignation over his tweet.

My biggest hopes are for Lawson, Ragland, and Seymour. While I'm not yet sold on any of them yet, they could all turn out to be fine starters. I'm not expecting much of anything from the rest of the 2016 class.

Let me preface what follows with this caveat: I don't think there's a fair way to rank RBs of the same era, let alone RBs of different eras. I will argue, though, that I think it was harder to pick up yards on the ground back in the old days. The RB was the heart of the offense, and defenses lined up 11 guys with one unified priority: stop the RB. Today's defensive schemes are designed more to stop the passing game. And now defensive linemen are chosen for their pass rushing skills. LBs are chosen for their coverage skills. And so on. Anywho, let me introduce something I call the RB Dominance Quotient which looks at how productive a RB was compared to the #2 guy. For example, if the NFL rushing leader racked up 1,100 yards while the #2 back ran for 1,000 yards, the leading back gets a score of 1.1. If the rushing leader rushed for 2,000 yards while the #2 rusher got 1,000 yards, the leader earns a score of 2.0. The idea of the RB Dominance Quotient is to measure how impressive a back's yardage total was for that given year. Here are the top four seasons since 1960. OJ (1973) 1.75 J. Brown (1963) 1.70 OJ (1976) 1.46 W. Payton (1977) 1.45 In a day and age when DCs were focused on stopping the run, they couldn't figure out a scheme to slow OJ down. He was in class of his own when RBs were big deals and attracted the best athletes and the most defensive attention. And OJ's measurables would translate well to today's game. When talking about the greatest RB of all time, I really think it's a two-name conversation: OJ and Jim Brown. And I think both would tear it up if they played today.

McD talks about "accountability" and that word comes from the words "account" and "count." The idea is simple - you count up the good or bad that someone does. Then you reward or punish them in equal measure. Washington, from what I understand, committed a minor offense. Cutting him is a major punishment. That's not accountability. That's stupidity. But maybe we should let all the facts come in before we figure out what's the best course of action. Which is what McD is probably doing.

FWIW, PFF gave Brown a score of 49.8 based on last season. 60.0 and below is considered "Poor" - the lowest classification they award. Brown was PFF's worst rated starter on either side of the ball. I'm guessing for all the reasons given that Brown will improve with McD & Frazier. But how much? Maybe all the way up to PFF Average (70 to 79.9)??? https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/27/15882900/pro-football-focus-rankings-buffalo-bills-27th-best-roster-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy

FWIW, PFF didn't hand out high scores to our defensive roster. https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2017/6/27/15882900/pro-football-focus-rankings-buffalo-bills-27th-best-roster-tyrod-taylor-lesean-mccoy Two players (Lawson, P. Brown) earned "Poor" scores and two players (Hughes, Seymour) earned "Below Average" scores while two players (Ragland, White) didn't receive scores. Only three layers were ranked "Good" (Kyle, Marcel and Lorax) and they barely made the scoring threshold for that rank. We had no "Elite" players on either side of the ball. The score of our average player was only 76.2 which is in the Average range. The problem I have with PFF's grades is that Rex's D did not bring out the best in people. A defense is not merely the sum total of it's players. Scheme, guided film-study, etc. also play a role. Individual grades will go up with better coaching.

Yep. I agree with the group that McD and Frazier will be better defensive coaches than Ryan & Ryan. But I don't see a top 5 secondary here.

I like COC's optimism and agree with many of his observations. But Yates is a "prominent player"?

Color me unimpressed. The vid shows he's got quick reflexes. Not amazingly quick reflexes but quick enough I suppose for the NFL. What about his speed? Agility? Hands? Cutting ability? Route running? Quickness off the line? Character? Discipline? Work ethic? Jumping ability? Elusiveness? Combativeness? I hope he proves to be better than the typical UDFA.

Here's what I worry about... Shaq - young, unproven Kyle - old, past his prime, reduced stamina (?) Marcel - undisciplined Hughes - small for a conventional 4-3 hand-in-the-dirt DE All you Positive Pennys may be right. A new coach and new scheme might do wonders for this unit. They might excel. But too many years of disappointed optimism has tainted my generally hopeful nature. I don't count my chickens until they're hatched anymore and I won't count my sacks until QBs collapse.

I'm toward the PP end of the Negative Nancy - Positive Penny spectrum. But, man, you're way past me! All four linemen with double-digit sacks? I'm not seeing it. I'll guess one. But I really hope you're right!

Vic is becoming Sully-ish in his unrelenting negativity. Then again, I'm worried about the secondary too.

Good story. My ex wanted me to take her out shopping that day. She couldn't understand why I kept holding onto hope when the game was a rout. When the Bills were down 35-3, she asked me, "Has any team ever been down that much and ended up winning?" I said no "glumly" but added with very little enthusiasm, "but there's always a chance." Kelly was out. Thurman was out. The game was hopeless. But I couldn't tear myself from the TV.

The only game I've ever rewatched. Saw it live on TV and bought the DVD years later. Most exciting game I ever watched - better than the No Punt game.

In my company, employees get 27% of the revenues. Should we also get 51%? It would be nice if we did - until the company went bankrupt which would happen quickly. The NBA pay scale is irrelevant to the NFL pay scale. Two different industries. The word "should" implies some kind of fairness. Wages in free market economies aren't based on fairness, they're based on market forces. If they were based on fairness, as I've said before, public servants who do serious work to help their communities would get paid more than athletes and other entertainers.

If the players negotiate more money through the NFLPA, the owners will protect their margins by increasing ticket prices, broadcasting pricing, etc. In the end, we fans will be the ones who pay. I think Sammy already gets enough of our money.

Tyrod may have shortcomings as a passer but we're screwed if he goes down. Likewise, I don't think we can afford an injury to Shady. But in other areas, I don't just worry about depth, I worry about the quality of the starters: Safety, CB, WR... It was a tough call, but forced to pick one I picked Safety.

We get there by different means and I don't agree with everything you write but I do agree with your bottom line. I guess my fear is this: Dennison undervalues the run game and works to build a better passing attack and we end up scoring fewer points because we simply have better talent for a running attack. Good Musashi quote, btw. That man was a stud.

Here's my perspective... Sports developed thousands of years ago as a way to teach children war-fighting skills and keep adult fighting skills honed. In American football, the ancient connection between sports and war lives on. Team leaders are captains. Games are won in the trenches and we enjoy watching the big men battle it out. The offense will utilize both an aerial attack and ground attack and sometimes employ the bomb. The defense will try to keep the enemy out of its territory and occasionally launch an all-out assault on the opponent called a blitz. Bills fans love Jim Kelly because the guy was a warrior. As someone who once had the honor of leading real warriors into combat, here's my problem: Fake warriors who play a children's game masquerading as war in order to entertain drunken fans get paid millions of dollars. And want more. Real warriors who fight real wars where people die real deaths in the serious cause of national security get paid peanuts. And typically don't complain. I get the point Sammy's making. I get that NFL players have special skills. I get how a free market economy works. I get all that. But if things were fair, real warriors would earn more than fake warriors. Public servants in general would make more than entertainers. In the big scheme of things, the teacher teaching my son math or the cop keeping my neighborhood safe ought to be paid more than Sammy. At least, that's how I see things.

Gil Brandt has had an excellent career as a personnel guy. I feel comfortable guessing that he knows more about football and football players than anyone on this board. And yet... some of his position rankings are, let's say, idiosyncratic.

Another dumb Carucci article. "Offensive line once ranked as one of the stronger areas for the Buffalo Bills. Now, it is looking, shall we say, a bit wobbly." According to Vic, the OL is suddenly a big concern because... Richie is still the best player. Glenn has an ankle injury Mills is still starting. Miller is trying to fend off Ducasse. Wood is recovering from a broken leg. Where's the problem? Richie still plays at a high level. Glenn played through injuries last year and missed some games. We have every reason to hope he'll be more productive this year. Mills isn't good but he's no worse than last year and maybe (some say) a little better. And he may get beat out yet. Miller isn't getting worse either. If Ducasse is better than we expected and giving Miller some competition: great! Wood without a broken leg (2017) is better than Wood with a broken leg (2016) How is this line worse than 2016? http://buffalonews.com/2017/06/30/bills-ol-area-strength-now-carrying-share-questions/