White Linen

I'll give him that - he's not been in trouble. That doesn't necessarily qualify him as a mentor though. He's a selfish individual - which is fine because it served him well. I get it - but it's just a theory and it's yours. I just have a hard time giving much blame to anyone but Dareus here.

So you admit we should have high risk players? Just like every other team.

How many players that he's mentored stayed out of trouble? We went down but it wasn't a clown show. That's just making things up.

There's successful (wins) and respected organizations that go through this too. Every single team has high risk guys and they sometimes get in trouble with those teams too.

Then how do you explain it happening on very well ran organizations?

The guy who performed the act is certainly above 50% to blame? Mario Williams a mentor? Now that's funny. On what? How to lay down and quit when you know you're getting released at the end of the season?

Spending spree? Whatever!

That explains the DT's that were just signed.

^^ This We are not allowed to say anything good about our draft picks.

The best part about this signing is locking up Taylor long term. The second is how mad it makes our fans that don't want it.

Fair enough take. My argument is that he's done a lot more good things than missing on some draft picks. Our roster is loaded with talent - would you agree with that? I'm not sure what the connection is between you being a Clemson fan and Ragland is (unless you meant Lawson) but - what sucks is Ragland won't have the opportunity to show what he can or can't be in the NFL. I'm surprised at your depiction of Whaley because he seems like one focused guy doing prudent things. Whether they manifest themselves into good things is yet to be determined. Of course our loyalty is always with the Bills but if I believe Whaley is doing a good job - I want him to stay.

You can't read good either, huh?

I'm surprised at how a significant portion of our fan base isn't understanding how lucky we got with Tyrod. He provides hope like no other QB we could have right now.

Who was this monstrous talent we neglected to pick at 19? Trading up is widely debated - should you ever trade up but not for someone you have graded significantly higher than the pick number outside of a position of need? What's convenient is that the majority of experts said defensive line was one of the deepest positions in the 2016 draft. Did anyone really think we weren't going to get one, except maybe you and a few other goofballs? Ragland was rated high by the Bills - you can disagree, that's fine. However to act like you absolutely know it was the wrong move is bizarre. You're right about one thing. The discussion is over because there's a clear winner - me.

No you said we in consecutive picks drafted a player at need. That isn't true. We traded up to get Ragland - which is much different than slim odds that you just pick a player of need at your slot in consecutive rounds. "The odds are probably pretty slim that the best player on the board is your biggest position of need, when that happens in consecutive rounds your probably paddling full steam up ***** creek and over valuing guys that fit your biggest need."

No you look at draft history before you tell all the untruths to fit your BS narrative. Accepting wrongness doesn't make you realistic. Was RB a need when we drafted Karlos? Was RB a need this year when drafting Williams? Was DT a need when drafting Washington this year? Yes you draft some needs and if the player at the position of need is close in terms of grade to the others at an off position - you draft them. If a player is graded significantly higher at a non position of need you draft them. Are you seriously going to try and preach to us with your paltry examples of teams drafting outside of need - to mean the majority of what they draft isn't at need positions? You'll say anything to dog this organization and you define that as fandom.

You do realize we traded up to get Ragland, right? So he wasn't the "next player on the board". You're a coward hiding behind your projections of Shaq and Ragland because you know they can't play right now. Your BS is boring.

Your not worth the time.

I can't say that I've watched him enough to fairly evaluate him on the field - so you're right I just looked at some numbers. However he did start 13 games the prior two seasons. Maybe you're right but the Packers need LB's and could possibly be without Matthews for a while - and they haven't signed him back. I dunno, I kind of like where we're at with LB's - not in love with it but unless it's definite upgrade type of player, I'm passing.

I read up on Neal a couple days ago because I saw him on a free agent list I was looking at. His numbers were pretty pedestrian for starting 15 games.

I'll help you. Tyrod Taylor has given us the most reason to think we've found a QB in 16 years.

and he's proven it's a different Era. It's just that our fan base has gone crazy.

God almighty. The best roster we've had in 16 years and we're to believe everything needs to be blown up?

Now that's some good advice and I'm gonna take it. Maybe I can help you. Losing Ragland sucks - no doubt - however it's not like we lost Dareus. Rookies can contribute and even have very nice years - but we back filled the injury right away with veteran help. It's not a season lost type injury.

Absolute class act. He had such a calming voice that was a pleasure to listen to.