Jump to content

Santana

Community Member
  • Posts

    883
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Santana

  1. 10 hours ago, BillsFan130 said:

    For the team because half the questions the media will ask the players/coaches all year will be on kaepernick.

     

     

     

    The raiders had so many terrible off the field issues last season, Kaepernick wouldn't even come close to being that kind of distraction. And they also had a player come out and say that he was openly gay. I think they'll be fine, they handled everything that was thrown at them really well.

    • Agree 1
  2. 18 minutes ago, Santana said:

    Fair enough. So we could all probably admit that Bobby Wagner has been the best MLB for the better part of the last 5 years, maybe longer. Bobby Wagner's first four seasons in the NFL he had 478 tackles, 9.5 sacks and 5 interceptions. All while playing with the "Legion of Boom". Tremaine Edmunds first four seasons he has 463 tackles, 5.5 sacks and 4 interceptions. I'm just saying I don't think he's as tradeable as a lot of us think.

    Also from years 5 through 10 Bobby Wagner has been to the pro bowl every year and has been an All-Pro every year except last year. Not saying he's the same caliber or player. But the similarities are worth noting.

  3. 18 minutes ago, NewEra said:

    He’s played 4 seasons…..age should not be a factor anymore imo.  His best season was year 2, when he was 20.  Experience hasn’t done much for him. 
     

    i hope that you’re right and that he’s does break out.  The DL additions should certainly help.  

    Fair enough. So we could all probably admit that Bobby Wagner has been the best MLB for the better part of the last 5 years, maybe longer. Bobby Wagner's first four seasons in the NFL he had 478 tackles, 9.5 sacks and 5 interceptions. All while playing with the "Legion of Boom". Tremaine Edmunds first four seasons he has 463 tackles, 5.5 sacks and 4 interceptions. I'm just saying I don't think he's as tradeable as a lot of us think.

  4. 13 minutes ago, NewEra said:

    Looking through this thread, I don’t seem much bashing.
     

    Here is the gist of many TSW members vs 49 as I see it:  His contract is coming to an end and the majority of the board agreed that his ability on the field isn’t worth what his market value will be.  Paying him big bucks could screw us in the long run as he’s just not a playmaker at the position. 
     

    personally,  I’d be ok giving him the same contract as Milano.  I think he’s an ok LB. His problem imo:  lack of big plays.  We hear that it’s because I of the scheme and I’m sure that part of that is true….but the other part is his lack of decisiveness imo.  His processing isn’t fast enough and that’s why he doesn’t make the splash plays other LBs make.  God blessed him with freaky athleticism and length and he seems to have gotten by on that to this point. His mental acuity regarding the game hasn’t progressed as we had hoped.

     

    jmo. 

    Thanks for your input and insight I appreciate it. Yeah there's not too much bashing on this thread but it's a pretty common reoccurring theme on here and other platforms as well. I get it, he has things to work on. Every NFL player has things to work on, especially a 23yr old MLB. I think he'll actually put it all together this year and be more decisive and play more downhill. Often nowadays, it seems as though we all expect players to come in and be stars in years 1 and 2. Some do and some take a few years. He's so young and he's been starting since he was 19yrs old. He's still 2 years younger than Joe Burrow. 

  5. For whatever it means or implies...apparently Taron Johnson changed his number to 7? Not sure of the validity of this as I haven't seen or heard anything about it anywhere else. Just thought I'd share.

     

    Go Bills!

     

     

     

    Buffalo Fanatics on Twitter: "New Taron Johnson number 7 jersey 🥶 single digit for the #Bills slot corner this season 🥶 https://t.co/BuxIuiKp8b" / Twitter

     

     

  6. 7 minutes ago, ProcessAccepted said:

    Not trying to be disagreeable but I just don't think that will work. You are correct in that the owners don't currently see value in diversity but I'm not sure that any class they organize will change that. Until there's minority ownership in the league I do think that will change. While not ideal getting people in the room is at least an opportunity for face to face time and to make an impression. 

     

    I'm not sure what is the right answer I just feel that they have to try something.   

    That's true it might not work, very understandable. But what they've been doing for the past 20 something years isn't working and it's actually just getting worse. I guess the main idea is that they have to somehow make diversity appealing to them in a competitively advantageous way. More wins equal more money, that's more than likely the only way get through to billionaires. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  7. 1 hour ago, ProcessAccepted said:

    What viable solution would you suggest. Looking at the current coach development pipeline there does seem to be evidence that it's not working.

    Personally I don't think any rule should be in place forcing clubs to institute any kind of hiring. What I think needs to happen is that the owners should have to attend classes on why diversity in coaching provides a competitive advantage. Although were are all the same, we still have differences in how we process information and how we view and see the game. Forcing the owners to hire people just based on color/sex/race isn't appealing to them. And obviously I don't know any of the owners personally haha but rather just going off of the history of hiring's and the current situation. I just think the NFL needs to let owners know how it can be competitively advantageous rather than penalizing or awarding mid/late round picks.

  8. As a black man, these kind of rules make a mockery of black people/people of color candidates. I understand what the NFL is trying to do and that is to "Save face". The problem is that they keep trying to make the NFL more diverse from the coaching level up. It doesn't work that way and it hasn't worked that way. I personally think that the owners need to hire more diverse candidates at the higher executive level (Director of PPP, VP, Presidents, Director of college scouting, Senior VP of player personnel/development). Then just let the diversity naturally trickle down to the coaching level. Idk it's just kind of counter intuitive. It creates this narrative that people of color or women are only hired because of a forced rule rather than them just being qualified for the job. 

    • Like (+1) 4
    • Agree 4
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  9. 41 minutes ago, H2o said:

     

     

    You'll find it at about the 3:15 mark in the video. 

    Thank you! I think this might be the hit, I thought it was another one but thank you!!

    1 hour ago, strive_for_five_guy said:

    That the Stevie Johnson why so serious game?

    That's the game I thought it was. It was a vicious hit.

    • Like (+1) 1
  10. Good morning,

     

    I've been searching for a few years for a video/clip of a hit on Chand Ocho Cinco from Donte Whitner. I cannot find it anywhere and was hoping someone on here might be able to find it? The game was in Cincinnati in probably 2009?

     

    Thanks!! GO BILLS!! 

  11. Did the Dolphins get better this offseason? Yes. Did the Bills get better this offseason? Yes. It is what it is honestly. I remember the Bills having star receivers and good lineman and running backs over the years and it never amounting to much. Having good players is only part of what you need to have a good football team. When I look at the Dolphins all I see is some good players. It reminds me a lot of the Redskins 2001 or 2015 Bills. Lot's of big names, average QB's minimal playoff appearances. The Bills have a top 3 front office, top 3 coaching staff, probably the best facilities in the NFL. There's just a lot of unproven things with the Dolphins at this point. 

  12. 16 hours ago, SCBills said:

    Good. 
     

    While the knee jerk reaction to the Hill trade and our CB depth is to take a Cornerback at 25, I think all this WR movement tells us that the pick needs to be a Wide Receiver. 
     

    Taking McDuffie, Booth etc at 25 isn’t stopping Tyreek Hill.   We can’t even single cover him with a healthy Tre White.  He’s just not that type of WR… you have to bracket.  
     

    25-30M going rate for elite WR’s now… Draft one and hope Diggs loves Buffalo enough to take a “discount” when the time comes. 

    Never really thought about it like that but I do agree.

    • Like (+1) 1
  13. 9 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

     

    To be sure, but I do think it means Beasley is likely gone, because I don't think McKenzie would have come back to understudy behind Beasley another year.  He made it clear he thinks he can start in the slot, and why wouldn't he look for that  vs. re-signing here?

    Absolutely. Once the story broke that Beasley was seeking a permission for a trade, figured he was as good as gone.

×
×
  • Create New...