Rocky Landing

I suppose that depends on the definition of "enhancement." I can say, with 100% certainty, that my performance in bed, and on the ski slopes is much better with a little weed. My performance on an aptitude test?... not so much.

That's not exactly true. There was quite a bit of speculation, right up until Kolb's injury (I'm not even sure which one!), as to who would be the starting QB last season. I would say that a clear majority of people on this forum argued adamantly that EJ should start right away, and anything else would be a waste of time. You might have been one of them. I was not-- and I felt distinctly in the minority.

That's really not true. We can easily place a value on future picks. (And the FO better be doing just that!) And, we can certainly discus how our current situation, and other likely scenarios will affect the value of our future picks. It's an interesting discussion. This thread is all about the perceived value of our trade-up for Watkins. How can we discus that trade, if we don't discus the potential value of what we invested?

I think this is a fair point, at least strictly in terms of numbers. But, watching the games (at least by my recollection), Tuel mostly stunk up the field. Lewis, i believe, played higher than expectations, and had clearly done his homework leading up to his performance. But, I think there was a definite difference in style, and it's easier to imagine EJ having a higher ceiling from what we saw, and Lewis less so. That's just my gut feeling, and my gut feelings are often wrong. Cute, but transparent.

That post pretty much qualifies you as a "hater."

Your post should have, "I conjectured," in quotation marks. It would still be wrong, however. I conjecture that Jauronimo was speaking in the present tense.

I agree with this. I wasn't at all happy with the trade when it went down, but it's exciting as hell. ALL IN!

In the simplest terms, the risk is that we won't get an adequate return on our investment. Our first, and fourth round picks in the next draft is our investment, which will be compounded if we have a dire need, say, at quarterback. The absolute worst case scenario is that Watkins gets hit by a train, and we get absolutely nothing for our investment. But, a more plausible scenario is that EJ plays below expectations, or gets injured again, we don't see a significant increase in our passing game, we miss out on a quality, first-round quarterback selection in the 2015 draft, and we start the 2015 season with very poor options at quarterback. That is a very real risk.

^^^You two should get a room.^^^

Training camp hasn't even begun, and already we are building the foundations for... excuses.

GMs are also looking to sell tickets, merchandise, and product sponsorship. And, considering that Sam has the #2 top selling jersey, (as a 7th round pick!), I would guess that will give him a leg up on making the final roster, IMO. The NFL is, after all, a business.

Is that not what sports journalists do in the offseason?

As a professional set-lighting technician in Los Angeles, I will take exception to your overgeneralization of the media. In fact, I've actually worked quite a bit for Fox Sports. The media are certainly whores, in that they sell themselves for money, but doesn't that just make them another business? Whores are just trying to make a living like everybody else. And, it's not entirely accurate to say, "they earn their keep by shilling for teams, coaches, and players." They're simply selling stories and opinions. The more interesting, compelling, (and yes, accurate), those stories are, the more people will watch/listen-to/read them, and the more they will be worth. They're not shilling for teams, players, and coaches. They're shilling for Coors, Budweiser, Old Spice, and, now with the newer LGBT-friendly NFL, maybe some nice designer fashions. But, don't think for a moment that these sports-media whores don't take the accuracy of their reporting seriously.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but CJ has pretty exceptional hands for a RB, no? I remember Gailey playing him for a while as a WR. EJ's going to have a lot of options out there. We didn't just draft Watkins to be an elite WR. We also drafted him because we are "all in" on EJ.

I think you are looking at it too narrowly. Speaking in terms of the thread subject, the value of Watkins should not just be confined simply to his ability, but to the impact he has on the team, and its overall value thereof. Suffice to say, if he's all he's cracked up to be, Watkins could probably make a play if Kevin Kolb were throwing to him from his hospital bed. But, would that get us to the playoffs? Not likely. Like it, or not, Watkins' effectiveness, like ALL receivers, will be inextricably linked to the person throwing to him. The debate here isn't whether or not we have drafted an elite player, but whether the value of his addition will equal, or exceed the price we paid for him. And, the tricky part is: if EJ is not up to the task, we have undermined Watkins' elitism for next season, as well as this one.

That, unfortunately, is one of the elements of the trade-up that makes it a high risk.

"Ain't," would've been more apropos. Can we get back to football, now? If it was Sam's idea to plaster their embrace all over the media (an event which lasted all of three seconds), I hope he is getting residuals.

High risk/high reward.

Trading up for Watkins was a high risk/high reward move. That term, "high risk/high reward," means that there is the potential for high net gains, as well as the potential for high net losses. (In this context, I am talking about net gains and losses in very general terms.) What the analysts are seeing (and it certainly is debatable), is that the likelihood of net losses outweighs the likelihood of net gains. It's hard for Bills fans, especially during the offseason, to take off the rose-colored glasses. But, to just look at the potential rewards, while ignoring the risks is short-sighted. And, at any rate, regardless of how Watkins pans out, it's going to be very frustrating a year from now to spend the entire first round of the draft twiddling our thumbs.

Especially if what this team wants to do offensively is win.

Nothing will be proven until players hit the field. But, it is inaccurate to say, "they did nothing to bolster a weak against the run defensive line." Spikes? Schwartz?

These low marks really don't surprise me at all. From the outside, the Watkins trade-up really is a bit of a head scratcher. Nobody was saying that WR was one of our greatest needs. But, from Whaley's "all-in on EJ" perspective, it was a high risk/high reward move. In terms of value, it seems crazy. We paid a high price to replace our #1 receiver with another #1 receiver. And, we're not just betting "all-in" for this year-- we sacrificed next year's draft as well. But, every pick we made AFTER round #1 seems perfectly in line with this strategy, and with GOOD VALUE. So be it. I HATE that we traded away Stevie-- I'll admit it, I was a fan. I was face-palming at the Watkins trade-up. I think we paid WAY too much. But, all-in, means ALL-IN. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE to gamble. In fact, it's one of my favorite things about football. I was always a little lukewarm on Whaley, but now I LOVE him. I don't agree with pushing in all of our chips at this moment, but, what the hell? Sometimes, you just go for it, and I respect that. There is no back-peddling with an all-in bet.

(...Deja vu...) Yay! We're winning the offseason! Again!

Manuel, Lewis, Dixon?

Personally, I was wishing we would have picked up a veteran already. But now, is there even anyone noteworthy left in FA? Or if there is someone on the trading block, what do we have left to trade? CJ? More of our picks from next year? Doesn't seem likely to me. When Whaley said, "all in," he meant it, for good or ill.