Jump to content

timekills17

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    403

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by timekills17

    NFL schedule release this Thursday

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    I prefer the opener against the Patriots. Especially with significant changes, i.e. new QB or new coach. It makes it more an on-field talent vs. on-field talent game than later games where the coach's ability to game plan is much more relevant.

     

    Not that I've felt we've been outcoached over the past ~20 years or anything.

    ESPN Sportscenter Draft Simulation

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    I believe that if Allen falls to 10 many teams would trade up. But Shaq Lawson, M Dareus, Kyle W, Jonathon Allen, LorAx Rags and Preston would be formidable. Get a safety & DB in Rd 2 & 3, then pray that Sammy isn't crippled for life and we resign Gillislee.

    I'd take Allen as well, although I think our play is tied to how effectively our "tweener" safety and LB members can play that zone between DB and LB and less on getting another DE - this year.

    If Sammy can't play (most) of the season, our offense will be effectively the same as last year, which wasn't that bad. I don't think we lose a lot with our #2 and #3 or whatever receivers gone even though I did like Woody.

     

    Bottom line: I don't think we pick a CB, because I think the Bills feel they have the safety and "tweener" LB/safety they need to protect the DBs in this defense. A DE that like Allen that can force a quick play helps, but only if we have a LB corps that can stop a quick pass to a TE or RB. And my main concern is the only LBer we have with speed is an aging ex-Oliner that may or may not have had a once in a career year.

    why draft a raw QB when we've got Cardale on the roster

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    I don't think it takes two years to evaluate talent a the quarterback position. Sure - like the "it takes three years for a receiver to blossom" discussion, they'll improve. But they improve from either a good starting point to become very good, or a mediocre starting point to become...something more than mediocre.

     

    Tom Brady, Ben Roethisberger, Russell Wilson - all example of QBs drafted with varying (from none with Tom to high with Ben) expectations to start quickly. All have improved as QBs tremendously since their starting jobs. Tom and Ben weren't sure fire HoF'ers their rookie years, but their skill, physically and mentally, as witnessed by the coaches showed they had a good base and they learned the game and became better.

     

    Russell Wilson was drafted as the thrid string behind expected starter Matt Flynn and previous starter Tavaris Jackson (ugh). Admitedly, Wilson was given equal opportunity that preaseason to showcase his talents, but it was obvious enough that he had the BASELINE needed to be decent and improve. Not "bad but with potential."

     

    Drafting a "bad but with potential" QB is dumb in the NFL. There is no time in the NFL these days to progress a bad QB to a possibly good one when snaps are limited and wins are needed.

     

    We should draft good QBs. They may end up not good enough, but I think they can be evaluated and moved on from within two seasons. The problem becomes the money committed to them when you decide to move on - which is even more reason not to draft "bad with potential" that eats up cap space and a player spot on the roster.

    Prospect Watch: Mitch Trubisky QB, UNC

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted · Edited by timekills17

    I really don't understand Pegula being there. If he is attending draft eligible player workouts, what else is he sticking his nose into regarding football operations? I know I know...he is the owner and can do whatever he wants blah blah blah....

     

    All I can say is the more involved he is, the more this team is f***ed.

     

    You're one of those guys that thinks a business owner should just stay in his/her office and let the experts run the show, I assume.

    I'd prefer for the ownership to have an idea what is going on. Participating and learning doesn't automatically mean making the decision.

    I'll admit that owning a football team is different than many other businesses where the owner or CEO actually has experience in the business, and (usually) got to the top through savvy business practice. In the NFL, the owners may not have the acumen to make player picks. I'd wager the NFL is not that different when it comes to it's typically when the owner/CEO becomes completely disengaged that the business fails.

     

    Being engaged is never a bad thing. I'd think the owners that are interested, stay involved, and know their limits are the best owners.

    Being involved is great. Listening to the "pros" debate their positions on why a player should be picked helps to strengthen the process. Over-valuing your experience is the danger that good owners can avoid.

    Cut Thad?

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    I noticed this also. It was funny how Collinsworth made it seem like they really put things together on that drive. He never mentioned that their starters were playing against the Bill's second or third string.

     

    Actually, Collinsworth specifically mentioned the Giants first string offense was playing against the Bills second string defense. Al Michaels was the one who said the Giants finally looked like they were getting their act together, and Collinsworth said "What I see is a first string offense doing okay against the Bills second string." He also mentioned multiple times how impressed he was with the Bills o-line depth, something that has concerned most of us.

×
×
  • Create New...