Sammy Watkins' Rib

If we don't make the playoffs this year there will be fans that were born in 2000 and have gone through their enitre grade school picked on for being a bills fan and having never seen them once make the playoffs in their 18 years.

Let's see how it plays out. 95% of us thought we would feel some pain from losing Karlos Williams. Also, IF we get 16 games from Sammy, that alone would cancel out the loss of Gillislee, Woods and even another player. And are they considering Goodwin one of our top three receivers? I guess technically true, but his production will be replaceable by one of the new free agent acquisitions.

Two teams you say are not good or were awful last year both finsihed 9-7. What does that make us? We could easily lose to the Bucs or Broncos. God help us if we lose to the Jets week 1.

That 92% for Patriots to win the divsion is disgusting but accurate. 14% chance for making the playoffs for us also seems about right.

Nice fortune cookie title OP.

Unless we trade him to the Browns, Jets or a similar team he's automatically going to a better situation in terms of a QB and team that will throw the ball to him consistently. Factoring that in, it's not likely that it will appear that we will get the better of it. And worse case we really get shafted if he ends up playing to his top 5 draft status.

Really Sammy should hit those numbers even if he misses 3 or 4 games.

Agree with some of your points regarding Gilmore and the defenses failures. But I think with regards to Watkins you are greatly under estimating how important the offensive philosophy and QB are for a WR. Is there a greater example in NFL history than Randy Moss in Oakland? And I think we have seen a bit more than just flashes from Watkins. His final six games of the 2015 season he played at a top 10 level if not top 5 for his position. No coincidence, he saw double digit targets in four out of those final six games. Zero double digit targets in the previous games he played in that season. (He was at 5 targets when he left at the half of the Bengals game and only two targets in the Miami game). Yes health is a big concern but I'm actually more worried about his supporting cast.

And what did we start that day off with? The #10 right? So how many 1st round picks did we net? Only one. This is pretty standard. I am not mad at all that we only netted one first round pick in the deal.

Watkins wins the properly utilized argument every time. Is there any player over the last three years that even comes close to not being utilized properly as much as Watkins? 1. Run oriented team 2. Flawed QBs throwing him the ball (EJ, Orton and Taylor). Why would you expect more than 1? You swap first and you receive an extra one the next year. That is how it always works with the exception of just moving 2 or 3 spots.

This is 100% correct. Nobody sasy we traded one first round pick for Marcel Dareus. We simply selected him with the pick we already possesed. So in the Watkins deal we traded one first and a fourth. Not two firsts. You absolutely have to factor in the compensation you receive into the equation. I agree. But unless it starts becoming the norm to say a team traded their first round pick to make their selection then it doesn't seem equally fair to say that we traded two first and a fourth for Sammy Watkins. Being fair would be saying we traded a first and a fourth.

Given the fact that we didn't pick up the option on him I wouldn't be surprised at all if his mind is drifting off to other possibilities. That would be expected from any player at this point. Just bad management once again.

But at the same time, when does anyone EVER say we traded our first round pick for Shaq Lawson, or we traded our first round pick for Marcel Dareus? Never. You say we took Shaq with our first round pick or we took Dareus with our first round pick. So techinically in Sammy's case it does make sense to say we traded a first and a fourth to take Sammy with our first round pick. At least that is the way I see since the 4th overall is better than the 8th overall. Now, if we moved back from 8th to 12th (downgrading our first pick) and also gave up another 1st and 4th round picks then it would make a little more sense. But I'm fine with however anyone wants to say it really.

This would be so depressing. So it will likely happen.

Pretty iffy IMO that the AFC West would have more than 1. Basically that means you think the Cardinals are a lock for 10 wins. Maybe a couple years ago that was true.

It's the worst if we are talking about it not being competitve for the division title. But the AFC South is still the worst overall until it proves otherwise. I still like the Bills and Miami over all four of the teams in that division. Not saying Buffalo and Miami would go a combined 8-0 against them but i do think 5-3 is probable. Throw in the Pats and you have a much better division.

That's half true. Both were to blame. Tyrod had arguably his best 1st Quarter of his career in that game. The other quarter and half he didn't do much but also didn't need to do much as we still built a 15 point lead. The final quarter and a half he was dreadful as was the defense. IIRC, the Raiders offense couldn't get out of their way in the first quarter of that game. Dropped pass after dropped pass and a couple boneheaded penalties. So it wasn't so much the defense holding the Raiders down it was the Raiders holding back the Raiders.

Actually, if anything I thought the Rams were a better team the week before we played them then I did prior to the season starting. They had managed an upset of the Seahawks and had a winning record going into the game. But even then, their offense was so bad, dead last by a good margin, that I was expecting a win still going into the game. Better examples are the Cardinals and Patriots.

Yep. Just say no to a QB who's body type is one that nearly had his career completely derailed due to a non-contact injury. Not to mention he was extremely average at best up to that point anyway.

I agree nobody wants more ties. But at the same time, a few more ties every season isn't going to be a deal breaker from a fans perspective. This change must be in the name of player safety, it undoubtedly lessens short and long term injury risk, just at a really small level and only in special circumstances. Yeah but that was before all the concussion stuff came to the forefront though. Is Goodell not allowed to change directions along with public and player opinion? I don't understand the criticism on this point. Next thing that needs to change is either discontinue the Thursday night games or, probably better yet for all parties, add a second bye week and have every team play the Thursday game after one of their bye weeks. This would also extend the season by one more week giving the league one more week of prime-time games to sell to the networks.

He wasn't too bad in '15 either. Just the entire defense stunk. But in '15 he was a major contributor in the final two minutes of two games we won. The Titans and final Jets game. He got to both Mariota and Fitz hitting there arm in mid-throw and causing interceptions in both instances. They don't go down as sacks but those plays were more valuable then an actual sack.

NFL needs to cut the BS and just make it 16 games for the next suspension. He already had a 1 game, then a 4 game. A player shouldn't need anymore of a wake up call than that.

We absolutely were supposed to beat the Rams on paper. That was no upset.

I'm looking forward to Taylor getting a third season under his belt as our starter. It should hopefully serve as the "tie breaker" in deciding if we hang onto Taylor or not as our starter. If he plays close to or worse than his 2016 performance then it's an easy move on. But if he plays close to or even better than his 2015 season then it is likely an easy decision to keep him. Hopefully his 2017 season isn't split down the middle between the two.

He was in 2012 or which ever season that was when he broke his leg. He was having an all-pro season up to that point.