MPT

Maybe we can still get Jackson at 22. Please?

So do y'all hear yourselves when you say things like "these players shouldn't be protesting against prejudices in the legal system" and follow it up with "I know literally nothing about the incident, but this black guy is definitely guilty of something horrible." Or nah?

Sounds like a fun Friday night!

I thought snowflakes were the ones who were easily upset and offended? You know, like when they go on a "this is what's wrong with the world" rant in response to a completely logical question.

Agree that we paid a premium for a former Panther, but we don't know that they didn't look at Poe. He may have just wanted to play with Short and Kuechly instead.

I agree with all of this. Jackson is a better player than Tyrod, but he's still going to need an offensive system catered to his strengths and weaknesses more than a prototypical pocket passer would. The Bills were completely unwilling to do that with Tyrod last year, but I'm hoping the change in OC will bring more creativity and flexibility to the offense that would allow a player like Jackson to reach his potential as a playmaker.

Threaten, threaten, play the victim. Sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between a troll and an inferiority complex.

I agree with the last sentence. I just think it's because they're hoping to make the team better and not because they're afraid of some media drama. They wouldn't have benched him in the first place if that were the case. If they're okay with benching their starting QB in the middle of a playoff race for a fifth round QB who obviously wasn't capable of starting, they wouldn't balk at benching him for a first round guy who is regarded as a possible franchise QB. Tyrod's "baggage" is simply a result of him being better than the guy he was benched for. If we get a guy who makes that invalid, then the baggage disappears. The media seized that story because it was an incredibly risky move, and Peterman was not meant to start in his first year. Drafting a guy who is actually meant to start minimizes that risk. If anything, the media would immediately be asking when the rookie was going to start, not second guessing it when he does. And when he does, you could do a lot worse than having Tyrod as a backup and a role model. Pretty sure this is all moot anyway. Like you said, Tyrod probably won't be here next year. I just want it to be because we got a better (or cheaper) guy, not because they want to appease the media and some blindly emotionally fans like the OP.

Obviously. So does everyone. But if they can't find a better vet for a reasonable price, they're not going to ditch their best option just because some fans can't cope with it. That's not the rational move. Look at the title of this thread for god's sake, and tell me which side is acting on emotion.

I am all for drafting the best QB we can get. I'd also like to get a better vet QB. But I think trading or signing for a worse QB just to avoid any "drama" you can't deal with is pure nonsense, and I'm sure the front office feels the same.

Interesting strategy. Sign a worse veteran QB so the rookie looks better in comparison. If only we had signed Tebow last year! Peterman might not have looked nearly as bad. There was only drama because Peterman was so obviously unprepared to be a starter. The Bills made a colossal misjudgment that almost derailed their season. That's why the media jumped on it. Not because of anything Tyrod said. And the Bills went 4-2 the rest of the season while beating every team not named the Patriots. I'd say they coped extremely well with the distraction. Replacing the QB with someone worse just to make you feel better about the transition is pure emotion, and I guarantee you that McDermott and Beane have never considered intentionally making their team worse just to avoid potential media pressure.

Just a reminder to the reminder that Matt Schaub had Arian Foster and Andre Johnson in their primes and one of the top offensive lines in the league. And Gary Kubiak was calling the plays, so Dennison's involvement in his success is questionable.

Most hockey teams used to have cheerleaders. Not so much anymore. But skirts on skates? I support that.

Can we please get an internet tough guy in here to shoot this guy in the head?

You really don't need to explain this. He is either trolling or an idiot. Not really. Fantasy is like 80% luck and 15% being awake earliest on Wednesdays.

And that is why you should never, never, ever deal in absolutes. Never ever.

It's also about public perception. Oddsmakers will make it more attractive to bet on a team that isn't getting as many bets. The Bills aren't viewed as a team that can reach the Super Bowl, even if they realistically have a better chance than, say, the Jets. They also know a lot of people will bet on the Patriots regardless of their actual chances, so the odds reflect that too, just in the other direction.

How can one bring the football to his body if one does not already have control of it? "Bringing it to his body" is Riveron's asinine explanation that has never, and will never again, be relevant to a catch. Receivers catch the ball with their hands all the time without then bringing the ball to their body. Benjamin is the only receiver to have ever been held to a standard of "securing it to his body" in addition to catching it. His back foot was also still dragging when he brought the ball to his body, so that explanation doesn't even make any sense. It was a Patriots call, plain and simple. Speaking of Patriots calls, how embarrassing is it that their fanbase is riled up about an illegal formation call that wasn't even illegal? THAT'S the worst call they can choose to complain about. The Patriots had two touchdown drives made possible by ridiculous holding calls, and the play before Foles' TD reception was blatant pass interference against the Patriots that was just ignored. That's a potential 18-point swing (and 14-point actual swing) in favor of the Patriots due to referee bias. Illegal formation? GTFO.

The Pats got two bogus holding calls that directly resulted in 13 points. The refs also neglected to call an obvious PI on the Pats in the end zone, but the Eagles ended up scoring on the Foles touchdown. That's 17 points the referees tried to give the Patriots. Luckily, this opponent was able to overcome those calls. Most teams can't.

Well, we learned that if you can't even recognize the strengths and weaknesses of your starting QB, let alone tailor your scheme to them, you'll get fired and replaced with someone who is hopefully less oblivious.

Game-changing horrendous penalty call. Big surprise.

Yes. People mostly seem to be debating whether Dennison or Tyrod was at fault. I hated Dennison as our coordinator and I'm fully aware if Tyrod's limitations, but that was a touchdown if Kelvin just turned around without pushing off. The play call avoided running into a stacked box and Tyrod threw a perfectly placed ball. The fault lies with the receiver who was signed to make those exact catches and bungled it in the worst way.

My bad, I was going by the $21 million figure that someone threw out there. Just can't trust anything these days. But my point remains. Mario Williams was a fine player, but he was never the game wrecker that his salary suggested. He'd have multi-sack games against bad opponents and disappear during important games. Surely you guys remember the frustration this caused?

By what metric? Fitz was 20-33 vs Tyrod's 22-20. TD:INT was 80:64 vs 51:16. QBR was 76 vs 96. This isn't meant as praise for Tyrod; I just don't think you can make a case that Fitz was better, or even as good. Edit & disclaimer: I loved Fitz when he was here too, so I'm not hating on him.

Are y'all high? He was a fantastic pass rusher, but that was all he could do and he got paid an absurdly overblown amount of money. Six years after his signing, defensive ends (including Super Bowl and NFL MVP's) still aren't making his average salary. That contract, like Dareus', was an embarrassment to the franchise.