GoBills808

Oh come on everyone likes Hughes. He’s our only pass rusher.

Which is kind of a weird insult, considering no QB in NFL history has a 68% career average and Romo is in the top 5 all-time best completion %.

... Asked and answered!

I think Samuel can be a Smith-Schuster. The question is whether or not he needs an Antonio Brown to be as effective because you are probably correct about Foster. I guess I have higher hopes for him than you, but still I don't see where that #1 is coming from in the draft.

I appreciate your ability to contextualize QB performance. I'm sure you've been as charitable to Allen regarding your reasoning as you've been here with Rosen.

If he's going to bring up passer rating I think it's fair game to mention that Allen had a better rating than Rosen. Not sure why you'd object to that. *EDIT- and I haven't heard anything about the Bills looking at drafting a QB this year, while there's talk of that in Arizona, so I'd say no, the same thing isn't happening here.

Between Samuel, Jones, and Foster I think they could be a good group. I'm expecting both Jones and Foster to progress next year and if Foster starts breaking into that WR1 role having two underneath/slot posession type guys in Samuel and Jones who can get open reliably would be imo best case scenario for the offense, considering what the draft class at wideout looks like to me anyway.

My guy at wideout is Samuel out of SC...thoughts?

Not for nothing but color me shocked that he writes of Allen: '...There are also still plenty of questions about Allen, who needed a late surge to finish with a 67.9 passer rating, the 14th-worst mark for a quarterback in a 300-attempt season in league history...' while giving everyone's favorite other Josh the kid gloves: '... it's unfair to judge Josh Rosen after he spent 2018 playing behind backup linemen..." and failing to mention that Allen's rating was actually, um, higher than Rosen's last season. FWIW Barnwell was a very big Taylor 'look at the stats' guy while he was in Buffalo.

LOL I just read back and you made the Evans comp last page?...didn't mean to steal your thunder! Overall looking at wideouts I think the value might be in the 2nd, I don't know how much the FO is going to enjoy spending a 1st on a wideout like Harry wrt the needs of this offense re: Allen.

Evans played big is my thing, he bounced corners off and was always coming back to passes and catching with his hands. His physical limitations didn't translate into weaknesses in his game, they were simply part of who he was as a wideout- not very fast, ran average routes due to limited quickness, but he understood how to play and make the most of his size. I don't see Harry doing that, I see the ball getting on him instead of him attacking it...his limitations physically sort of define him as a wideout in a way that Evans' didn't. I can't say for sure obviously but I don't see Harry having success in the pros unless he drastically improves his technique which is why I don't like him as a first rounder. Screams project imo.

To be fair I predict Super Bowl every year, he may have been listening to me.

I just think he's not a natural catcher of the ball. Big physical wideouts can do well for themselves in college but imo you need more to justify a first round pick and body catching is kind of a bad look for a guy who isn't a particularly twitchy route runner or explosively fast. I'm not sold on Harry at all tbh, he looks like a much lesser Mike Evans to me and I don't think that's value for your first rounder. His combine numbers will be interesting.

Let me know when you see a team win 40% of a game.

Predicting 6.4 wins in the NFL is the height of statistical pretentiousness.

Bojack.

I think he's meh. Rather have that Samuel kid from SC.

Correct. He's attempting to predict the Vegas o/u for 2019-20. My guess (haven't seen the current listings) is that if the Bills do open at 6 wins it'll get pushed up pretty quickly, but maybe that's the fan in me talking.

Ha! Katy Perry's ok but I'm mostly about the shark tbh...the guy just decided to throw his own dance moves in there and it's still hilarious to me. Watch the one on the right doing the dance correctly and then watch the one on the left??

Will legit do anything to get left shark back in the mix

Think you're right on that...but after high school personally the car was only in case of emergency. Too many weird angles and not in the fun way, a man needs some space to maneuver!

Why are they always having sex in the car?

Couple points: the study does indeed reference illegal immigrants as opposed to legal immigrants, specifically here: ...Illegal immigrant incarceration rates are not well studied, although one investigation estimated that 4.6 percent of Texas inmates are illegal immigrants while illegal immigrants comprise 6.3 percent of that state’s total population.7 The best research on illegal immigrant crime exploits a natural experiment to see how the removal of illegal immigrants from an area through the Secure Communities (SCOMM) program affects local crime rates. SCOMM was an interior immigration enforcement program started in 2008 that checked the fingerprints of local and state arrestees against federal immigration databases. If ICE suspected the arrestee of being an illegal immigrant, then ICE would issue a detainer to hold the arrestee until ICE could pick them up. The Obama administration ended SCOMM in 2014, but the Trump administration reactivated it. If illegal immigrants were more crime prone than natives, the crime rates in those local areas that were first enrolled in the program should have seen crime decline relative to areas that were not. As it turned out, SCOMM had no significant effect on local crime rates, which means that illegal immigrants were not more crime prone than natives.8 and here again: There were an estimated 2,007,502 natives, 122,939 illegal immigrants, and 63,994 legal immigrants incarcerated in 2014. The incarceration rate was 1.53 percent for natives, 0.85 percent for illegal immigrants, and 0.47 percent for legal immigrants (see Figure 1). Illegal immigrants are 44 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal immigrants are 69 percent less likely to be incarcerated than natives. Legal and illegal immigrants are underrepresented in the incarcerated population while natives are overrepresented (see Figure 2). If native-born Americans were incarcerated at the same rate as illegal immigrants, about 893,000 fewer natives would be incarcerated. If natives were incarcerated at the same rate as legal immigrants, about 1.4 million fewer natives would be incarcerated. Secondly, the Cato Institute is hardly my go-to source for policy studies. I linked it because imo they are more likely to publish in support of more stringent immigration policies; that this study found the opposite was more a nod to the idea that the data is likely to be reasonably unbiased. Another study among numerous others that finds similar results is here: https://www.nap.edu/read/21746/chapter/9#328 and while it does not differentiate between illegal and legal immigrants specifically, it includes in their 'crime' figures illegal immigrants whose sole offense was entering the country illegally, and the percentage of total immigrant crime (both legal and illegal) is still sufficiently low to support the findings of the Cato Institute I referenced. It takes a little bit of math (partly because there are some conclusions to draw from the data that aren't stated outright but fall into the 'generally accepted' category like the <5% figure, and partly because some data for illegal immigrants like incarceration rates aren't totally reliable) but you can work it out yourself. Most of these studies agree that we tend to overestimate rates of crime (again, other than entering the country illegally, which I am well aware is a crime) and incarceration for illegal immigrants, so the rates could actually be lower still. We have a difference of opinion on what good policy for immigration might look like (logically, advocating for an open border policy in light of the data seems to make the most sense, if crime is the motivating issue) but I think the statistics are generally agreed upon.

In my comment you quoted I said <5% of the total population of illegal immigrants. The evidence isn't anecdotal, it's widely available from various studies including this one: https://www.cato.org/publications/immigration-reform-bulletin/criminal-immigrants-their-numbers-demographics-countries

Locks are overrated.