HappyDays
-
Posts
22,156 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HappyDays
-
-
Key word "free agents." Everyone knows free agents are negotiating before the terms of their contracts are up, teams have a vested interest in looking the other way. It's a different situation when they're under contract.
Here's where you straw man. "Exact hypothetical contract details?" Let's try to be a little less disingenuous, please.
My guess is Tyrod believed he wasn't going to get any more than the Bills we're offering
Lol, I said this exact statement.
Oh, right because those teams that lost draft picks didn't risk it.
:lol:I don't think both sides disagree too much, all I'm saying is no one knows. And that Tyrod could win this restructure, and it's certainly a reasonable belief that both sides thought they were getting a good deal with the restructure. It's a pointless conversation anyways. Let's say you're right. Is it illuminating to me that the Bears and Browns weren't willing to pay Tyrod more than he paid the Bills? Not at all. Teams make dumb mistakes all the time so it's not like other teams' opinions of Tyrod has any material impact on his level of play. I for one thought the Bears would be going after Tyrod, but Glennon changed that which IMO is a big mistake. So we'll see.
-
Agents talk to teams constantly. You're being naive if you don't think Tyrod's agent didn't get a good sense of his market value before restructuring the contract. Is that not something Tyrod would want to know?
You're being naive if you think teams will risk draft picks on talking to the agent of a player still under contract, when that player isn't even in their plans. Why would an agent even casually have a conversation with another agent? It's not just the team but the agent himself that can be punished, right? Yeah there are some skeevy ones out there but they're gonna choose their battles. I don't believe for a second there's some underground network of agents constantly talking to each other about their clients under contract. Not to say you don't put feelers out there, of course you do. But the Bills and Tyrod both were in the same boat, they had guesses about what the market would look like and nothing more.
-
Teams do this all the time. It's called due dilligence.
Ya'll thinking that TT and his agent had no clue what his value on the open market would be are insane.
Of course he had a clue. But there's a narrative you've built that has his agent slyly talking with other agents, getting exact hypothetical contract details, and then going back to Tyrod to let him know the Bills are as good as it gets. That narrative is nonsense. Teams are not constantly negotiating with players under contract with other teams, I refuse to believe that is happening. The NFL does punish it. My guess is Tyrod believed he wasn't going to get any more than the Bills we're offering and decided to bet on himself another year. Again - if Tyrod plays well this year HE wins the restructure, not the Bills. If he had played well under the old contract they would have had him on the cheap.
-
Teams got punished. That must mean it doesn't happen....
You know agents work for multiple players and talk to teams all the time, right? The Jets don't have to call Tyrod through the Bills FO to plant some seeds.
You're talking out both sides of your mouth. If teams are willing to break tampering rules, risking fines and draft picks, just to NEGOTIATE with Taylor... he must be one of the most highly sought QBs in the league. Or do you really think teams cheat on tampering with every single player who's already on contract? Come on. You're filling in the blanks as you want to but the truth is no one knows anything. It makes no sense that teams would break tampering rules to offer LESS MONEY than he was already getting. How does that make any sense?
Thank you Shaw for coming to this forum. I was a little on the fence about this discussion but now I am firmly decided that he can't have been secretly talking to teams, it makes no sense.
-
Have you heard of the legal tampering period? TT had a whole day to talk to other teams. If the Browns were gonna give him $10M more than the Bills and the starting job, why would he stay?
He would not be the first player to take less money to stay away from career killing Cleveland, Tony Jefferson for example. My best guess is Tyrod thought Cleveland and Chicago would be interested, once he saw that Chicago was going after Glennon he saw the writing on the wall and realized he would only get more money if he signed with Cleveland. So there was no benefit to moving on from the Bills. He and the Bills both re-rolled the dice. The contract is basically a restart of last year. If he plays well this year Tyrod will come out the winner of the restructure, that is what people forget.
-
Shady cared about winning more than anyone on the field last year. Really couldn't care what kind of trash talk he uses on Instagram, and god saying that out loud makes this whole thing sound really dumb.
-
Trubisky is my favorite QB in the class. If they want him in the 1st they'll have to trade up and you know what I wouldn't hate it if they really like him. He has good accuracy and makes mostly smart decisions, it's just his experience that's the question.
-
Trump is slowly turning into a standard Republican president. Supposedly he is considering cutting ties with Bannon. His "drain the swamp" supporters are jumping ship but the GOP base is bigger than that and they will like the recent moves. Smart move by Trump to get his approval ratings up without much risk. Russia's angry response is just posturing.
-
If Tyrod goes down and Yates has to start the season is over anyway. Yates wont do anything but give you a worse draft pick.
And what if Tyrod is injured for just a series or a quarter? What if he's injured for one game against a bad team and our defense has been clicking? This logic makes no sense IMO.
-
He isn't in the Bills plans, otherwise it would be like the first EJ off-season where we were spoonfed constant updates on his training regimen.
-
no worries Yolo!
I just figured I'd explain the nuance of the post since some were trying to say I was comparing the 2 and further bash the "cot"
unfortunately I know more about Rodgers than I care to with my wife being a bachelorette fanatic. his brother strikes me as kind of a douche and I'm not entirely convinced Rodgers wasn't using Munn as a beard (don't care) so maybe you're right, after his terrible year last year maybe he can improve 😉
So I'm not the only one who thinks Rodgers is secretly gay... good to know. I just have a feeling.
-
Our QB depth would immediately be better than last year, I would like the move.
-
@arrowheadaddict
Bills GM Doug Whaley is reportedly in love with Deshaun Watson. Thats bad news for teams picking later.
http://arrowheadaddict.com/2017/04/07/bills-rumors-deshaun-watson-love-buffalo-nfl-draft/
Perfect smokescreen, good job boys. I swear every year there's some leak about a QB we secretly love in the 1st round. If this makes someone trade above us great job Whaley.
-
Yeah, I am not big on removing events unless they are extreme. In this case, it was VERY extreme where we got a shutout in one game due to extreme circumstances but gave up over 25 points per game in the other 15 which was 94% of our total games played. It does the team no good to shut out a broken team one week if it then gives up 25 points per game or more the rest of the season. And the week 17 removal from the offensive side is also clearly extreme too for us since we started a scrub QB and a raw QB finished the game, so wasn't really our offense out there.
Other than that, yeah I totally agree with you on Football Outsiders DVOA rankings, its a pretty good metric.
To be fair most teams only have to play the Pats once, or zero times, so adding in a hypothetical 2nd game against Brady isn't really correcting for anything. I think the DVOA ranking makes the point on its own in any case.
-
If the Seahawks trade him to New England they will regret that decision within 3 years if they plan on going to the Super Bowl again.
-
Thank god tbe filibuster is gone. What a dumb idea, it has no place in our democracy. Republicans and Democrats have both used it. A simple majority should be enough.
-
FireChan I like your method of posting a response, I am stealing it.
Again, what holes have we filled with picks 6-32? Shaq Lawson at DE?
I already answered this in my original post. The Bills haven't filled holes with those picks but the solution is to draft better, not to throw away picks on a player that is very unlikely to succeed.
This is two fallacies meshed together. There is zero reason to suspect that the Bills highest ranked QB when they were picking was the QB taken next. I cannot stress that enough. For all we know, Teddy and Carr were their #1 and #2 QB's in 2014. We just don't know. To say that they would make the same pick that another NFL team did is a speculative argument at best.
This is true but for the purpose of analysis I just have to go off the final draft board. You've argued well enough that Carr should be included so I'll grant you that. He is close enough to the range and it is definitely conceivable that he could have been a late 1st rounder. I dont know why Carr fell to the 2nd. Just looking at his draft profile...
http://www.nfl.com/draft/2014/profiles/derek-carr?id=2543499
...it looks like his main weaknesses were playing in a spread offense and playing for a smaller school. I mean it's crazy to me reading this profile that he fell as far as he did. He didn't have mechanical issues. He had good pocket presence. The last line of the profile says "Will be a starter sooner rather than later and the degree to which hes able to make those around him better will determine his ceiling." Yeah your guess is as good as mine why he fell so far but he is still the exception, not the rule. The first success since 2008.
And then the second part. You say you the Bills should recognize they are not smarter than other teams, and that they couldn't have known what QB's were gonna be good, but they should know what other first round prospects are gonna be good? If this team had drafted Ngata and Orakpo instead of Whitner and Maybin, we still would not have had a franchise QB. Ergo, we still would not have found consistent success.
It's not definitively true that if we had taken Ngata and Orakpo we wouldn't have found success. As I said originally every time you miss on a 1st round pick you create a hole on your roster. Filling those holes takes more picks that could have been used on prospects like Wilson and Prescott. You can never know for sure if your prospect will work out but there is at least a decent shot, much more so than if you take a QB there.
Again, this is the exact thing you argued against in regards to QB's. I could easily say, "just take better QB's." Same argument.
It's not the same argument because there weren't better QBs to take. There are better players at OTHER positions that we could have taken but not QB. The exception as I agreed would be Derek Carr, we could have taken him in 2014 and been in great shape.
Responding to the rest of your post would leave me mostly repeating myself.
-
I 100% agree with this statement but my conclusion is wildly different.
If the draft is a crapshoot, and usually only 1 QB per draft on average becomes a franchise tier guy, you absolutely need to take shots on guys you believe in. Derek Carr would've been successful taken a round earlier. So would've Dak. And Wilson.
If finding a franchise guy is dumb luck, then you need to buy some lotto tickets. And as much as folks bag on 1st round QB's who bust, let's look at Bills first rounders in the last 11 drafts who are on the roster in the 6-32 range. Shaq Lawson. That's it.
You need to take shots on QB's. Oakland didn't turn their franchise around because of Khalil Mack. They did it with Derek Carr. Luckily for them, they ended up with both. But I contend that if we reached on Carr at #8 in 2014, we would be the ones who made the postseason last year, not them. And while I understand your take of "then all QB's would be taken higher" taking an early second late first QB prospect in the top 10 ain't that crazy. It just really isn't.
The problem is every guy you take a shot on in the 1st round creates a hole on your roster. And filling that hole next year creates another hole. The reality is that if the Bills traded all their bad 1st round picks from the last decade for the next QB taken off the board in the same draft, they would be in the same boat now because not one of those QBs would have been a success (you MIGHT have a case with Flacco but I really doubt he wins a Super Bowl here with this coaching staff and roster at the time). Whereas if they traded all their bad 1st round picks for other players at other positions they would almost surely be better off now than they are.
The problem with Bills drafting past isn't that they haven't taken enough QBs in the 1st round - when would a 1st round QB have saved our team at our draft positions? - it's that they have drafted poorly. The solution isn't to switch over to a strategy that haven't remotely worked out since 2008, it's to draft better players in the 1st round.
You ignored my list of QBs taken in that range because there isn't really a good rebuttal to it. QBs taken outside of the top 2 in the 1st round are traditionally bad. Since 2008 the ceiling of that range is Ryan Tannehill. If I'm taking a QB at 10 he has to be better than Tannehill, that's pretty much the floor of legit starting QBs. The only rebuttal you could have is that just because it hasn't worked out in a while doesn't mean it won't this time. Which is true. But there's something to this. There's something about QBs that have enough flaws to scare away the early teams, but also have some wow factor that convinces other teams to overlook the flaws. If a good CB falls to you in the draft it's not necessarily because teams above you didn't like him, it may be that there were just better CBs taken earlier. Not so with QBs most of the time. Anyone that slides to 10, like Manuel slid to 16, has some kind of major flaw unlikely to be corrected. This is shown in the data too.
The Raiders would have been just as successful taking Carr in the 1st round, but the Cowboys would have been successful taking Prescott in the 1st round too. Hindsight like that isn't a reason to start taking any QB you like in the 1st round. The failure of drafting a bad QB in round 1 is twofold - you miss out on your QB, AND you miss out on a 1st round caliber player.
-
I heard from an inside source that Bill Cowher was the maitre d'
-
The flip side is imagine if the Raiders took Khalil Mack and Carr was gone by their next pick.
If you take this logic far enough you'll have 4th round QBs taken #1 overall. IMO part of being a smart GM is recognizing that you're not smarter than everyone else. There is an element of luck with the draft, and with QB it's far less than a 50/50 proposition. A real GENIUS would have taken Carr at 1, Wilson at 2, Prescott would be a top 5 pick at least. Since no one sees these prospects coming, it makes no sense to me that you would spend your QB lottery ticket in the 1st round since that's when your other lottery tickets are much more likely to cash in. If there's a QB worth the 10th pick that QB is also worth the 1st overall pick which means you'll have to trade up or already have it.
We don't have to be merely hypothetical about this. How many QBs taken in the 6-32 range end up working out? In reverse order: Paxton Lynch, Johnny Manziel, Teddy Bridgewater, EJ Manuel, Ryan Tannehill, Brandon Weeden, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder... Please make it stop. In 08 you have Flacco and of course 05 you have Rodgers. That's the success rate of the last 11 drafts.
But you're gonna try and tell me the Bills will be making some huge mistake by choosing to not add another name to this list? Come on. You're not smarter than everyone else. It takes a smart person to accept that.
-
I wholly defend the EJ pick in 2013.
Was it a pick that worked out? Unquestionably not.
Was it a smart pick at the time? Absolutely. If you don't have a franchise QB, and you believe that there's a guy available that can become one, then you're negligent if you don't pull the trigger on the guy.
That's not to say you should pick a QB just for the sake of doing it...there's a major difference in the two statements.
I fundamentally disagree with this but I'm guessing it's one of those things we'll have to agree to disagree on. I understand the mindset, but to me drafting any player in the 1st round that is off the team within 4 years is a horrible pick. Indefensible. Not an immediately fireable offense, and there's more leeway with QBs than any other position, but you just threw that pick away. Imagine if the Raiders had taken their favorite QB instead of Khalil Mack (maybe Manziel, or Blake Bortles in an alternate universe) and then passed on Derek Carr at the top of round 2. Forcing a pick isn't worth it. I say always select BPA in round 1. If you're that sure about a QB you should do everything you can to trade up. If you're not sure enough that you're willing to let another team draft them first, then you were never that sure to begin with and you might as well take a blue-chip prospect. Round 2 and onwards I have no qualms with overdrafting a QB. There's just too much value with top 10 picks for me to throw it away on a prayer. The Bills not only didn't trade up, they traded DOWN before selecting EJ. No confidence at all. I mean it's still better than staying put and drafting him but it was an utterly bizarre move that reeked of dysfunction and lack of direction.
What a complete and utter non sequitur. No one has said "only QB matters."
No but they've said we should use a 1st round pick on one at all costs, even though the 1st round (especially at #10) is when blue chip players are available. The Jaguars missed out on an amazing 1st round draft class when they selected Blaine Gabbert in 2011. I mean who was the last QB taken later than #1 or #2 that ended up succeeding? Lately, more success has been found in the 2nd (Carr), 3rd (Wilson) and 4th (Prescott, Cousins). I think the Bills would be much much smarter to identify a QB they like in round 2 or later and grab a blue-chip player at #10, rather than losing out because they took a project QB with major development concerns (see: Manuel, EJ).
-
When has a CB, S or WR ever been seen as the guy who turned around a franchise's fortunes?
Yeah, yeah it takes a team, etc. etc.
Let's get real: The Bills don't have a top QB.
You don't trade for top QBs because they are few and far between.
You don't sign top QBs in free agency because nobody lets them go, aside from a freak occurrence once a decade or so: Brees then Peyton.
You need to draft one and hit on the pick. But this whiny, weak, pathetic, loser attitude of "well we might miss guys! Wahhhhh!" Is why this team has gone nowhere in terms of wins and losses for a generation.
Of course none of this goes to prove that Mahomes should be the pick at 10. If only QB matters, then why not pick QB at every single pick until you get it right? No you can't just keep blindly taking QBs without logic behind it and that's really what you're saying here. You're basically defending the Manuel pick in 2013.
-
Go back to bbmb. I didn't like Fitz or Edwards either, guess I'm a flawed because I enjoy competent play from the qb position. .
I'm gonna guess you specifically meant to not include EJ in this list. Are you another EJ truther? The most bizarre collection of Bills fans I've ever encountered, there's like 10 of you or so that could never let it go.
-
Whaley asleep at the wheel again. Ugh.
I can't tell if this is sarcasm
Tyrod Taylor's Highlights
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
True but the team was fined... And that was just for the owner making a comment, it wasn't actual tampering like we're talking about. All he said was "I would love for Revis to come back." There was no evidence of agent tampering. If it had been discovered that Revis's agent had been talking to the Jets there would have been a much bigger problem. And sure teams might even be willing to tamper for someone like Revis, but Tyrod? Not even I think teams see him as some savior for their franchise.
This is all complete speculation, and I think a lot it stems from the late season reports that Tyrod was not in our future plans. Well a lot of these late season reports were contradictory and a bunch turned out to be bogus. The truth is we don't know what the Bills plans were and we don't know what kind of discussions they had with Tyrod. We also don't know if his agent was tampering, although I think there is good evidence to believe he wasn't.
And it is still true, I'm saying this for a 3rd time, that Tyrod wins the restructure if he improves this year. I haven't seen anything to suggest I'm wrong on that. That doesn't strike me as a scenario where the Bills had Tyrod cornered, it sounds like a negotiation in good faith where both sides thought a redo on the one-year tryout made sense.