HappyDays
-
Posts
22,191 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by HappyDays
-
-
Common theme among the Tyrod detractors is to bring up Wentz. Which lead me to believe you didn't pay attention to the Eagles last year. Those first four weeks though.You just listed Carson Wentz who the Eagles gave up a boatload of picks for. if you really would rather have Tyrod over Wentz after last year you are just a TT fanboy.
Indeed, as much as receivers Alshon Jeffery and Torrey Smith decided to sign with the Eagles for the strength of the organization and a decent contract, they mostly signed because of Wentz. They mostly chose Philadelphia because of what that have seen of the Eagles quarterback as a rookie, and the respect Wentz has already gained around the NFL.
On Monday Smith said that he was excited to play with the Eagles in large part because of what he saw from Wentz in terms of the leadership Wentz showed as a rookie. Smith said he watched how the Eagles responded to Wentz, and he knew that was no small achievement for any rookie, let alone a rookie quarterback from a small school.'
http://www.phillyvoice.com/carson-wentz-makes-eagles-long-last-desirable-destination-again/
Meanwhile TT can't even draw Andre Holmes.
-
Does this board have an ignore feature I'm not seeing? It's not too hard to tell who the trolls are around here, and the one in this thread has finally tested my patience enough.
Thanks for compiling all the research transplant. It's good to know you didn't lose everything in the BBMB purge. One bit of research I keep thinking of doing, but never find time to do, is an analysis on how QBs perform without their top receiver(s). There seemingly aren't any articles out there that have tried to find out what the effect is, and I'm curious to know how Tyrod's regression after losing Watkins might compare to other QBs.
-
I've noticed that Tyrod taps the X button instead of holding it down, causing a lot of his passes to float incomplete. If he held the x down he would have a tighter, more efficient spiral. Those are just facts, and I think the Bills brass knows that and told him to do that very thing.
Lol, and EJ has the L1 button permanently taped down
-
The Bills make me want to SHOUT
-
Okay I like this signing after reading the thread. Could be an underrated pickup. I am still worried about our #1 though, please don't let Sammy get injured.
-
He could be talking about the draft as well. He just said bring some guys in. They could have told him their draft plans for all we know.
Well a supposed insider that was at BBMB and is here now (username here is Bills Media) claims the front office doesn't see receiver as a big need, and they plan on drafting a secondary player in the 1st round. This guy was also right about Tyrod restructuring a week before it happened so he has some credibility. But who knows, I'm hoping we draft our #2 but after the top 2-3 guys there's a big fall off.
-
Did Tyrod specifically state better receivers?
Also you got to take into consideration, if you're a free agent WR, wouldn't Buffalo be towards the bottom of your list for destinations?
Since you and someone else asked, this is what I'm referring to:
In taking the new deal, Taylor lowered his 2017 salary-cap number from $15.9 million to $9.7 million, which the quarterback hoped would give the Bills financial wiggle room to build a better team around him.
"Hopefully we can bring in some guys [at receiver]," Taylor told the Bills-produced radio show last Thursday. "We definitely have some guys on the roster, as well, too. But the more talent the better. I put my faith and my trust in the coaches and the management, that they'll bring in some guys that can create some plays for us."
Honestly I don't know why "at receiver" is in the brackets like that, there must be some context from before that line which made it clear Tyrod was talking about receivers. It might be clearer in the actual John Murphy interview.
And maybe other receivers don't want to come here too badly, but I haven't even heard that we were in the mix for anyone. Jeffrey, Marshall, Torrey Smith - no talk about the Bills going after these guys. For comparison we know the Bills went after OT Andre Smith but he made a different decision. Haven't heard anything like that about FA receivers, except I guess Kamar Aiken.
-
I don't understand what the plan at receiver is. Tyrod said part of the reason he took a pay cut was to get better receivers on the team. But as of right now we have worse, yes WORSE, receivers than last year. Is the plan to evaluate Tyrod for a year or not? Sounds like they're just saying F it, we'll run our backs into the ground and pray Sammy stays healthy.
This has been a bad weak spot for Whaley, along with RT.
-
That's not necessarily true. Every person who doesn't get coverage because of removing the mandate aren't created equally. If you are priced out of coverage because of the bill, then you'd be right, but make no mistake there are plenty of people who can afford it who would rather not obtain insurance.
Sure but the GOP could placate those people by simply removing the mandate. They have every branch of the government locked down, wouldn't be a challenge. But my understanding (which admittedly is very limited and probably mistaken) of the bill is that the mandate was necessary to pay for it. Maybe there are other avenues, God knows I'm not an economics expert.
-
In other words, theyll be exercising their freedom of choice as adults to opt out of the system and should they try to get back in only when they get sick, they will have to pay a 30 percent penalty for their effort to game the system.
That's not "freedom of choice." That's like me saying when I pass a multimillion dollar mansion, I am "freely choosing" to not buy it. Trust me, I'd buy it if I could afford it. That isn't liberty, that's pure capitalism in a literal life and death market.
If the GOP really just cared about liberty, they would simply remove the individual mandate. But the liberty argument is just an excuse. The truth is there's still a vocal wing of the party whose philosophy is basically "let poor people die" and that wing won't accept compromise. It has nothing to do with choice, it has everything to do with cost. They want to get rid of the mandate AND make it impossible for certain income levels to have healthcare. In this economy, that's a quick way to lose your voter base in 2 years.
-
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/3/14/14923784/christopher-ruddy-medicaid
Close Trump friend says ditch Paul Ryan's plan and embrace universal health care
A key Trump friend and ally is urging the president to dump Paul Ryans Affordable Health Care Act and embrace something that sounds sort of like a lightweight version of a single-payer health care system. Christopher Ruddy, CEO of the conservative Newsmax brand, isnt normally considered a major thought leader on policy issues, but he is a longtime friend of Trumps, and counts as one of a relatively small number of conservative players who have closer ties to Trump than to congressional Republican leaders.
And he is warning loud and clear that Trump could inherit the bad political baggage of both Obamacare and the House Republicans if he insists on going along with Ryans version of repealing and replacing Obamacare.
Instead, Ruddy puts forward the rather radical notion that Trump should attempt to live up to his campaign promises on health care rather than signing on to legislation that betrays them all. To do it, he encourages Trump to ditch his effort to court the Freedom Caucus and instead come up with a bipartisan plan that accepts a large government role in providing insurance coverage.
The Ruddycare seven-point plan
In an op-ed published Tuesday, Ruddy argues that Trump should be sticking to his own gut on healthcare reform. He did this during the campaign, which helped him win Democratic states like Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania.
And he offers the following seven-point game plan for Trump to regain the initiative:
Ditch the Freedom Caucus and the handful of Senate Republicans who want a complete repeal of Obamacare. They don't agree with universal coverage and will never be placated.
Find a few parts of Ryancare II [i.e., the AHCA; Ryancare I refers to Paul Ryans longstanding desire to privatize Medicare] that can win passage in the House and Senate with either GOP support or bipartisan support. Declare victory.
Rekindle the bipartisanship in Congress that President Obama destroyed. Impanel a bipartisan committee to report back by year's end with a feasible plan to fix Obamacare.
Reject the phony private health insurance market as the panacea. Look to an upgraded Medicaid system to become the country's blanket insurer for the uninsured.
Tie Medicaid funding to states with the requirement that each pass legislation to allow for a truly nationwide health care market.
Get Democrats to agree to modest tort reform to help lower medical costs.
While bolstering Medicare and improving Medicaid, get Republicans and Democrats to back the long-term fix of health savings accounts. This allows individuals to fund their own health care and even profit from it.
As a pure political strategy, the key elements here are probably the first three points. A commission probably wont lead to any major changes, but thats okay. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Affordable Care Act exchanges will probably stabilize in the next year or two even if nothing changes. Trump can do nothing and fix it.
But steps 4 through 7 do suggest a route to a possible future vision of American health care.
This all sounds pretty reasonable to me.
-
Canada seems to be doing just fine
True but I just don't think our massive population could sustain it. Plus rich Canadians come to the US for their healthcare. Obviously we wouldn't have a similar option if we went the same route.
-
Remember when the ACA plan so good the entire Democratic party exempted themselves from it?
And this shows just how far modern conservatives have fallen, and why moderates like me have trouble staying sane in today's political climate. It's a GOOD THING that you don't have to buy government healthcare. That's basically what Bernie Sanders wants, everyone on free government paid healthcare. That's how you bankrupt a country. What you should want (and what Republicans wanted in the 90s) is a mix of private and public healthcare. Give poor and middle income people a government option. No it won't be perfect, but it's better than nothing. Meanwhile the private industry can continue on in the free market and people can choose to go there's instead.
What the AHCA wants to do is drive up the price of healthcare for everybody, which kicks over 24 million people off their healthcare with no realistic opportunities to get it back. There are actual real people that will die if this bill passes because they can't afford their prescriptions anymore. There are stories like this all over. It would be devastating to roll Obamacare back. Keep tweaking it, sure, but this replacement is horrible.
-
If 14 million are projected to drop off the healthcare coverage rolls because the mandate to have healthcare coverage is dropped, what's the big deal? If it's so great, they'll buy a policy.
Because the policies will be exorbitantly more expensive, especially for senior citizens. This is why the AARP has come out against the AHCA, the buck gets passed to their members. If there's one group you do NOT want to face off against politically, it's the AARP. The bill will fail.
It kicks poor people off their coverage and doesn't give them any feasible replacement options. So it doesn't matter "if it's so great" if you can't afford it.
-
Only my 2nd venture into this forum, but can any Trump supporter tell me how they feel about Trump walking back his statements about Obama wiretapping him? I mean he woke up one morning and decided that little factoid was important enough to tweet, plenty of his supporters actually believed him for no reason, and now it turns out it was complete BS. Doesn't this bother you if you voted for Trump? At all?
So you are saying the NYT was lying when they wrote:
Can you tell the difference between general wiretapping ordered by some random official, and direct wiretapping of Trump ordered by Obama? The NYT's statement isn't inconsistent with anything that has happened. It is plainly obvious that Trump read an article somewhere claiming Obama wire tapped him, and he ran with it. He didn't have any intelligence to go off (in every meaning of the word).
-
Another Whaley star pick!
I sure hope this didn't take you a long time
-
You think we still add a S? Probably need 2 CBs or more
I can't imagine us passing up on Adams or Hooker if they're there at 10. I thought CB Sidney Jones made a lot of sense too, but with his achilles injury we could conceivably pick him up in the 3rd round and store him on IR for a year. I would guess at at least 2 secondary players in the draft along with a few more depth signings.
-
So we have 2 safeties that can switch to CB in a pinch, and Darby as our #1. Not a bad start to the secondary, especially with the draft supposedly being deep there.
-
This is an awful offseason to be looking for wide receivers. Draft and free agency are both lacking. Whaley needed to get this taken care of last year.
-
You said "he sure didn't take snaps like a receiver that started 13 games. In a lot of those he was extremely limited"
Except his snap count is pretty close to Dez Bryant's, a WR who started 13 games. And the difference is easily made up considering the fact that Dez was the clear #1 all year, rather than the #2 for half of it like Woods.
I don't understand what point you're trying to make. Dez played 5% more snaps first of all, and no him being the #1 doesn't make up for it. You literally just said Woods turned into the #1 for most of the year. You're all over the place so I'm gonna bow out of this one. If you think Tyrod had normal time with his receivers compared to other teams, I don't know what to tell you. Look at the chart yourself and make a smart evaluation.
-
He played 60% of our offensive snaps and missed 3 games. Roughly, doesn't that track him out compared to a guy like Dez who also missed 3 games?
I don't see how Dez Bryant's snap count is remotely relevant.
-
I mean, I just said that.
Clearly when you have Sammy taking up 40% of the snaps then ditching for 8 games, it's gonna throw everybody off. Goodwin was the #3 who turned #2. Woods turned #1.
Furthermore, I have no reason to believe we ran 3 WR sets as much as some of the other teams in the league. That also throws off the snap count.
Woods turned #1... except he was constantly injured. Maybe he officially started 13 game but he sure didn't take snaps like a receiver that started 13 games. In a lot of those he was extremely limited. So I don't know where you're getting this idea that Woods took snaps like a normal #2. He didn't, it really wasn't even close based on that chart.
There were numerous times where our top 2 was Goodwin and Powell. Anywhere up to 40% of the time actually, but it was probably slightly less than that. Even if 1/3 of all snaps we were missing Woods and Watkins, you don't think that would have a detrimental effect on ANY quarterback in the league? There were also times where Goodwin was injured in addition to Watkins and Woods. I mean come on, Tyrod isn't a top 5 elite QB, he needs more than that. It's perfectly reasonable to argue that most if not all of Tyrod's drop off from year 1 to year 2 was because of receiver depth.
-
Goodwin played 60% of our offensive snaps, Woods 59.5%, Sammy 39.5%.
You'll find most teams have their #2 WR's around 60-65%..
Will we find that? How about some proof. Here's mine:
http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/snapcounts
Woods played less snaps than Goodwin. Do I even need to say anything else? Or are you going to argue that "most teams" have their #3 playing more than their #2?
-
The only passing related stat that truly correlates with winning and losing over the long term is passer rating differential: http://www.si.com/more-sports/2011/06/23/most-importantstatpasserratingdifferential
The two teams with the best passer rating differential in 2016? New England (1st) and Atlanta (2nd).
Hahaha this is great because so many people have told me passer rating doesn't really matter, or it's easy to manipulate. Turns out it's easily the most important stat to look at when evaluating a team's success.
Things Taylor did on the field in 2016 that kept him around
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
At the other board there were like 4 posters who made it a point to come into every Tyrod thread and talk bad about him, literally all of their posts were about how Tyrod sucks. Seems like there's only 2 of those posters here. So an upgrade by my count.