wilcoam
-
Posts
356 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by wilcoam
-
-
We are extremely healthy, I would expect all or most of those on the non practising list to suit up
As for our new mgmt, I love the plan, it what we needed all the years, if they can execute it, we'll be fine moving forward
But its fair criticism to be be a skeptic and to question if they have the exp and chops to execute
Look we should easily beat the Jets, and Ilm fairly certain we will win 6-7 games this year
Some will see that as a step back and you're right
If we win even less it'll be hard to deflect legit criticism of this new regime
However of we win 8-9 games, boy are we set for 2018
Folks will have to admit these guys know what they are doing
For now I;m just sitting on the fence and gonna wait to see how it all plays out
Meanwhile I'll enjoy the games, the socialization of tailgating, and I'm always pumped for the home opener
But yes, I see why alot of fans are not pumped the way they were the last 2 seasons
You don;t have a HC bullshitting you
And I think most of us know we are not likely to be contending for a playoff
You just have to enjoy the transition this year, I will
jc
-
I agree 100% with MJT and others who do not see a tank, what I see instead is an overhaul of a roster and a major player transition, but it's not geared to lose and get a high first round draft pick, instead its geared to giving up a little short term talent for more potential long term talent by stockpiling 2018 draft picks
Really no different than the 2017 draft trade with KC, we gave up on potential better CB for the long term, in return for still a potential great CB and a first round future draft pick, its a great m,one, sure I could say I think we should have got even more, but the idea works, as does any trade where you accomplish the same objectives
And I think its overall a marvellous plan, sure I personally don't like losing Darby, this whole story that he was not a fit with the new scheme is a bit overstated, but I understand why they did what they did
I just think they want to win by hand picking their own players (nothing new there), and creating a new culture (nothing new here either) and with players that have a certain disposition to both a hard work ethic and their way of thinking (that might be unique)
Sure, I'm not yet convinced their plan works, call me a skeptic, and its been applied inconsistently, I mean why lose too easy comp picks if that's the plan, by signing marginal talent, and I'm not a big fan of whom they signed this off season and the money involved, and our secondary looks badl on paper, however I will be the first person to admit my criticism was incorrect if this team wins more than games than I think it will and or the secondary plays better than last years unit
But I sure do like the plan, if they can execute it, its miles ahead philosophically speaking than any other HC or GM the Bills have had in a long time, a and if it works, fans are in for a nice run here, and boy we deserve it....
jc
-
I'm torn too, about whether our Buffalo Bills really need to have our entire secondary and wide receiver corp blown up
Or is it just something all rookie HC and GM do, the majority of the time which is unsuccessful
Because the transition to all new starting players takes too much time
The bottom line will be the final 2017 W-L record
If we win 9 games plus fans will hail our rookie mgmt as genius poised to become perennial playoff teams
If we win 7-8 games fans will say look 2017 was a transition year, give these guys time
And if we win 6 games or less the knives will be out because clearly all their moves didn't work out for 2017
It just has to play itself out
jc
-
Nothing wrong with feeling the future is bright in Buffalo but I think you are conning yourself if you thing only winning 6 or 7 games this year denotes moving in the right direction, lo, to me it denotes making a ton of offseason moves that didn't result in winning any more games
Just saying...
jc
-
No question, the player turnover, both in terms of last seasons starters, and the entire roster, has been humungous between the Whaley/Rex regime and the Sean/Beane regime, more so than any other regime here in quite some time
Basically the entire 2016 WR and Secondary starting lineup is gone (7/24), so yes no starter from last year is safe, but if this regime doesn;t win games, mgmt won't be safe either, because turning over the roster doesn't necessarily equate to winning more games, ask all the other rookie HC and GM's that failed, time will tell...
jc
-
The OP is correct that in the last 7-8 years not a single trade where out team traded up in the draft has worked out
Yet we keep doing it, or rather every new set of mgmt does it, and folks continually cheer it on
However we have more success with trades outside the draft
jc
-
I buy that the majority of Bills players have trust in Sean's HC ability
However alot of that trust is based on his character and not his coaching record
And if HC Sean wins 9+ games the year the trust placed in him will grow
However the opposite is true
If he goes out and only wins 5-6 games this year that trust will organically recede
So it only means something if you win, just like today's blockbuster trade will only viewed in positive light years from now if we win
jc
-
I also don't see a tank, but I surely see a major transition, both in our entire WR corps and SECONDARY corps where 7/24 starters from 2016 have been replaced, not to mention all the depth
The question is will Mgmt now turn to every other starter from 2016 and replicate?
If they are continually in transition, its that much harder to play winning football, which is my greatest fear when the Bills take on new rookie mgmt, typically that transition of players takes 3-4 years, where you don't win, and its the next regime that benefits from all your moves
Time will tell here, but I agree with the assessment that the trades today make us weaker short term, more so in the secondary, long term they likely make the Bills much much stronger, if they can re-sign or franchise Matthews, and if they hit on the extra 2 picks acquired, just the same as maybe we got a weaker DB in White than what we could have gotten at #10, that extra draft pick, if we hit, bodes well for the future, and the future really is the 2018 draft for this team
jc
-
Let's be honest, the reason our Bills got extra high draft picks for next year is because we got lessor players back in that Sammy's potential is way higher than Matthews and Darby's potential is way higher than Gaines
Short term the Bills lose a little, but long term those draft picks make the trade a potential big win for the franchise
That being said in terms of short term Matthews is no slouch, he is a top tier #2 NFL WR, or at worse a lower tier #1, and Gaines did have one good year, so maybe in the right system he will improve
IMO Matthews is solid enough that very few of us will miss Sammy, my concern is that we purged every one of secondary starters last year, its a massive transition year on this D, and we might have serious issues with our 2017 secondary, and that both new players are impending free agents
jc
-
The mistake mgmt made wasn't necessarily singing fringe depth players like Holmes, Ducasse, and Davis, it was that they signed them b4 June 1st or whatever the deadline was, or didn't make an arrangement with their agents to be signed after x date so they would not count as a negative towards the comp count
If we lose, what should be easy lower 3rd and 4th round picks, it makes that much harder to trade up in 2018 for the players mgmt really wants, which now that you can trade the picks, is likely their best value, not so much actually drafting any players but to be used to move up
Sons eno one really knows all the cap rules, other than what is listed on the overthecap website, I am not convinced releasing these players b4 week 10 changes the formula, where we are presently have singed 7 and lost 5, meaning there would have to a swing of 3 players just to get one comp pick
jc
-
Sure, why not, despite this entire forum anointing Holmes as our WR #2 or WR#3 back in March. lol, I always thought there was going to be an open competition at the position to both make the team and where they end up on the depth chart
Now I am not convinced Holmes or Brown even make the team, we will see what transpires in the first 3 exhibition games, who gets injured, who does not, and other variables
jc
-
I can't argue Graham's play declined at the end of the season last year however it should be noted he was still rated as our best secondary player in 2016 and having played better than either of Hyde and or Poyer
So if you want to create a narrative that Graham was finished, fine, what does that say about the players who have replaced him, that in 4 years of NFL experience neither approached the level of play Graham was at, and was even worse than Graham at his worst?
Just saying.....I will miss Graham
jc
-
Just my opinion, but I think the NFL rules need to be modernized/changed with regard to the use of weed for medical purposes
In that regard, I think Henderson should have asked for a meeting with the commish prior to using
Laid out his case
Said, look I am going to start using weed, are you willing to exempt me?
Maybe nothing changes and he still gets suspended
But the action would have put pressure on NFL mgmt to have empathy for his unusual situation
I have friends with Crohn's, and they are very upfront about it, they all smoke weed, its hard not to have tons of empathy
Just saying it easier for the NFL, and fans, to judge Henderson harshly, when you no clue about his condition, his pain, etc
jc
-
I find to hard to believe anything in KC comes close to either Franklin's or Le BBQ's Texas ribs or brisket
I mean you never know, but I'm a doubter
Let's just say there's a reason for the long lineups beyond being fashionable and trendy
Trust me the seasoning alone on Franklin's pork rib is to die for
jc
-
Like Scott Law I neither saw the Pegs, or DW, say it was their fault for allowing anyone to dismantle the identity of our 2014 team, the D pass rush/front 4, and it was Pegs hire, and Pegs willingness to allow that to happen, resulting in less wins the next 2 years, and still no playoffs
However that was then and it has little to do with 2017 moving forward
And with no offense to those who think whatever Coach Sean says this off season is inspiring, my guess is you likely said the exact same thing to whatever Rex or Marrone claimed those off seasons too, lol, belief is al, 'you gotta stay positive', but.....at the end off the day the only thing that really counts is winning 10 games plus, on the field, during the regular season, not owning anything or winning anything, or saying all the 'right' things in the off season
Who cares if Sean owns it? If he can only guide us to 6-7 wins in 2017, big effin deal?
The off season PR is pretty and all, from ownership down to Chris Brown they all look focused, and say all the 'right' things fans want to hear but this is the NFL, you ain't gonna last unless you win on the field, and you are not deemed successful unless you both win 10 games plus and make the playoffs, and not just once, but numerous times
jc
-
Considering Rex took over a 9-7 team, the most 'successful' Bills team in a decade, I could not understand why Rex was given a mulligan by the fans after year 1, and in the same consideration of Sean, I apply the same logic
If the team only wins 7-8 games this year then he didn't do a better job than Rex, and all the off season moves he made will have amounted no a nothing burger, and he wins even less, then come Jan 2018, looking back, it will time to a admit his moves failed
On the other hand if he wins a minimum 9 games clearly our HC made moves that led to more wins, regardless of making the playoffs, in this scenario I'd extend the mulligan, he should get credit for a winning record
Yes how the team looks, in terms of on field preparation, may make fans feel better going into 2018, but it won't change that this years season wasn't 'successful' if we only go 6-10 and or 7-9
jc
-
To me a 'successful' season is one in which you made 'improvements' from the prior season, in the chase for the ultimate objective, which is both winning the division, and or making the playoffs - So IMO winning 8-10 games will be a 'success' even if we do not make the post season
However if our Bills only win 3-7 games there's no way anybody can call the season a 'success' unless you use context and a ton of personal opinion to make excuses as to why our Bills didn't improve our W-L record from the previous season, however the 'success' is only fleeting if you cannot use the building of having improved one's record, from say 7-9 to 9-7, to gain more continued success by eventually winning even more games and making the playoffs
No offense, but going 3-13 can never in way be called a 'success', neither can 6-10, unless of course you only won 2-3 games the previous season, there is the optic of 'success' in moving in the right direction, complete 'success' can not be achieved with out at least winning a min 9 games and thus ensuring a better than .500 season
I still view our 2014 season of 9 wins as have been a 'successful' season despite not making the playoffs because we improved our win total by 3 games that year, yet it is still the only season in the last decade I could deem that
jc
-
On the more positive side, since most NFL pundits and media, with a few exceptions, all project our Bills only winning 6-7 games, if they in fact win more they will have exceeded those folks expectations, especially if they contend for a playoff.
As for claiming the Bills won't have any success the next 3 years, I take you back to this very time in 2015, when every Bills message board was talking about having one of the world's greatest D units, and whether we would win 11, 12, or 13 games
If any writer had suggested back then that 3 years later we would still be struggling to win maybe 9 games and were not really any closer to a playoff spot but in fact are further back, fans would have been sarcastic, angry, and ridiculed the writer, as they did anyone who suggested the #2 DVOA D might struggle with a new scheme and HC/DC, but the writer would have been, ah, dead on
Which tells me rabid sports fans don't really want to hear an honest assessment of the team they root for, they prefer to believe, every player will exceed expectations, every off season player move will be a huge success, nobody major will get injured, that anybody we lost in the off season is a bum, and our team will undoubtedly win way more games than they lose, but in reality nothing like that actually occurred anytime in the last 2 decades, and is unfort unlikely to happen this year, but shsshhhhsss, don't mess with anyone's belief, they get all uppity, lol
Sorry...
jc
-
I'd love to see our Bills surprise all the pundits and be a legit playoff team but I'm just not sure the talent on the back 7 D will get us there
USA Today just came out today and ranked our secondary 4th worst in the NFL and our LB's 24/32
Not saying they are correct, just saying if they are close that ain't gonna get into the playoffs, or anything close to a top 5 or Top 10 D
Nor does it suggest the revamping of our secondary paying dividends in 2017
jc
-
I keep reading, all over this forum, what a 'special' player M Hyde is, or what a great get he is - Honestly I don't get the hype, yes I think he's a solid young 5th year depth player, with potential upside to start in the right system, but one should remember the Packers never saw him an NFL starter, and made no attempt to re-sign him, here's a review by a packers media pundit who witnessed Hyde's game in and game out over 4 seasons
Despite some of the big plays that Hyde made down the stretch, Hyde is part of the reason that the Packers’ defense struggled as much as it did as well. Hyde does not have top end speed. He struggles in man coverage. He has made some big plays, but gave up his fair share as well. Hyde is a solid all around player, but does not do anything special. He would have been a solid piece for the Packers to bring back if the price would have been right. When the Packers’ secondary was healthy in 2015, Hyde was designated as the player to shadow the opposing team’s tight ends. He was repeatedly targeted, and mostly abused in coverage. 2016 brought about a bigger role for him because of a secondary that was ravaged by injuries. Hyde performed admirably. An eight-game stretch does not, however, erase the kind of player that the Packers should have learned that Hyde was over the stretch of the first four years of his career. In order to retain Hyde, the Packers would have had to pay him more money than what they let Casey Hayward walk away for just one season ago. Even if you remove Hayward’s outlier season in terms of interceptions, Hayward was always a better cornerback than Hyde. Hyde’s versatility, while useful is not worth the price that was ultimately paid to him from outside of the organization. The lack of an offer by the Packers proves the team felt the same way. By removing Hyde from the defense altogether, the Packers are almost forcing themselves to get faster in the secondary. They will need someone to replace all the things that Hyde did for them. They’ll likely find someone who is better athletically and with more speed. His play down the stretch turned into a big payday. Hyde should be commended for that. Without Hyde, the Packers may not have made the playoffs, let alone been one step from the Super Bowl. It can also be true that the defense was bad with Hyde on the field. It can also be true that Hyde is one of the main reasons the secondary was as poor as it was. Hyde was a limited player. His new contract is paying him as if he is a premium player. While the Packers technically got worse by losing Hyde’s versatility in the short run, it forces them to get better in the long run. For that reason along with several others, the Packers made the right call by letting Hyde walk.
jc
-
I'll be elated if Ragland is our B Spikes of 2014, but playing inside, and stops the run on the first 2 downs, and comes out on passing downs
What's wrong with that?
Its a terrific way to use the rookie in 2017
Who said he has to play every down?
Shag and Adolphus didn't
In fact how can folks be so excited about a guy like Hyde
Who in GB (until they suffered injuries) over 4 years was mostly a 3rd down backup depth nickel CB playing mostly just one down
Barely 600 snaps in 2015
And yet so unexcited about Ragland just playing two?
I keep reading posts about Hyde being 'special'
How so? What has he actually done as a player to date that was 'special'? lol
Nada, he's a nice piece of needed change in our secondary but he has very little upside
I am far more primed about Ragland's upside, let's dream big
Not to mention Hodges PFF rating vs the run last year was superb, better than Zach's and Lorax, that's EXCITING....
jc
-
Excellent points on how Preston excelled in 2014, note Schwartz moved the insider Spikes outside where he equally excelled
Which brings us to the million dollar question
We have 3 MLB's in Ragland, Brown, and Hodges
So who moves outside and can they be successful there, because as you pointed out its likely not gonna be a fit for Preston
jc
-
I see our D 'potentially' improving to the 16-19 range 'if' Hughes has a better year, Hodges/Ragland stop the run, and Hyde becomes a legit NFL starter
I think Hodges could turn out to be a terrific FA signing in lieu of losing Zack, but I'm unconvinced any of the safety moves were upgrades
I prefer Hyde as our nickel corner as we will play alot of nickel (as did GB)
Wish we would have signed Tre Boston to start
Not saying I'm right but those 2016 PFF ratings on folks like Hyde/Poyer/P Brown, etc are not confidence builders
jc
-
Im confused, was this ever in question? I mean I thought it was pretty clear our 3 LBs are Lonzo, Brown, and Ragland.
Actually, us fans feel/think Lonzo and Brown may be liabilities vs the run and that's why they went out and brought in Hodges, who got a terrific PFF LB rating last season, just a bit below Zack Brown, and specifically vs the run, rated 12th best in the NFL, right after, sic, Bradham
Based on last years stats, Hodges and Lonzo, are the best 3 down LB's, and one of Brown and Ragland, will begin as a backup, though Frazier seems to contradict what alot of us are thinking, lol
Considering we should be in nickel/dime 65% of the time, and only 2 LB's will see the field, I see a rotation of sorts, Ragland and Hodges being the primary LB's on run downs, both come out for Lonzo and Brown on passing downs, that works, and now having brought Hodges in, re-upped Lonzo, and depending upon if Ragland is the real deal, our LB's situation is not as dire as it once looked, might turn out to be a strength, however no one really knows until the guys hit the field, let alone, who is starting, etc, its all a transitional year
jc
2024 comp pick update
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Actually the NFL ranks Tremaine as the 61st best player in the league, as per his new contract, thus potentially the top tier 3rd round comp, noting any FA signed after the April/May draft doesn't count, nor any FA signings under 2.5M, so G Edwards also didn't count, not Harris or Sherfield
However a DL Calais C FA signing might negate the 3rd round comp
jc