Rochesterfan

Depends on what year they are drafting a QB. The talk earlier in the off season by the dolphins reporters was to expect this to be a 2 year slide targeting Lawerence in 2021 and acquiring picks to set that up. if you get Lawerence in 2021 - you are talking 2022/2023 before that QB is most likely ready to shine. If they suck and get Hebert or Tua this year - not sure they are in a better place than with Rosen. We will have to see - it just seems they are willing to (and already have) ripped it to the studs and the piece to build it back up is still unknown. It is a risk for them, but I get it - just not sure it fits in a workable time frame to be logical.

But does it makes sense if you then lost your younger, better LT and potentially your best receiver. Seems like that that would be the potential for a multi year rebuild where just as you are getting good 2021-2022 this guy is over 30 and becoming a potential FA.

We have the GM that negotiated with Clowney’s team in Houston and had a deal minus Bill O’Brien - I think we know what he is looking for.

Boy you are right - Mario did nothing as a Bill - almost 40 sacks his first 3 years, multiple ProBowl, all pro, and anchor to two of the top sack defenses of all time and probably one of the best Bills defenses since the mid 60’s. Boy I hope we do not get that kind of production from other players. Sarcasm off Mario was fine and if the get Clowney it will be a major boost to the team. We will have to wait and see.

Its ok - he will change names and try again.

Love the idea - just a few to many to get any real discussion on. Maybe a few less with offense, Defense, and overall - could include officials, calls, mvp stuff Really appreciate the effort - lots of work, but I think it will be helpful.

I think the first 3 years Mario most definitely lived up to the contract. He made those defenses under Jim and Pettine come alive with pressure. He got sacks, pressures, and helped keep containment on QBs allowing Hughes and Dareus to make plays. Yes his last year was a mess, but Rex ruined that entire defense and no one was playing hard at the end.

You mean invisible in the multi-time prowbowl/nfl all pro type player? 43 sacks over 4 years - with basically nothing the last year where no one gave anything for Rex (essentially 13 sacks a year before Rex ruined him). That type of invisible - if I could get that from Clowney - sign me up.

If you look at 0:25 and 0:26 seconds in the video there is the perfect shot of the ref with the flag already out and starting to throw it and the ball is just arriving at the receiver. That is how how you can be sure whatever he saw had occurred well before the the final contact. The 2 announcers were from the Redskins feed - so of course they were like what the heck - I mean Joe T has not been a relevant announcer for over a decade - this is like Tasker questioning calls in a Bills game. The problem is the limited view we have compared to the refs and people assume all the time that the tape is correct, but our view of the tape is very limited and the refs are focused on a specific area/player group. In the end though - I agree the rule change was stupid and we are seeing the exact reason why - ticky-tack hand fight occurs on every play and you have just inserted a rule to point that out and it will be enforced inconsistently and cause more problems than it solves. Good job Coaches - getting what you want when you don’t know the issues it will cause - stupid.

It got pointed out that the OPI was earlier in the route where the receiver pushed off to gain the separation that caused the later contact. I believe they made the correct call - you just can’t see it from the game film - because that part was prior to the downfield view. The ref had already started pulling the flag and throwing it well before the late contact. It was actually the correct call - just hard to see in the context of the game and rule change. There is a beautiful view of the ref with the flag getting ready to throw it just before the contact occurs. It is obvious after the fact that they called the receiver push off and that was seen on review and upheld. That lead to the defensive PI, but that was not called - so it stayed as just OPI and was correct.

Agreed - you could just see it coming - nothing had gone right and he wanted to make a play. Just get to the next one and move on, but in the end making that terrible throw - lead to the weak roughing the passer call that lead to the score - so there is that.

Not sure I agree with the rookie part - it is more like a throw a guy that over trusts his arm makes - no matter how many years they were in the league. We saw a guy like Farve throw similar passes late in his career - simply because he always thought his arm would win. That is the exact play they are trying to get Josh away from - I just think that will most likely be a small part of his game forever and we need to accept that - it is part of who he is.

I think McDermott had it right - if things look good could be a few series - if they feel the time could use more time - then the half. I think it is a mistake not playing these guys at all, but we will see in the end.

Already a member - enjoy the local guys immensely - I would sign up for Fairburn and Joe B every day of the week.

Love the Tre White comment on Ray Ray - He is a full 360 degrees better than last year - LOL. Even the comments afterwards were funny. Great Article - fun to hear who the players are seeing as improved.

Agreed, but this was written by a “national” feed writer - so essentially it is no different than a national ESPN hack. The only part of the Atlantic that I really enjoy are the pieces written by the local team - especially Fairburn - that actually has focus on the Bills by guys that have actually watched OTA’s, Mini-camps, practices, and the games. They have seen the growth and change in players. The numerous “national” feed writers are just looking for content and clicks - no different than the hacks at ESPN or CBS or insert sports site here. They have no real insight just the same basic overviews as other national writers.

I wouldn’t - not because I don’t think he is a great offensive talent and not because I don’t think he can help my team, but because as we move forward I want my offense money spent on protecting Josh and catching passes from Josh. A running back is great and we know that being a top running team helps, but it is not where I want to be over the next 4 years. I think you can get a majority of the production from 1 or 2 less known RBs at a fraction of the cost and use that money on whatever weak points continue to show up on Offense - like O-line or WR or even a quality TE if the drafts picks struggle. I can totally understand those that would because Zeke is a top end talent that every team craves, but from a money allocation point of view - I would like to move away from the high priced RB positions and use that money in other ways. JMO

Wow - I think you totally jinxed Hakeem. Now do it for Brady. Come on - really help the Bills out.

First let me say I like the idea in general because so many plays are bang - bang and I do not mind the human element. I also in general do not believe the NFL is fixed and therefore do not believe the Refs and the league office are driven by an agenda - therefore for me this works. The biggest issue with this is that fans and media will still have access to the ultra-slo mo frame by frame replay - meaning that even if things are decided at real speed - the mistakes will then get pointed out - ultimately invalidating the entire point of replay to get it right. I totally agree that reviewing the play at full speed rather than frame by frame helps eliminate some ticky-tac calls and therefore would reduce the number of overturns greatly as the refs actually do a great job for such as fast game. Unfortunately the increased use of HD cameras, multiple camera angles, and the ability of both TV and media to stop plays on a specific frame is what lead to the original outcry for replay and ultimately what has caused a lot of the issues with trying to decide what to overturn and what to say was a correct call (see catch rule and PI rule). The real test test are the situations- like the NHL offside rule - where you can stop on a frame and for example clearly show that a runners knee is just off the ground and a ball is loose for a fumble, but at real speed the refs called him down by contact - watching at real speed it is bang bang - so the call is upheld, but the image everyone will see is the one still shot where it is clearly a fumble. How do fans react to that and do fans/media respond - especially if that is a game or even worse Super Bowl deciding play? I just don’t know - I definitely think that if you they (replay officials) are debating looking at a frame by frame and are not sure - they should watch full speed and accept the call, but there are times a frame by frame slo-mo does show an actual correct outcome that is impossible to see with the naked eye at full speed.

I understand and agree with you, but - AB is not fighting the ban. His position is simple even if crazy - Last year the Air Schutt model was not banned because the only one being used was his and that model was not safety tested because it was >10 years old. So that model was never placed on the banned list for failing testing - just his for age. If the wording of the agreement was you must change helmets because these helmets are banned and you have 1 year grace period to find the new helmet - his point is this current model and year was just banned last week with the testing - I want 1 year grace period to find a new helmet from that point. The league and the NFLPA agreed to the years grace period on helmets that failed the safety standard for last year - so there is a precedent. However (and more likely to my mind) if the wording was here is a list of approved helmets that have passed safety testing and a listing of banned helmets that failed (or are to old) - you have 1 year to choose an approved helmet - then he will lose the appeal very quickly. I find it very interesting that the NFLPA has not backed him at all in this fight and seemed to agree with the NFL and the arbiter earlier - it tells me they do not agree and it will be harder for him to win.

I know what you are saying - it will be interesting to hear the arbiters take on the wording because he may or may not have a case. The league does not have the final say - an independent arbitrator does. The Raiders GM just wants this to go away and be done, but AB is going to try as many fake outs as possible. I wouldn’t be surprised if this fails - if he has another end-around to try and one more arbitration hearing after this. They will try to find some loophole right up until kickoff of game 1.

Exactly my point - it will depend on the wording of the lists. My guess is in the end - he was aware that his helmet was banned and had the 1 year grace period for that. My guess I’d: He will lose out because then he chose a newer model of that same brand, but by that time the players and NFLPA already had an approved list. The NFL will argue they even tried to get his newer helmet approved and it failed. And since he knew last year he had to switch helmets - if he wanted to get a newer version tested - it should have been done during that time - not after he already was given a grace period with an approved list and already fought that decision. I think it is just fascinating to watch.

Again I am not so sure. Cardale didn’t beat EJ out in the 2016 camp. It went TT as 1, EJ as 2, and Cardale as 3. All 3 had a chance to play in the regular season and both EJ and Cardale sucked enough that both were soon gone. The Bills then traded Cardale where he got 2 more years on the Chargers practice squad and is now going against TT for a back-up job. So Cardale is now 3 years in - was it wasted? If he beats out TT the Chargers may not think it was wasted. If he loses out and is cut - then it could be argued as it was wasted. Again I get that Cardale was more prepared than Tyree, but they seem to have a lot more in common than they do differences. Yes they are both tall and yes both can throw the ball far, but on top of that - both came out and struggled reading defenses, neither was accurate passing the ball with most games being at or below 50% completion rate and more Ints with no TDs. Both tend to force the ball into windows deep down field that has resulted in said Ints. Both could have used more time in college learning how to be a QB. Both have always been the athletes with the biggest arm and incredible athletic ability at every stop up until the NFL. I totally agree that Tyree looked abut as bad as you can look - so I can totally understand if the Bills move on, but I can also understand there is reason to believe if he is a hard worker and is picking things up - that a PS spot is not out of the question. What it really comes down to is does Daboll and McDermott see any improvement and do they want to give him a spot. It may also depend on injuries and what kind of makeup they want on the PS.

It will be interesting - his helmet was actually banned for being >10 years old. His model was not tested nor banned, but it also was not on the approved list provided last year to teams and players. He had a year to find a helmet on the approved list, but now he is trying an end around with a different year of an unapproved model to get a second grace period year. It will be interesting to see if his negative verbiage - my model was not tested or banned beats out the verbiage of this is the approved list provided last year - everyone has 1 year to find a helmet on this list. My guess is in the end he loses this grievance because the NFL will point out the approved list that was agreed to with the NFLPA and the fact that his helmet fails testing even with new models. It will really come down to the wording - did players have a year grace to find a helmet on the approved list or did they get a 1 year grace to find a new helmet. If it is the first part - he had a year grace already and will lose. It also does not help that he has already fought to keep his old helmet and lost, but it could depend upon what the arbitration team decided there - in regards to a newer model.

Two things - 1) Yes - Cardale looked more ready, but he was actually drafted not an UDFA - so he should have been a bit farther along - he was a significantly better prospect. 2) As for Cardale Preseason performance - Games 1&2 he was only near 50% completions and threw an Int in both games with no TDs. He was not miles ahead of TJ. It was not like he looked like preseason Peterman. The point being he was big, inaccurate, and needed a lot of seasoning just like TJ and now 3 years in he is finally competing for a true back-up role. That is the same arc that TJ would need if he is ever going to be an NFL QB. He is not ready in year 1 and may not be ready in year 2 - just to raw at this point to play in the NFL.