SoTier
-
Posts
4,991 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SoTier
-
-
9 minutes ago, baskingridgebillsfan said:
I don't want McDermott making final calls he has a lot Dick Jouron in him
My observation was only in relation to the assertion about Beane being "the smartest guy in the room", and I'll stand by it. Since we don't even know exactly what Beane's actual responsibilities are for player personnel decisions, annointing him as some kind of "genius" is nonsense. He dealt primarily with ordinary personnel decisions (job descriptions, wages, benefits, etc) rather than with decisions about which players to acquire, release or retain during most of his time in Carolina, so McDermott may very well have better player evaluation skills. IMO, Beane is the same kind of GM that Whaley was: subservient to the higher ups in the Bills FO and to McDermott.
-
1 hour ago, zow2 said:
Agreed. Beane is the smartest guy in the room. He's the guy I want making decisions on how to build this team.
How do you know this? He's never been responsible for making player personnel decisions before. There's a big difference between being an assist and being the guy in charge. The 2 big player personnel moves that can be attributed to him in Buffalo were the Watkins and Benjamin trades, neither of which suggests he's close to being "the smartest guy in the room". Watkins has not only stayed healthy in LA but he's repeatedly helped insure that that 2nd rounder the Bills got for him will be at the end of the 2nd round not at the beginning. Benjamin has a history of knee problems, was hurt when the Bills traded for him, and has been hurt most of the time he's been here.
-
1
-
-
If the Bills feel that Glenn's injury is going to be "chronic", why is he still on the active roster? Why isn't he on IR and rehabbing so he can get as healthy as possible so that the Bills could trade him -- if they're actually interested in trading him? As others have noted, Glenn was unlikely to pass a physical back in October because he wasn't playing much then because of his injuries. Just because the Bills traded for an injured player (Benjamin) doesn't mean that Seattle would have done the same.
Moreover, Glenn's injury is NOT a single injury IIRC but apparently at least two separate injuries, one to each foot/ankle. That does not necessarily mean that one or both are "chronic", and AFAIK, the Bills have not said publicly and explicitly what his injuries are (teams never do). Foot/ankle injuries in athletes are always problematical and tend to take a long time to heal whether surgery is invovled or not.
IMO the sum and substance of the OP's "inside information" seems to be little more than a rehash of a lot of opinions floated on this MB and not real "inside information" at all. If the OP truly has a "source", then that "source" is leading him on. For example, the OP's claims about disagreement between Bean and McDermott about cutting "marginal" players for compensatory picks and Beane being worried about Glenn's "huge cap hit" sounds like the BS that was constantly raised on this MB (and probably others, too) earlier in the fall. It just doesn't ring true, even for a dysfunctional organization like the Bills have been for this entire century.
-
32 minutes ago, Rc2catch said:
I agree Groy needs some playing time. I’m not the biggest Wood fan but the guy has the respect of the locker room and they just extended him didn’t they? I can maybe see someone taking his job but can’t see them releasing him outright for nothing
Agree.
Wood is a decent C so I wouldn't send him packing until the Bills have somebody better to replace him. I'm not sure that's Groy, but they have bigger trouble spots on the OL than C.
OT isn't a trouble spot at present either -- unless the Bills decide to listen to the ignorant fans who want Glenn traded because he was injured this season. The Bills need to keep Glenn because there's no guarantee that Dawkins will continue to develop as a LT. I believe he was drafted with the intention of playing him at RT anyways. Most collegiate LTs don't have the quickness and agility to play LT in the pros, but they can make excellent RTs.
I think that the main focus on OL should G because that's where the Bills need an upgrade. Incognito is 34, so a kid to replace him in the near future -- 2018 or 2019 -- seems almost a necessity ... except that the Bills need an upgrade at RG desperately. At least one of the Bills picks in the first rounds needs to be used on somebody to put Vlad Ducasse on the bench permanently. If Dennison were given his walking papers (along with his OL coach), then John Mills might become a useful RG again, but it doesn't look like he has a future with Dennison/Castro.
The Bills should probably take 2 OLers in 2018 ... definitely a prospect for RG within the first three rounds and either another G or a C prospect later in the draft. Bringing in some UDFAs wouldn't be a bad idea either. A new QB isn't going to have much success if he's running for his life instead of throwing the ball.
-
22 hours ago, P51 said:
Personally, if we could land Cousins, I'd sign him and keep the picks especially if both Buffalo and Kansas City end up with picks in the lower half of the 1st round. The cost of moving up would be steep and personally I would rather have a QB (I consider Cousins a franchise QB watching him here in VA all the time) and 4 (4 picks in the 1st 2 rounds) more players.
Given Buffalo's current picks, they could package their 2 -1sts and 2 2nds to move up (using the trade value chart) to the 3rd pick w/SF, and their would likely be 2 QB's off the board already, so they would be getting their 3rd choice likely...
IMO: Cousins + 4 picks in the top 64 > 3rd Choice of QB in draft.
or
Cousins + 4 picks in the top 64 > 4/5/6th QB choice at 18 and 3 more picks in the top 64 or any other combination or moving up and losing picks.
However, I dont see us landing Cousins so....
This is what makes the most sense but it's not going to happen because I don't see the Bills landing Cousins either. I am adamantly opposed to trading up for any QB except the consensus #1 pick in the draft. They succeed about 80% of the time, after that the success rate drops like a rock: 50% for QBs in the top half of the first round. Trading up for the 3rd best QB prospect ... supposing there even is one ... is a waste of resources. If 2 QBs are already off the board, stay put and see who's available at your spot ... or take a flier on a QB in the 2nd or 3rd round.
Somebody like Mayfield who's undersized but who would otherwise likely be a first round prospect would be a good choice if he fell in the first round or into the second. Lack of size can be compensated for (Brees, Wilson, and Cousins have all proven that) but you can't compensate for a lack of the instinct/processing ability/"it" factor that separates guys like Peyton, Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Wilson, etc from guys like Sanchez, Ponder, Gabbert, Osweiler, etc.
10 hours ago, stuvian said:I want us to draft a QB at #1. I wake up in the middle of the night from a nightmare where we trade a #1 for Case Keenum
How'd that work out in 2013? It's not ANY QB but the RIGHT QB that they have to draft. If there's nobody worth taking, take another position and see what's up in the 2nd round. It's a lot easier to send a 2nd round bust packing than a 1st round one.
-
Kevin Kaduk got it right. With all the NFL games looking like well choreographed productions, that game was special ... an echo of earlier times when the game of football was simpler ... and maybe more joyous. The shots after Shady's TD of the Bills players in the end zone with snow showering down on the players and fans were cool, but the shot of Matt Milano making a snow angel after the winning TD was the best!
-
On 12/9/2017 at 6:30 PM, MAJBobby said:
And the Settle because i declare it is a weak class has led to all the other crap we had under center
"Settle" for what? Drafting a QB in the first round isn't what makes a QB a success!
Drafting a QB prospect in the first round who should be drafted later just to draft a first round QB is what the Bills have done twice in this century. They got 2 busts for their trouble ... and they effectively locked themselves out of picking up better QBs from the drafts in the following years. The Bills lost out on even the opportunity to take Aaron Rodgers in 2005 and on Jay Cutler in 2006 because they had so much invested in Losman. Instead, they tried to make a third rounder into their franchise QB, and so didn't take a shot on Joe Flacco in 2008. Because they drafted Manuel in 2013, the Bills ignored Bridgewater, Carr, and Garoppolo the next year.
It's not that the Bills haven't looked at QBs in the first round of the draft or that they haven't had the opportunity to draft decent to great QBs. It's that the bad choices they made in the QBs they did draft in the first round in 2004 and 2013 came back and bit them in their arses. You keep yapping about fans being willing to "settle", but in reality it's the Bills that "settled" for the fourth best QB prospect in the 2004 draft -- and traded up to get him, too! It's the Bills that failed to act in 2012 and take Wilson in the third or Cousins in the fourth and "settled" for Manuel in 2013, a kid who wasn't even a first round prospect, just to say that they took a first round QB.
IMO, they drafted both QBs simply to excite the fan base and sell some more tickets. My guess is that they'll do the same in 2018. It's always dicey drafting a QB in the first round because they're expensive. No rookie minimum for any first rounder, especially a QB, and since most teams only carry 2 QBs with only the starter getting reps in practice, taking one in the first round precludes taking another one in the next draft or the one after that unless your original one sucks Johnny Manziel-style. The Bills' drafting rationale makes it even dicier.
-
On 12/7/2017 at 10:59 PM, fridge said:
How do you figure? The team has always had poor attendance in the final couple games of the season.
No, they didn't. Not when late season games meant something like back in the 90s. We wanted to see the Carp come to Rich Stadium in December and freeze their aqua and orange arses off.
-
Sorry, but the Drought is all on the Bills themselves, and that's particularly evident with the argument about the Patriots. If the Bills FO was seriously interested in making the playoffs, they would have built better teams than they did over the years. In 8 of the 17 Drought years, 2 more Bills wins and 2 fewer Pats wins would not have even given the Bills a winning record. In 2004 the Bills lost to the Stillers' backups in the final game of the season; that's all on them. In 2008, the Carp won the division with a record of 11-5. Even if the Bills had swept the Brady-less Patriots, the best they could have done was 9-7 which wouldn't have gotten them into the playoffs because NE missed the WC with an 11-5 record. The only time that 2 wins over the Pats would have definitely put the Bills into the Patriots was in 2002 when they would have won the division. In 2014, they actually won the season finale against NE, so sweeping NE would have given them a 10-6 record, so getting a WC would depend upon winning the tie breaker against Baltimore. In 2015, the Bills would have vied with the Pats, the Jests, and the Stillers for the last WC with 10-6 records.
The Patriots vs the Bills records since the Drought began:
2001: Patriots 11-5, Bills 3-13
2002: Jests 9-7, Patriots 9-7, Carp 9-7, Bills 8-8
2003: Patriots 14-2, Bills 6-10
2004: Patriots 14-2, Bills 9-7
2005: Patriots 10-6, Bills 5-11
2006: Patriots 12-4, Bills 7-9
2007: Patriots 16-0, Bills 7-9
2008: Patriots 11-5, Bills 7-9
2009: Patriots 10-6, Bills 6-10
2010: Patriots 14-2, Bills 4-12
2011: Patriots 13-3, Bills 6-10
2012: Patriots 12-4, Bills 6-10
2013: Patriots 12-4, Bills 6-10
2014: Patriots 12-4, Bills 9-7
2015: Patriots 12-4, Bills 8-8
2016: Patriots 14-2, Bills 7-9
-
2 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
...EXCELLENT illustration as to how far the QB spot has declined over the last decade except for a handful..........collegiate ball no longer wants to serve as the gratis NFL training ground for NFL ready QB's.....booster demands and what sells seats is their focus......the omnipotent NFL disbanded their minor league ala NFLE years ago while the other 3 major sports have a significant network of developmental leagues....look at your list of 1st rounders or even 2nds over the last decade....hell the majority would NOT even be UDFA's yesteryear..so desperate teams and stupid money exemplify "you get what you pay for" which overall is abysmal at best IMO......
I don't think the NFL's ability to select QBs has actually ever been very good. Over the last 20 years, when the #1 consensus pick has been a QB, he's worked out about 80% of the time. QBs taken in the top half of the first round have about a 50% success rate (great/good/decent). I think it's only about 25% for the bottom half of the first round, and after that, it's probably single digits.
The 1983 draft was the best QB draft ever. Six QBs were taken in the first round but only 10 more were taken in the remaining 11 rounds of the draft, none in rounds 2-4. Of those 6, Elway went #1 and the last QB taken was Marino at #27. Blackledge went at #2, Kelly at #14, Eason at #15, and O'Brien at #24. The HOFers were mixed among the busts.
Back before college teams ran the simplistic read option passing games, they ran the ball more. The pro game was also simpler (which is why the colleges could use pro-style offenses although many, perhaps most, did not), with much less sophisticated offenses and especially defenses, so QBs had a lot less to learn, recognize, and react to during the game. A QB with a cannon arm, a solid OL to keep blitzers at bay, a couple of speedy wide outs along with a good RB who could catch balls coming out of the backfield were a prescription for a successful offense. Most reasonably intelligent collegiate QBs with good arms could be half way decent. Today, the sophisticated defenses with their myriad of disguises, require a lot of skills that not many collegiate QBs can develop in the 2-4 years they're in school. Meanwhile, pro scouts are still totally enamored with tall QBs despite the success of Drew Brees, Russell Wilson, and Kirk Cousins and the failure of Brock Osweiler.
1 hour ago, xRUSHx said:Very strong class IMO
Josh Rosen
Sam Darnold
Lamar Jackson
Josh Allen
Baker Mayfield
Mason Rudolph
Drew Lock
Luke Falk
Clayton Thorson
Jarrett Stidham
Riley Ferguson
Kurt Benkurt
Chase Litton
Nick Fitzgerald
This is just the group that is projected for the first 3 rounds. Yes this draft is a very good draft for QBs. Of course it depends on who stays in school but it is a very good class.
I don't think his stock has changed much I just think others have shined more. IMO it will come down to what team wants him and what team wants someone else.
Unless a QB would be a first round prospect except for something that has nothing to do with how he plays on the field -- lack of height (Brees, Wilson), a slight build (Cousins), athletic department politics (Brady) -- almost all QBs taken after the first round are destined to be backups. Other than Brees and Dalton, what second rounders have actually become solid starting QBs? For third rounders, there's Schaub in 2004 and Wilson in 2012. Who else? In the fourth round, the only one with a solid claim to fame is Cousins, although Orton did have a couple of decent seasons.
Drafting a QB after the first round in hopes of finding a franchise QB is like counting on winning the Powerball lottery to finance your retirement.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:
No, because if you follow the draft enough you know this happens every year. Next year is always the better class until its not.
IMO you cant decide if a class is over or underrated until the players start some games in the NFL.
This is true, but it's not the number of QBs taken high in the draft that makes a great draft; it's how the QBs from the class play over the course of their careers that determines the quality of the class. .
- 2011 was supposed to be a great class. The first rounders were Newton (#1), Locker (#8), Gabbert (#10), and Ponder (#12) in the first round and then Dalton the 3rd pick in Round 2 and Kaepernick the 4th in Round 2. Newton and Dalton are the only ones who've done well. I don't believe that Locker, Ponder, and Kaepernick are even in the NFL in 2017.
- 2012 was supposed to be even better with Luck, RG III, Tannehill, and Weeden in the 1st, Osweiler in the 2nd, Wilson and Foles in the 3rd, and Cousins in the 4th. It actually was the best class since 2004, but that's only because the 2 under-sized QBs picked later, Wilson and Cousins, have blossomed into exceptional talents. Luck has been somewhat of a disappointment in that he hasn't really developed into quite the superstar envisioned by the "suck for Luck" crowd. He's still a "franchise QB" but between playing on a crappy team and injury, he's definitely not the best QB in his class. Tannehill is an acceptable starter on the level of an Andy Dalton or Joe Flacco -- capable of looking really great with the right supporting cast but otherwise pretty ordinary. IMO, Wilson is the best QB from 2012, and Cousins probably the second best based on what he's actually done on the field.
- Generally, there's 1 really good QB from a draft class with occasionally another decent starter whether there are 5 first round QBs or 1 or 2. Very rarely does a draft class produce multiple good/great QBs. That's why 1983 and 2004 are considered "generational" draft classes.
-
9 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
All joking aside all of the people that always want to see Russ gone this is what they should be talking about (not team performance). When the tickets drop to $6 and the fans become apathetic he is in trouble. Wins and losses were never going to impact how he was judged in the building. He will be judged on the strength of the brand.
Agree. IMO, the only way to ever get rid of Brandon and his minions' influence over the way the Bills operate as a football team is if fans stop going to games. Back in the mid/late 80s, when Bills' attendance plummeted (crowds under 30k were common in a stadium that held 80k then), and Wilson responded by putting a "football guy" in charge: Bill Polian.
I think that the "honeymoon" is ending between the Pegulas and a lot of Bills fans who had hope that new ownership would mean a new emphasis on winning football games. Instead, it looks like the new owner is following the same course as the old owner. That the Sabres have sucked under Pegula's ownership doesn't give fans a lot of optimism that things are going to improve for the Bills, either.
Will fan discontent translate into a big enough drop in ticket sales to force Brandon and Co out, and if that happens, does it mean the Bills will improve on the field? I don't know the answer to either question as I don't have a particularly good crystal ball. What I do know is that this is one fan who is no longer a season ticket holder and is unlikely to attend any Bills game until there's a significant improvement in the product the team puts on the field.
-
13 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
First of all, you aren't not remotely close to what I stated. If you read what I wrote, it was based on a comment in ANOTHER thread where I stated that while we are IN the hunt for a playoff spot, the coaches owe it to the veterans to put the team out on the field with the best chance to win. It was about which QB to start. I stated that if they feel NP gives them best chance, it should be him...if TT is that guy, it should be him. And I said they owe to the vets who go out every game, every week, every season even when futile to win to keep striving what was beat into them all offseason and year...make the playoffs.
People responded that the players are owed nothing. And quite frankly that is total bull**** thing to say, and honestly your whole rant here, even as off topic and inaccurate it is of a reply to what I said is also another self entitled fan bunch of BS.
I swear, fans make me sick with how they coldly view players at times. They think because players make more money then them that they are deserving no respect for what they do for a living. You think football isn't that dangerous? Then you are a fool. Sure, there are professions that have higher risk of fatality, but football as a sport is incredibly violent and players are hurt badly every week and many end their careers with life altering pain, issues, and now brain damage.
But you as a fan have this entitled opinion of screw em because they make so much money and remove all humanity for what they put on the line to ENTERTAIN you. Yes they get paid well, but ONLY when they stay healthy and the teams honor their contracts.
Honestly lost some respect for you on your reply. Players deserve more from the fans...
Well said, Alphadawg7.
-
22 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
Jordan Matthews has 250 receptions, 2,995 yards, and 20 TD's in 4 seasons. He was a 2nd round draft pick.
On a team that had a pass-first offense under supposed coaching genius Chip Kelly for 2 of those 4 years ... hell, that offense even made Nick Foles look like a top QB for a while, and Pederson runs a pass-first offense too.
On the Bills, Foles has only been able to play in 10 games with 25 catches for 284 yards and 1 TD. If the Bills can let Hogan, Goodwin, and Woods walk and trade away Watson, why on earth would they want Matthews even if he is "cheap"? Shell out $50 for a winter coat at Walmart rather than $200 for one at LL Bean and see which one keeps you warmer at 10 below.
-
23 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:
How much has changed in the last 5 years?
It’s Reboot time and we should shelf the Ralph and co failures with that of the Pegulas.
Why is it "Reboot time"? Despite the big deal made about all the changes at OBD, the Bills have pretty much managed player personnel the same crappy way they have for 17 years: let talented players walk rather than pay them and replaced them with high draft picks and scrubs. Face it: the Bills desperately needed to replace Stephon Gilmore, so they couldn't take a QB then even though 2 good prospects were still available. How many other times in the last 17 years have the Bills passed on more talented players because they "needed" to replace a DB, WR or RB they got rid of?
20 hours ago, reddogblitz said:Since the beginning of the 2014 season, Bills are exactly .500. 30-30.
Since the beginning of the 2014 season, Bills are exactly .500. 30-30.
What's so special about 2014?
-
22 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
....we're in a completely different world as far as drafting players and the salaries of draftees with the Rook Cap.....the last two beneficiaries of no rook cap drafts were Bradford at $50 mil guaranteed and Stafford at $41 mil guaranteed if memory serves me...so with the rookie limitations on one hand and the cap continuing escalating on the other hand, why doesn't it all fit?....Overdorf has been the capologist since I believe 2008 with final say on contracts (not Whaley)....if he is the culprit, why did Pegula retain him?........
I have no idea who is the culprit in the Bills FO but unless the Bills figure out how to "afford" to retain the decent players they draft, they aren't EVER going to make the playoffs. It's not like they're drafting busts; ex-Bills are scattered all over the league, many of them starters, some of them Pro Bowlers, most of them key pieces of playoff teams, including Super Bowl winners ... but they either weren't "good enough" for the Bills or they were "too good" for the Bills to afford to re-sign. How can that be when the Bills are not paying for a franchise QB or a marquee DE or a super WR? Aside from Dareus, Glenn, and Clay -- and maybe McCoy -- I don't believe any other of the Bills vets are making top money for their positions. Taylor certainly isn't.
The Bills couldn't afford to keep Hogan in 2016 or either Woods or Goodwin in 2017. They sold the Watkins trade to many of the gullible on the assumption of "they wouldn't be able to afford to sign him" in 2018. They couldn't afford to keep Gilmore or Gillislee or Zach Brown either. How are they going to sign any veteran players above the veteran minimum if they have a QB who will be demanding $20+ million a year (likely $30+ by 2023)? Hell, even high first round QBs like Winston and Mariota currently make nearly $7 million a year on rookie contracts.
-
9 minutes ago, Bangarang said:
You understand that not wanting to pay a lot for Matthews doesn’t mean I want a roster full of rookies and cheap vets right? Mathews is best served in the slot and more than likely the same goes for Zay. If given the option I’d prefer Zay there at a cheaper price. Mathews is a fine player, just not on the outside and not for the price he will likely ask.
What has Matthews done to merit even being brought back? Find somebody better.
6 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsMagic1 said:4 years and only 2984 yards for aguy we gave up 2 first rnd picks for basically, to me a wasted effort.
^^^
1 minute ago, BillsEnthusiast said:That's about 750 yards and 7 touchdowns per year...was it worth it for the price we paid?
Again, you refuse to face reality. Watkins is a good WR, maybe even a great one which he might prove to be if he stays in LA with Goff and McVay. You can't blame Watkins because the Bills traded up to get him, never ran a pass-first offense, and have failed to draft a franchise QB since 1983.
15 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:...NOT to worry!.....he's a 2018 UFA so pay him and sign him to 12, 13 or 14 mil a year, whatever it takes......his 2017 absence has been THAT detrimental......OBD does its "mea culpas", he's back in Buffalo blue and you're happy happy.....problem solved IMO........
Every time the Bills decide to shed another blue-chip player, they hint at this and fans grab it up and run with so that it becomes "FACT".
Pity the poor Bills! They can't afford to re-sign most of their best players ... even though they aren't paying a franchise QB or even a premier DE. If they actually do find and develop a franchise QB, which seems highly unlikely, they're going to have to let him walk after his rookie contract or totally gut the team around him to keep him. Neither solution seems promising for the future, but keep applauding the Bills for their "foresight".
-
2 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:
it is a microwave society BL
people want stuff right now!! and have zero patience
We were blinded by the light,
...
....
Some all-hot half-shot was headin' for the hot spot, snappin' his fingers, clappin' his hands
"Zero patience"? With a team that hasn't managed to get into the post season in 17 years? With a team with exactly 2 winning seasons in those 17 years? The Bills have been perpetually "rebuilding" since 2001 ... and they are have gotten nowhere. I'm not impressed by Jauronball 2.0, however much you think it will be solved by dispensing with Tyrod Taylor and replacing him with a rookie QB.
-
59 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsMagic1 said:
another disappointing Clemson draft pick....
Well, that's only if you ignore facts, sweetie ... Sammy Watkins has 184 receptions, 2984 yards, and 29 TDs in 4 seasons, 3 with the Bills ... but carry on pretending the geniuses at OBD know how to build a winning team -- or are even interested in doing so.
-
1 hour ago, Bangarang said:
We are probably better off moving Zay to the slot and letting Matthews walk. Unless of course he’s willing to sign here on the cheap
Has the phrase "you get what you pay for" EVER occurred to most posters here? I know that the Bills don't really care about winning as long as there's butts in the seats, but fans who want to win can't have it both ways: a veteran player is "cheap" because he sucks, and if you think the Bills are going to win more than 7 or 8 games a season by filling the team mostly with rookies and cheap vets, you've obviously been playing Rip Van Winkle for the past 17 years.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, teef said:
i don't know why people are being so dense about this. people keep saying we've "replaced" players, when that hasn't been done yet. this year was a purge year, and the build up begins this off season.
Keep telling yourself that. How are the Bills going to replace the players they shed and didn't replace this year when they're undoubtedly going to shed more players in the coming off-season? They don't have enough draft picks to fill all the holes they created even if every one of their picks is a difference maker, and if they decide to trade up for a QB, they'll have a lot fewer anyways. They won't add expensive FAs but will round up more career JAGs, STers and PS refugees and call them "quality players". It's the essence of Jauronball 1.0 just given a shiny new paint job for 2017.
-
1 hour ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:
If he is what he is why do you need to exaggerate to make your point?
He is a 3000 yard passer in 14 games with Watkins, Woods, and Hogan
He is a 3000 yard passer in 15 games with Woods, Goodwin, and Watkins for 7 games
Anyway, this is about our WRs, not QB, as Kirby suggested multiple times.
Plain and simple, the Bills WRs this season are not NFL caliber. Aside from Benjamin who has played 1 game plus 1 series of another game, none of them would be starters on any other NFL team ... if they even made the team. Holmes is a career STer. Thompson was a street FA when signed by the Bills.
-
5 minutes ago, RobH063 said:
Absolutely give your QB weapons. I'm just saying have the above average QB first. Without the QB, the receivers don't matter.
How, exactly, will you know that you have "an above average QB" if he doesn't have protection or targets? When he goes elsewhere and shines like so many other ex-Bills have done in recent years?
-
1
-
-
20 hours ago, Rigotz said:
No, I'm not being sarcastic.
Last year, we went 7-9.
In the off-season and during 2017, we lost:
-Our three best wide receivers
-Our two best corners
-Our pro-bowl DT
-Two starting linebackers
We gained:
-An unheralded FS and SS (Hyde and Poyer)
-An unheralded CB (Gaines)
-A better kicker (Haushka)
-A great WR for one game (Benjamin) and throw-in (Matthews)
Most of us thought it would be a 4-12 season.
To take that many personnel losses and IMPROVE to 8-8 or 9-7 with a significantly worse roster...
To me, that's impressive.
It's Jauronball 2.0. Replace most talented players with JAGs, career STers, and PS refugees and pretend they're "just as good" because they "buy into The Process" while adding 1 big name "star" to con fans into filling the stadium ... rinse and then repeat ... ad nauseaum.
Slow Down The Dolphins Hype
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Well, that may be true in general, but he looked like a pro bowler against the Pats. NE played as flat as I've ever seen that team play except for maybe the Miami game back in 2007 when the Carp came in winless (that was the year they went 1-15), and the Pats were on a roll --- and got their butts handed to them by the Fish.