SoTier
-
Posts
5,586 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SoTier
-
-
My screen saver is a slide show of my favorite nature shots.
-
3 hours ago, Augie said:
Sure, prices only go up. Based on a quick search, it makes Solder the 2nd highest paid LT, about $4mil/year more than Cordy who is also close to the top. Dawkins is practically free! That’s was my point. I get what you’re saying, but if the trade helps us get a Franchise QB, I’m all for it. We need that piece before we worry about anything else. I love what the FO is doing. Just my opinion.
I agree. I'm not complaining about trading Glenn to move up to #12, making a further move into the Top Five infinitely more feasible than it seemed last week. I just wanted to remind all the idiots who wanted Glenn gone because "he wasn't worth the money" that good LTs are almost "priceless". That's why Cinci was willing to swap #12 for #21 (and change) to get Glenn despite his foot question.
-
49 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:
Time for you guys to do some Fact Checks
Bad pass % means bad player don't get?
Tom Brady both years starting at Michigan was around 61%
Jim Kelly 42%, 52%, 58% and played part year 62%
Joe Montana best year 54%
Peyton Manning last year was 60%
John Elway finished college at 64% but had 2 years in the 50% range
Dan Marino best year 58%
Brett Farve best year 54%
Except for Brady, all of these QBs played their college football more than 20 years ago, and some more than 30 years ago. Both the college and pro passing games have changed significantly since.
-
45 minutes ago, Augie said:
Wow, pretty rich for a tackle. Makes Dawkins look like a steal!!!
It's the going rate for quality LTs which is why I was against trading Glenn for any reason except to move up for a QB.
-
Teef, use KBB.com to get a price on your current car. Then use KBB or TrueCar to price out your new car ... including the options you absolutely need to have, those you'd like to have, and those you don't care much. All the pricing sites are zip code specific, so that will give you a ball park figure about the cost of the new car and what you're likely to get for your old car in your area. The difference in prices will be what you pay out of pocket, and is a good measure of what kind of deal you're getting from each dealer.
Two points to remember:
- since you are buying a new car, keep in mind that you can always walk away if you don't like the deal;
- a good service department is worth paying a few extra dollars for, especially if you buy one of the many new models with maintenance included.
Happy car hunting.
-
10 minutes ago, Limeaid said:
It reinforces that there is not a lot of confidence on offense staff.
No, it doesn't. It's pretty much a foregone conclusion around the league that the Bills are angling for a first round QB in the draft, so any veteran QB who signs here has to accept that he's here for a placeholder for that young QB. Backup QBs with aspirations to be starters don't want anything to do with the Bills; they're going to be interested in signing with teams where they have better opportunities to become starters. Think of Ryan Fitzpatrick signing first with the Bills and then with the Jests.
-
6 minutes ago, Yav said:
What have any of the kids coming out of college have done?
McCarron has seen action in the NFL, yea we all know 3 games, but he has practice and preseason experience and has already had NFL coaching. If you can get him on a cap friendly deal that saves you money from what you were paying Taylor on a 2 year deal, then why not?
EJ Manuel. Blaine Gabbert, and Christian Ponder all have NFL practice and preseason experience plus they have significant NFL regular season experience, too. Whoopty-doo.
-
1 minute ago, Chuck Wagon said:
That is classic Bills, at least classic Ralph Wilson era Bills, setting a price they won't exceed and watching all the talent walk away.
What "talent" are the Bills "watching ... walk away"? Get a grip, dude! If AJ McCarron was such a great talent, he'd have been drafted higher than the fifth round.
The Bills are looking for a modest veteran FA QB to serve, at best, as a placeholder for a season or part of one before they turn the reins over to the young QB they traded up for in 2018. "Veteran" means a player with more than 3 games of NFL experience. Somebody like Hoyer is adequate, and better than some others whose names have been bandied about.
-
What the hell is the fascination with AJ McCarron????? He's started 3 NFL games and played in 11 games, total, in 4 NFL seasons. He's attempted all of 133 passes. At best, he's a replacement for Peterman as as backup QB but a "bridge QB" he's a joke ...
-
3
-
-
If I were the Browns GM, I wouldn't do it. If I really loved one of the QBs, I'd take him at #1 and possibly consider trading #4 for the right price. If I wasn't in love with one of the QBs, then I'd take Barkley at #1 and the QB I liked best of the ones left at #4 (all 4 could be available if the Giants and Colts pass on QBs and don't trade away their picks).
-
If you think the Bills had one of the top ten best OLs in the NFL in 2017, you obviously watched Bills game with your beer goggles on. PFF is clueless in its statistical evaluation of OLs. They totally lacked consistency, they failed way too often to provide adequate holes for the RBs, and they were saved from giving up many more sacks by having a QB with ultimate escapability. Furthermore, the only reason that this unit improved in the second half of the season was because it played so poorly in the first half.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Hahahahahahaha.
McDermott won't draft a guy who is a different religion? Really? Well that was fun.
It's not funny. It's reprehensible that the OP would proffer such an idea even as a joke.
-
2 hours ago, BigBuff423 said:
To be fair though, it’s not like it’s a Rookie contract. It’s a fair one, but it is costly and considering how well Dawkins played - I understand the impetus to try and parlay him into McBeane type of guys who are younger. However, I also support keeping him and moving him on the O-line.
Good LTs don't come cheap!
Moreover, while Dawkins played well for a rookie, he certainly didn't play well enough to be considered one of the better LTs in the league -- and there's no guarantee that he will even play as well in 2018 as he did in 2017. It's just not QBs who can look great before defenders get their numbers.
As for how "well" the Bills OL did without Cordy Glenn last year, consider how many times Shady was stopped for 0 or minus yards (I think he may have led the league in those) and how often the pass rushers were in the backfield almost before Taylor got the ball.
-
15 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:
Cleveland isn't picking a QB #1
I can see the Browns taking Barkley at #1 (to get ahead of the Giants) and then using #4 on a QB, meaning neither Cleveland pick would be available for trade. Too many trade up advocates seem not to understand that a team cannot trade up if the teams at the top aren't willing to trade down. In both 2011 and 2012, there was no way that either Carolina or Indy were going to trade out of the #1 pick no matter how much another team offered them.
-
16 hours ago, NoSaint said:
Weve seen the list a dozen times this offseason.
find the list of guys like Keenum, McCarron etc... that have become viable answers vs the ones that disappeared. It’s even longer odds.
How, exactly, is McCarron a "viable answer" to anything? He was a fifth round draft pick who hasn't started/played in a dozen games in his career, so he's more like the legendary franchise saviors like Rob Johnson and Matt Flynn.
-
5 hours ago, BuffaloButt said:
Could this years draft be similar to the 1983 QB draft that we have not had since? There is a real possibility the top 6 QB's could all be successful (some more than others) but maybe this could be a duplicate type draft finally. We need a new era of young QB's to start taking over for the older ones that are nearing their end! I just get a feeling 4 or 5 may end up successful QB's in the league. Hopefully we end up with one of them!
Thoughts?? Go Bills!!
No, it's not a reprise of 1983. It's also not a reprise of the next best QB class of 2004. Both of those classes had consensus #1 prospects who were clearly superior to all the other prospects (Elway in '83 and Eli in '04), including being pro-ready. They also had at least one other pro-ready QB prospect (Marino in '83 and Roethlisberger in '04). Because most of the top propsects played in pro-style collegiate offenses, there were many fewer question marks about the prospects in '83 and in '04, and still teams managed to find first round busts like Blackledge and Losman.
All of the 2018 top QBs come with serious questions about how they'll adapt to the NFL. These is no consensus "best prospect" likely to go #1 or at least first among the QBs. Most have not played in pro-style offenses, so there are all kinds of questions about how these kids will adapt to the style and complexities of the pro game. None are nearly as pro-ready as the top QBs from 1983 or 2004. Additionally, most of the top QBs seem to also have mechanical or technical flaws that are probably going to have to be "fixed" if they're going to have real shots at NFL success.
IMO, 2018 is more like 2011 than 1983 or 2004: probably 1 bonafide top prospect (Newton) and a flock of pretenders (Locker, Gabbert, Ponder) being pushed by hype machines courtesy of self-styled "draft experts", 24/7 sports networks, and social media.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, PeterGriffin said:
Because this is the year if there ever was one to trade up for a QB.
IMO the Bills gathered 2 - 1st, 2nd, 3rd for the sole purpose of getting a QB because again this is the year to do it.
No one can ever be sure about anything but this is a talent rich QB draft and to be left out with all those assets would IMO get people questioning things and potentially fired. Not the goal with such a QB rich draft.
Famous last words. 2011 and 2012 were both supposed to be "QB rich drafts", too, except that they really weren't when NFL reality bit.
2011 had 4 QBs taken in the first 12 picks, but only #1 pick Cam Newton wasn't a bust ... and he's a good NFL starting QB but not a great one. The only other successful NFL QBs from 2011 were 2nd rounder Andy Dalton and 6th rounder Tyrod Taylor. This success rate is pretty much par for most drafts in terms of successful QBs since 2000.
2012 also had 4 QBs taken in the first round, 3 in the first 8. Andrew Luck as the supposed "greatest prospect ever" at #1 has been somewhat of a disappointment in living up to his expectations, and he's been hurt the past season plus. If his shoulder prevents him from playing again, then he will definitely not be the best QB from 2012. Robert Griffin III had a good rookie season in an offense that was tailored to him, but he was injured and never regained his rookie season form, which was mostly, IMO and contrary to legend, because he didn't/couldn't develop or master the skills a successful NFL QB needs. Ryan Tannehill has been a fairly successful NFL QB but as rumors persist that Miami is looking to upgrade the position, that suggests he's been a disappointment not unlike Jay Cutler who was Denver's pick at #11 in 2006 -- too good to jettison but not quite good enough. Brandon Weeden was a bust.
The real value in 2012 came in the rounds after the first. Seattle hit the jackpot with Russell Wilson, easily the most successful QB from that draft, and definitely the epitome of a franchise QB who "carries" his team. Kirk Cousins came out of the 4th round in that draft, and "super sub" Nick Foles became a "legend in his own time" with his 2017 playoff heroics. Any semblance of success that Washington has had since 2013 has come from the arm of Kirk Cousins BTW.
The lesson from both these drafts is that contrary to myth, the world doesn't necessarily end if a team doesn't "mortgage the future" to trade up in a supposedly "QB rich draft".
1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:NewDay, it is really not realistically possible to pronounce upon the 2017 QB class yet. Watson is not a success based upon 6 games and 19 TD. Trubisky is not a bust based on 12 games and 7 TD/7 INT. The one looks more promising than the other, but it's early days for both.
Taking out those 3, you have 6 QB.
Goff, Wentz, and RGIII were taken at the top of the draft. At worst, that appears to be 2 out of 3 success, and RGIII had an amazing year and what (for other QB) would be seen as a good year before injury derailed him. 2/3 success (66%) is within the observed success rate of top 2 picks (analyzed over 20 years) whether by trade up or not
Bridgewater, Manziel, and Freeman were taken later in the draft. Freeman gave Tampa Bay a meh rookie season then 3 promising years before addiction or whatever wiped him out. His second year in particular was EXCELLENT, and he passed for >4000 yds and 27 TDs in his 4th season. And we have 2 years of data on Bridgewater pre-injury; how many are we going to give the new QB we draft? I would call him "OK" - not a bust, but not The Man either. So let's call that two partial successes, at least 1 of which may still prove out if he can return from a horrific injury - that would be 1/3 success. 33% success is within the observed success rate of the rest of the 1st round (analyzed over 20 years) whether by trade up or not.
Drafting a QB is not an exact science. In particular, it's hard to predict injuries and their impact, or whether someone's head will implode as Freeman's did when silly amounts of money are placed at his disposal.
My bottom line: Trade ups are neither more or less risky than owning the pick in question. The risk comes from the uncertainties of the player personnel evaluation. Some you can see coming (Manziel) but some teams think that the talent makes them worth the risk (or have meddlesome owners who have hopefully learnt their lesson)
Trading up is not a sure route to a franchise QB, but the probabilities of success are still significantly higher at the top of the 1st (1st 2 picks) than elsewhere in the draft.
I disagree with this primarily because the risk in a trade up is magnified by the number and quality of the picks given up. Swapping first round picks and throwing in one or two additional picks is much less risky than swapping a higher first for 2 firsts and additional Day 2 picks (rounds 2 or 3), and both are infinitely more risky than already having the target pick (say #2 or #3).
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Wagon Circler said:
Today is the day! The Peterman era has begun. Ladies and gentleman, I draw your attention to the only quarterback on the Bills roster and therefore, the de facto starter. The train is ready to leave the station, but there is still plenty of room on board! #DON'TSLEEPONNATE. Who's with me?
Well, this is one train I'll miss. While a great arm doesn't guarantee QB success, lacking an NFL caliber arm pretty much guarantees QB failure as a starter.
2 hours ago, offyourocker said:I don't get all the hate for Nate. I thought he played well in the Colts game until he got hurt. San Diego was a tough first NFL game. On the road aganst a hot team. The first int was a defelcted pass the Bills wr could not secure. It went for a TD and then he has huge pressure to get back.
Well, I suppose "played well" depends your definition of "played well".
-
3 hours ago, BuffaloRush said:
You are assuming Glenn, himself, can stay in an upright position. A huge assumption to make after last season
If Glenn isn't healthy, then the Bills won't be able to trade him. I fail to understand how so many posters here think that other teams are going to trade for a player who can't play.
3 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:Yep.......put TALENT around that young QB.
And mark my words........if they go to camp without Glenn to serve as a motivation for Dawkins to aspire to that LT job...........I predict Dawkins will take a step back.
Competition is very important, especially for developing young players.
Sometimes young players without competition get lazy or simply get trapped in their own head and can't just play fast and loose...........they operate better in ACTUAL competitive situations with other players.......which is the wiring that got them to the upper levels of the game in the first place.
We tend to take for granted that good rookie years will mean better sophomore seasons and that's not necessarily how it works.
With TT gone it's looking ever more likely that a guy like Rosen, Darnold or Jackson will be starting for Buffalo as a rookie and the better the supporting cast the better the chances of success for that guy over his first two seasons.
That's how the Eagles and Rams just accelerated the production of THEIR young QB's.
I pretty much wholeheartedly agree with this. The only part I disagree with is your assumption that Dawkins could take a step back if he doesn't have competition. I don't think it's a question of having competition so much as about the fact that lots of good rookies fail to get any better or even regress ... mostly because opposing coaches and players figure them out.
If Glenn is healthy, he's a better LT than Dawkins, so he should stay on the left side while Dawkins moves over to the right, giving the Bills a pair of good/decent bookend OTs. A better RT than Justin Mills can improve the play at RG, too, whether that is Miller or another player. FTR, a solid OL improves QB play no matter who is under center.
2 hours ago, H2o said:I am in the camp of keeping Dawkins at LT and moving Glenn to RT. You would have two of the better bookends in the league helping keep a rookie or whoever upright.
Glenn plays LT significantly better than Dawkins. Don't confuse a Dawkins playing the position well "for a rookie" with playing the position well period.
-
10 minutes ago, NastyNateSoldiers said:
I posted about this bout a month ago and u thought the board was getting ready to hang me from a building, lol.
It was a dumb idea then, and it hasn't improved any.
-
Just say "NO!" to Derek Anderson!
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
...could care less if it was Rex who brought him here (I hate Rex).....the kid came and I believe he worked his tail off to become a starting QB......cannot find fault with his work ethic, public persona or anything negative regarding his teammates....unfortunately LIKE MANY, his shortcomings involved the mental aspect of the game at this level, which gives you the "luxury" of 5 scant seconds to process.....more fail versus succeed for that very reason.....yet the fecal little keyboard cowards hoped and prayed for his failure......did I want the kid to succeed?...why not?...it would benefit the club. but it didn't work out so on to Cleveland with my best wishes lad for a new start to reallize your lifelong NFL dream......to the detractors, fecal DOES sink...Bon Voyage......pathetic..........
Very well said!
-
For David Ogden Stiers fans, WGN is running a MASH marathon featuring the "best of DOS" beginning tonight at 7 pm and again tomorrow (not sure of the time).
-
4 hours ago, Sig1Hunter said:
I'm not interested in arguing with you anymore. All you seem to care about is brow beating those of us that don't like Jackson, and trying to convince us that he will be great. It's tiresome, and irritating.
Pot meet kettle.
Solder to Giants - 4yrs $60 mil
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I haven't heard anything but the trade didn't become official until 4pm today.