Zerovoltz
-
Posts
1,623 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Zerovoltz
-
-
2 hours ago, John from Riverside said:
Where is the Chiefs fan we have hanging around to tell us that this article is wrong and give us two articles of how wonderful Mahommes is.
I'm here. My thoughts on Mahomes haven't changed because of this. We expect Mahomes to throw some INTS...he'll take chances that Alex Smith simply will not. He'll rely on his arm and make throws at times that he shouldn't make. That's fine...that's part of the deal. He is never ever going to have a 5 INT season like Alex Smith....very few QB's do. I've said it plenty of times before when discussing Mahomes and Smith...Smith was a good QB who was especially careful. He made it a point to take care of the football. That isn't a bad tihng in and of itself...but Smith's QB rating drops from the first quarter to the last, and his red zone efficiency is HORRIBLE. This isn't because Smith is an awful QB, it's because he is a very safe one. At some point, Smith figured out that you can do well by not turning over the football. .....what Smith does that you can't see on a stat sheet very easily is taking a 3rd and 8 and rushing for 3 yards instead of making a play to move the sticks, keep the ball, and the clock and score more points. I will trade the 5 INTS for 15 Mahomes INTS if Mahomes makes 30 plays to score points or extend drives that Smith did not make
If you read that article and consider that panic worthy, then you are reading into that what you want it to tell you and not what it's actually saying. How many is an acceptable number in a practice? How many do we know the defense did or didn't know the play call? How many were the QB actually making a mistake? Looking forward to preseason game action...
-
2
-
-
4 hours ago, Sky Diver said:
I don't know what their model is or what factors they might be missing.
As far as weather, it's certainly a factor. It's easier to throw a football in Hawaii than Alaska from Sept to December, for example.
Wentz played in ND. Pretty nasty there in winter. Maybe they aren't weighting weather enough or it's not even in their model?
...um...North Dakota State plays in an indoor stadium.
The argument about Allen is this: Given his physical tools and mental makeup, either A) he really does suck because we have a BIG SAMPLE size that says he does. or B) He has sucked so far because in his youth and college years, he never was around good coaching or other players that would push his development along and he won't suck anymore after he gets good coaching and has teammates and opponents who are better quality.
That's it. I love metrics...I think metrics are really useful.....but it doesn't take advanced metrics to tell any reasonable person that Josh Allen's actual performance in football has been poor. That includes the Bills staff.
The Bills staff believes the answer is B....because you don't take him if you think it's A....and you also don't take him even if you believe it's B, but you aren't sure you can fix him. They think he's undercoaced and underdeveloped.
I don't think they can do it. I would only say, in this case, where you may actually have a guy with a ton of talent, who just hasn't been developed properly for years...that could be something the analytics would miss because the analytics are analyzing high level football players, and makes no assumptions where they came from or how much football they played where, or against who. This is where you'd not rely on a number spit out by a formula...but a human judgement. Again..I don't think it will end well, but I can see a case here about why the analytic numbers may not apply.
-
3
-
-
Just now, GunnerBill said:
The Giants will be wanting a Quarterback. I think Manning is done and they made a mistake passing this year in my mind, though I always believed they would pass this year. Then after that:
Denver (Keenum is a guy I have always liked but he is a bridge and not to Paxton Lynch who is terrible)
Jacksonville (Bortles still has a tenuous hold on that job)
Washington (need to take a guy while they have Smith very much as KC did)
Miami (they can move on from Tannehill after this season and I think they are going to majorly suck this year)
Then the other possibles (except for New England and New Orleans maybe looking for long term guys) are Tampa, Tennessee and Cincinnati but I think any of those QBs would need to have a really bad year for the cord to be pulled.
I also thought the Giants made a mistake passing on QB this year...and that Manning is toast...they made some investments in their line and Barkely betting he has something left...we'll see.
Denver is an interesting situation....I think they'll be caught in between thinking he is the man to not really being good enough, but too good to move on from....even though they probably should.
JAX......They did sign him to that extension...but they can easily get out of it....they basically bought themselves another season or 2 of figuring out if he can or can't. He's probably going to last as long as that D is good and they can run the ball I'd think.
Washington...will need a guy in a year or two to start preparing to take over..but I don't think they will need that after this year.
Miami....Tannehill quietly signed an extension....he's an interesting case..was having something of a breakout year when he got hurt...really had that completion pct up there at 67%...now has injury history....you are probably right...he has to show big this year..and probalby wont.
Pats, Saints...need to find someone to groom.
Tampa may be the one team that ends up truly needing to find a new no.1 to start over with.
Titans....I think Mariotta isn't very good..but in his defense, their weapons have been lower end....and I don't think internally they consider him a bust.
Cincy....this is one where I would have been in that derby in this past draft...Dalton isn't that good...at least not consistantly enough.
-
I don't know what the Bills would want or need...but I do think a few things are worth noting here for 2019.
1. This upcoming offseason may well be the most stable all 32 franchises have ever colectively been at QB...with this past season free agency and QB rich draft...I can't think of a team that would even really need top of the draft QB....New England might look for Bradys eventual replacement....in a year when so few other team would be in the market, they once again can zig when everyone else is zagging.......New Orleans..and maybe the Chargers could be in market for their teams future QBs.....throw the Giants in there as well...but in those cases..they are talented teams and those guys are still producing....otherwise...maybe Tampa if they decide they are done with Jameis....is about it really.
2. Part of the big push in this past draft year to nab that QB...was that 2019 has long been shaping up to be a poor QB draft year.....Drew Lock is the early leader, and he needs lots of work.
So, should the Bills find themselve up high or even at no.1.....they may find their pick to have lesser value than 2018 no.1 had....more like 2013...a year with no QB prospects worthwhile.
-
7 hours ago, HappyDays said:
I'm kind of shocked a writer for Football Outsiders doesn't understand that the deep ball is only like 20% of why arm strength is important. The rest of it is the ability to execute plays in a timing offense to perfection. Take Peterman's last pass in the Jaguars game. He actually threw the ball right on time and arguably made the correct read. But it didn't matter because Jalen Ramsey was able to get to the ball. If Allen makes that exact throw, it wouldn't be an interception. At best Ramsey could have broken up the ball. The ability to throw the ball faster than a defender can catch up to it gives Allen a tremendous edge over other passers. Obviously that alone won't be enough. But anyone who sums up arm strength as "can throw the ball far" is way off the mark.
.....you keep suggesting Mahomes will be a bust but this is a huge part of his game....getting a ball to the target like a lazer.
4 hours ago, Da webster guy said:I love how they use the term "empirical evidence" as some sort of qualification.
That literally means they haven't witnessed or observed him having success in the NFL. Sadly, this hack writing is clickbait crap and they got me. Well done hacks......
The writer didn't really think this through....the evidence that Allen would be great are his combine measurables...wich are optimal for an NFL QB....that alone got the guy drafted 7th overall....the size, arm, wonderlic...GREAT STUFF.....and all of it is evidence that points to the idea the kid could be successful. What he, and pretty much anyone should be saying isn't that there are serious questions about why that has not translated very well to onfield results.....that's been the question since pre draft....who is Josh Allen? Another in a long line of perfect size, arm strength etc that just couldn't make it happen....OR....is he that perfect specimen who came from a small nowhere high school, to a small no where JUCO..to a small D-1 program...and never ever did get coaching or play around the kind of up and coming talent to grow his skill set with?
I've been on record all over this forum saying I don't think he will make it...but I have always maintained that HE COULD if you believe the scouting reports and your own coahces.....and that goes right along with who they think they got...the super talented kid that never did have the proper environment to reach his potential.
I'd hate to use a soccer analogy, but in that world...it's often said of american players...in order to develop to the fullest and take their game to the next level, they need to go play in Europe, around better players and better coaching.
Someone had mentioned the QBASE metric that suggests Allen will fail....because all 27 other QB's who ever had negative QBase like Allen, also failed...that poster correctly pointed out doesn't mean ever QB who ever scores that low will fail.....because it is a metric...and it doesn't know if Allen really is this star talent that just hasn't been put in position to grow. learn and improve with the right conditions etc.
Frankly, its an incredible gamble and very interesting to see how it works out....
I disagree this would be a victory for the "old school" ...but rather this WOULD be a victory for folks who really did identify a talented kid and realised that he was FAR FAR off from his actual potential.......other prototypical QB's who failed, came to the leauge much more developed and polished...having played in higher level programs from youth onward.
Again, I don't think he'll make it...BUT....I'm very willing to believe that he COULD....I do think there is something to the idea that his developmental years were not well spent on football development and there is a lot of room there to be couched up, unlike so many other prospects. Should be interesting.
-
3 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
One thing you might want to remember is that Allen got more and more time with the 1s as OTAs and Minicamp progressed.
And he got virtually all snaps on the last day of Minicamp... at least as far as it was reported.
You're right... actions speak louder than words.
But McDermott's words also spoke loudly when he claimed that OTAs and Minicamp should be viewed as having a rep chart rather than a depth chart and that depth chart can start being truly scrutinized in TC.
Well, Allen's reps increased throughout... so he seems to be moving up... and his last day of practice when he got the most reps might've been his best... and he's been back in Buffalo working for the last week or so.
Yes... I agree... actions speak louder than words and those actions spoke loudly.
I think we've about talked this out as far as it can go.....can't wait to see how he looks in preseason to get a better idea where he's at.
-
1
-
-
IF they thought he was on the verge of starting, he wouldn't be running with the 3's. .....Actions speak louder than words...when he is running with the 1's at least half the time in practice etc...that will tell you what they think. ....they can tell a media person all they want about how he "isn't raw" or "further along than the scouting reports suggested" .....ALL these statements the staff is making are subjective....you can't quantify any of that....you can quantify what unit he is running with...the 1's, 2's, or 3s.
I'll try this one more time....if McCarron reaches his full potential right now...and the best he can ever be is a "5"....and he's at a 4-5 right now..then he is as READY as he'll ever be. He can't improve through more film study or practice...he is what he is right now. ......and the coaches start him while the work on getting allen READY....and his ceiling is 8,9,10...but he's at a 5.5....that would mean he is still the "best" QB on the roster, but he isn't ready in the coaches estimation. Before putting him on an NFL field, with your suspect line and not dynamic skill players....they might want to build him up to a level 6-7-8 away from game action.
I think we probably agree Allen is already the best QB on the roster right now....it's a matter of what we think the coaches determine the criteria to start is. I continue to contend that there is a lot of work to do....especially as that pertains to calling the correct audible, making a correct read, and an accurate throw. When they think he has made progress you'll know when he moves up and runs with the 2's, displacing one of Peterman or McCarron.
-
1
-
-
We are glad to have Ragland here....he fits what they want him to do wich is mostly be a run stuffer....as the season goes on you can really see that he excells at reading the play, getting to the gap, filling, shedding etc...as other here have mentioned, Ragland isn't all that adept at coverage...and that's fine. KC won't ask him to do much of it....for his role etc...now having recovered from the injury and seeing him progress, I'd say we got a good deal....we'll see how it goes this year. Another person mentioned we signed an LB (Hitchens from Dallas) ....that was to replace Derrick Johnson...a great LB in his time..but he was noticibly VERY SLOW.....no longer able to pursue sideline to sideline nor cover like he once did....major liability....loved him as a player but time caught up to him.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:
Interesting interpretation. Really feels like you're reaching here trying to somehow stretch McDermott directly stating that Allen is more developed and further along in some ways than they thought initially (and lest we forget Beane's public rebuke of the preseason draft national narrative that Allen is somehow more "raw" than the other prospects or other historical 1st round rookies) followed by the incredibly obvious statement that we're not going to put him out there unless we feel he's ready.
Well duuuuhhhhh...
What coach would not do that? Or what good coach would not do that?
You might agree with Allen's scouting reports. But that really doesn't relate to what McDermott said and might even be counter to it.
If Allen is already better than McCarron and Peterman as you concede he likely is, but he's still not ready, Beane deserves to be fired for not seriously addressing the 2018 QB position.
You're massively insulting Peterman and McCarron, and if they're as bad as you seem to think they are, we're screwed.
Luckily, I think you're very wrong in more ways than one here.
We'll have to continue to agree to disagree.......The problem with this most recent argument of yours is that McDermott says "Allen is more developed and further along in some ways than they thought initially".......well that's all well and good except nobody knows what the baseline is for any of that.....it's like calling your friend who is driving to town from Toledo...you call to see how far away they are thinking they ought to be just about to Cleveland, and instead they tell you they've made good time and are at the ohio/penn border....still far away from you, but closer than you thought....we have no idea the criteria they are talking about....has he made to cleveland or has he made it Erie? ....either way, what we KNOW the coach said was he still has a long way to go wich of course is subjective...but what isn't subjective is that the coach says he is not READY. That doesn't say anything about who the best QB on the roster is to start a game if one were played now (It's Allen)
To put it another way, lets say there is a set of criteria that McDermot is working on with Allen and all of those have a rating 1-10...10 being fully developed...and overall Allen is at a 5 right now...but before he puts the kid on the field he wants to see level 7 and 8 in practice....even though McCarron is at 4 right now and Peterman is at 3. Allen is the best QB on the roster....but he isn't READY....if you have 3 qbs who all aren't ready...why not build up the actual future of the franchise and get him actually ready and burn up the expendable scrubs until he is? ....that's what is going to happen. The other 2 don't have big enough arms to overcome their lack of experience and wisdom. I expect Allen will see the field when they think he is READY....not when the other 2 prove they aren't.
-
59 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:
This quote by McDermott is one I hadn't seen before and seems to be pretty ambiguous on who starts at QB for us and leaves the door as open for Allen to win the job as McDermott might.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.democratandchronicle.com/amp/783231002
“There’s been moments along the way through Josh’s career as a Bill to this point where you’re saying, ‘I knew he was here (at this level), but in fact, we think he’s a little bit further along than that in some areas,’” McDermott said. “That said, (there is) still a lot of work to do. We’re not going to put him out there unless we feel like he’s ready and that’s the important part of this, that we develop a nice foundation of strong fundamentals and football knowledge so that he can go out there and execute.”
This is the approach I have been advocating the whole time...the wording here is important....."We're not going to put him out there unless we feel like he's READY and that's the important part of this, that we develop a nice foundation of strong fundamentals and football knowledge so that he can go out there and execute."
He did not say we are going to put him out there when he is BETTER THAN THE OTHER GUYS. He most likely already IS better than them. This quote shows your coaching staffs thoughts are right in line with the pre draft scouting report that said he'd need work to improve his fundamentals and football knowledge. .....again, I am normally an advocate of getting a guy on the field ASAP, but in this case, I agree with the scouting reports...and your coaches.
-
20 hours ago, SoTier said:
The quality of individual players in any draft is not determined by either the other players in that draft or by the hype spread by media talking heads.
- In the 1983 draft, the greatest QB class ever by result not by ratings of talking heads, produced 3 HOFs plus a decent NFL starter. The KC Chiefs still managed to pick an absolute bust in Todd Blackledge, the second QB taken.
- In the second best QB class ever, 2004, produced first round QBs Eli Manning, Phillip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger ... and JP Losman. Losman was not a first round prospect, and being drafting in the first round with three other QBs who are likely HOF candidates didn't make him any better or worse than he was.
FYI, the last time I looked, finding good DBs is a lot easier than finding good QBs. If Mahomes turns out to be a stud and Allen does not, the Bills will have screwed themselves once more ... just as they did in 2009 when they gave away All Pro LT Jason Peters or in 2010 when they gave away All Pro RB Marshawn Lynch.
If you don't like my opinions, don't read them or put me on ignore but don't dare tell me -- or any other poster -- to "shut up".
FTR, the Bills do not have "one of the best secondaries in the league" but feel free to make up BS to justify your uncritical fandom for a team that's produced only 20 winning seasons in 58 years.
THIS.....is absolutely correct. Think of the best DB of all time...you pick...Darrel Green, Ronnie Lott, Dieon Sanders......doesn't matter..pick that guy....then think of what QB you could expect to get in a trade for one of those guys.....Aaron Rodgers...no....how far down the list of QBs would you get before some team would say....yeah...Ok...we'll take your stud DB for our QB......you'd get pretty damn far down the list.....and you certainly couldn't get Mahomes for White. or White and any combo of players and picks.
-
1 minute ago, Haplo848 said:
So my question would be, why wouldn't we just wait until the Chiefs inevitably have to cut one of their ridiculous number of good RBs?
You absolutely could...but they'd miss YOUR training camp.....wich isn't a real big deal...and I would guess, that we are talking 6th or 7th round type compensation either way.
Someone mentioned Tevin Coleman, and I have seen that name elsewhere on this board....he'd be a great aquisition if you could land him......would take something good to get them to move on from him now considering he is really good proven depth.
-
4 minutes ago, Cornette's Commentary said:
How's everything going over on the Chiefs board?
LOL...I don't spend anytime on Chiefs boards..I am part of one facebook group and I can't hardly stand that....WAY WAY too much blind homerism in KC. (Cameroheads) I really enjoy this place...good discussion here.......been interested in the Bills since the Mahomes trade....and have found that lots of good, smart fans to chat with on this board...even though I am not a Bills fan.....all the Allen talk....and just general football discussion...plus the recent trades between KC and you for Ragland....and also we have Watkins so interesting to read all of what folks think of him here....wish KC had a board like this.
-
1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Tolbert doesn’t play here.
West and Ware aren’t necessarily an upgrade from Ivory but at least in the same tier. I’d be interested for sure. A trade is a better route than any street FA other than Murray.
sorry on that Tolbert....thought I had read somewhere you all had signed him...my mistake.
-
Considering the possible issue with "shady".....and frankly even with no issue with him....Ivory and Tolbert aren't excactly good RB depth.
Considering the Chiefs have something of a glut of RB, and that both our team and the Bills have made some recent trades....it's perhaps worth considering another mutually beneficial deal should it become needed.
For you consideration. Charcandrick West. Has started for KC at times and been effective. Decent pass catcher as well. Expendable due to Kareem Hunt and the signing of Kerwyn Williams, as well as others on a deep depth chart at RB. Started 11 games in the last few years for us.
Spencer Ware, has started 16 games including 14 in 2016. Was out all of last year with injury. Career YPC 4.6 (with a large sample size) Also can catch out of backfield with 48 career receptions, 42 of wich came in the 2016 season....again, expendable due to Kareem Hunt, other signings and other depth at RB, including West above. Ware now healthy.
Good NFL backs with some proven performance to look at. Just FYI.
-
1 minute ago, transplantbillsfan said:
David Carr was thrust into an absolute shitstorm. He never stood a chance with that team. They were an expansion team and their #1 player in the expansion draft never played a down for them. That was All-pro OL Tony Boseli. Yeah, he might've helped a little.
Otherwise, they had absolutely nothing. Again, they were an expansion team and they decided to start their #1 draft pick immediately despit bringing entirely new players and coaches together across the NFL and college in their very 1st year.
And David Carr, while very talented and likely ruined by poor choices by the Texans, was pretty immobile. He wasn't remotely elusive in the way Allen is.
I agree that Carr is a great example of a rookie QB being mismanaged, but we look NOTHING like the 2002 Texans.
I guess it is worth asking if you think even if Allen is the best option RIGHT NOW....is there a benefit to HIM and the team, staying on the bench until he shows some sort of tangibile, meaningful progress (in the eyes of the coaching staff) ? ....if you don't think there is a benefit (and you may well be 100% right there isn't any) then he should start. My whole point on this is that I believe the scouting reports and what own coach has to say about him...and that is he needs to develop on the bench. I would normally agree that a guy learns better and faster by playing, but Allen I think...as his scouting reports suggested prior to draft day....he is one of the few guys who can make tangible, measurable progress on the bench and on the practive field and in the classroom.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
There's a good chance Allen wins the starting job ahead of the season because he currently shares the depth chart with 2017 fifth-rounder Nathan Peterman, who briefly replaced Taylor in the lineup last November and promptly threw five interceptions in 30 minutes of football. The Bills also signed veteran AJ McCarron, who spent the first four seasons of his career with the Bengals, where he started four games (including a playoff game) in 2015 after Andy Dalton went down with a thumb injury.
"I think Josh is a mature guy who has handled his responsibilities the right way," said Bills offensive coordinator Brian Daboll. "He works hard. He improves. He listens to the veterans and coaches. If he makes a mistake one day, he works really hard to try and fix it the next day. He has the right attitude."
Actually Vigen explained that, as well. Been posted more than once.
Wait... so right here you acknowledge that Allen is probably better than Peterman or McCarron already.
I agree that's most likely the case, and that's why he's most likely to start week 1.
It's going to be extremely difficult to explain away to your vets why you aren't starting the best QB on the roster. And McDermott preaches open competition all the time...
If Allen wins that competition, he's the starter. Dabol and McDermott will likely have some sort of plan in terms of game planning and what not to protect him throughout the season.
I can understand your point, but consider David Carr.....he was better than anything the Texans had the moment he was drafted. That doesn't mean he was ready....and behind a bad line, he got clobbered.....now, he may never had amounted to anyhting...or maybe in a better situation he could have....there's no way to say...but MIGHT it have been better to let some journeyman get killed at first while Carr had more time to practice good football in a controlled practice environment? maybe. Allen is a long term investment. If you really wanted a QB that was plug and play you could easily have outspent Denver and brought in Keenum.....All I am saying is that considering what Allen IS NOW....a physical specimen that the scouts all said would need some time to develope...AND who your own head coach has said will take time to develop.....I would say that even if Allen is the best QB on the team.....if the coaches say he isn't ready yet.....then let Peterman or McCarron go out there until he is READY. They are expendable. I also get how the veterans might take that wrong by holding back the "best" player to help the team win....I would think that your coach has enough credibility in the locker room for those guys to understand "the process" ....and consider once again, if Allen was plug and play ready, he would have gone 1/1. If you trust your coach...he'll know when Allen is "ready" and that is when he will see the field.
-
5 hours ago, transplantbillsfan said:
Well this sounds like an appropriate post
It's rather odd you chose this analogy. Do you have issues of your own?
As to the point and disregarding your absurd analogy, how far exactly does Allen have to go? How much further ahead are Peterman and McCarron from where he is right now? Regardless of whatever progression Allen needs, what makes you think his progression will be better served on the bench than on the field?
I won't post the quotes or links again, but Allen's OC Brent Vigen (who also coached Carson Wentz) raved about Allen's progression in college and his ability to immediately step into the NFL and execute an NFL offense. Our GM Beane essentially shot down the national narrative that Allen is (too) raw in a post draft interview with Buffalo News.
He's also getting plenty of praise from teammates so far, including Shady, who's likely about the most bluntly honest player on our team.
Allen might be ready to start. That'll be determined this Summer. If he is and is better than Peterman and McCarron, I want him starting.
1. What Vigen says and what he actually did are two completely different things. For a guy who is supposed to be the best guy on your team, the best guy on the field...the play calling sure does suggest they tried to avoid putting it on Allen as much as they possibly could.....
2. Allen may very well be better than Peterman and MacCarron right now (in fact, he probalby is BETTER) but being better than Peterman and McCarron is a low hurdle IMO. Even if he is "better" than doesn't mean he is "ready". ....he should start when the coaches think there is nothing else to be gained by sitting. I don't propose to know what that means because I think QB's do the vast majority of their learning by playing in games...so if the coaches think ALLEN has improved and learned all he can while sitting, then he should start and see what he can do and how/if he progresses in real games. Whenever you get to that point, start him. That might mean week 1, or it might mean week 1 next year.
-
6 hours ago, The Process said:
Is anyone else disenchanted by the swoosh Logos? Perfect example is the Pats ugly guy face swooshing out of....well....nowhere! The jags had the same.....Panthers.....same.....I wonder if the same overpaid artist is laughing all the way to the bank selling the same ole same ole....over and over. Am I nuts for noticing this or just an old fart not wanting to embrace modern design....?
I agree with this. a good sports logo and branding is able to convey that you are strong, confident, a sense of tradition, it's iconic...something familiar to a community as times change...
The Patriots HAD that look with their old logo. I don't tend to like logos that include a piece of sports equipments such as a ball, helmet, etc...but the old logo with the patriot ready to snap the football was classic, and met the criteria I set above. the current logo looks like the letterhead for a large life insurance company that formed after they merged two or three times with others. They've won a bunch in this look so it won't change..and will probalby become "classic" and "iconic" because of the winning tradition.
The Broncos is another example. I hate those guys, but the D with the horse head in it was a really strong look....that thing on their helmet now screams "western city public transit authority".
Jacksonville should have just stuck with their original uniforms....good clean look..they were a winner right away in those....no reason to have changed, but they did.
I prefer a clean crisp, classic, look, like the Colts...or Steelers (hate them too, but nice uniforms.) Might I even venture to say that KC has decent, iconic classic look that hasn't changed and isn't made to look like a swoosh etc.
I've always thought that it was arena league like to "swoosh": your logo....and another offense that comes off as minor league...having your font for the team name start with a Capital letter, have lowercase in between an uppercase, large final letter. .....are we advertising a tractor pull? (I'm talking to you EagleS, bring back the old eagle font and kelly green!)
FWIW, I like the old standing Buffalo logo better than the current one. (but it's not awful)
-
I've never seen a QB who understand an NFL pocket better than Tom Brady. I don't like the Patriots...and I am certain the Patriots are hated universally here...but you watch the guy and litterally, the one thing he does that makes him elite instead of average is that he stands tall in the pocket...sliding left/right or moving up/back just slightly as needed to maintain himself in a small spot and area while KEEPING HIS EYES downfield. In the NFL, so often, the winning play is made when the QB has time to make a read and throw. And so often the QB is his own worst enemy, by taking your eyes off your targets and looking at pass rushers and tyring to see where you can run to...you are no longer looking for the best target. Plays can and are made from this circumstance....but once the QB no longer can see ALL of his available targets on the field..the chance the defense will win the play goes way up. Brady wins from the pocket at a HIGH RATE because he almost always is standing up straight, eyes downfield...finding the best target and delivering the ball to that target.
That's it...there is no magic..and certainly Brady doesn't ahve a cannon arm and he can't run....his excpetional skill is understanding how to win in an NFL pocket. That is it.
-
5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
While I agree with some of this, I just wanted to point out that it is NOT unprecedented to see completion percentage improve by almost 10%.
Brett Favre 1987 Southern Mississippi 40.7%
Brett Favre 1988 Southern Mississippi 55.8%
Brett Favre 1989 Southern Mississippi 54.1%
Brett Favre 1990 Southern Mississippi 54.5% (college totals 52.4%)
Brett Favre 1991 Atlanta Falcons 4 attempts the whole year
Brett Favre 1992 Green Bay Packers 64.1% on 471 attempts and a career total of 62%
Interesting to note that Favre sat for a year before his major improvement occurred.
I admit I overlooked the case of Brett Favre....probalby due to the guys I researched to compare being within the past 10 years or so...but since you bring it up, it does fit in with my thought that Allen COULD do this...but in my opinion, he'll need the good reps, good coaching, etc..and lots of it to get him "right". I can't say i know much about Favre's college career etc but playing at small school, that wasn't in a conference back then, with the big arm and good size....there may be some similarities there.
....it is worth noting that late 80's early 90's era NFL football, it was considered GOOD to have a mid 50's% completion pct....different era, different rules....that's worth noting....Favres college numbers would seem BAD if he played now.
-
On 4/27/2018 at 8:07 AM, Magox said:
I want to preface these series of thoughts with the fact that I was hoping for Rosen over Allen. With that said one of the common gripes that I am hearing from some of our fans on this board is that Josh Allen is the bigger risk for this franchise than Rosen. The argument goes something along the lines that Rosen is the best pure passer, the most NFL ready therefore he's close to a sure thing. Whereas Allen is the big armed QB who is inaccurate similar to EJ Manuel and he's got Bust written all over him.
On the surface this argument makes sense.
However, there are huge gaping holes with this argument.
A) One of the big things that people talked about including lots of whispers from NFL personnel is that Rosen was not a leader of men. Some questioned his demeanor and whether or not his heart was fully in the game. I don't know whether or not that stuff is true or not but it was definitely out there. I will say this, the little that I observed of him I definitely saw a smugness about him. Does that matter? I don't know. But it was certainly palpable and if I saw that after a few interviews then I'm certain that this reputation was observed by many others as well. The fact that his ex coach Mora could not give him a full-throated endorsement and even picked his in-state rival as being the QB who should be picked first to me screams of a red flag. Sure, Mora tried backtracking some and equivocating why he said that, but the bottom line is that he didn't feel the urge to gush about the player he coached.
B) His injury concerns. Will he be a Bradford sort of player? I think that is a fair question. He's had a couple concussions and I believe a shoulder injury that kept him out for some time. He's not the most mobile QB, tends to hold on to the ball too long sometimes because he's a QB that likes to try to make plays but if you are in the NFL and you don't have great protection and you hold on to the ball too long and you are prone to some injuries, it's stands to reason to believe he could be an injury prone QB in this league. That is a risk.
Allen on the other hand is a big hulking QB that can not only shake off arm tackles but he's very mobile and makes amazing throws on the run. Considering the offensive line we have, this is probably a better fit than Rosen is essentially just a pocket passer.
While Allen has his shortcomings primarily in the accuracy department, it is an overblown charge that people make and it is without doubt in many cases an on-the-surface observation primarily to the famed 56% completion rate. There certainly is some there there. But a few things you have to keep in mind.
A) This was a down-the-field sort of throwing offense which is more susceptible to producing higher incompletion rates
B) His offensive line was very weak and he was constantly under duress.
C) His WR's were very poor and they weren't able to get a lot of separation.
His intermediate and long range passing is really good, where he struggles are his short passes. That is something that will have to be worked on and to me that is more a matter of setting his feet/mechanics and from what I've been reading it is something that he has worked on and improved, as evidenced in the Senior bowl game. He was the best performing QB that attended this year.
You have posted some contradictory statements here. (A This was a down the field sort of throwing offense which is susceptible to producing higher incompletion rates...but then in your next statement, you say that Allen excelled at long range passing. .....it would seem that the offense was therefore geared to take advantage of something you say Allen does well...wich should lead to BETTER NUMBER...not worse numbers. So, was it beneficial to throw downfield more, or not?
The guy is also an anticipation thrower that can hit receivers in small windows. He's also a very intelligent guy and hard worker and a leader or men. Where he needs some work on the mental aspect are his progressions which of course is a very important element. To me, this is his biggest risk into becoming a franchise QB.
While they both have their risks, it is a fallacy from my point of view to believe that Allen is the bigger risk considering that Rosen may have troubles leading his teammates and his injury risks.
There is a reason why not only was the whisper campaign in NFL evaluator/GM circles in full effect to "stay away" from Rosen and the fact that teams in need of QB's early on decided to forgo him, not to mention that most mocks had Allen being selected over Rosen. It's not because he doesn't have the talent, it's because of these other concerns.
Rosen could very well end up being the better QB, but the risks are there and they are reasonably undeniable. Again, this is not so much an argument of who is going to be the better QB it's to address the fallacy that Allen is the bigger risk.
you make a valid point about risk management here for sure. I would simply ask....that given the Risks with Rosen are based on his percieved aloofness and arogance...personality....and injury history.....vs the more tangible metric of completion percentage/results on the field for Allen....is Rosen the bigger risk? I don't propose to know, but some arogant jerks who can produce on the field have been good pros before...whereas this completion pct/stats issue for Allen has a lot of actual math behind it to suggest there is substantial risk. .....again.....I am not trying to say one or the other is a more worthwhile risk.....certainly an interesting take on it.
-
....probalby has to do with the notion that a college QB with such a low completion pct has never been successful in the NFL.....and even when there have been a few to imrpove...the best case is Jake Locker going from a 54% passer in college to a 57% passer in the NFL....3 pct...and still well below what most would consider good enough to succeed.
The anger isn't so much at Allen as it is in the idea that for 2 years this whole series of trades, moves, jockeying, etc...was all to lead up to getting "the man" ....and when the pick finally came in, the leadership selected Josh Allen...a huge gamble/risk.
(I have my reservations about Allen, BUT...I LOVE that your front office pulled the trigger and is shooting for the stars instead of accepting status quo)
-
10 minutes ago, transplantbillsfan said:
1- Is an NFL game ever not brutal? You're projecting too much about how good the teams are in our first 8 games. Regardless of what a coach should or should not do, I highly doubt that's what McDermott is doing. The NFL changes so consistently year to year that I'd bet you money that at least two of those teams you (and so many others who--like every year--are predicting how difficult our schedule is based on the teams we play) allude to who you think will be so great in the first 8 games will end the season with losing records. At least 2. Probably more. I don't think projecting like this is something coaches do or is even plausible--except for when the Bills play the Patriots
2- More projecting. Similarly to #1, Beane's job as GM is to evaluate players and bring in the best known good to great players for value but, more importantly, to rely on scouting--both pro and college--to go out and find those diamonds in the rough. We have and unknown offensive roster, not necessarily a "not very good one." Maybe it's downright awful, but the good thing is that McDermott has had OTAs and Minicamp and will have Training Camp and Preseason to evaluate it. If he thinks they're much worse than they were last year, I'm sure that'll factor into his decision. I, personally, thing the offensive roster is better than you think. But I've really bought into what Beane has been doing with the roster on both the pro and college side.
3- I think this is a playoff team, just like I thought we'd make the playoffs last year and thought it before the season started:
https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/195955-why-are-you-so-sure-we-arent-a-playoff-team/
We were a playoff team. This year, I think we'll be better. I don't even know who our QB is, yet, but I think we'll finally get to double digit wins and won't rely on another team in a miracle win to make the playoffs. I think that not simply because I am a Bills fan. I think that because it's year 2 under a HC who already coached an underrated team into the playoffs once and he's going into year 2 with a seriously upgraded defensive roster (and that's his bread and butter), he brought in an OC who's advertised as very creative who he seems to know well personally and trust, our RBs are better, our WRs are already better with simply a healthy Benjamin, our OL has an opportunity with 2 aging vets who left to inject some youth in the interior OL, and we have lots of potential at the QB position... with whoever that might be. Plus, again, this is year 2 under a regime that broke a 17 year playoff drought. There's buy-in already built in.
Allen might not start week 1. If he doesn't, it's going to be because Peterman or McCarron were clearly well ahead of him. I doubt it's for any of the 3 reasons you provide.
1. - even if your first 8 games happen to be against what ultimately turn out to be the easiest 8 games played in the NFL all year....he should still be on the bench.
2. I certainly could be wrong about my evaluation of the Bills offensive talent. I'm not a scout etc. I wouldn't have a different opinion in regards to Allen if you had for example, the Patriots offensive roster. I THINK that Allen isn't ready to carry what appears to be an offensive side lacking the kind of talent to carry a QB.
3. McDermott did quite an impressive job getting the Bills to the post season. I certainly wouldn't have counted the Bills as a playoff team heading into last season.
You and many others have stated that if Allen can show he is heads and shoulders above the other 2 running the offense in camp/pre-season, he should start. I AGREE with that....but since this is pre camp, and no preseason games to watch yet, we are speculating here....and so, I am speculating that his pre draft scouting report isn't wrong, that he is who everyone says he is...(a physical talent, a smart kid, who was inaccurate in actual games, on a bad team in a bad conference) I think this will manifest itself in camp and especially on the field in preseason. I frankly can't wait to see how it plays out. I think what will happen is that Allen will look like a guy who needs some work and time on the bench when we get to live action, but I'm certainly looking forward to seeing what he looks like in a game setting and having my views challenged.
Also...I'm not ANTI Bills or Anti Allen. I've said on this board many times that I really want this all to work out for you folks. This board and fan base are GREAT to interact with...it's why I keep showing up here...great group. Unless you are playing the Chiefs, I will be rooting for the Bills. (and hey, I got my picture taken with Poncho Billa at the draft even) .....Anyhow....I am calling it like I see it....like I said...my worthless 2 cents.
-
1
-
Mahomes Struggling in Camp
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
You may be entirely right or wrong about Mahomes, Garrapolo...etc....I do kind of smirk at the love DeSahun Watson gets.....he put up some big TD numbers....and good for him...but he was also on pace for 30 Turnovers....given that a good portion of his his long TD plays were of the catch and run variety and not so much the long awesome throw type...he might not seem so awesome.....agian....we'll have to wait and see...but it's as if people discount the fact he had so many turnovers...