Richard Noggin

His demeanor to date suggests that he's NOT actually a great backup, if we expect a backup to be focused on helping the ACTUAL starters prepare to play each week. He might be an intriguing short-term replacement player, for the same reasons he might not be an ideal backup guy in the QB room (ego, desire to start, public statements to that effect, etc.).

Doubt they'd ship out BOTH starting EDGE guys, but...this is a smarter move than Mack, all things considered.

Your axe is sharp. Careful with that thing.

Toddlers lack patience and require immediate gratification, or they become whiny and throw tantrums. Also, many posters in this thread because a trade happened that didn't involve the Bills. Self-reflection, folks. Self-regulation, for that matter.

While of course hand size "matters" to at least SOME extent, it's important to consider exactly HOW hand size is measured. It's essentially "handspan," from tip of pinky to tip of thumb when the hand is fully splayed. A dude could have incredibly LONG fingers that wrap around the ball, but if his hand is not terribly wide, or his thumb doesn't hinge outward in a particular way, then his measurement would be lacking. Dante Culpepper, if I recall correctly, had relatively small hands (9.5" compared to his 6'4" height) by this metric because his fingers didn't separate widely (almost like they were slightly webbed). I'd bet Culpepper's hands are larger than mine if held up against each other, even though my hands actually measure "larger" by the NFL standard. Mediocre example because I'm sure 9.5" is right around the NFL average. Like so many metrics, there are limitations and there are exceptions. Nevertheless, Pickett's hands DO seem pretty effing small for an NFL QB, and especially for a dude of his stature. I'm sure solid fundamentals (TWO HANDS ON THE BALL) and modern gloves can mitigate how much this matters.

CVSs are like amusement parks now, with their own islands for each attraction/department? Imagine how long the receipts would be for such pharmacy getaways...

Oh boy. Such a fraught topic. Sorry, mods. (I will not reply to anti-vax social media posts, I will not reply to anti-vax social media posts...)

You don't think McKinnon earned some money with his late-season/playoff performance?

He definitely had some issues executing Daboll's option routes as the season wore on, but then again, so did Sanders and everyone else (including Diggs and therefore Allen). We all saw the passing game sputter a bit in unforced ways.

No way. He does NOT rush the passer well. Objectively and subjectively, this is as close as we can get to a football "fact." To date, Tremaine Edmunds lacks pass rushing ability. Anecdotally, who was the RB who absolutely stepped up and STONED Tremaine's blitz late in the season? It was such a notable play for me, as I've seen MANY other LBs fight through such A-gap blocks or even run OVER such blocks (ahem, Matt Brieda), including our own Matt Milano. (Such a notable play that I can't locate the specifics right now, of course.)

I really like this take. A lot.

Do you even KNOW how young he was when he was drafted? Let's tally up the talking points. (FTR, I would never call Edmunds a BUST, but I also would NOT endorse the team paying him even Matt Milano money for a 2nd contract.) (Also, Walter Football LOL. The blurbs for many of these picks are baffling. Lots of references to 2019 stats, freshman year performances, and just observations in general that don't fully connect.)

I like CB most of all in round one, as the value and need really seems to sync up there. If the defense can be more effectively multiple on the boundaries moving forward (switching up/blending man and zone coverages and press and off alignments), that will help against top flight QBs/passing attacks. We face a few of those next season, and for the foreseeable future in the AFC. WR is of course intriguing as well.

https://walterfootball.com/draft2022_1.php This pick and blurb oughta get a rise out of folks. Dontcha think? Discuss.

Berrios at the price referenced (sub-6M) would be a SMART signing. His fits in the slot and the return game would be ideal. Ogbah at the price referenced (plus-10M) would be LESS smart, IMO. Which is much more about the price than the player. Solid LDE in a base 4-3. Better version of Shaq Lawson, if you will. But that price doesn't mesh with current cap and draft resource allocations. Which is the issue with FA. That OG is super meh at the price referenced (~8M), when we could have Bates at less than half that and already have Williams at just over it (who seems like a similarly effective player just with tackle flex rather than center flex). Maybe moving to a more zone-heavy scheme recalibrates o-line assessments? Devalues Williams and elevates Bates? Therefore opening the door to replace Williams with someone like whoever this Rams guy is? Could be. I'm losing focus.

Maths.

That's actually THREE big points.

I 100% HATE country music. Despise it. Anything called "country" past the 1970s is just pop music with a twang. So there.

Well, except for the Manning Curse, of course.

Offseason social media gonna offseason social media (But circumstantially, this is of course tantalizing)

You're not suggesting McKenzie is on par with McCaffrey, are you? I agree that Li'l Dirty is a cheaper, lower ceiling (maybe higher floor?) answer to a similar question, but...they are not the same. Availability matters, of course, and familiarity is also nice, so the McKittrick idea is the Occam's Razor to this slot/playmaker quandary.

His dad, I presume?

The bolded phrase is inherently oxymoronic. You are actually sharing your subjective thoughts, or...feelings. I'm not saying I disagree, but I am saying that you're confusing the concepts of objectivity and subjectivity. Or at the very least not supporting your claims with actual objective evidence.

The proposed trade seems like a moderate risk, high reward move. I don't think Beasley coming back at his price makes any sense, but I do think exchanging him for CMC at roughly the same price (minus a couple draft assets) is at least worth consideration. People laughing off this proposal must be reacting emotionally.

The uniformity of the narrative presented (ZERO concession or complexity), and the absolute lack of concrete attribution for ALL evidence submitted, adds up to a polemic hit-piece that reads more like a conspiracy theory than the whistle-blowing reportage it wants us to see. Maybe the unnamed authors are on to something, but this published compilation of hearsay, conjecture, and innuendo isn't a convincing presentation.