MJS
-
Posts
19,190 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MJS
-
-
Wow, how idiotic would the Jets have to be to trade a guy they just signed (and paid a huge signing bonus) to a division rival? Nobody could be that dumb, right? Right!?
-
3 hours ago, chris heff said:
If that were true why did the league create a network to talk about team news for hours every day? Why hold a huge media event for the draft? The NFL wants you the fan not only to watch the games, but watch their network, watch the draft, watch video from training camp and watch preseason games, which are really just practice.
The NFL, sure, but not the coaches. Not the GM. Their job isn't to entertain you or engage the fans. Their job isn't to sell tickets. Their job is to build a team and win games. They aren't in the entertainment business. So I can see why they might want to reduce the distraction and outside noise because that doesn't help them win football games. And if they don't win, no matter how entertaining they are, they'll be fired. So entertaining the fans is probably nowhere near their priority list.
1 hour ago, BillsFan17 said:So, shows like Hard Knocks do so well...
Yeah, and how many teams line up to be on those shows? Most of them are forced into it from league mandates. The coaches and the GM just want to focus on their job, which is winning football games, not adding distraction. Now the league, of course, is all about entertainment and engaging the fans. But there's a difference between the league and the team football operation leaders.
-
2 hours ago, chris heff said:
The NFL is in the entertainment business, why would ownership deny media access? They went so far as to create their own network. We the fans pay everyone involved, the owners, the coaches, the front office, the back office and the players. Why would you not want the fans engaged?
Fans engage in the games. Those are the real events. They really have little to gain by providing access to all the behind the scenes stuff.
-
22 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:
Honestly what are they afraid of. They should have more media availability but just make them all stay in one area. I enjoy reading the charted plays that people like Joe B and Matt F do.
We need more than 1 day to scratch the itch
Eh. If it were me in charge I'd have as little media as possible.
-
2
-
-
I remember during the draft a lot of people projecting him to guard. Wonder how good he'll be. Did he stay healthy last year?
-
I actually liked the show better back in the days when it was only John Murphy. Made his job harder, which I'm sure is why he wanted a co-host, but he was forced to collect a ton of material for each show, didn't waste time making small talk and conversing about stupid things, and gave more time to callers and guests. Adding Donald Jones made the show almost unlistenable to me. Tasker is a little better, but sometimes makes me cringe when he just can't get words out or states an opinion that just makes you wonder if he does any homework at all.
But honestly, I think the show is ok. Not good, not terrible, sometimes interesting to listen to, and sometimes just pointless. Much like almost any radio show I have ever heard.
-
1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:
Yea this must be why they didn't take Mahomes or Watson.... it couldn't be because McDermott and Beane didn't think either guy was worth the pick and they were more concerned with getting one in what was a more highly touted class the following year.... they took "steady Eddie" as Beane refers to him in Nathan Peterman a few rounds later.... you think they were using Whaleys board? There were a lot of rumblings from Carolina of the Bills stealing their board.
Just call it what it is. They passed on Mahomes/Watson because they wanted to.
They passed on them, I believe, because McDermott wanted a real GM in position before making such a franchise altering decision. Didn't hurt that the next year's QB class was viewed as being better so there was incentive to wait.
1 minute ago, SoTier said:Point 1 - if Darnold becomes a good QB then who drafted him will be totally irrelevant. If he proves to be a bust, then who drafted him will also be irrelevant. Being "his guy" or "their guy" only matters when a highly drafted QB prospect doesn't develop into more than a mediocre starter and a team has to decide whether to keep him or move on. Goff wasn't McVay's "guy" until he proved himself a good QB. If Tampa moves on from Jameis Winston, it won't be that he's not Bruce Arians' "guy" but that he simply hasn't developed into a good enough NFL QB.
Point 2 - the only legitimate reasons to pass a great QB prospect when the opportunity to draft one arises is that a) you already have a franchise QB on your roster or b) you already drafted a great QB prospect the previous year or two or c) the player evaluators don't like the QB prospect(s) available. Passing on a great QB prospect in order to give your future GM a chance to draft "his own guy" is beyond stupid simply because the team may not have the opportunity to draft a great QB prospect for the next 5 years or more, either because there aren't any QBs worth drafting (2013) or all the great QB prospects are already gone (2004 or 2016).
Or D) You're not a GM and don't trust the evaluation of the current GM, so you need to get a GM you trust in the building so you can feel confident that you are picking a good QB.
-
I love having linebackers who can cover and range sideline to sideline. Just have to make sure you have some depth guys who can come in and stop the run, both as linebackers and on the defensive line.
Luckily Edmunds is huge AND fast, so he should be a real asset both in the passing and rushing game. Just needs more experience.
-
1 minute ago, ShadyBillsFan said:
I'm such an idiot.
I need better gasses.
???? Gronk is 5 yards away from Tre' .
I ASSUMED
At first glance it looks kind of like McDermott.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Gugny said:
I'm no purist, by any means. I think if technology can make the game better, then it should be taken advantage of. I would really like to see replay used to catch the egregious penalties missed by officials; especially game-changers. If they're egregious, then they should be able to be seen at full speed; very quickly, at that.
I just think they need to go back to only reversing calls when there is clear and incontrovertible evidence. That needs to be reemphisized. If there is any gray area, they need to let the play stand. If it requires multiple angles pieced together, let it stand. If it requires super slow motion, let it stand.
The officials should have an innocent until proven guilty mentality, and look for reasons to let the play stand instead of reasons to reverse it.
-
2 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:
I think the one thing interesting about the future of the running game is defense. Today's defenses are geared to stop the pass. Nickel is the most commonly run defense in the contemporary NFL. In the old days, linebackers used to be thumpers. Now many LBs have better coverage than tacking skills.
It seems the time is ripe for a creative OC to build an offense around a strong running game to take advantage of today's defensive tendencies.
That's what Bill Belichick did last year.
-
What makes this guy well known? What's his claim to fame?
-
1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said:
I still want to know why he was yelling at the REF before the Neanderthal clubbed Tre'
You mean the Pats coach? He is probably yelling that Tre interfered with Gronk (which he clearly did). Did you think that was a Bills coach? Pretty sure the Pats logo is on his hat.
-
1 hour ago, Gugny said:
I've never heard this, nor considered it. But I like it.
John Murphy talks about it all the time. He wants to get rid of replay too, but in absence of that has called for replay to be only allowed at full speed.
-
What does "make it" mean? He's a backup caliber QB, so if he works hard and stays out of trouble he could be a backup in the league for a long time. If not, he won't.
-
24 minutes ago, JOE IN HAMPTON ROADS said:
why do certain people think oversized logos are an upgrade?
Yep. Not sure.
-
Good to see at least one person still believes Tyrod can be a starter.
Heck, he's a good backup, but to suggest it is a good idea to sit a franchise QB in favor of him is just amazingly hilarious. I'm sure that would go over well with Rivers and his teammates.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, Gugny said:
Theoretically, yes. We keep Allen so he can learn from Wentz (for the Allen haters, mind you) and when Wentz inevitably goes down, Allen will be more prepared.
Wentz is still young. How long are you planning on having Allen play behind him? And if he is guaranteed to be injured, why would the Bills want him instead of Allen?
-
They seem to have a theme of taking classy, simple designs and overdramatizing them.
-
1
-
1
-
-
What did I just read?
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Boca BIlls said:
What are you talking about I was just saying he has no excuses now b.c of what they have done with the team.
Well, the excuses would be that he is only a 2nd year QB, still raw and inexperienced, lacks a true #1 receiver, and is playing behind a brand new oline that will likely take many games to mesh and play well together. I don't agree that he has no excuse. He is still a work in progress, as is the entire offense.
We didn't bring anyone in who is more than just average except for perhaps Morse. So we shouldn't expect the offense to be better than average.
Expectations are through the roof for Josh and I do not think he is going to be as good as everyone believes this season. Don't get me wrong, I'm a Josh Allen supporter. I just think he still has a long road ahead.
-
1
-
-
Hmm. I felt like he did throw into tight coverage and rarely threw check downs.
-
1
-
-
Pretty sure they can't challenge inside of 2 minutes.
-
1
-
1
-
-
32 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:
The Chargers were 4-12 and 5-11 in the two years before Anthony Lynn arrived.
21-11 since.
Done while playing two years entirely out of market without a home field advantage.
So, you're wrong.
Do better.
And his coaching is not why they are better. Their increase in talent is, and much of that talent was there when he got there.
LeVeon Bell - On trading block already? Bills mentioned
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Sure they would. The Jets already paid a big portion of his salary, so they'd be getting him for a lot less.
I believe he'd be in McCoy's range for annual salary after the Jets already paid a big portion of the guarenteed money.