Jump to content

Buffalo03

Community Member
  • Posts

    4,670
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Buffalo03

  1. Beane: "Hey Deonte, do you remember in Miami last season when you returned that punt for us and changed the momentum of the game"

     

    Harty: "Hell yeah, that was fun. I can't wait to do that again for us this season"

     

    Beane: "Yeah....about that....that's not gonna happen"

     

    Harty: "What do you mean?"

     

    Beane: "I am asking you to do the opposite of stay"

     

    Harty: "I'm not sure I follow"

     

    Beane: you see that door right there?"

     

    Harty: "The one that goes out to the parking lot?"

     

    Beane: "yeah, that one. I need you to go through that door and not come back in it"

     

    Harty: "why?"

     

    Beane: "Just a game I like to play"

     

    Harty: "Doesn't sound fun at all"

     

    Beane: "Deonte, go through that door. And don't come back. Take your car to the house like you did that punt, but stay there and don't come back"

     

    Harty: "But I don't think"

     

    Beane: "Deonte, you're cut. Get out"

     

     

  2. 2 hours ago, Sweats said:

     

     

     

    I believe that Burrow has the benefit of the doubt for not playing well.....he had been to the SB only the year before, so i cut him some slack. When our team has the post SB blues and doesn't play very well, i'll cut them some slack too.

    It really shouldn't matter. And it was "2 years before" not the year before. I was simply commenting on the fact that someone said the Bengals went 9-8 last season and then someone said "that was with no Burrow". I simply pointed out that even with Burrow they were 5-5 so let's not give him that much credit. Burrow didn't win his Super Bowl and this is a thread about which QB will be the next to win their first so...there's that. We don't know who it's gonna be

  3. 3 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

    Hopefully the bills are not thinking this way they better be more than one guy
     

    This happened last year there was a run on wide receivers and Buffalo ended up taking Dalton now I’m not advocating for another tight end, but the idea I’m having more than one guy on your board is still sound

    I'm sure they will have more than one guy. But of they really prefer one guy over another, it probably wouldn't be a bad move

    • Like (+1) 1
  4. 4 minutes ago, Gregg said:

     

    I wouldn't be surprised if it's the Jets again. The Bills and Jets seem to open against each other a lot. With Rodgers back the league can finally get that Allen vs Rodgers week one primetime matchup that lasts more than 4 plays. Then you had Dion spewing hatred towards the Jets with Sauce firing comments back at him. There is some bad blood between the teams. Remember the fight in the tunnel after the game in Buffalo last season. The league has some juicy story lines here with these teams.

    I feel like the Jets opening week would be too repetitive. They have done it so much

  5. 52 minutes ago, mrags said:

    I’m not saying it’s the ideal way to do business. I’m saying it’s likely what we’re going to do this year. We are over the cap at this point and I believe we’ll be under enough at the time to make some signings, I don’t expect them to go big. Also, like you said, we are good now. We have Allen now. We have Diggs now. We can afford to take some more average players and hope this coaching staff can get their best out of them. It drove me insane too when it used to happen. Not right now we need a real infusion of young talent and that needs to come from the draft and FAs that were recently released or never caught on with teams but have some real upside and could be something in a new place. Picking up Hamler at WR is exactly the type of move im speaking of. It will be more moves like this imo. 

    I agree with this. It was moreso a complaint about how some of the prior Bills GMs would preach the "build through the draft and sign our own" which I agree with but you would have thought when the playoff drought reached 10 years they would have said "ok, let's make some splashes while building through the draft" they just always seemed to want to cheap out and get average players to mix with bad draft picks and it was a never ending cycle until Beane, thankfully 

  6. 2 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

    They let the core drafted players leave.  They never paid big guaranteed money besides Williams.  The best players at premier positions they let walk.   Its was a constant Draft replacing those starters that left. For every guy they extended 2 walked.  

    Yeah, that was also a big part of it. We never wanted to pay out big contracts to guys that deserved it. But during those years, it was so frustrating to sit back and watch big FAs get signed and then we were looking to spend less on dust settle guys that wouldn't have made our team any better than it already was.

    • Like (+1) 1
  7. Mike Schopp picked his top 5 teams he thinks will NOT be the Bills opening week opponent. 

     

    He said Chiefs at Bills obviously isn't happening but then went on to say the Jets, Rams, Ravens, 49ers and then said the Lions. I actually think at the Lions would be an awesome opening Monday night game. But I found his whole picking of opponents interesting

  8. 19 hours ago, mrags said:

    I imagine it’s all going to happen almost at once. Like bang bang bang. For 3-4 straight days you will see updates of cuts, restructures, extensions. It will likely all happen before the tampering period starts but if I were a betting man, I’d bet against them going after any player in the first few days of free agency. My bet is they wait it out and look to not overpay for the high price, higher profile players. JMO

    Operating this way now when we are good is fine. But man, during the drought, this never made sense to me. Like, we always had the money, we sucked year after year and with the exception of going all out for Mario and McCoy, we always went after the "after dust settles" guys and it drove me insane 

  9. 19 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

    I laughed every time someone suggested Pittman leaving Indianapolis. He's a 26 year old star #1 WR, with a good bill of health, that was their Rookie QB's go to guy as he's developing, and Indianapolis is 74m under the cap.

     

    Much like Tee Higgins before Jim, it was a no brainer to me he'd be Franchised.

     

     

    In a vacuum, it's good for people who are afraid we'll re-sign Gabe Davis.

     

    But the reality is that anytime a FA WR is taken off the market, it not only drives up Davis' price, it drives up the price of any WR left. This makes guys like Hollywood Brown or Odell Beckham Jr. go from an outside chance to an impossibility as they'll be the top options available and will become too overpaid for our price range. And it may make that next level of guys like Curtis Samuel too expensive as well.

     

    It also makes more teams looking at WR turn to the Draft, which will make it probably impossible for us to get a guy like Brian Thomas Jr. and have to Trade up for the 5th WR off the board instead of them falling to us.

     

    So in the long run, it's not a good thing for us.

    I think if they didn't get Anthony Richardson last year, there was a good chance Pittman may have been dealt. But Richardson showed promise when he played and getting rid of your young number 1 guy would be very dumb at this point 

  10. 9 minutes ago, Don Otreply said:

    You are not being “forced “‘to do anything.  What you want is to reap the benefits of others labor for free. You can try to spin it any way you want, but it boils down to what I typed in the second sentence of this response, you want services and you don’t want to pay for them, an article or a cup of coffee, or whatever, it ain’t free, and you’re not special so you gotta pay, 

     

    boy this is fun 🤩 

    Lol. You make it sound as though there aren't millions articles on the internet about pretty much anything that can be read all the time free of charge. I don't expect "labor" to be given to me for free. I don't expect free food at a restaurant, I don't expect mortgages to be free like the other guy you are agreeing with. I don't expect to have my car worked on for free. That's true labor. None of those are the same as reading an article online. And it's not Mel Kiper himself charging for it. It's the company he works for so it doesn't really have anything to do with labor. Espn plus should be for programming, not for being forced to read an article here and there on their website. I say it again, peacock and Amazon prime offer tons of shows and movies as part of their subscription. Does that mean it's right to make customers pay for football games on their platforms when ALL other games are available on local TV? No

  11. 13 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

    A Mel Kiper mock draft is one of the very few things I would be interested in reading from ESPN. I would assume they consider it some of their more valuable NFL-related content, so it's certainly not a surprise they would keep it behind their paywall. I understand why you would like it to be free (which illustrates why it isn't), but why exactly should it be free?

    I like to read as many mock draft articles as I can. Whether it's from Mel, or whoeever else. Anyone can pretty much read an article like that for free in a lot of places but you got the select few that include into a subscription along with TV shows and all that that they want them to pay for. It's ONE article and people are forced to pay $10.99 even though, they get more with the subscription, I want to read the one article. No one should have to oay for that. Just like I think the Amazon Prime football games and the playoff peacock game should have been free and forcing people to pay for that to watch a game even though those platforms offer other shows is just wrong

    • Agree 1
  12. 17 minutes ago, NewEra said:

    They are putting hundreds articles, videos and shows as part of the subscription …..not one.  This is part of the business model.  In your case….you just want to read one article, so you’ll just have to ask others that do pay for it to fill you in with the info you need.

     

    i wanted HBO strictly for Game of Thrones…..nothing else.  So I should be able to watch for free?  

    I KNOOOOOOWWWWWWW. again, I don't want to read all of their articles or watch their programming. I want to read THIS article. The game of thrones comparison is not the same thing. I pay for Netflix, I don't do it for one show. Even if I did, I understand that that's the only possible way I have access to thay show. I think it was wrong to make football fans subscribe to peacock just to watch a football game. Am I wrong for thinking that way too? The articles can be included with the ESPN plus subscription. That doesn't mean they can't make each individual article free to the reader. 

    • Haha (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...