.png.395d368d8b720b1e31cfea1d1789947a.png)
Mikie2times
-
Posts
8,802 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mikie2times
-
-
11 minutes ago, Nuncha said:
No one for Josh to throw to yet the Bills are ranked 11th in passing with 2,937 yards. The top passing yard team, Dallas, has 3,581 yards. A difference of 644 yards. Dallas has 109 more passing attempts, most likely due to being behind way more often than Buffalo.
So, the nobody's Josh has to throw to are doing pretty damn well.
The passing offense generated 3 TD's vs the Bengals. But realistically, Allen was 2 of them completely. Which is what we get from our passing game. When Allen has been boxed in or the run game is not working, which was the case in Patriots, Falcons, Texans, we just don't have a whole lot. It's turns into screens, check downs, short TE passes. We literally have to be perfect, which usually doesn't happen because these defenses are usually above average.
This notion that since we are productive as a whole we are fine is failing to look at how that production is happening and how it fails. The missing component of our offense is on time intermediate and downfield passing. We are solely dependent on Josh to create that right now.
-
This is the game I bought the late season Sunday ticket for. Only cost like 40 bucks for the end of the year. I would be getting the Chargers Sunday.
-
2 hours ago, Chaos said:
Sometimes good is the enemy of great.
Certainly is. To use his own words, he's a fundamentally strong coach. I really don't think he prevents us from winning, especially with a better roster. But I also don't think he's vaulting us to the forefront. I put most of that on his reluctance to add top coordinators outside the team including on his own defense.
Watching what Ben Johnson does with Chicago's offense is just, wow. The motion, misdirection, all of it. It's a serious advantage. He's not bringing that type of advantage to the team.
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:
Going all in never fails.
got that right
-
Amazing throw. I would argue this isn’t even in Allen’s top 3. Just off the top of my head, the pass to Murray in the Chiefs game, the Ty Johnson throw in the Denver playoff game, the TD to Knox in the Patriots playoff game, the throw to Shakir vs Baltimore regular season last year.
I mean this is literally just the tip of the iceberg. He has some of the most improbable completions we have ever seen.
-
2
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, gjv said:
In my opinion, Josh Allen is the best player the Bills ever had.
4 minutes ago, Neo said:i think I’m there. Bruce, Thurman and Josh are the top three in my mind. Josh, if i’m picking one.
3 minutes ago, Clyde Smith said:Definitely Josh and Bruce at least.
Bruce still gets the nod, but Allen certainly can pass him. Bruce is the NFL sack leader. An equally freakish talent and the most productive player in NFL history at probably the most important defensive position.
-
7 minutes ago, zow2 said:
My comment at halftime was :
i think Allen needs to scramble more. They won’t be able to get footing to stop him. he can’t stand back there for 10 seconds and get nothing from it.
Im sure glad he started running instead of trying to be a pocket QB. Thats his huge advantage over Burrow and most QBs. His running off script. Hemming him in the pocket is an advantage for the opponent. Glad to see he’s unleashed for December football
I don't think most teams are rushing him aggressively like they used to. It's usually much more controlled. He just doesn't have as many chances to stick his foot in the ground and run decisively up the middle as we saw so much in the past. That said, it was GREAT seeing that Pittsburgh/playoff like TD run today. I also would really like to see Brady scheme more runs for him. I remember Daboll scheming up some sweeps for him, pulled lineman, and designed run plays that can really bring a new dimension to the offense.
1 minute ago, Walking Tall said:Imagine Allen with Chase and Higgins? Or even one of the two?
Sign me up for some Higgins. Josh would be devastating with that type of WR.
-
1
-
-
It's usually hyperbole nowadays for these talking heads to try and force all these GOAT conversations. But the reality is, with Josh, he wins in ways that nobody else has before. That conversation doesn't need to be about if he's the best. It's just about what he brings as an individual player to the offense. Nobody has ever won like this or made these types of plays as consistently as him. Favre, Elway, Vick, Fran, Mahomes all those guys could do it, but not by air or land, and if so, not as consistently and as inconceivably consistent. He is the GOAT playmaker at QB and from my view fairly undisputed.
-
2
-
2
-
-
9 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said:
Very impactful first half for Groot.
Hes “sneaky good”
-
2
-
-
This team isn’t anything without Josh. It really is that simple.
-
4
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, Simon said:
Instead of watching all the things he's actually doing on the field, you're trying to quantify something with this tiny little data set of arbitrary statistics that only represent a fraction of what is actually being done. You act like the only negative impact plays are sacks or TFLs, but you never talk about him tossing a Tackle into the 3 hole to blow up a play and put the offense behind the sticks to endanger their possession. You never talk about how fast he makes a key read and blows up a screen on 3rd down to force a change of possession. You never quantify how often he repeatedly sheds and puts the offense into broken chaos because their playcall just went out the window. You never talk about how many times he uses those 10' arms to instantly drive a Tackle into the QB's field of vision and force a throwaway to avoid 600 lbs of humanity quickly bearing down on him. All of these things (and more) are negative plays, all of these things (and more) happen every week and all of these things (and more) are completely ignored by you guys who want to take just 1-2 things that are easy to see and count while ignoring 10 other things that aren't.
Micah Parson could have a game where he makes 5 negative impact plays, 3 of which are sacks; while Rousseau has a game where he makes 6 negative impact plays, only one of which is a sack, and you guys will be on here throwing 3 column charts around acting like that covers everything and complaining Rousseau is invisible.
Your methodology is wrong and that makes your perspective skewed, incomplete and inaccurate because you're totally disregarding most of the game.
I'm not the person who declared one side of evaluation to be meaningless. The eye test does matter, but I don't think any person is capable of using that alone to evaluate dozens of players and then forming a rational conclusion on who is the most impactful. Perhaps if that is all you do for a living but I assume you're not a NFL scout. If you aren't comparing him to his peers, than what are we talking about? We know he's good. This conversation is about if he's top 15-20 good?
Is it not reasonable to assume his peers who are producing more havoc also do the same things you're calling out or do we have the only DE in the NFL capable of producing between the numbers? Better yet, the only one who is largely, ONLY capable of producing between the numbers.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Simon said:
I honestly think that 90% of it is simply about personal experience.
A lot of folks haven't been lucky enough to spend a lot of time on a field and learn what really counts. It doesn't make them stupid; it's just that the more experience you have working any particular complex problem, the more you come to understand what's actually important in those complexities and what's just tlts on a bull.
It's like an accountant from Raleigh looking to buy a tractor; he doesn't have much experience so the first thing he's going to look at is the paint job. When the reality is that even some farmbilly from the red clay hills of Central Caroline has been elbows deep often enough to know from experience what's important, no matter how big a rube he might be!
You already formed your entire argument on what you see and invalidated any statistical measure at the position. Statistics that are meaningful, but you still dismiss the benefit of that knowledge all together. Such a view isn't capable of being applied to other players equally for context. It's has no real anchor in what a player like him should be doing relative to peers. When challenged you revert to "Other people just don't understand football". Somebody else called out "fantasy" mind set. I here similar arguments all the time for McD. It is our seething blind hate that clouds are ability to be rational therefor our opinion must not be relevant. Here, it's just are lack of football understanding. I played from 9 until 1/2 year in college, so your speculation, along with the other "fantasy" brain call outs is just off the mark.
The players in his weight class of pay make a higher rate of negative plays. That can be sacks, TFLs, or even pressures. You don't care, I get it, but the history of the game does, the actual game does. Negative plays do matter. If you're basing your opinion on how good he's been with run fits, anchoring, double teams, helping others produce, things that don't get on a stat sheet, than great! But you still won't find any players in his weight class failing to get on a stat sheet at the rate he does. Which IS part of the conversation. Ultimately those measurements are how elite production is defined and paid out for at his position. Anchoring and run defense is not what gets a DE in the NFL upper money bands.
He's a good player but overpaid relative to the skill set he is giving the Bills. Paid enough that further investment in players that can actually generate the negative outcomes at DE is greatly reduced. You clearly don't agree, but lets not pretend it's based on some higher level understanding of the game.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, Simon said:
At what point will you figure out that I simply do not give a shlt about pretend math?
Good grief....
The moment you understand your thoughts aren't objective
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Simon said:
Thank you for more math and less football.
There's nothing sneaky about him being good if you're actually watching him play instead of cherry-picking numbers to advance a narrative you've decided to dedicate yourself to.
Yards are math, points are math, sacks are math, tackles for a loss are math, hits are math, wins are math. All of which can be applied objectively against his peers. What goes on in your head can't be applied that way. If he's so good, the traces of that performance would carry over relative to his peers in the "math". He's performing like a 10-15 million dollar player. It's not anymore complicated than that.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Simon said:
Clearly.
And I would put forth that yours is rooted in math and highlight reels while mine is simply based on actual football.
You are free to rely on yours to advance your agenda and I am free to rely on mine to discuss what actually happened. 🤷♂️
You see the chart I posted over the whole season, relative to his pears. Sacks, TFLs, QB Hits. Underperforming on a per game basis relative to everybody in his pay range. It's not unreasonable to use objective tools in context over large samples vs your subjective view on how sneaky good he is.
-
4 minutes ago, Jrb1979 said:
They are not the worst number 1 seed. They are winning the games they have on their schedule. I would agree if they were winning most of their games with last minute scores. They have been putting up points and blowing teams out. Now if you are talking about Denver than yeah they are aren't as good as their record indicates.
According to DVOA they were the worst 10-2 team since 1978 (when they started measuring it). That is a fairly unbiased data point on who they actually are relative to record.
-
Here is a stack rank by average contract value. Then it shows the sacks, TFL, QB Hits, sum of all 3, then the sum of all 3 divided by games.
Rousseau is the lowest in the per game count of any DE making what he makes, and you don't find anyone lower than him until you hit Hasson Reddick who is making 6 million less per year. His per game counts put him firmly in the 11-15 million dollar range.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, MDH said:
Is the OP really stating that Benford got "market value?" Ok. Dude is a top 7-10 CB and is getting paid like the 20th. You should be ecstatic about this contract.
I keep seeing people rip Beane for "almost losing Cook." You're ripping him for getting a high end RB for $11M a year? Shouldn't you be happy that he got him on a lower per year deal? Wait till you see what Gibbs and Robinson get.
Groot is getting paid like the 16th best DE and that's without a some young guys who are better getting theirs yet. This is probably market value, maybe a tad high. Nothing worth complaining about. If you want good edge play you have to pay for it. Groot is good - not great. Most fans don't know what they're looking at when they rip Rousseau.
Shakir - he probably got about the right amount, maybe a little high. He's getting severely misused in this offense. It's as if Brady thinks he can only catch screens.
Bernard- I'm not happy with that contract. He can't stay healthy. He's never available in the playoffs. I would have passed on him. Best way to salvage it is to move him to outside backer and hope his smaller frame can hold up better there.
Palmer- I liked the signing at the time but the missed time is frustrating. If he could stay healthy I like what he can bring to the O and he'd develop a better rapport with Josh...but that's a big IF. He's had some injury issues his entire career so this isn't exactly surprising.
Samuel- I hated the signing at the time because of his widely known and discussed injury issues. That's come to pass.
The Hoecht signing was awesome. He was going to be a wrecking ball in this D. It's unfortunate what happened but that can't be placed on Beane. Stuff happens sometimes, it's not always someone's fault.
Overall I think what fans are most frustrated about is the injuries which end up producing uneven play week to week. The team gets decimated every single year by them. That's part D philosophy (wanting small DTs and LBs), part bad luck and part signing guys who have injury histories. Beane isn't blameless for the faults of the team but he's done a pretty good job overall. Despite what fans want to believe, Allen isn't carrying this team to division titles and playoff wins every year by himself. The team is solid...just a little snakebit.
Groot prevents further premium investment at DE. I would rather take my chances in Free Agency with a Bosa or a Floyd which still preserves the ability to go after a Miller type.
I really like Shakir, but he has been a niche YAC player. He hasn’t even been able to fulfill the traditional slot route tree. Pure screen guy. When your entire WR room sucks having him as the gold piece isn’t exactly shiny.
Shaq Thompson is outplaying Bernard. A street free agent nobody wanted. Who was going to come in an pay out 15 pound MLB prime dollars at the end of his contract? Beane jumped the gun like he did with Knox when he had no risk of waiting. At which point, if he did wait, he would have found out his market value is in the toilet.
Palmer and Samuel are just brutal signings at this point. Somehow Beane thinks you can create a great WR in the slot aggregate with guys that have barely been able to stay healthy or reach high production levels in past lives.
Benford was a good signing, but the concussion stuff will always be a risk with him. The Hoecht was also a good signing, but we did so knowing about the PED issues, guaranteed lost time, increased injury risks associated.
At the end of the day it’s more of the same with Beane. Ever since Diggs and Von burned him he’s afraid to take any swings. He would rather invest in numbers with the hope a guy breaks thru or avoids injury despite being injured most his career. A whole lot of hope and wishing. Very little that can be counted on. He needs to go back to taking some swings and get out of his little baller ways.
-
-Darnold will Implode in the postseason
-Jackson will implode in the postseason
-Allen has no support
So my guess is Baker
-
Rams are legit. I don’t see Darnold holding up in the playoffs. Eagles just aren’t there this year. In the AFC if you eliminate the big name teams like Buffalo, KC, and Baltimore, I sort of like what the Jaguars are doing but think it’s probably Houston. That game Houston lost to Denver was going to to be a blowout when Stroud got hurt. I just think they’re the most dangerous team in the AFC right now.
Rams vs Texans, Rams win.
-
9 minutes ago, MJS said:
Like I said, I was against signing him to a 2nd contract. So, I agree with you. Rousseau is a good player, but not what we need. We need a sack specialist.
Fair, and I don’t disagree, he’s a good player and we aren’t exactly overpaying. I think that is the prevailing argument around here and it’s incorrect.
Even a guy like Bernard I apply the same logic with. That could be a good deal so to speak, but from my view if that deal prevents more aggressive investment at MLB to try and upgrade it’s not a good way to build the roster.
You obviously can’t have studs everywhere. I just think we tilt way too hard of late towards B players vs maybe some D/C filler types with some A players. Which really frustrates me because I believe Beane was more on the path if trying to get higher talent in the past. But the conclusion of the Diggs and Miller situations just left him burnt. But to me those were the correct moves even if they didn’t go how we wanted in full. The year Miller got hurt he very well could have been the piece we needed.
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:But this raises the obvious question - how much of a say does McDermott have in roster construction? I understand that Beane scouts the players and runs the draft. I do not however believe that he is going renegade signing players that McDermott doesn't believe in. McDermott sets the direction, Beane steers the ship. That's always been my understanding of their roles. Remember, McDermott hired Beane not the other way around.
As an example Seattle traded for Rashid Shaheed at the deadline. I am very confident that was at the request of Klint Kubiak who had previously coached him in New Orleans. I have no doubt if we had an offensive coach here we would place more of an emphasis on skill players. I don't believe McDermott is secretly seething behind the scenes because his GM doesn't give his offense enough weapons or brings back old defensive players that know the system. I believe McDermott is ultimately responsible for the overarching philosophy that guides these decisions.
It’s very hard to separate them, which is why I largely don’t try to do so.
-
8 minutes ago, MJS said:
He isn't making top 15 money. He is the 16th highest paid pass rusher, and every season that ranking will go down.
We made the decision to block spending premium dollars on a premium position to “lock” in a run defender. It’s dumb roster building. You would be infinitely better off signing rotational pieces at DE to sub top 45 money and landing a premier player. Same story with how we treat WR. “Bargain” major air quotes with Samuel and Palmer amounting to almost nothing, vs just taking a shot at higher talent. If you want to focus on 16 money vs 15 vs top 20, none of it really matters. It’s enough to prevent future premium investment. That is the problem.
-
1
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, MJS said:
Rousseau isn't paid like a premier pass rusher, though. He is paid like an average starter.
He will make top 15 money the next few years for his position. How many run defenders who can’t rush the passer are going to make that at DE? How many teams have a guy like that making top 15 money and then have another elite pass rusher (which requires top 15 money).
It was a bad deal from a roster building standpoint. Classic Beane move. It virtually locks up a mediocre pass rush at DE because he has to be your primary DE from a payroll perspective. If he’s not we have too much $ allocated to the position. He's not a guy you pay if for a discount because he will block impact players in the future. Same with Bernard, same with a lot of these lil baller decisions.-
3
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, st pete gogolak said:
Are you against paying Phil Hansen? I’m not. Sad day when he retired. Pretty much signaled end of an era.
33 minutes ago, MJS said:Phil Hansen was better than Rousseau, unfortunately. That being said, Rousseau is the 16th highest paid edge rusher. That's not a huge overpay.
I was sort of messing around with that comment because like most Bills fans he’s certainly a favorite of mine. The main point I was making is Phil was the do everything run defender of that era. To me he’s a very similar player to Greg. Which is why I would still contend that deal is/was a mistake.
Phil was not a foundational
piece nor is Greg, rather an absolute stud to partner with a premier pass rusher. Phil had Bruce, but Greg’s not going to get anybody. At that contract he’s going to make it very hard for us to sign an elite pass rusher even if we have the chance to do so. It will just be too much locked up at the position. He was the wrong centerpiece like Phil would have been in the same situation.
Is there Beane/McDermott Tension???
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Same was said about Diggs, Daboll, Allens breakup, you never know which one of these stories is true.