Tanoros
-
Posts
431 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Tanoros
-
-
1 hour ago, Charles Romes said:
It’s unfathomable how he and Stevenson could be drafted in the same range.
Two different drafts completely. Stevenson’s draft wasn’t deep at all, it was considered one of the weakest drafts in many years, where as, Shakir’s draft was considered one of the deepest in many years. Not all drafts are the same, even though there is always 7 rounds.
3 minutes ago, FilthyBeast said:Hope this team is smart and gets him in the lineup quickly and doesn't insist on wasting snaps on McKenzie, who IMO should not even be on this roster to begin with.
He will be worked in, and how much so will depend on how he does and how McKenzie does. I personally believe McKenzie is going to surprise many this year, but I also think the same of Shakir. The difference is, I believe Shakir will be moved around more, where McKenzie will be primarily slot.
-
15 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:
Well 2 days ago on nfl network mike giardi said staff was raving about him the whole time he had been there. Add that to the fact that we didn’t see a whole lot of him in games and I would guess they’ve got some planned hidden gems with his name on it coming up.
Exactly this. McDermott is all about brining rookies along slowly, which means pre-season reps. The fact that he didn’t get a lot, seems to indicate they like what they see and don’t want others seeing it until it counts.
-
2
-
-
The way the team played last night seemed to be an indication of this whole thing impacting on the field play. Our o-line was no help, but the team didn’t seem to have the same mojo as the first two games.
-
2
-
1
-
7
-
-
7 hours ago, gordong said:
sorry but he really hasn't done enough to warrant making this team IMHO. he not fast enough and doesn't get much separation. he can stay or go. if we were to keep one boundary guy I would vote for the rookie RB
The separation part is true, but have you seen the grabs he’s been getting? The guy really can catch anything. He seems to be a great contested catcher, and could have some value in short yardage/red zone passing situations.
As the ST snaps graph shows, the Bills are looking for a reason to keep him, which means they like his on field performance too.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, uninja said:
Good lord McDermott looks like a deer in headlights there. I’ve seen trauma victims that are more lucid than he is right now.
It’s quite clear his hands were tied as to what he was allowed to say. That’s very common when lawyers are involved.
-
6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:
If I'm going to make the case that justice should apply equally, regardless of station, I'm not using this case as my north star. We already live in a world where that patently isn't true, and it's also likely a HUGE part into why we don't have all the facts. His status as a big time athlete and a college that worked with a police department to bury a lead is the exact type of injustice you should be railing against. He's not the victim here.
Quite frankly, neither you or I know who commuted those acts against that girl. It’s very possible she doesn’t even know. Due process is of the utmost importance at times like these, clearly that’s how the Bills organization feels too. We all know they are run very well, and look how they are handling this situation, they are exercising due process just as they should be. It’s really quite simple.
Also, just because not everyone is treated the same in the world, is not an excuse to treat others differently. We need to be that which we wish to experience, otherwise things inevitably turn to anarchy.
-
2
-
-
12 minutes ago, BillsNutHawaii said:
Lets examine this, (With my response in parentheses after each of your statements):
- "It’s pretty easy to tell all the individuals who have their own skeletons in their closets coming out to defend this piece of trash." (It's pretty easy to tell who the individuals are who do not value: due process, the laws passed by our representatives, or the US Constitution in general).
- "Why DEFEND Araiza at all?" (There's no defense of the individual in question, there is a defense of due process.)
- "To silence any other women who have the courage to come forward?" (No one rationale wants to silence anyone else. I would question why anyone would only want the accusers voice to be heard, and who would try to silence the defendant, that failed logic is what needs to be questioned. Additionally, why is your question only focusing on supposedly silencing women? Seems there is a failure to acknowledge and understand that men are also viscously assaulted.)
- "You don’t know anything except charges have been levied." ( I / we all know as much about the charges as you do, assuming you were not directly involved here.)
- "What grounds do you have to defend such abhorrent accusations?" (As previously covered, the grounds to defend the accusations are based on defending due process at large, and not just an individual. Additionally, with the same vigor to determine if the accusations are true, the justice system also needs to take equal effort to determine if the accusations are false.)
- "Every stupid emoji, every baseless defense on indefensible actions speaks volumes to your own personal character, and which virtues you hold true, if any." (I agree, including yours.)
- "If any of you taking the stance of blindly defending this dbag just because he he’s got a Buffalo on his helmet, as your wives what they think, or daughters, or mothers." (I do think of my wife, daughter and mother. But it would be false logic to believe abuse is limited to females. We also need to think of the husbands, sons and fathers.)
If my logic or conclusions are flawed, flame away, I'm here to learn; I'm interested in the truth. On the other hand, I'm not too interested in biased viewpoints and I'm skeptical of those who try to suppress the viewpoints of others, (Via supposed shaming, etc). In the apparent absence of continued / imminent danger to the accuser (She's getting the therapy and support she needs / deserves - the defendant is no where near her), let the punter have his job till due process dictates otherwise.
You covered this very well! Thank you for responding to that incredibly short sighted post in such an articulate manner.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:
I completely agree - that's why my solution from the very beginning was to release him regardless of guilt or innocence. You take all emotion and judgement out of the equation and you solve the problem. If he's innocent, you can try to re-sign him, and if he ends up getting picked up elsewhere, he's just a punter. Grab a new one next year.That’s not a good look either. It’s about more than him, “just being a punter”. Would you want to be part of an organization that treats people differently based on who they are or what they do? I surely wouldn’t, and there is a good chance that would turn away others too.
There is no easy answer when things like this happen, but the right path is following pre established plans (even if it was to get rid of someone at the onset of the accusation, but clearly, that’s not the Bills plan).
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:
The goalposts of this thing will forever move for some folks. If he gets charged, there will be the "what about the trial" crowd. When the trial starts, there will be "what about the verdict" crowd, if a guilty plea comes down it'll be the "what about the appeal" crowd, and once all that's exhausted it'll probably be "deep state" or whatever.
The only way that this dude is 100% innocent is if he didn't have sex with her, didn't drug her and had ZERO idea anything suspect was going on. Any other scenario and he's some level of negligent to guilty. If he's got an alibi, now's the time, because I don't see it getting better for him.By and large the vast majority on this thread are simply saying, a decision shouldn’t be made based on the court of public opinion. But instead, due diligence should be exercised in order to get as much facts as possible and then make an informed decision whether that be releasing him or not.
There really is nothing worse than those who jump to conclusions based on emotion. That’s a recipe for disaster not success!
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
-
5 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:
I know he is a distraction and is just a punter. That is all I need to know.
It’s about more than the punter though. It’s about the Bills acting in a way that won’t be prohibitive to signing other players in the future.
This current Bills organization is a very high character organization. They aren’t going to make rash, emotional decisions. They are going to follow their pre established plans and act accordingly at the conclusion of following those plans. In this case, if the Bills believe the rape accusations to be true, I can’t imagine they wouldn’t release him, and justifiably so.
What would you say if Josh had such an accusation made against him? Would you still want the Bills to make a rushed emotional decision and move on? Would you be willing to forgive him?
For me personally, I wouldn’t want anyone on the team who was proven to have raped another (proven being the key word btw). However, as it relates to this instance (or any like it), if the Bills believe that Araiza acted in the wrong, while not being 100% definite, that should be enough to pull plug (I would hope so). Just the same, due diligence must be exercised first in an effort to adhere to the high standard the Bills organization adheres too.
-
3 minutes ago, Bills2022 said:
Due process is for courts. This is about the team. He is a distraction and a PUNTER. A great punter is worth very little on a high scoring team like the Bills.
However, a situation like this needs to be handled the same regardless of player/position. It’s doesn’t help build chemistry/morale treating people differently based on the position they play.
Imagine Josh being accused of something like this. Should we expect the Bills to get rid of him immediately because of the bad look to the organization? I know many here who are so willing to move on from Araiza wouldn’t feel the same if it was Josh.
I know for a fact I wouldn’t want to work with a company/organization that handles hard times differently based on who you are/what you do. Fortunately, the Bills are not such an organization.
-
12 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:
Why do people have such a hard time understanding the difference between laws of the state and the practice of private industry when it comes to things like rights? He has no right to be treated as "innocent" by his employer (or us for that matter) until someone proves that he's guilty. His behavior has negatively impacted the franchise. That's reason enough for termination.
Why do people have such a hard time understanding the private industry in AMERICA should represent American ideals in order to attract hard working Americans. Who wants to work for a company/organization that doesn’t adhere to America ideals? Those pulling the weight of this country along are the ones who adhere and respect the American way of life.
Obviously a private company is free to do things that are counter to the American justice system, but such actions are not free of consequence. In the instance the Bills find themselves in, there isn’t one right answer as so many in this thread seem to indicate. EVERY organization/company worth a damn has procedure/protocols in place for dealing with the multitude of things that can occur. Just as the Bills do in this instance. The best thing the Bills can do is follow their pre established procedures/protocols (even if that means dumping the player, however, that doesn’t appear to be the case as of now).
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:
The Buffalo Bills aren’t the justice system. They have no obligation to wait. They’ll act based on what’s best for the organization.
Agreed, however innocent until proven guilty is an American value. Do you think the Bills are more or less attractive to players when we cut people the second a negative accusation is made against them? Of course not, the reason being, not adhering to a core tenet of the American way of life.
Just any team preaches the best man wins the job, so should the team follow their existing procedures for this kind of thing, and I guarantee you, the procedure is NOT to act based on feelings and public perception. The Bills have to show honesty and integrity in regards to their players, illustrating that they respect them as people.
Too many in this nation react emotionally and then don’t see anything wrong with that. Pure insanity
-
2 minutes ago, Logic said:
The issue I see is that it's very difficult to get to the real "truth of the matter" in these types of cases, and during the entire period of time that the team is in the process of attempting to do so, there is a giant distraction hanging over their heads, and a lot of damage being done to their reputation.
Suppose this ends the way these things so often do -- with a settlement out of court and an NDA being signed. No real answer of what happened or didn't happen, no real closure. Meanwhile, weeks of national discussion, distraction, outrage, and damage to the Bills' image of "family and culture" has been done. But now their punter is "free and clear" legally and they get to keep him. Was it worth it?Consider the counter to what you say. Who wants to sign with a team that dumps a player the second there are accusations made against that player? There are never easy choices in these situations. At the end of the day, the right answer is to follow plans put in place for these kind of things and NOT make off the cuff decisions based on emotion.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:
For a guy called "Logic," I find it odd that you've created a false binary choice. I don't want the Bills to "stand by Araiza" nor do I want them to ditch the guy because he's not worth the headache. Both options you present are noxious. I want the Bills to investigate the matter and then do the right thing.
It's flat out morally, ethically wrong to pull a Brian Banks on Araiza and crap on him because of a false accusation. But if the accusation turns out to be true, the right thing to do is cut him. At this point it doesn't seem the Bills - or police - know enough to make an informed decision based on the preponderance of evidence.
This right here. The Bills have to exercise their own due diligence and determine if he did it or not. They might not get a 100% definitive answer, however, they should be able to get enough information to make an informed decision one way or the other.
However, the Bills should NOT act on an accusation alone. Too many people in this country jump to conclusions based solely on headlines and quick sound bites. Fortunately, the Bills organizations seems to be beyond that.
Whatever the outcome, hopefully the truth prevails.
-
1
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:
Immediately released.
In this country we are innocent until proven guilty. Anyone can make an accusation.
If guilty, he deserves punishment, but he deserves a chance to defend himself, as we all do.-
4
-
-
19 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:
It's getting to the point where it's pretty obvious he won't make the Rams game. He will be missed.
But the next 3 are against Tannehill, Tua and Lamar. Not the biggest outside and deep passing threats.
Bills getting Tre back after game 4 won't be too bad. At least it won't be against Mahomes and Rodgers.
Get him healthy if need be, it's a long season.
The thing is, if he goes to the PUP list, he can’t practice either. As good as he is, he is going to need some practice time being for going full go in a game. So he would miss a minimum of 4 games, but would the Bills have him play game 5 with only one week of practice?
If they don’t put him on the PUP, it’s one less person that can be stashed, however not everyone on the 53 is active every week. If Tre is close, it might be worth having him inactive for a week or 2, while still being able to practice and ramp up.
The best thing about this news is that he is close. If he wasn’t, he would be on the PUP already.
-
1
-
-
On 8/19/2022 at 4:47 PM, Ethan in Portland said:
I'm about as far from a Bills homer as it gets, but the roster being 6th - 10th is laughable. They have question marks but so does every team in the league. They are a top 3 roster with incredible depth at multiple positions. If White was healthy, I would list them #1. Right now my top 3 in no particular order is Tampa, Buffalo, and LA Chargers. All three have question marks. Will age finally catch up to Brady? Can the Chargers rebuilt defense come together quickly? And in Buffalo can the CBs step up until White and will Davis emerge as a true #2.
This should get the board riled up...
Now if you include coaching then I would agree a 5-7th overall ranking probably is correct. McD and Frazier cost us a SB last year and both are back with a massive question mark at OC.
I know Dorsey is a massive question mark, but I have such a good feeling about him as an o coordinator and I’m anticipating our offense looking better than it has to date (with Allen).
-
On 8/19/2022 at 8:27 AM, ScottLaw said:
12 for WR is right on the money IMO.
I agree. We all have faith in Davis and McKenzie (trust me, I do big time), but we can’t expect them to be rated near the top until they’ve proven themselves over a full season.
I expect after this season, the Bills wr room will be ranked much higher, and that’s the crutch with exercises like this, you can’t rank guys who haven’t produced ahead of guys who have, yet we all know guys who haven’t produced will break out during the season, but we can only guess who. In the end, you have to perform these exercises based off of proven performance (which is more looking back than forward).
-
1 hour ago, ToGoGo said:
It represents persistence, will, desire. All the timeless qualities of success. Good character and ethics go without saying.
Very foolish, ignorant, simple, and poorly read people would come to the conclusion that it is a license to cheat. Ironically, they were possibly projecting their own feelings of "needing to cheat" to get what they want.
Exactly. Look at the high character people associated with the Bills, they most definitely don’t see the mantra as something that would allow for cheating. Like you said, good character and ethics go without saying.
-
1
-
-
22 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:
Von Miller #93
Doofus McCorkle #85
The list has officially jumped the shark.
This used to be OK for entertainment purposes. Especially since it is player-voting. See who the players think deserves it. But McCorkle making this list AT ALL, let alone ahead of Von Miller, is an absolute joke and completely discredits what little validity it ever had.
I was done with it when I saw McCorkle on the list. There is no way he is top 100 material, especially as a rookie. He was very solid for sure, but top 100 players are well beyond solid.
-
16 hours ago, MasterStrategist said:
Perhaps. Just going off last yr tho (only 3 game preseason to compare against), Josh only played some in final game.
I think getting him and other starters "live" action is def a delicate balance, but I like the idea of 1 quarter (game 2 or 3, not sure it matters much).
I think McDermott will wait until game 3 again. Because of the roster cut down dates, game 2 is the last chance to see many live before the big cut downs.
Before game 1 it was stated that McDermott wanted to give the guys fighting for a spot as many opportunities as possible.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, FireChans said:
So they are similar but not comparable?
Let's play a game:
I compared two QB's to Lamar Jackson. Can you guess who is who?
Ok, so compare players based on stats alone? That’s the end of the line? How do they achieve those stats? Garbage time, against a backup, wide open play, there are so many variables as we all know.
For me personally, my comparison of the two is based on what I see with my eyes, them as a football players on the field. Lemar’s play on the field is far and away different than Tyrods. Tyrod was lien a Trent Edwards who could run. That’s who he compares to.
-
1 hour ago, FireChans said:
I posted 2021 already. Here ya go.
As far as the LJ topic is concerned, how could you argue they aren't similar. Unless you are arguing that similar means same, in which case I would point you to the good people at Merriam Webster.
I don’t see them as similar. Unless by similar you mean a black qb who can run.
Lemar is not only faster than Tyrod, he has a better arm and is more willing to throw deep. Lemar is so much more explosive as a player, and he looks to take open lanes and run.
Tyrod was more like a classic game manager, who took the easy, open shots. He could run, his running was more of a last resort or play extending, than taking open lanes immediately. Overall, I think Tyrod’s running is closer to Josh than Lamar.
Lamar is such a unique talent at qb. It’s really hard to compare him to any qb. I’m personally excited to see if he can take a step forward passing this upcoming season.
-
1
-
1
-
Tre White to PUP list, out first 4 games
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
No, that’s not the case. Dane Jackson proved he could fill that hole last year when White was out. If Dane Jackson could preform with Levi Wallace opposite of him, clearly he can with White opposite of him.
Drafting a cb in the first was absolutely done with the idea White may be out for some time, and trying to pair top end talent to work with Dane during White’s absence. Getting Benford and him looking good is an added bonus.