Nephilim17
-
Posts
1,698 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Nephilim17
-
-
I'm sure Knox will have something to do with a box and a fox.
-
Watching the Joe Marino podcast on MVS, I feel better about it. He points out MVS has ZERO drops in the playoffs for his career. His 2022-2023 including playoffs EPA (expected points added per target) against man is .38, against zone is .09 — and the Bills have the highest % of man coverage in the NFL last year. We need receivers that can beat man coverage and MVS does that.
Marino says he hopes MVS can open up the underneath for other guys. He's not expecting him to get a ton of targets but he's useful as he brings a vertical element we didn't have otherwise. "I think the Bills got a faster and cheaper Gabe Davis," Marino says and would rather sign MVS to to this deal than Davis to 3 years for $39 million.
Before people lose their minds, Marino is not saying he's saviour or a number one, just a useful addition and an upgrade to Shavers or Isabella.
"And yeah, I do wish his drop rate was better. But if you can't see what he brings to the table then you just wanna crack jokes and be mad," Joe says.p.s. he expects Kincaid to lead team in targets.
-
1
-
-
This to me is interesting because it suggests a couple things:
1) Beane isn't totally confident with the WR as it stands. That's good news for most of us who are anxious about what we have (or lack).
2) Beane wants a vertical threat. The draft had vertical guys we could have taken but Beane didn't pull the trigger. So this to me suggests he simply didn't like the guys who were available for the value they would have required.
Perhaps if MVS doesn't sign they might explore Metcalf later for size and speed (and consistent hands). -
This should, at the very least, be interesting. If I can separate my fan feelings for a minute, f this guy doesn't get it right most of the time, it will be funny to see McD lose it.
But you gotta credit them for trying. -
I don't think this is a binary choice: will Beane trade for a WR or won't he?
I think they might want to see how camp shakes out a bit to see what kind of shape they're in. If Coleman looks really good and someone else steps up maybe Beane has confidence about going into the season like that. If Coleman struggles and no one steps up beyond maybe Samuel, then Beane might reset his expectations and consider a trade later on to salvage the season and avoid fan mutiny (with lots of people upset with the Coleman pick I think it would be a PR disaster if Coleman struggles this year and Beane doesn't make any further WR upgrades).
We'll know more in a couple months... -
12 hours ago, PBF81 said:
A 4th round pick for a short yardage back though?
I never said if that's all Davis is that that is good value. I just said we could still be "fast" with Cook as the primary guy.
Cook is in year three. if it's a 60/40 split (either way) and Davis is the feature back in 3 years, I'm good with that. If he's just a role player, then no, a 4th for just a short yardage back is not good value.
LIsten, I'm not saying it was a great draft. I hope it is. I hope Coleman becomes a number one but if he is a good number 2 that's acceptable. If he's less than a good number 2, it's a failure. I don't think we've done enough for Josh over the years and I hope this team takes a big step forward — beating good teams in the playoffs and challenging for a Super Bowl — and if not I'm in favor of a new regime. I don't want this regime to go another 4 years without challenging seriously for a Super Bowl. For me, one to two more years, tops. -
8 hours ago, PBF81 said:
I wouldn't disagree with your prognostication here. Cook also isn't used on 3rd-downs because he's not a classic 3-down RB, he's far from the guy that will get you the short, tough yards. He also wore down over the last fourth of the season with his average production and efficiency metrics dropping severely. His per-touch average was pathetic over his last five games and five of the nine under Brady. That's a chicken/egg thing though. This is the most curious and will be the most interesting season in McD's career to date.
Moss had a far more notable collegiate career and production than Davis, so I'm curious about this. But perhaps most curious is that just last offseason McD said that he wanted to go to a faster, quicker offense, which they did with Cook. Now, what, they seem to be slowing it down again.
Once again, the team seems to jump all over the place on offensive MO and there's almost no plan that's perceptible much less consistent. It's almost like on the offensive side it's been trial and error for seven seasons now.
I'm not necessarily prognosticating just saying IF Davis supplants Cook as the main back, I have no qualms with it.
I see where you're coming from with the seeming lack of a plan and the seeming trial and erros. If Cook remains the number one and Davis is most the third and shorts and goaline back we could still have a "fast" offense. But who knows. I don't think McD is an offensive guru so let's see what Brady does. -
1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:
Having Metcalf as the lead WR outside would allow the Bills some time to develop Keon Coleman and not force targets to him.
If we got Metcalf, how do you see Samuel's role, boundary or splitting slot time with Shakir? Who would be the other boundary starter, Samuel or Coleman?
Sounds good to me but I would hope that we didn't waste $8,000.000 per year for three years on a back-up slot guy. -
On 5/10/2024 at 11:21 AM, Warriorspikes51 said:
calling it now....he will steal RB1. 60-40 split in favor of Davis
On 5/9/2024 at 10:31 AM, Logic said:I thought Cook had a good year but in a Joe Marino podcast I believe the day we traded Steph (so that Cook podcast was overlooked by many) Joe was fairly critical of Cook and not as high on him as many. I vaguely remember Joe saying the line actually opened a lot of holes for Cook and while he was good in certain respects, he was limited and not a true feature back.
So if Davis picks up more carries and is a better blocker and inside runner and good in the short-yardage TD situations, I don't mind. Cook is in his third year; I don't want to extend him for substantial money given the position. Let's do what smart teams do and not pay running backs, just draft them and let them go and replace with cheap drafted labor.
-
1
-
1
-
-
21 minutes ago, wppete said:
I agree with your take on Solomon but not on Coleman. Think Coleman will be a solid #1 WR for Josh Allen.I don't know what he will be. I'd love for Coleman to be a number 1. I'm just saying if he's good but not great or a number one and a couple other guys like Solomon and Bishop become starters, this could be a good draft.
I still wish the best for the kid — I haven't rooted for a Bills draft pick this much since I can remember. He seems like a charming and genuine kid and I'd love for him to be a 1,200-yard WR in a couple years.-
2
-
1
-
-
For his sake, he better run faster than Coleman.
Am I doing it right? 😁-
2
-
-
If this guy could eventually be an 8 to 10-sack guy and Coleman settled into be a good number 2, not great, but a good number 2, this draft, along with Bishop might be seen as a success.
Yes, he fell to the fifth. But we've drafted successful starter there before.
-
2
-
-
I just hope it's the last 59 minutes and not the first.
-
Some of it was funny. But I can't believe they made those Hernandez suicide jokes. I'm pretty liberal when it comes to humor but that's not my thing.
-
3
-
-
Don't think this was posted here, if so apologies. Funny and kinda fun to see Belichick laugh at it.
-
I enjoyed him for decades. He had the aw shucks small-town charm that I think represented Buffalo well. At least those teams. Wish him a good recovery and happy retirement or whatever he's going into or leaving.
-
1
-
-
Elam just turned 23 on May 5th, days ago. I don't think he's too old to never change or improve. He's younger than Xavier Legette.
Not saying it will happen but it could. -
3 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:
in 2024 minority head coaches are at the highest number in league history.
Never head that before. That's great news.
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, ChronicAndKnuckles said:
How is Bruce Smith a drought player ? He literally played in all 4 SBs.
I misread the wrongly spelled thread title: "Add 2 Bills draught players in their prime"
I read "draught" as "draft" not "drought" as @H2o later corrected me.
Given my fondness for alcohol and that "draught" and "draft" have the exact same sound, it's not that unreasonable! -
2 minutes ago, H2o said:
Drought players. Bruce wasn't part of that. Schobel was.
It should almost unanimously be Moulds as option 1. The 2nd option gets a bit more cloudy. I think I would go with Mario Williams. The guy was an athletic freak. A 6'6", 295lb man who was almost the perfect blend of athleticism and strength. 2012-2014 he was a beast in our defense. Then came Wrex.
Oh... poor spelling messed me up.
If it's "drought" era players, I might go Mario too. But I might also take Owens over Moulds, even at that later point in his career.-
1
-
-
I'm guessing that Beane wants to see what happens in camp and maybe even the start of the season. If the WR room is as bad as the critics say it is, expect a trade.
The trade deadline is Nov. 5, 2024. Lots of time to get a vet that way if Beane was wrong.-
1
-
-
Je$us, are we gonna have to deal with a decade of hoping this kid gets hurt so we can feel vindicated? That's exhausting.
-
1. Bruce Smith (people are nuts taking Schobel over him)
2. Eric Moulds if "drafted" by the Bills is a criterion
2B. Terrell Owens if there is no "drafted" requirement
-
1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:
Coleman's actions show a player who doesn't separate at the college level and has shown little nuance/refinement to his game. Which is why his numbers are so modest at the NCAA level. He's really raw and it's not like he has 4.3 speed to fall back on if he doesn't refine his game or the Bills don't make it an emphasis to FIND ways to get him open at the expense of giving those opportunities to other, less talented players who also need that to succeed.
What's your projection for him in a couple years when he has the time to refine his game?
Do you think he has high-level starter potential (even as a number 2 rather than number 1) or do you strongly feels he will be a JAG due to his lack of speed?
THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - Receivers are a Dime a Dozen
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
Interesting take calling WRs the new running backs. Not sure if you're 100% correct in implying teams don't need a stud number 1 any more but one thing I like with the model of a very good committee vs an elite WR with an average cast: With the elite guy, if he doesn't get his targets, he can sulk, complain, be a distraction.
With 4 good/very good but no great guys, that's a harder act to pull as each guy is less vital on his own and can be more easily replaced.
People point to Green Bay. And KC seems to buy into that but A) they do have one of the best TEs ever (essentially a WR in the short/itermediate zone) and the best QB and possibly best coach in the game. Plus, a D that was very good.
I hope you're right and Beane is right that we don't need a true number 1. Not sure. But we'll know in about 4 months.