Nephilim17

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.

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.

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.

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.

For his sake, he better run faster than Coleman. Am I doing it right? 😁

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.

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.

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.

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.

Never head that before. That's great news.

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!

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.

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.

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

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?

RE: his combine interview. II love this kid. Best "character" I can remember from a rookie — but he seems genuine as well and team centered and willing to put in the hard work. Will he be a good or great receiver? I don't know. Will I root for him and hope he's a huge success? Damn right.

Bigger receivers don't fundamentally means transition to more running (though more effective blocking when we run helps). Perhaps Beane thinks bigger WRs can outmuscle smaller dbs, either to make the initial catch or for YAC. It would be folly to not prioritize the arm of the one of the best QBs of his generation.

G**damn, Claypool's a bigger boy than I remembered: 6’ 4’’ 238 lbs If he gets his head on right maybe he realizes at 25 he still has a chance with Allen to make a something of his career.

If Samuel can't play outside full time it was pretty dumb to give him that contract (as opposed to spending it on a true outside guy) when we have Shakir and Kincaid. I see where you and others are coming from. I'm hoping it works out because getting worked up about it is futile.

So you don't believe Samuel and Coleman can start outside? I know Samuel has played a lot inside but he's played some outside and Keon is a rookie but it seems like that's the plan. At least, I don't know of any other way to read what Beane has done. We can't have a team full of slot specialists, can we?

I like his vision going up the middle and he seems like he's got decent hands. But I'll take his "five foot eight" with a grain of salt; he looks super short. But with some muscle on him that's a lower center of gravity and perhaps harder to tackle. I like his counterpoint to Cook's speed running outside.

Dirty player, dirty citizen.