dave mcbride

Thanks! PS - Just checked: Ingram had a sensational year last year: 5.1 ypc (1000+ yards) and 46 receptions to go with 10 TDs.

Question for 26CB - has there ever been a player whose option was declined by the team that drafted him and then either a) signed an extension with that team the next season or b) was franchised the next season by that team?

This makes absolutely zero sense.

Good take, but the foot is the core issue here. None of us know enough about that. The good news: if he IS healthy in 2017, it's in his interest to light it up. And that's great news for Tyrod Taylor. When healthy, Watkins is about as good a receiver that can be.

Good take; I agree. That said, history on his side w/regard to his injury (i.e., he probably should overcome it) and he is young. If he has a big year, though, expect him to try and get out. Many don't like to hear this, but with star players the team doesn't hold all of the cards. Players can force their way out if they're good enough and angry enough. Re Rex, I suspect that there's a little bit of CYA given that the staff pushed him to play when he wasn't ready. He shouldn't have been playing early in the season; that's clear now.

A guy who tore his ACL! yup. He can sit out the first six games, come back and protect himself in the remaining ten, and in the process burn all bridges with the team. He'll hit the market at age 25 and presumably coming off a big 2017 season (assuming he is healthy).

Another guy who was "injury prone" (far more than Watkins) early in his career: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SmitJi00.htm .

Coughlin was a hardass and couldn't win? He got to the AFC championship game twice with an expansion team in its first five seasons. "Winning" encompasses more than winning Super Bowls ...

When I think of the label "injury prone but super talented," this is the guy that comes most immediately to mind. Look at his career: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylFr00.htm Watkins is very young and supremely talented. It's more likely than not that he'll have some good luck on the health front. He's due.

You need to understand: I actively root for Cowboys dysfunction. In my mind, the world is a better, more functional place when the Cowboys are dysfunctional. I only care about my guys. Screw the rest!

As Yolo mentions above, the foot is probably the biggest issue here. There's a lot that we don't know. Speaking of that foot, I have to think Watkins and his people (agent etc) are pissed at the Bills for pushing him back on the field in early 2016. He shouldn't have been playing, and playing made the situation worse.

I'm talking specifically about the teams I'm a fan of. The Bills are a mess, and have been since Ralph decided that he didn't want to pay Butler the going rate before the 2000 season.

Yes, this is the real issue behind everything.

Me too. I think you are deluded, my friend. He's going to want out, and the Bills aren't going to want a player who absolutely doesn't want to be here. He'd be foolish not to be very protective of his health this season too.

I agree.

This regime didn't surrender that for him; the old regime did. That's not McDermott's problem, and it's a sunk cost anyway. I think Watkins wants out (why wouldn't he want out given the circumstances???), and I think McDermott wants guys who are "all in." I also think that the foot is a real wildcard here. In any event, I don't expect the Bills to pony up $17 million for a one-year deal with a WR. I like Watkins a ton, so I hope I'm wrong. But we've been down this road before.

If the Bills pay it. I strongly doubt that they will.

Me too.

Interesting stuff. My guess is that Watkins wants to get the hell out of Buffalo ASAFP. This place has been chaos central ever since he arrived here. And I won't be surprised if he plays in protective mode this season given looming free agency and his injury history. He's not gonna take one for the team and play while hurt. And who can blame him? The Bills totally effed up his injury situation last season.

yeah, but you get my point. Since Parcells took over in 2003, they have had three losing seasons, three .500 seasons, and eight winning seasons (and two 13-win seasons).

Belichick is occasionally great and amazingly discursive in some interviews. It depends on the questions presented to him.

To repeat, I was not a Yankees fan then. I'm talking about *teams I actually rooted for*. The old Yankees weren't my problem. The Bills have always been my problem. As to my larger point about the Yankees teams that I have rooted for: are they not among the best run and most stable organizations in sports? The Bills cycle through coaches and GMs like there is no tomorrow, and all they do is lose. But that's irrelevant anyway: I don't root for the Cowboys or Raiders. The Cowboys are hardly dysfunctional either - they have been to the playoffs something like 10 times in the past 15 years.

wha ...? His foot may actually be fine now. None of us know.

I think this is an optimistic assessment. You may prove to be right, but I've read so many predictions about the Bills doing what many thought sensible - keeping Whaley on, matching Gillislee, etc. etc. -- that I don't have faith that this is anything other than what it suggests: he's not in their plans. I hope I'm wrong. The foot might be worse than we know about, of course.

Vic C's account sounds plausible to me - http://buffalonews.com/2017/05/01/vic-caruccis-bills-wake-call-new-gm-wont-change-structure/