Luxy312

Good for the NFL. They're protecting the brand. NFL games are not a forum for individual players to air their political opinions or present their personal axes to grind. When you come to the game, play football. If you have a personal cause, do it on your own time.

To say that the team shouldn't have approached him is ridiculous, and simply grossly oblivious of reality. In the same token, should a guy that has significantly outplayed his contract NOT approach the team for a new deal, but simply play out his contract? Of course not. That's just stupid and not how the NFL actually works. Should OBJ just play the last year of his contract for less than $9m or ask the Giants for a new deal that will probably pay him close to $18m per year? Every team in the NFL asks players to rework deals, and every team in the NFL has players that ask for new deals before their contracts are done.

My two cents on this debacle: Richie played a few good years for this team. Great run blocker and just OK pass blocker, if I'm honest. He didn't have to take a pay cut. That's a choice that is 100% on him. On point #2, maybe he figured out AFTER signing for less money that his agent was giving him bad advice. Players in the last year or two of their existing deals renegotiate all the time for more or less money. This is not new. If he hadn't signed for reduced money, the Bills may have released him anyway. Then again, maybe they just pay him for the last year of the deal. If he used the "broken body" excuse for retirement and now comes back to play somewhere else, that's simply unprofessional. I don't really care what the truth is about his situation. He's either got some mental issues or just didn't think out his situation as it unfolded.

Physically, I just don't think there is. When I think of the population of men in the world in the context of a normal bell curve, with the most of the average in terms of size, strength, speed, etc., the men playing in the NFL are probably in the 99th percentile. I say that with somewhat of a leap in that there's 53 on an NFL starting roster and 32 teams in the NFL. In terms of starters, that is literally 0.0017 or if you don't like that 0.17% of the total number of kids playing high school football in a given year. When I then take the population of female athletes and even looking at who's in their 99.9th percentile, are probably not qualitatively in the men's 99th percentile. With all of the statistical stuff set aside, I think that for the purpose of simplicity, we simply need to look at Olympics. Talking purely speed, women fall short of men by about 10%. When you start talking strength and things like the long jump and high jump, that gap widens to about 15%. Get into Olympic lifting records for similar weight classes and it further widens to over 20%. When you combine all of those things and talk about NFL athletes being big, strong, fast, and agile, I just don't see it happening.

Someone has their "leap to conclusions" mat out today. I don't think anything that I've read suggested that anyone is "against" her playing football with men. Technically, she's playing football with men in college, well below the D-1 level that most NFL players come from. So there's that. The question is whether she has the qualities needed to play at the NFL level. The overwhelming conclusion that most get to is that she's not tall enough, not fast enough, and not strong enough. The comments about people's masculinity is simply a red herring that does nothing for you.

The Bills were dead last in the NFL last year with passes and yards thrown to receivers. We're talking 96 YPG. I honestly don't care who the receivers were or are this year. When your QB play is THAT terrible, there's really no way to assess what what the Bills have or don't have. With that said, there are 13 WR's and 6 TE's on the roster right now. Those kind of numbers tell me that coaches are looking to see who might have chemistry with whomever is under center. I'm in wait and see mode.

The dog signed an affidavit. Said that Foster was RUFF with him.

It's a nice story, but that's really where it ends. Over 1 million young men play high school football every year. Tens of thousands go on to play football in college. By comparison, there's only about 1,500 young women that play high school football (yes it's that many) and a few dozen that play college football. Taking the mathematical odds of making it to the NFL level where teams are only filling out 53 active roster spots on 32 teams, it is extremely unlikely. Simply put, if an NFL caliber punter is one-in-a-million, then men's football (starting with HS) will turn out one a year. By comparison, we would see one female punter about every 600 years. As for Toni Harris, she's a 5' 6" safety playing for Bethany College. She's not even the best player on her team, much less a viable candidate for the NFL.

And for every case where there's actual charges, there's multiplicative instances where DV occurs and there isn't a charge. Paint me unimpressed with your observations.

Lots of idle speculation, but not a lot of actual thought put into this based on contracts. Let's start with guys that will carry a bigger cap hit being cut than they will on the roster. McCarron, Lawson, Jones, and DiMarco all carry additional dead money hits to let go, significantly beyond what they're going to count this year being on the roster. McCarron isn't going anywhere. He's basically the starter to boot, pending a knock your socks off camp and preseason from Allen. Lawson was decent when healthy last year, albeit not a star. I see him as the heir apparent to Jerry Hughes, who hasn't had a good season in three years. With only one more year on his contract, the Bills could save $7.5m next year by letting Hughes go or forcing him to renegotiate if he has a similar year as the last few. Jones is too cheap not to wait to see if he improves from his inconsistent play last season. If the system that Daboll is going to run doesn't involve much in the way of fullback play, DiMarco could go, which would accelerate another $950k in dead cap this year. Peterman comes so cheap that I can't imagine not keeping him on as backup to McCarron, in the event that Allen doesn't light it up. With that said, if Allen climbs into the #2 role or heaven forbid becomes the starter, I think Peterman could be a casualty going to the practice squad to make room on the active roster. In terms of other potential pickups for Buffalo, I could see another veteran as insurance for Jones if he doesn't pan out. It's hard to say they would think this way with 13 guys on the roster (4 of which are rookies), but it's possible. The Bills did meet with Kevin Minter, so I do think the another MLB could potentially be out there that they could add for depth. Barring a debacle, Edmunds should be the week 1 starter at the position. Besides Minter, I could see them signing a Cushing or Timmons, but certainly not to start.

Why don't you just go ahead and list some of the other starters in the NFL while you're at it? Trubisky (51), Watson (45), Prescott (54). It's a nice cherry pick, but I would bet you that there isn't a single Bills fan that wouldn't take the latter of those two. Trubisky is a TBD.

Awesome. This could put the bills up to 14 receivers, 20 if you include the TE's. Sign away every schmo!

Gotta love the apologists that come out. "But that's my thug....he must be innocent". Typically with DV, where there's smoke, there's a raging fire.

I'm not saying I don't have concerns about Peterman at all. I had concerns about Peterman's arm strength when they drafted him. One of the single biggest knocks on him in scouting reports was his ability to really throw the football when he needed to. From their respective college game tape, I would still take McCarron over Peterman. He just looks better.

According to the link that the O.P. posted, Peterman threw 49.

The road schedule usually determines every team's fate in the NFL, unless they're absolutely atrocious (see the Browns the last two years). The Bills season will be won or lost based on their first 7 games. With 5 on the road in potentially tough venues, coming away 4-3 or better would be a win going into a MNF matchup at home versus the Patriots. Going into it 3-4 or worse makes the Patriots a must win scenario and likely dooms the season. We will of course wait and see what happens.

My take with reasoning: 1 - The quarterback roster could be better but could also be worse. If our QB's are willing to actually throw receivers open, that should give the offense a much better chance of winning games. Tyrod's 3.3/1.0 TD to INT ratio is really good and also means he wasn't losing us games. I would call this a wash for now. If our new QB's can sling it for 4,000 yards and maintain that 3+/1 ratio, they will be better for sure. 2 - The running backs are the same. The running game lives or dies with McCoy. Ivory is no different than any other spell back the team has had since McCoy got here. 3 - The receiving group is the same for me as well and for the same reason. The top-3 guys (Benjamin, Jones, Clay) are the same top-3 guys we had last year. They could look a lot better if our QB situation looks better, but it doesn't change their quality. 4 - The offensive line is the same. Dawkins played LT last year, so losing Glenn is irrelevant. Groy played Center with Wood out. Mills, Ducasse, and Miller rounded out the line last year and that doesn't appear to have changed at all. I don't know how you can get better or worse with the SAME guys lining up on Sunday. 5 - Big changes to the defensive line lead me to believe they will be better. Let's be honest that Dareus never lived up to his potential. They didn't need a $100m run stopper. Lotulelei is better than anything they had last year. Trent Murphy was a 9 sack guy just a couple years ago before his ACL injury. Harrison Phillips could see a lot of snaps as well in his rookie season. I can list the rest, but they're the same, but for another year of experience from Lawson. 6 - For Linebackers, there is much change as well. I thought Edmunds was the best linebacker in the 2018 draft. I understand that a lot of people liked Smith better, but my question about him is his size. I don't doubt his speed or effort, but question whether he can actually cover big TE's (hint: there's one in the AFC East that I'm most concerned with). 7 - for defensive backs, I would also say that it could be better but could also be worse. Replacing Gaines with Davis could be better if Davis shows some of his younger form and is able to suit up for most or all of the season. If Davis plays like he did last year, I think the secondary is worse. If the front 7 are in fact better, that will take pressure off of the defensive backs and make the defense as a whole better than it was last year. We have to keep in mind that the defense overall was average last season. You could only say they were above average based on turnovers. Yards and points allowed were middle of the pack. Getting to 9+ wins will most certainly require better or at least equivalent quarterback play. I can't say with a straight face that we definitely improved in 4 out of 7 of these categories, unless I unleash my inner homer.

Reuben Foster is just another thug that has no reason to be on any NFL team. He needs serious help.

While it's not a cannon, it's certainly not inadequate. Still crazy though that Allen's was 62 and set the all time record since the metric started being measured.

Rasmus for the win.

Did you even try to read the thread. It's on this page. LOL. Terrible laziness on your part.

Terrible meandering POS article that fails to make any real point. Rosen reminds me of Jimmy Clausen coming out of college. Emotional wreck on draft day because he doesn't go where he thinks he should go. Follows it up with idiotic egotistical statements to the media. We will see if he can check his ego in Arizona. If Bradford stays healthy (I know that's a big IF), Rosen won't see the field this year.

Gotta love all of these useless comparisons between players. To even say that one QB's completion percentage was better than another's is pointless. It implies on the surface that each QBs situation is the same in terms of making the same throws to the same caliber of talent of receiver playing against the same caliber of talent of defense. Without a control group to make a true comparison, we're left simply with generalization. When all is said and done, the "analytics" over the last 30 years have been about equally wrong as right in terms of quarterbacks taken in the top ten in the NFL draft. For every Cam Newton, we get a Jake Locker. That's even saying all of the mediocre QB's are part of the 50% "right" with the likes of Ryan Tannehill, Alex Smith, Kerry Collins and Trent Dilfer. Not terrible QB's by any stretch, but certainly not HOF bound. Until the analytics get better in terms of predictive value, I'll remain cautious in terms of how they're used.

Yes, that would be true. None the less, he's not going anywhere. Ridiculous notion that they would trade him.

Good thing Lamar Jackson was drafted exactly where he was expected to be drafted (late first, early second). Backup.....