MRW
-
Posts
2,092 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MRW
-
-
I'd love to have Andy Reid as OC.
-
2
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, Max Fischer said:
It's dispiriting and appalling to see more than a few posters who equate #Metoo with "Fake News."
The horrifying part is dismissing the fact that sexual assault is an all too common occurrence.
Patricia is a public figure, he is subject to public scrutiny and this is part of his public life. it's not a "witch hunt" to report what happened.
So are you satisfied if Patricia denies that he committed the crime? It doesn't seem to me that there's much to debate about a 20 year old alleged crime that was never prosecuted and that the original complainant won't discuss.
-
15 minutes ago, teef said:
i can never get over, "ya'll". isn't it y'all?
Common man, don't get so hung up on that.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, BuffaloRush said:
The Jets signed McCown and probably Bridgewater. This gives them 4 QB’s on the active roster. Are they really going to spend draft picks to move up and draft another QB? I can’t see it
Petty and Hackenburg won't be sticking around there. McCown and Bridgewater are on one-year deals. They aren't out of the draft competition by a long shot.
-
33 minutes ago, #34fan said:
If it ain't Darnold, -then it's a mistake.
That's coming from a guy who isn't a Darnold fan either... The money in this draft was DT at 21 and LB at 22...
Moving up for a QB bust seems like a play from Buddy Nix's book
When did Nix move up to draft a QB?
-
16 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:
People are arguing against a reasonable interpretation of the words you wrote in your post.
You might consider that.
You wrote " i only see it two ways into getting the top QB Talent " Now apparently what you MEANT was "I only see two ways of drafting a QB who is rated as top talent pre-draft", in which case your take is closer to accurate (I would argue still three - be bad, trade up, or have him fall for some reason).
But that's not what you actually wrote.
What are you trying to accomplish here exactly?
Yes, it seems like "top QB prospect" is defined as "QB who is expected to be picked high in the draft". In which case, the argument is mostly correct, but pointless.
-
2 minutes ago, DC Tom said:
Is that how you do it???
And here, all this time, I've been trying to watch games by flaring my nostrils. No wonder I never see what's going on.
You've smelled some pretty bad football over the years, I bet.
-
3 hours ago, Figster said:
Without replay capabilities to correct mistakes made by officiating crews you have zero accountability which is already a big part of the problem in my humble opinion.
All plays should be open to scrutiny IMO. ( Red flag)
I used to share this point of view. But in catching the obvious mistakes, every play has been opened up to too much scrutiny. I don't want to sit waiting for a replay review of a 15-yard catch on second down.
-
When instant replay was brought in to the NFL, the hope was that it could be used to eliminate egregious errors. Instead we've got refs scrutinizing every aspect of a catch down to the finest detail, coaches challenging the spot of the football, and still seemingly no end to the bad calls that determine the outcome of games. I'm coming to view it like the idea of measuring for first downs, that is, a fine level of precision based on garbage data (I always laugh when refs eyeball where the ball should be after a play, then trot out the chains, introducing more variables, then measure to the inch).
I wouldn't have said this a few years ago, but maybe it's time to eliminate instant replay. Is it actually adding anything to the game, or just slowing it down?
-
JFC the fans of this team.
-
I too get nervous thinking about the Bills' recently historical fast starts.
But - correct me if I'm wrong - it seems to me that those teams started quickly while primarily relying on offense. And none of those offenses was loaded with particularly special players. I love Fitz and Freddie as much as the next guy, but they ain't exactly in the HOF discussion. Never mind Trent Edwards.
I think in general that good offense is less stable/reproducible than good defense - unless you have several superstars (QB, WR, OT, and either TE or RB or more WR etc.). So it doesn't surprise me to see a team flash on offense for a while and then fall off the cliff.
Good team defense on the other hand can be pretty consistent due to player cohesion, smart play, intelligent coaching, and guts. Doesn't hurt to have a defensive superstar or two, of course, but I think good team defense is more reliable than good team offense. So I think the 2017 Bills are likely to be a little more consistent over the rest of the season. Doesn't mean they will go 5-2 over the next seven, but I have a hard time imagining them completely imploding now.
The reliance on turnovers is worrisome, though, as others have pointed out. Yes, they are causing many of the turnovers with their technique and gang tackling, and yes, on the other side, Tyrod has proven to be consistently safe with the football. So it's not a total fluke. Nonetheless, their current margin is too wide to be sustainable over the long term. Hopefully the D and the O will keep improving (still a new system for them) so as the turnover differential comes back to earth they will still be able to win.
Take away the turnovers from yesterday's game and you're left with (obviously) a much closer game, but I don't think it's fair to say they won because of the turnovers. For the style of play of this team this year, if the D continues to keep points down, if they keep teams out of the endzone, they can be in virtually every game. Based on what I've seen to this point, even if the turnovers slow down they will continue to be competitive.
-
It will probably take at least a second to get it done, and if we do that it would almost be trading Sammy for TY, which is a bad trade.
People need to stop overrating Watkins based on potential. Look at actual performance.
-
So true. Look at the production the Bears and Ravens get out of their 5th round guys. And I could go on and on
Kareem Hunt too. Even if you think a guy is a rare talent at RB I think it's tough to justify using a first round pick these days.
-
Can you not blame Pegula for being irradiated by this? He didn't live up to his price tag. Not even close.
I hope Pegula develops superpowers.
-
✔ @spotrac
Dareus leaves dead cap hits of $10.66M & $14.2M to the #Bills in 2017/2018 while saving $5.7M/$2.3M respectively. http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/jacksonville-jaguars/marcell-dareus-7718/ …
But we are still paying $10.66 and $14.2 million for no player. "Saving" is a bit misleading in this regard, unless someone wants to clarify.
Salary + additional guarantees + amortized cap would've exceeded the dead cap number, so on net the Bills get some cap savings.
-
Then I guess we disagree. Xavier Omon, Cary Harris, Danny Batten, Chris White, Mark Asper, Dustin Hopkins, Nick OLeary, Tony Steward, Kolby Listenbee, Kevon Seymour and Tanner Vallejo are the 6th round picks over the last decade. If you are feeling good about that and $2M of cap space more power to ya. IMO, its a mistake.
Feeling good? I'd say it's more indifferent.
-
We have had him for a decade and no playoffs!*
*One of the only other nearly as ridiculous things as TB was a sixth rounder, "We didn't win with Joe Blow so how good could he have been?!,
We could get the next Matt Darby!
-
Throw potential out the window (but keep in mind hes been to the pro bowl twice and been an All-Pro). Do you believe that a 6th round pick and $2M in cap space will equate to Dareus impact? That is what e are talking about. If you believe it thats fine. I dont.
I believe it's very possible. Dareus has been a huge disappointment to me after his great years under Pettine and Schwartz.
-
We better hope to God that Dareus doesn't play well. If this sixth rounder turns into a fifth, we lose our shot at Tom Brady.
We could get a shot at Kyle Williams, though!
-
Because you arent getting anywhere near the production that he is capable of for $2m in cap space.
Our biggest point of disagreement probably comes down to what we think potential is worth. To me, not a whole lot, especially for a guy on his second contract, but it's an interesting thing to think about.
-
And that nails it. You have to hit a homer in with what you gained to even get mediocre dareus quality of play and have no chance at the elite dareus play.
Essentially youve accepted all the downside and shipped out all the upside
I dunno, I just can't get behind this. Culture is a real thing. It sends a message when a guy like Dareus is your highest-paid player and not doing squat. And I think if you kept him around you'd always be waiting for the next problem to pop up.
-
You are understanding it right. Its peanuts.
OK, but that changes the question, doesn't it? Isn't the decision to be made simply are we better off with Dareus, or with ~$5 million cap space this year, $2 million next, a 6th round pick, and no further obligation? I don't see how the dead cap number is relevant.
-
I read this and thought it had to be a joke. I don't care about his attitude and contract. He is a Pro Bowl DT and one of the better ones at his position. We should have gotten a player and a 3rd which could escalate to a 2nd or 1st based on performance. BAD BAD TRADE!
Albert Haynesworth was a Pro Bowl DT back in the day. Did Washington make a mistake when they cut him?
-
You need about $6M on the rookies. If you factor in Kyle and Wood that could be WAY higher. The Bills have a boatload of space. Eating $14M instead of letting him play through next year is foolish.
I thought that, even taking dead cap into account, we are getting small to modest net cap savings this year and next. Are those numbers wrong or am I misunderstanding?
Soooo, was Parcells all Belicheck?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Not ALL Belichick. Parcells showed a talent for turning floundering franchises around even in the absence of Belichick.