Ennjay
-
Posts
1,095 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ennjay
-
-
1 hour ago, transient said:
Serious question, did the RBs they drafted suck or did they just not effectively work them into the game plan? I’m working from memory here, but they always struck me as being willing to live and die by Marino’s arm. I don’t really remember them as a team that ever had a game plan that tried to establish the run. Contrast that with the balance the Bills had with Kelly under center (granted, with Thomas in the backfield).
To further that point, I just looked on the Pro Football Reference site. Marino is 14th all time in average pass attempts per game, but he’s the only one of his era in the top 20 (unless you count Favre at 17 and/or Bledsoe at 12, since they overlapped the latter part of Marino’s career). The next from that era is Warren Moon at 24. Jim Kelly is all the way down at 45.
This is how I remember it too. The Dolphins were always ready to scrap the running game, probably because Marino wanted to throw it. Obviously that's what he was best at.
-
10 hours ago, whatdrought said:
There are going to be teams that get remembered for wasting generational/historical talents by fielding crap football teams, and the Texans with JJ Watt are high on that list. We’ll see if they can capitilize on his renaissance, but I doubt it.
Browns and Joe Thomas might be top of the list.
Off topic maybe but I've always felt sorry for Eric Moulds for the same reason. On another team he might have made the HOF.
5 hours ago, Doc Brown said:No. Barry Sanders is at the top of that list. Marino would be a close second.
Agreed on Sanders but I have a hard time having sympathy for Marino. He didn't play on crap teams -- just teams that were stuck behind others that were better (usually the Bills), like Earl Campbell's Oilers were stuck behind some great Steeler teams.
-
I guess we could have skipped this whole thread.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/26896216/pats-cut-te-seferian-jenkins-1st-day-camp
-
1 hour ago, billsbackto81 said:
Pressure washing............
Is that what we call cold showers now?
I for one am proud to be posting on a blog where 87% of voting participants understand he's doing just fine.
-
9 minutes ago, Gugny said:
This is the most updated list I've found (last updated on 5/25/19): https://nfltraderumors.co/list-of-unsigned-2019-nfl-draft-picks/
Two trivial observations:
1. The Packers also have an unsigned Third Round TE, so I'm wondering if Knox is waiting to see what he gets. Or vice versa.
2. What's with the Rams? Are they taking this year off?
-
3 hours ago, Haslett_Stomp said:
I recall Starr scored the winning TD on a QB sneak after someone (Jerry Kramer?) blocked "massive Jethro Pugh", allowing Starr to score.
That block may have put Jerry Kramer in the Hall of Fame, although he generally deserved it -- I think he just went in last summer. That was the famous Ice Bowl NFL Championship game before Super Bowl II (pre-merger when the AFL was still operating) and I feel ancient because I remember it.
RIP Bart Starr. All you ever heard was how much class he had.
-
2
-
-
I can see the Jets losing a lot of games as a weak roster and bad chemistry snowball. But ownership (Christopher Johnson) has such a man crush on Darnold that I don't see them taking any QB in 2020.
Now in 2021, when Woody Johnson gets back . . .
-
4 hours ago, Chuck Wagon said:
The "Matt Barkley" potential on Tua is very high IMO, ie media builds him up to be sure #1 pick years in advance, then ends up going much later.
Did you mean Matt Leinart? Barkley was a 4th round pick, so expectations weren't high. Leinart would've been the top overall pick after his junior year, slipped to #10 (still first round) after his senior year, and finished his career as the sacrificial starting QB in the Bills' last preseason game one season.
-
5 hours ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:
I hate blanket statements, and so I think my comment is really a response to overemphasis on season sack numbers. We should always be trying to get sacks, but I don't think the number of sacks we get at the end of the year should be the metric or focus.
Agreed. And QB pressures are important when they take the Offense out of plays as called.
-
9 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:
I am like 75% on the way to a complete change of philosophy: Sacks don't matter!
And by that what I am really saying is that sack numbers are completely overrated. Like, if you get a sack, it will be a drive-ruiner. But even NFL sack leaders do not get enough sacks to significantly alter the course of a game. This of course excludes well timed sacks.
I think what really matters is consistent QB pressure + coverage; something that is attainable as compared to sacks.
I think you're on to something and you make sense. But I have to say the problem with many blanket statements (like "sacks are great . . . sacks don't matter") is that, like so many things in football, the impact is situational and, I think, we often "over-statisticize" and use stats to come up with a rule that may not apply to all situations. A sack on second and short may (may) kill a drive. A sack on third and long may be meaningless because the punt was likely anyway. And a sack on first down . . . I dunno, you've got at least two plays left to do something about it so I really don't want to generalize.
But you're right that sacks are over glamorized.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
Kyle Rudolph, Vikings are talking extension, but not making much progress
Per a source with knowledge of the situation, ...
I for one am disappointed by the narrowness of this report. On this page we usually get our inside information from sources with no knowledge of the situation. What are they saying?
-
1
-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, Doc said:
The Jets keep on drafting high-1st round DT's and keep on getting rid of them.
Once upon a time you could say this about the Bills and CB's (Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, . . .), except the Bills didn't get rid of them -- they played out their rookie contracts and then left.
-
1
-
1
-
-
This would be such a Jetsy thing to do. And I predict they'll be thrilled with the 4th round pick they'd get for him, because no one will bid higher for a non-Pro Bowler you can get on your own terms when he's a FA after this year.
-
Jets at 18, Browns at 27, Patriots at 32.
Yeah, I'm going to take this guy's opinion seriously.
-
13 hours ago, Bills Fan of Maryland said:
Patriots chances of a playoff are too dependent upon Tom Brady remaining healthy. If he is injured early in season or even worse takes a cheap shot in preseason our chances are not too good. KC's chances of a playoff are too dependent upon Mahomes remaining healthy. If he is injured early in season or even worse takes a cheap shot in preseason our chances are not too good. Jets chances of a playoff are too dependent upon Darnold remaining healthy. If he is injured early in season or even worse takes a cheap shot in preseason our chances are not too good. Packers chances of a playoff are too dependent upon Rogers remaining healthy. If he is injured early in season or even worse takes a cheap shot in preseason our chances are not too good. Just sayin', it's the same for all teams. It's a QB league.
And that's why every one of these guys will barely play in the preseason.
-
There must be a law somewhere that you can't honestly criticize John Elway or John Lynch.
-
1
-
-
A couple obvious morals to the story:
- Nobody knows anything when it comes to the draft. Tom Brady was pick number 199 in the sixth round; the Patriots weren't smarter than anyone else, just luckier. Johnny Unitas (look him up kids -- he was pretty good) signed with the Colts as a free agent. But Jamarcus Russell was an overall #1 and even Bill Walsh thought Trent Edwards was a keeper. That's why I stopped reading most pre-draft expert analysis.
- Notwithstanding nobody knows anything, drafting for need vs. taking a better player is a mistake. And if you can't tell who's a better player you're doomed anyway.
- A lot of guys simply can't play QB in the NFL.
-
6 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
Turned it on late, but so far have only seen jets, and cowboys coverage on NFLN. Steelers on now
So let me go out on a limb here with the big news headlines of the day:
- Tyree is starting! (Never mind he has no competition here.)
- Bills are going with a two-TE offense!
- Knox isn't being punished for his contract holdout! (Which isn't a holdout anyway if he's there and practicing.)
Rookie minicamp . . . my nominee for the least newsworthy event on the NFL calendar.
-
On 5/6/2019 at 9:27 PM, Alphadawg7 said:
The TV Deals bring no revenue into the XFL. There are no rights fees being paid by the networks, just like with the AAF. This is pretty standard until the XFL establishes ratings and sustained interest. Likely a 2 year deal with an opt out after 1. XFL likely wont see revenue from TV until year 3 at the earliest unless they have a big first season and have an opt out clause to negotiate rights fees for season 2.
TV exposure is vital to any league starting up, so its a great deal still without the rights fees as the networks have agreed to pay for the production which is expensive at about $400,000 per game. Had the networks not done that, the XFL would be responsible for paying to produce the content too.
This is exactly correct. As the article says:
"The networks are not paying a rights fee, but ESPN and Fox are picking up production costs, which generally amount to around $400,000 per game, sources said. As part of the deal, the nets will sell ads around the game; the XFL will handle sponsorships at the venue."
$400,000 for ~3 hours of national programming is actually pretty cheap. The play here is that enough people will watch any kind of football to get enough ads to cover the nut. If they can pedal spots for $25K to $50K the networks will actually make a few bucks on what might otherwise be dead air time. (I noticed that tonight one of the ESPN's was carrying women's corn hole, so my point about dead air time is already made.)
There's a reason SEC games are televised on Saturdays and MAC games on Thursday nights. You can guess which ones get better ratings and ad revenues. Nevertheless, somebody will watch the lesser product in the offseason I suppose.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Chemical said:
You build from the lines out, haven't you heard that fact before? I heard Steve Tasker say it.
I know I'm dating myself but LOU SABAN said that way back when.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 5/1/2019 at 6:44 PM, Binghamton Beast said:
Oliver should take 77.
The best Bills d-linemen in our history have work jersey’s in the 70’s.
Sestak, 70, Smerlas, 76 and of course Bruce, 78.
How soon they forget: #77 Ben Williams was pretty good too.
-
1
-
-
On 4/28/2019 at 9:53 PM, ALLEN1QB said:
Tyree Jackson #12
If so it's a guarantee he never makes the roster.
On 4/29/2019 at 6:32 AM, FeelingOnYouboty said:The #88 on Knox looks amazing
They didn't retire Reuben Gant's number?
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, glazeduck said:
Big body, big arm. To some, that's all you need to see (not saying that's a good point, btw...)
Why get someone who reminds you of Mike Glennon or Paxton Lynch or Brock Osweiler when you can probably get the real thing(s) pretty cheap?
-
On 3/22/2019 at 8:29 AM, dollars 2 donuts said:
Absolutely and the documentary on that game is pretty good. However, his success didn't come from playing football.
I know, but I still think it's a pretty cool. I'm a big Tommy Lee fan.
-
1
-
Arthur Moats thanks Bills fans in retirement announcement
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
He deserves credit for enduring some really ugly uniforms he had to wear -- chiefly those Bills hockey shirts with the blue band across the shoulders and the Steelers bumblebee throwbacks.