mannc
-
Posts
15,592 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mannc
-
-
That seems about right, but an ugly 8-8, where the team is eliminated early and then wins a couple glorified exhibition games (kinda like last year) would probably spell curtains for Rex and maybe Whaley, but the details will matter. Rex and Whaley seem to have forged a mutual non-aggression pact for now, but if the losses start to mount, that will blow apart in a very ugly way.I think it would be hard for Whaley and Rex to survive if the record is 7-9 or worse this season. Just my opinion.
-
That's fair. McCoys contract is not wildly out of line with what two other somewhat comparable backs are getting. That still doesn't mean he is worth the money to the Bills. (Carolina probably has some buyer's remorse re the Stewart contract.). So far, McCoy has not been worth it. Maybe he will have a better year in 2016, even though he's a year older.36.5 m is significantly less than 40m over 5 years? Considering the production of either back up to that time (Stewart had one 1000 yard season and McCoy had had four of the previous five), I'd say McCoy deserved that extra less than a million per year.
Martin was only a slightly better back in 2015 than McCoy was in 2014 (contract years) and had only one other 1000 yard season (opposed to Shady's three).
-
McCoy signed for significantly more money than Stewart and Martin was a far better back than McCoy last year.The opinions of GMs, coaches and players in the NFL -- when discussing a player's perceived value within the league -- are much more relevant than the opinion of a fan.
Sure, just look at the contracts around the league. AP (older) got a bigger deal. Stewart's deal (same age when he signed) and Doug Martin(same age) are all getting paid in the same range as McCoy and he's better than both.
-
McCoy is not even in the same discussion with AP. Please. I'm not at all sure Shady is better than Jonathan Stewart, who is a very different kind of back than McCoy.Jonathan Stewart was just a year younger and far less accomplished when he signed 5-years for just 4 million less.
Adrian Peterson was almost exactly the same age, and received 7 years and 96 million, 2 more years at about 5-6m more a year.
I'd say he's somewhere between those two in talent and stature, and much closer to AP.
-
As a person who writes for a living, I think Sullivan is better than most sports opinion columnists.Trust me as a former journalist.... Sully can't write. His "opinions" are one thing, his journalism is another.
Well thought-out post. Thanks for your contribution to the discussion.Wow. This is hilarious.
-
That's true, just like my opinion that the Bills needlessly gave away two fourth round picks to move up for Ragland. I can't prove he would have been there at 49, but the Bills can't prove he wouldn't have been, either. And I'm not aware of any other backs McCoy's age with similar production who scored a contract that lucrative, are you?The claim no other team would offer him that kind of contract is not based on anything but your opinion.
-
"Middling star" is being kind given McCoy's production the past two seasons, especially when you look at his YPC. He is on the downslope of a good career. There is not another team in the league that would have given him the contract Whaley did last year. And he's not a great person either, FWIW.Oh, come now. McCoy was hardly a "middling star." Compare his stats to Hall of Famers at comparable ages and he stacks up well. He is currently 8th on the active yards list and only two players in the top 25 -- Alfred Morris at 18 and Doug Martin at 22 -- are younger (and this is counting last year's somewhat off season). When we traded for him, he was a top 5, probably top 3, back in his prime (on average, RBs have their best season at age 27). Middling star...yeesh!
-
Doesnt seem like an outrageous statement to me. The guy is good, but he's not exactly JJ Watt.It wasn't a good piece. That's the point.
Edit: oh and here.
-
So, 25 years on the job and you found a bad piece that he wrote? Get out the tar and feathers.It wasn't a good piece. That's the point.
-
That was his opinion, based on Dareus's off-field antics. So what? It's an opinion piece and that was Sullivan's opinion. I did not see anywhere that he said Dareus is not a good football player, did you?
-
You seem to know. Did he? Link?Was he the one that said cut dareus?
-
I don't want to turn this into a Jerry Sullivan thread, but the virulent hatred for this guy around here is another example of fans wanting to lynch the bearer of bad news. Like it or not, Sullivan has been right about this team and this organization a lot more than he's been wrong. And when he's been wrong, it's usually been when he's bought into what OBD was selling (the Fitz contract extension, the Rex hire, etc). Is he the most knowledgable football writer around? No, but he's also no dummy and he is almost always thought-provoking, which is an opinion columnist's number one job. Those who complain about Sullivan should read the garbage spewed out by fishhacks and homers in other markets around the country. There is a guy in our market named Canzano who has not written an interesting paragraph in 10 years. Trust me, Sully is way above the average.Found another definition:
na·bob
ˈnābäb/
noun
historical
plural noun: nabobs
--A Moronic individual who constantly complains. Invents conspiracy theories where none exist. Finds the most evil answer to any subject. Sometimes disguised as radio talk show hosts, sportswriters or posters on fan sites in the Buffalo NY area. Believes Rex Ryan and Doug Whaley were time travelers on the grassy knoll in Dallas.
Appearance resembles Jerry Sullivan.
-
Huh?Sammy and Harvin only played together for 3 games last season. And that was the healthiest the offense was last season. I don't think you can glean a lot from those 3 games.
-
Hope you're right.I am not saying he wont be good....but there was some draft evals I read on him that he was not a good tackler, lacked instincts, and ALL he was is fast.
-
Something tells me Lee is going to be a thorn in the Bills' side for a long time. I hope not, but I can just feel it. Kinda like Gronk.I wanted Lee the OSU lb first. Watch Lee be ROY and I will be even madder
-
uh. Blablablabla. Do you realize how much defensive talent he had on that team? How much he squandered it? Do not give me crap about who his QB's were. A shell of a fart of one of the greatest qbs just won the super bowl.
Rex had so much talent on defense it was pathetic he didn't win more. Two of the best man corners in the NFL surrounded by talent that was a giant collective of first and second round talent with only 2 players not in the first 3 rounds starring.
So yeah, Rex sucks ass and if you want to continue an argument against mine I'll need more than just how good he did in games 5 yrs ago. I'll need actual evidence to show how his coaching won games. Because... it didn't.
I'm hardly a Rex supporter, but John is right. (Did I just type that?) There is no denying that Rex had quite a bit of success in the fairly distant past. I don't care how you spin it, he achieved a lot with his early Jets teams, despite minimal offensive talent. They whipped Brady and the Pats (including in the playoffs) and they advanced to the AFC championship game twice in a row. It was largely because of that record that I supported the Rex hire. It is now appears that I was wrong, and that he either has forgotten how to coach or the game has passed him by. But that doesn't change the fact that Rex did in fact do a great job with those early Jet teams. I think it's pointless to argue otherwise.
-
This board is all about content. People come here to read new and interesting opinions and information about the Bills (and the NFL in general). There are some incredibly well-informed and articulate contributors here; after a while, you get to know who they are and, if you are like me, you pay much closer attention to what they say because they clearly know what they are talking about and they say it in an interesting way. These posters fall on both sides of the realist/optimist divide, but for me, most are in the former camp. It bothers me to see those posters attacked or mocked because I want them to stick around and keep sharing their opinions.
As McBride said upthread, the Bills are a sick organization and have been for a long time. Although it is nice to finally have owners who are willing do what it takes to win, it's not at all clear that the Pegulas know how to do it. (I know--heresy!). The know-nothing coach reports directly to the owner, and there seems to be no clear, coherent plan in place, probably because there are too many hands on the wheel. The signs of a major turnaround are scarce, even though the team now seems to have a few more talented pieces than it did in the darkest days of the ongoing drought. Many of us still see an organization that is behind the curve in the modern NFL. Until that changes, we will continue to view everything this organization says and does with a skeptical eye. So far, we've been right a lot more than we've been wrong.
-
I really hope your joking and not being serious....
If serious....learn football .
C'mon John . . .
-
I don't understand how you've concluded that his injury wasn't taken into consideration.
Also, can you link to a few of these projections you saw with him all the way at 24? I never once saw him on a big board in the 20's, let a lone a few of him in the mid-20's.
Why is half a rookie season not worth a healthy career for you? That's really the most important point in your post.
I don't think it was adequately taken into consideration because immediately after the news of the injury surfaced, Whaley announced that the Bills weren't a bit concerned about it. He was either lying or downplaying the injury to avoid looking like a fool.
I'm not saying half a rookie season is worth more than a healthy career. I'm saying that a shoulder injury that is going to result in a player having surgery and missing half of his rookie year is going to (or should) affect his value heading into the draft, not that he is undraftable, although reportedly some teams had removed Shaq from their draft boards or at least "red-flagged" him, whatever that means. I think the Bills know that, which is why they were so unforthcoming about the injury after the news came out.
-
Did the Bills use a first round pick on a player with a medical question mark? They certainly did. So what? The issue that plagued him was an issue that was correctable by surgery. I'm sure Whaley felt that Lawson could get through the season and then the shoulder issue could be addressed. It didn't work out that way. He had the surgery and he will miss a good portion of the season.
When you make a high draft selection, or any selection for that matter, the priority issue shouldn't be how good is he going to be in his rookie year. The more important issue is what is the player's potential and how good is he going to be for you in the long run. Most draft analysts had Lawson pegged in the top ten range. If he turns out to be a good player a little later rather than sooner then it was not only a good selection but it was also smart selection in that we selected a player ranked higher than where he was selected.
Not the analyses (or mocks) I read. Lawson was generally pegged in the 12-24 range, with some even projecting him outside the first round. So I don't believe it's accurate to say Lawson was picked lower than where he was "ranked". The Bills picked him about where he was projected to go, but those pre-draft "projections" to my knowledge did not factor in his injury, which was not widely known or reported prior to the draft (hence the reaction to Shefter's infamous tweet). The real question is, would you have taken him at 19 knowing he would likely miss the first half of his rookie season? I would answer "no", but others obviously disagree. At a minimum, it should have led to a discounting of his value and it does not appear that the Bills took that into consideration.
-
Sorry, but you are forgetting: The Ryan defense is not premised on actually rushing or hitting the passer; it is a complex psychological operation against the opposing QB in which the goal is to confuse, annoy and distract. It is very high-level stuff that only the Ryan twins and Bart Scott truly grasp. It would probably take a 15-year vet like Freeney the better part of a season to absorb even the most basic concepts.Dwight Freeney!
- We will obviously be without Shaq Lawson for the first month, and Hughes is the only other effective rusher on our roster. We desperately need another rusher, and I think Freeney can be our guy! He was the Cardinals leading passrusher as a situational guy and he didn't even play the whole season. We can probably pick him up fairly cheap on a one year deal and play a similar role like he did last year.
- So, brining in Freeney and playing him like what the Cardinals did with him last year makes a lot of sense to me. Hopefully the Bills see it the same way and make signing a rusher opposite Hughes a priority!
-
Donald was a guy a lot of us liked a lot coming out of Pitt and thought the Bills might take him with the original first round pick they would have used if not for the Watkins trade. That was a loaded draft.The best player in the NFL last season: @RamsNFL DT Aaron Donald. Full Top 101 list here: http://buff.ly/1rCEHGS
-
You're right; not the same as Emoulds's inside tip on Shaq and Cordy, but go back and read BigK's post from August 2 last year. He forecast a big drop off on D due to Rex trying to jam a square peg into a round hole and lack of buy-in from the players, using Dareus as an example. He also predicted an improved offense.I dont view this as the same as the Emoulds drops.....who gives specific in the know information....
nobody....NOBODY could have predicted how inflexible Rex Ryans D schemes were actually going to be to last year's defense......I dont care what anyone says....I still feel that he just got lack of buy in and needed some players to leave so that he can bring his own brand of D to the team
FWIW, the guy also correctly predicted the Bills would use their first three draft picks on defense this year, in an effort to salvage Rex's wreck of a defense. (Actually, they used their first four picks on defense, including the 4th they traded to move up for RR.)
-
This is a valid point. Another no. 1 is a lot to invest at WR on a run-heavy team. However, despite the fact that he has not missed that many games, Sammy's health worries me, and the offense was absolutely putrid last year when he was out. If he misses more than a couple games this year, the season is pretty much down the tubes. Our WR corps is NOT a strength. And I think Treadwell and Doctson are going to be really good players. (Not sold on Fuller, though.)Remember that year we took Hardy?
NONE of those wide receivers panned out......even the ones taken in the 1st round.
The bills have put a lot of money into their scouting department......maybe they felt that Lawson even with the shoulder risk would end up being a better player the the WR's that were available?
The strength of this draft was in its D....it has been talked about a LOT prior to the draft.
I really think that people who are upset at our WR core are just not taking into effect how this team generates is points
- Watkins is a bonafied 1
- Woods serves as a number 2 just fine
- Teams that have 2 number 1's intend on THROWING to both those players.....this team is gonna run the ball a lot.....A LOT....as evidenced in the deep stable of RB's.....every single one of them can catch as well
- Clay is a bonafied pass catcher as well
- IMO I think people worry because 7-11 departed....who we basically found on scrap heap...the bills were really smart in resining Hankerson....and they have a couple of under the radar WRs as well
Sure....if Watkins goes down we are hurting.....if Cinci loses their star WR THEY are hurting....etc etc.
The equally annoying "Obnoxiously Obtuse Optimists"
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted