mannc
-
Posts
18,445 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mannc
-
-
Who is this "Cossell" you keep talking about?Cossell falls in love with Blake Bortles hates Derek Carr. This year it's Davis Webb and he hates Mahomes.
Cossell your cup of tea?
-
I was joking (look at the thread title). I've got no issue with Tyrod running the ball.I don't like putting a QB at that much risk, but we scored plenty of points. THAT was not our problem. This year? Who knows?
-
The Bills led the league in QB runs last year and it did not really work in their favor.
-
I hate this idea. It has been tried many times and has literally never worked, although there is an outside chance that Philly may have a good QB in Wentz. Let the draft come to you, or trade down.I've been on board trying to get a 2018 1st so that you can go from 10 to 3 or whatever to land one of those elite guys.
-
There is nothing whatsoever in that two and a half year old article that supports your "feeling" that Cardale will be cut or that he has a poor work ethic. Nice try, though.http://collegefootball.ap.org/article/nfl-talk-buzzing-cardale-jones-says-hes-not-ready
Plus I have read reports of him taking a lot of time off last season. Sorry can't find a link for that.
It does not matter though, I just feel Jones will not be in the NFL long.
-
The problems with Sherman are that he is 29, highly paid and apparently is considered toxic by one of the best and easiest coaches in the league to get along with. Most teams don't want to trade a no. 1 for that. Hope the Bills don't.
-
Not quite. Browns could trade up to 10 to take MT or another QB because they are afraid AZ or another team will trade up to 10 and do so.If the Bills were willing to trade down 2 spots, that would imply they don't want Trubisky because a lot of people expect the Browns to take him at 12. The only reason the Browns would make that trade is if they thought Buffalo was going to take Trubisky,
Therefore that trade doesn't make sense unless the Bills know (with confidence) that the Browns don't want Trubisky.
Otherwise the trade is a catch 22.
-
I'm not sure where to start, but let's go with your laughable statement that ACC and Big 12 defenses are superior to PAC 12 defenses, as if it's some sort of unarguable piece of received wisdom. Then there's your attempt to deny that Ross was an extremely productive receiver, but most of all the punk attitude you took with one of the most knowledgeable and respected members of this board. And I didn't even mention your third grade level spelling, punctuation and sentence structure.😃What part was ignorant?
The part where he claimed one injury when he actually had 3 and was corrected?
The part where he said he isnt oft injured? When he was corrected that the kid has missed more time from his college career to injury than he has played?
The part where he was corrected about the stronger conference. I mean the PAC 12 screams high level talent.
The likes of Colorado, Wahington state, california, utah, ucla, arizona.
Cmon dont come here and bandwagon mean and act as if i said posted something that was wrong. The kid has had 4 major surgeries. One acl, two meniscus, and a microfracture surgery. About to get a torn labrum fixed and has only playe one true year of college ball with any results. Hea not worth a top ten pick regardless of what attacking posts you send my way.
-
First you were wrong about his td production.
Then you were wrong about his level of competition vs roscoe and goodwins.
The only thing you uave said that is even remotely true is that he is the same size as Antonio Brown. You know who else was Roscoe and Goodwin. He missed two seasons. One with a torn meniscus the other with a torn meniscus and acl. Why do you continue to lie? Now hes scheduled for a shoulder surgery and likely to miss quite abit of time at the beginning of the season. The only reason hes being talkes about at all is his speed. That isnt a reason to remotely draft him anywhere near 10 with 4 significant injuries, a bery small frame, one year of production against low competion. You might want to step away from the keyboard abit.
Wow. This caps off one of the most profoundly ignorant and insulting series of posts in the history of TSW. Congratulations. After only 296 posts, you are on a pace to re-write the record book.
-
...pretty surprising for Pete.......he is a rah rah players' coach.......
Sherman is not a team guy. He's taken numerous shots (publicly) at the coaching staff and his teammates. Carroll is a very positive guy and I think Sherman's act just rubs him the wrong way, as it should.
-
Because he was benched at OSU. Didn't you know that???why?
-
Do you also factor in the first that the Eagles got from Minn for Bradford?IMO you absolutely have to factor in the cost it took to get Wentz.
Eagles gave up two top 12 1st round draft picks, plus the 2nd, 3rd and 4th, plus the cost to move up in the 1st round last year with Miami.
Wentz has a very long way to go to ever be worth everything given up to get him.
I get what you're saying, but the cost to get Wentz is a very real factor.
At any rate, I think the verdict on Wentz is still highly uncertain. He did not look good the second half of the season. If we were just talking about the 2017 season, i would definitely take Tyrod over Wentz.
-
John, you're absolutely right, but wasting your time. If you look at the numbers, TT has better numbers than Jameis Winston the last two years, but it's ignored. They have about the same number of NFL starts, too.based on what? The individual qb numbers? passing yards?
Most certainly was not total offensive production
How do you know that?Based on no NFL team would rather have Tyrod than Carson Wentz.
-
IMO, most likely trade down is to 12 or 13, which would probably net us a 3rd. I'd do it.
-
Not according to ESPN. Seahawks have plenty of cap room and no viable replacement for Sherman on the roster. Pete Carroll is simply tired of this guy's act. No, thank you.The Seahawks are willing to trade him for the same reason that the Patriots traded Richard Seymour or Chandler Jones. They ARE about to run into MAJOR cap issues over the next couple of years. Some of these guys won't be back. You try to get back assets to replace them instead of letting them walk (a la Gilmore) with nothing to show. Teams make moves like this when the return will be greater than any compensatory pick that they could possibly receive. This is a problem that only really good (and deep) teams have. Most teams can allocate their cap dollars to their 5-10 best players. When you have 12-15 guys in that mix though it changes things.
-
Is there any reason to believe that the reported combine number was not accurate? Were his throws clocked again at his pro day? (Reports re his pro day were not encouraging, btw.) You saw the data in the other post regarding ball speed--if Watson's reported 49 mph was real and not the result of injury, I think it makes him to a mid-round pick at best.I don't believe the data we have is sufficient to conclude that Watson isn't there.
-
Yep. The problem was not Detroit's heavy investment in the position; the problem was that they drafted lousy WRs (except for Megatron, of course).And was a dynamic option for that offense. Not apples to apples what he was looking for but I think illustrates that the Detroit lions aren't the only possible outcome
-
Worked ok with Moulds and Price,I'm curious- has any team hit on two premium guys that close? I know a handful of whiffs but if we added a Julio and green type of pairing (just picking two successful ones) would you think it a bad course to take?
-
i must have missed that. Link?....scary part is published reports about his struggles to run the Scout Team....
-
Are you Watson fans concerned that his "fastball" only hit 49 MPH at the combine? I am. I used to be a fan of using the 10th pick on him, but for QBs, this stat seems to be the equivalent of a WR running a 4.80 40-yard dash--a huge red flag.
-
I read it (a long time ago) and I remember them obsessing over Youkilis for half the book, God of Walks, or something like that. OPS was the super-stat, if I remember correctly, and the key was valuing players by sabremetrics over old fashioned stats. Good read.
Yes, and unfortunately the obsession with walks and "working the count" caught on around the league and is now a major contributing factor to three and a half hour baseball games, which are now the norm.
-
1) Atlanta has a franchise qb and had a couple bad years before this year. And they drafted ONE receiver since then in the 4th round (2015, Justin Hardy).
2) the Texans spent 2 picks in the 20s on WRs. Completely different than one at 4, 10, & another 1st rounder to boot.
They were forced to give a terrible contract to a qb they got rid of a year later. Now, they have no qb.
3) good qbs make good WRs. Right now, no other receiver will look great since we don't have a great throwing qb. Sammy is the only mouth to get feed consistently and he probably doesn't get the ball enough.
Again, look at the Steelers and how they draft WRs. Wr is a cool position. But if your oline sucks and your qb isn't good, receiver is the definition of a dependent postion.
The Steelers have been very good at drafting and developing WRs in the lower rounds, no question about it. We have not been as fortunate (or as good).
Aren't you concerned about the fact that Watkins is going to be on year four of his rookie deal this year? Assuming we pick up his option, he's only under contract for two more seasons. We need another potential no. 1 receiver on the roster, don't we?
How would you feel about taking Howard at 10? I'm starting to warm to the idea, despite that the league-wide history of taking first round TEs is not great.
-
I really like Davis and I really like Williams.
But there is not one example of a successful franchise that has ever invested 2 top 10 picks on WRs 5 years apart.
You've made this point before and, although there might be some truth to it, I don't think it's a reason not to take Williams, Davis or Ross if one of them happens to be the best player on the board when the Bills pick comes up.
First, I can think of a few successful teams that have invested heavily in the position. For example, Atlanta made a huge investment in the position when they traded up for J. Jones (one of the only instances I can think of where a first round trade-up actually worked) and Houston has recently used two first round picks on WR. More importantly, though, there is no logical reason a team shouldn't invest heavily in the position. Which team is better off, a team that landed two outstanding WRs with their first-round picks in successive years, or a team who landed an outstanding WR with their first round pick two years ago but then drafted a mediocre front seven player with their first rounder the year after?
Also, I disagree that WR is a "dependent position" in the NFL. Having one or more game-breaking WRs opens up the field and creates opportunities for the entire offense, not just in the passing game. You don't need a "franchise QB" for your offense to benefit enormously from having WRs who can create mismatches for the defense. And vice versa: Look at what happened to the Bills offense the past two years when Watkins was sidelined.
Lastly, in the Bills' case, the cupboard is bare at WR, other than the oft-injured Sammy. It's clearly an area of need. And don't forget, teams DO need lots of WRs. They aren't like QBs--teams generally carry six of them and there are often three on the field at the same time. And as a bonus, many of them also contribute heavily on special teams.
IMO, the only reason for the Bills NOT to draft a WR at 10 this year would be if none those guys is the BPA.
-
Good, that rules out the Bills, which is fine since Seattle wants "a mint" for him, according to the article.Sherman is involved in the trade effort, but hes looking to play for a contender and wouldnt cooperate with trade talks if the talks are with a bad team.
Interesting article evaluating Trubisky & Watson
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted