mannc
-
Posts
18,545 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mannc
-
-
No, The fact that Tyrod's numbers were significantly better when he had a healthy Watkins available is always ignored by the crusaders--and those who are appalled at the idea of drafting a WR in the first round this year.Did we have Sammy for this game?
-
Yeah, that's about what I expected from you. Which Oregon QBs have I promoted? Only one I can think of is Marcus Mariota. I'll gladly own up to that one. Go back to pimping Mr. 6-5.Why don't you cry a little louder and tell us more about all the Oregon qb's that should be starting for the Bills ? You're the king of terrible takes but I like the emotion. Guess you've forgotten the raiders and steelers games too.
Fact based arguments of badol ? Lol. He lost his press pass over his Lesean McCoy megafail.
Best qb since Kelly = aka 25th in passing yards sandwiched between Simien and Tannenhill. Puleeeze
1-7 vs .500 teams = don't caaaaaaaaare. Get it together Mann. Here's a nice clip for ya if you're tired of the Baltimore one. Check out EJ baby !!
Can't even pass for 190 yards while down a million. Sad. You're better than this.
-
John from trade this crappy qb way back in 2016 ! Tyrod blows and you know it.
Your anti-Tyrod crusade is easily the most tiresome and asinine crusade in the history of TBD, and that takes in a lot of territory. To summarize, your unrelenting crusade is based on the following unrelated premises: (a) That the undeniably best QB the Bills have had since Drew Bledsoe (and probably going all the way back to Jim Kelly) sucks, and (b) an ACC quarterback whose career record against Division 1 college opponents is 6-5, is going to light up the NFL.
The thing about crusades like yours--aside from the fact that they contribute nothing to the board--is that people tend to remember them and, when they are proven to have been baseless or just plain wrong, the crusader is judged accordingly. What's particularly pathetic about your crusade is that you've never backed it up with anything except references to the opening game against Baltimore this year, the supposed NFL ranking of the Bills' passing attack in 2016, and a series of juvenile comments that quarterback X "pansed" Tyrod. Meanwhile you have never really responded to fact-based arguments of people like BADOL, who have pointed out that Tyrod, while maybe not a grade-A franchise QB, brings a lot of value to the table that cannot be easily or cheaply replaced.
-
IMO, this is the most realistic and attractive trade down scenario for the Bills. They move back a little and recoup some of the late round picks Whaley has donated to other teams.The Saint's are openly looking for a Drew Brees replacement, and the Browns desperately need a QB, so I see the Browns trading up two spots to snag him. I used the draft pick trade "thing" from CBS to determine the picks worth. 10th is worth 1300 while 12th is worth 1200. The Browns 4th and 5th round picks equal around 100 together making it an even trade.
-
wasn't talking about mocks. I meant here on TSW. My recollection is that Shaq was a very popular pre-draft pick.Like which mocks, Mannc? The closest I saw was Walter Football, which predicted we'd take Ragland at 19, not Shaq. NFL had us taking Rankins after Ragland went 1 pick ahead.
I don't have ESPN Insider etc so I don't see some of the most popular - maybe some of those predicted Shaq?
-
You might be right about the mock drafts on espn, etc. I recall Shaq getting the most votes in the pre-draft poll on TSW, though. FWIWNot true, I looked. In fact you should too because it's funny to see where they had players going (Zeke to cleveland etc.).
They simply have no idea. Every mock is 90% wrong
-
Really? A LOT of folks predicted the Bills would take Shaq last year.The only 1st round guys that have been successfully predicted in the last 30 years are Bruce and Dareus.
-
Taking into consideration what the Redskins gave up for him, RGIII deserves serious consideration for biggest bust ever. He did play one decent season of football though.
Bonus Question: Guess which AFC East team Ryan Leaf beat in his NFL debut?
-
I think the Bills would be very lucky to extract a second round pick to move back only three slots. Can't imagine the Cards would throw in more picks on top of that. I do think a trade with the Browns or Cards is the Bills' most likely trade back scenario, though. I would be happy to come away with the Browns' high third rounder.Arizona is in a good position to trade up because they have a number of comp picks projected for next year - including a 3 rd and 4th. This would make them feel more comfortable about trading a 2nd this year plus a 3rd or 4th next year to move up 3 spots
-
Not just the first round: we get to pick higher in every round this year--except the fourth and seventh, of course. It was the right thing to do, no question about it.
-
Let's not forget this important comparative data-point:That's great, in theory. Could the Bills afford Brees with the way the roster is currently constructed?
EDIT: Also, look at how the rosters are built in general.
2016 NO Pass Catchers: Cooks, Thomas, Snead, Fleener
2016 BUF Pass Catchers: Woods, Clay, Goodwin, Watkins
2016 NO RBs: Ingram, Hightower, Kuhn
2016 BUF RBs: Shady, Gillislee, JWill
2016 NO HC: Sean Payton
2016 BUF HC: Rex Ryan
-
But completion percentage was far lower in 1983 than in 2016 - something must account for that other than that WRs are better.
In 1983, 8 (eight!) QBs completed 60% or better of their passes.
In 2016, 29 of 32 starting QBs completed at least 60% of their passes, including two who completed 70% or better.
In 1983, the TD/INT ratio among starting QBs was 1.15 : 1
In 2016 the TD/INT ratio among starting QBs was 2.28 : 1
I think it is very hard to argue that those differences are not at least partially due to the significant rules changes that favor the passing game.
To be clear, I don't think that there is any debate that players today are better trained (some help to chemistry) and practice sport-specific skills more than earlier generations. The proof of that is in the height/weight/speed of players today vs yesterday's players. However, I can't accept that the change in today's passing game is not at least partially due to those rules changes.
No question that the completion percentage was lower and the interception rate was much higher in 1983. I think the reason for these numbers is that in 1983, teams did not use the short passing game the way modern NFL teams do. Look at the Pats under Brady: the percentage of pass plays they run is through the roof, but most are quick passes that don't travel more than 7 yards beyond the line of scrimmage, are likely to be completed and unlikely to be intercepted. Teams have realized that short passes are difficult to defend and are a better and more reliable way to pick up yardage in 3-7 yard chunks than the running game is. The average yards per completion (as opposed to per attempt) is significantly lower now than it was then.
-
I think it means QB is very likely in this draft, but not necessarily at 10. I expect it will happen in round 3 or later.I also think that the fact they haven't signed a QB tells me they are either a) very confident in Cardale or b) very much in play for a QB at #10.
-
Well, the numbers don't support your theory. The league-wide average yards per pass attempt was 7.2 in 2016--the exact same as it was in 1983, before all of the rule changes you bemoan.I must respectfully disagree with this point. DBs used to be able to make contact w WR through route - not just in first 5 yards. DBs used to absolutely kill WRs after the catch - really intimidated WRs and hurt them too. Today if you hit below the waist or above the shoulders - penalty. If you hit too soon or too hard immediately after catch - penalty for hitting defenseless WR. You almost can't hit a QB in the pocket anymore and pass blocking rules have been substantially modified to allow more use of the hands.
-
What would be other recent examples besides Dak?
Well, I suppose we could go all the way back to Kurt Warner and Tom Brady (I know, Brady wasn't a rookie when Mo Lewis took out Bledsoe), but a more recent example would be Kurt Cousins, who played really well when RGIII was injured in his rookie year. In fact, I think the reason RGIII rushed back was because Cousins played so well after he went down. At any rate, plenty of rookie QBs have played well out of the chute, although not necessarily after an injury to the starter.
-
The trouble with that philosophy is that the season is basically over if the starter gets injured... IMHO.
Not necessarily. Sometimes rookie backups who get an opportunity because of an injury far surpass expectations. Dak is only the most recent example. Do you think the season wouldn't be over if TT went down in week three and the Bills rolled with Brian Hoyer or Matt McGloin for the rest of the year?
-
Conversely, name the last QB the Bills successfully developed.
(It was Joe Ferguson.)
Sorry, that doesn't come close to proving that Dak or Carr would have failed in Buffalo. Since 1996, the Bills have only attempted to draft and develop two QBs: JP Losman and EJ Manuel. (I suppose you could throw in Trent Edwards, too.) You will never in a million years convince anyone that those guys were victims of the Bills' supposed inability to support and develop QBs and that they would have become quality NFL QBs if they had only been drafted by, say, the Texans or the Chiefs. The Bills organization has utterly failed to identify and draft quality QBs. Period. Carr and Prescott are two blatant examples of that failure.
-
Neither Carr nor Dak were going to succeed here.
The problem isn't that the Bills draft bad QBs. The problem is that the Bills eat QBs - good or bad - and spit out train wrecks.
This is an argument that is commonly asserted here ("_______________ [insert name of wildly successful player, such as Odell Beckham, Russell Wilson, etc] would have sucked in Buffalo"), and it's always made without a scrap of evidence to support it. So please enlighten us: Which quarterbacks that were drafted or acquired by the Bills would have succeeded elsewhere? For that matter, name a quarterback who succeeded elsewhere after being traded or jettisoned by the Bills?
-
Ill say Reggie Ragland, drops a little weight, is a little quicker and efficient "in space" on his zone drops and in man coverage from the ILB spot and his ability to diagnose plays, stop the run and run the defense will be a welcome addition to the defense, he'll stay on the field on all 3 downs and in sub packages. Projected: 130+ tackles, 15 TFL's, 3 FF, 2 INT's.
p.s. Bills fans will praise Whaley's foresight in trading a 2017 4th round pick to move up in the 2016 draft to acquire him, as in hindsight its a wonderful move again...
You're forgetting about the fourth round pick in 2016 that Whaley also gave away to move up for Ragland--a pick that could have been used on a certain QB.
-
Because he has something called a contract. If the Bills wanted to, they could play him at WR. The lunatics don't run the asylum--yet.why would glenn agree to that?
-
Wrong. Not even close to a bust.It's not even close....it's Walt Patulski
1st overall pick in the 1972 draft and the dude played 4 years here and did very little. Yes, he was better than Aaron Maybin and some of the others, but they weren't #1 overall picks. That matters. They had their choice of any player they wanted and ended up with him. Patulski is ranked #27 on the all-time NFL bust list, FYI
-
You apparently don't. He was far from a bust. Four-year starter, who made 22-sacks (in an era when sacks were much rarer), and was thereafter traded for a second round pick that turned into Joe Devlin.I didn't check every page but does anyone remember Walt Patulski?
-
And he's the NCAA champion long-jumper!If were talking versatile CB I think it has to start with Adoree Jackson from USC right? He won the Paul Hornung award for the nations most versatile player, I think he's played every position on that team.... WR (39 rec, 628 YDS, 6 TD- career since 2014), RB (15 carries, 92 YDS, 6.1 YPC AVG- career), PR/KR (79 KR, 2141 YDS, 27.1 AVG, 4 TD) (46 PR, 578 YDS, 12.6 AVG, 4 TD) and then you get to the defensive side , he had 55 total tackles, 2 TFL, 5 INT this season on defense. If still around in round 2 he would be the exact player that McDermott is talking about, he ran a 4.42 - 40 at the combine, great football AWR and has been said that he loves the game, can't really get more versatile than this guy if you ask me.
-
Want: Adams or Hooker
Don't Want: J. Allen
Dark Horse: Solomon Thomas
Think: Lattimore
Report: Seahawks Open to Trading Richard Sherman
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Anyone who wants to trade a high draft choice for Sherman needs to be able answer these questions:
Why would Seattle, a very smart team that knows Sherman best, be willing to let him go and potentially replace him with a rookie from this year's draft? Do you think you know more than Schneider? What makes Sherman more valuable to the Bills than to the Seahawks?
I just don't see it. This guy is 29 years old and is unquestionably past his prime, even if he's still very good. Oh, and he's a jackass.