widerightradio
-
Posts
89 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by widerightradio
-
-
Love it or hate it (I'm ok with it as long as no AFCE games are played there), the series HAS helped to regionalize (and thus make more financially viable) the franchise. I don't recall where I read it, but the Southern Ontario fan base has overtaken the Rochester fan base in season ticket support.
And don't forget, the Bills have SUCKED during the first years of the series. If we see a playoff-caliber team up there at the end of the year, I'm anxious to see how the composition (and excitement level) of the crowd changes.
Exactly. The series was perhaps ill-timed. It performed more like the London series where no real home team existed. If the Bills are relevant (competing for playoffs, few deep playoff runs), I think the atmosphere will gradually shift over a period of 10-15 years. The only time I get salty about the whole deal is when I see articles in the Toronto papers that go something like, "Toronto Scheduled for Most Boring Bills Game."
-
There are benefits to not having your starting QB position up for grabs every season. Look at what Fitz was able to do by bonding with the offense over the past two years. There was an interesting piece in ESPN Magazine a couple years ago that Aaron Rodgers started to do the same thing before Favre announced his return. This is what good QBs do and throwing open the starting job prevents the locker room from bonding.
Furthermore, not all people (and therefore players) perform their best under intense, constant competition. I'm not advocating never having competition, but I'm not sure any of us would be great at our jobs if our bosses hired someone every year and said: "If this person looks better than you on some sample projects, you're fired." Good coaches and bosses know what buttons to push on which players and when to push them.
As a side note, I think that there are different definitions of what it means to "compete" for the starting QB position. There's equal first team offense snaps on day one. There's giving a guy a few more chances if he looks good during the first couple preseason games. There's having a quick hook if the starter struggles during the regular season. And there's contemplating that you might replace a starter if he really struggles.
-
thats total bs, and i hate when people say this.
spiller was a great pick... he has marshall faulk written all over him.
troup was the most productive dt in his rookie year, had a great offseason and few days of camp and then got hurt.
carrington is a beast! not sure what the hell people are talking about here...
easley has shown great potential in the offseason and got hurt.
moats was a steal and is a really good 3rd down edge rusher.
batten is a solid backup
Zero starters after 2 years. I think Nix is on record saying you want to find at least 2 immediate starters in every class. By his own standard, this draft was unsuccessful.
The draft may yet prove productive, but Nix massively underestimated the team's quality and depth at RB. Although I like Carrington and think the Bills have probably done him a disservice by moving him around so much, he has yet to be a difference-maker. Injuries are part of the game. I don't wish to rehash the Is-Moats-Great debate. But 5 career sacks does not make him a really good pass rusher.
-
If you think that if VY outperforms Fitz in camp and preseason that he won't be the starter you are kidding yourself.
Every position is up for grabs at the start of camp. Fitz being the returning starter (with the shiny new contract) has it as his job to lose. But it will be a competition. Which is good if for no other reason than to have someone on the roster that can actually push Fitz.
I disagree with you. First, Young will not have the opportunity to compete with Fitz. Second, the entire playbook will be structured for Fitz and Fitz will receive the vast majority of the snaps as well as the playing time against first string defenses in the pre-season. Any comparison would be apples to oranges. Third, even if the coaching staff universally agreed that Young outperformed Fitz, I think you'd have a mutiny in the locker room. Chan and Buddy know this and have gone out of their way to characterize Young as competition for backup QB. If Fitz rocks a 50.0 QB rating through 6 games, we might have a different story. But Young will not have a shot at the Week 1 starting job.
-
Randle perhaps
Just guessing: Hill, Jenkins, Floyd.
Not sure Randle had the speed they were looking for. As a side note, just because Graham was the last one left doesn't mean that he was the last one on the Bills list of those four.
Buddy's comment on the Quick pick was also interesting. Clear they thought of him as a late second rounder or even a third rounder.
-
Doesn't matter. The manufacturers have said they can't build a helmet that will stop concussions. Stop hitting the head. It is simple. You don't have to in order to make impactful hits. Stop going to the head.
To say that manufacturers can't build a helmet that will stop concussions does not mean that they can't (and haven't) built helmets that reduce concussions and other types of traumatic brain injuries. Gregg Easterbrook has written extensively on this issue.
http://espn.go.com/espn/print?id=6759254&type=story
There may have been changes over the past 10 months since he wrote the article, but look at this research by Virginia Tech: "[T]he VSR4 -- Virginia Tech's second-lowest-rated helmet -- was the most common helmet in the NFL last season." Changes need to be holistic, from equipment to rule changes. Transparency would be a good start. All teams should be required to disclose the types of helmets used and by which players. The NFL should employ doctors independent of teams to report concussions with fines and suspensions for both players and teams where traumatic brain injuries are not reported.
-
Bradham will be a solid nfl lb. If he Barnett and shep are on the field together at mid season I won't be surprised.
Bradham reminds me of Nic Harris. I'm going to reserve judgment this time.
-
There was a piece of the NFL Network last week about this whole "going to eat" metaphor that players and coaches have started using in the past few years. It's not a Dareus thing. It's league-wide verbiage. That said, please do tuck in, Mr. Dareus.
-
OP makes two distinct points. First, the Bills have either failed to address certain issues or the fixes employed are young, unproven players. Second, that the Bills new roster has not played a down and is unproven.
On the first point, all NFL teams have weaknesses in the salary cap era. Patriots had one of the league's worst defenses with bad pass coverage. What about the Giants rushing attack? Deficiencies and youth in the secondary were covered up by one of the league's best pass rushes. If the point was that Fitzpatrick isn't a franchise QB, well, I think that's been discussed sufficiently.
On the second point, that's the purpose of TSW. We prognosticate, guess, and dream. To take your argument to the absurd: We can never consider a team better than its prior year's performance. So, shall we just proclaim the Giants Super Bowl champs again and skip the season? These off-season moves, including the rookies, will have a significant effect on the Bills comparative competitiveness with other NFL teams. It's fun discussing what we think that effect is. Enjoy the process.
-
This should be where we see the "Mario effect" come into play, especially with Byrd--Gotta Billieve Mario makes it more attractive to stay.
This cuts the other way too. Byrd could by thinking that he's undervalued due to a poor Bills pass rush. With our new defensive line, he could have a monster season and be due for a swank pay check.
-
Really? This type of comment is a bit old, don't you think?
I'm sorry, sir. It won't happen again.
-
My brother's wife's dog's best friend's owner who knows this homeless guy on Elmwood Avenue overheard a conversation between two guys who claimed to know someone named Nicks and someone named Buddie that Wood's father's livestock heard him whisper to his favorite stuffed animal that he wouldn't be ready until November. Tru story.
-
Buddy is banking on Mcklovin playing lights out in his contract year...
If by lights out you mean stumbling around in the dark blindly searching for the football, then yes.
-
Cross out Rogers and insert Brooks. I think its because how high they are on Brooks that made Florence expendable. Rogers (if kept) will the 6th corner on this team IMO.
I love the Brooks pick, but his biggest problem is a lack of reps in college. I think he's gotta be #6 right now. McGee goes down and Brooks is not going to be the slot CB. Rogers was ahead of McKelvin on the depth chart at the end of last year, I think. That said, but for Brooks, Florence would still be on the team.
-
The Florence move says to me that the Bills 1) think McGee will make it through the year, and 2) are high on A. Williams and Rogers. Reading the tea leaves, I think it may also indicate that front office knows that we're still a year or two away. Florence will not be part of those teams and therefore it's better to get more playing time for Williams, Rogers, Gilmore, and Brooks.
-
It would be easier to list which position don't need an upgrade. RB, Safety, and MAYBE D-line.
All the other positions have either question marks or just need upgrades. Hopefully some young guys will step up this year and the list of positions not needing upgrades will become longer than the ones that do.
That's just being silly. Our D-line looks like this: Pro-bowler, Pro-bowler, #3 overall pick in draft, 10 sacks last year. Backed up by Kelsay, Johnson, Edwards, Carrington. Under the salary cap system, you simply cannot have that kind of quality and depth at every position.
-
I don't think it's fair to identify LT or WR as a continuing need. I think the Bills think they have their starters at tackle and #2 outside WR on the roster. Until the draft class hits the field, I'm inclined to defer to the front office.
LB quality is an interesting question. From the interviews I've read with Wannstedt, it's not a critical position. You wouldn't want me lining up at OLB, but it's not where your big playmakers go. Furthermore, the Bills will be in nickle and dime packages so often that a player like Morrison will only be on the field for something like 30-40% of defensive snaps.
If we give the front office the benefit of the doubt and say that Fitz is the answer and this draft class will pan out, then I think the hole is a lack of overall depth, primarily at WR, LB, TE, QB. The fall-off from Johnson to Nelson/Jones/Graham is significant. Same with Fitz to Thigpen, Sheppard or Barnett to whoever, Chandler to Lee. Injuries happen and depth matters a lot. Bills need to hit on this draft and the next to be competitive with the big AFC teams. If Fitz isn't the answer, it's another 4-5 years of waiting.
-
i mean, id like to think that he wasnt completely out of ear shot, should someone need to reach him.
I thought about that. You wouldn't exactly want some scout to go all Howard's mother from the Big Bang Theory: "HEY BUDDY! ARIZONA WANTS NEXT YEARS FIRST AND THIS YEARS SECOND FOR THEIR FIRST! THEY'LL THROW IN SOME BRISKET!" But you're right. They could probably run out and grab him.
-
It must have been horrific in the Bills' War Room. Buddy gone. The phones ringing unanswered for whole seconds. The draft board left completely unattended. The wheel of the Titanic left metaphorically unattended as the Bills' draft veered into the proverbial iceberg. Scouts and the rest of the Bills staff were running into each other screaming, "Women and children first."
Ease up. If a great offer had come in, there was probably someone delegated to make the decision. If we're talking about trading into picks 11 through 15, the ammo that would have taken would have been incredible. Probably next year's first rounder. Furthermore, let's hope the Bills know their board and know if there's someone they want that badly. And as another poster pointed out, football is a show. Interviews with the media are a critical part of a GM's job.
If Nix had been seen smoking a cigar, watching Conan in his underwear during the last ten picks of the first round, you might have some evidence. Otherwise, carry on. Nothing to see.
-
Dont you think there are outliers who are far More aggressive trying to get every last penny for their services, more willing to split on their team and enter into holdouts?
I do. Although I might rephrase that as: I think there are players who place less value on personal and professional consistency, being perceived as good guys by their teammates. For example, Kyle Williams has consistently signed with the Bills long before his contract expires. That can be perceived either as loyalty or as Williams trading the probability of a larger future stream of income from an undefined team for the reality of a current lesser stream of income from a definite team. Taking an example from a completely different context: Is it altruistic to give money to charity is that donation gives you a commensurate good feeling? It's a similar thing: Is it loyalty if the gesture comes with commensurate personal benefits?
-
I think all these discussions are a testament to how well Nix & Co. kept their poker faces. What's the potential list at now? Floyd, Glenn, Martin, Reiff, Kuechly, Barron, Gilmore, Kirkpatrick, DeCastro, Cox. Plus guys who might slide: Blackmon, Tannehill, Kalil. Part of it is where we are in the draft, but basically nobody has any idea what direction the Bills are going in.
-
That's too general a characterization. There are lots of guys who take pay cuts to stay with a team and also guys who retire rather than opt for playing somewhere else.
I guess I have less faith. People stay with organizations because they are comfortable, know how things work, like the city. I think players who stay with an organization or take a pay cut because they feel a loyalty to the people of the city, the owner, the team, or their teammates are rare. As for retiring a year or two early, that too is often a business decision. Exhibiting loyalty to one particular area could open up lots of opportunities for a player after he retires.
-
Almost all players are hired guns: They get paid money to play for a team with whom they would otherwise choose not to be affiliated.
My understanding of the Revis contract is that it was a compromise which the parties structured a particular way in order to avoid certain salary cap implications. Revis and the Jets understood that it would have to be renegotiated after two years.
-
I'd rather the Bills go in a different direction, but DeCastro wouldn't be the end of the world. He's been called one of the surest bets in the entire draft and would make the inside of our line unbelievably strong, leading to immediate improvements in the interior running game and giving Fitz more room to step up in the pocket. He may also serve as a hedge on Wood (Urbik to C), given that Wood has suffered two major injuries in two seasons, and/or Wood or Levitre leaving through free agency. DeCastro will almost certainly be the BPA when the Bills are on the clock.
My instinct is that Nix/Gailey will select the guy they think is the surest bet to start for the Bills over the next five years. I think that means that Reiff, DeCastro, and Kuechly will be at the top of the Bills' board. The fact that the Bills were so aggressive in going after Meachum makes me think that they may go WR, but I don't think Floyd will be the BPA.
I think the Bills should sign Visanthe Shiancoe TE
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
This is an ipse dixit argument. Because a player is available, nobody wants him. Because nobody wants him, we shouldn't sign him. Thus, nobody should sign available players. The same applies to contracts. When the Bills sign a free agent, the Bills will always pay more for a player than any other team is willing to pay. There are lots of reasons why players might still be available: teams are waiting for injuries to heal; many teams are happy with their depth at a particular position; the player is waiting for injuries during camp to get a better situation/contract; front offices have been busy with camps, the draft, signing picks. These guys may be done, but their availability is not a reason in and of itself to exclude them from consideration.