finn

Nicely summed up. The best he's done is to rise to the level of adequate. Then everyone is excited: "He's adequate! He's adequate!!" EJ apologists point to a game here, a half here, but this qb has never, not once, flashed greatness or even above-averageness. He's a mediocrity with only the slimmest chance of developing into a very good quarterback. The only question now is when the front office will move on. Given the politics, the answer should be after the season. Worst-case scenario: the "it's too early to judge him!" or "It's his line! And WRs! and...and" sentiment will prevail and we'll be having the same exchanges about his ineptitude for another season, with Promo the Robot intoning that it's too early to judge him. Give him another three seasons. God, it sucks being a Bills fan.

This is more or less the observation I was going to make. The two have made built a pretty good young roster, but they put all their chips on EJ and rushed him into the lineup....all while having had two--count 'em--veteran qbs on the roster, paid for and ready to go, in Jackson and Fitzpatrick. In my view, they (and Nix) have gotten nowhere near the heat they deserve for first signing Fitz to that huge contract then letting him go one year in, meaning that they have to pay him without getting his services in return. They messed up signing him, but why did they then cut him, doubling the mistake? I don't buy the "he'd be a distraction" argument, because a much more plausible explanation is right at hand: they made a mistake and wanted it to go away fast. And it worked. How often do you see this crew flamed for their appalling double mistake--I mean giving Fitz a huge contract then cutting him, burdening the franchise with enough dead money to have signed Byrd and more? Neither qb is the long-term answer obviously, but having one or both would have allowed EJ to learn from the bench--or, far, far (far) better, bought them time to bring in one or more qbs with more potential than EJ. The qb position is just too important to put all your chips on one player. We've seen it a sickening number of times here, and we all know the litany. Yet this is just what these two have done. So no Fitz starting while the coaches have time to develop and evaluate one or two young prospect. No long-term plan to stockpile picks in order to move up in the next year's draft to nab a player with more potential. Whaley is praised constantly on this board for the moves he's made. But it seems to me these moves are all about his own career and making himself look good. Usually that self-interest coincides with the franchise's, but cutting Fitz, drafting a questionable "franchise" qb now versus a more sure thing later--and (doubling down) giving up two first-round picks for a wide receiver (hey, if it means the playoffs, great, if not, Whaley figures he'd be out of here anyway)... those are not the moves of a GM thinking long term and putting the franchise first. He's a talented guy, and it might be best for Pegula to sign him to a long-term contract so he can put the Bills first instead of himself.

This back and forth is getting old, guys. "E.J. sucks"; "Yeah, but he's had only 12 starts" in every variation, with lots of hyperbole on both sides. Can we agree that a) it's too early to judge him definitively, and b) he is awful on bad days and seldom more than adequate on good days? How about an acronym to speed things along: IKIEBHRS: "I know it's early but he really sucks?"

No, I was referring to the backlash I've been reading and hearing in many places charging that the negative reaction to the beatings amounts to political correctness or a lynch-mob mentality. Maybe that's what we call widespread responses that we don't like. But I like to think that virtually all of us can agree on some things, like beating a 4-year old bloody is wrong.

Thanks for posting the video. This is the kind of thing a lot of parents need to hear, directly about their own behavior but also indirectly, about their own parents'. Carter's message is that someone you love can be simply wrong; acknowledging they're wrong doesn't change your love for them. You know, the NFL is all about fun and enjoyment, for us, anyway. But. like any public forum, it's also a means of reinforcing--or, on rare occasions, changing--behaviors. Maybe this outraged response will make a few parents think about what they do to their kids. I wouldn't call the outrage a "mob mentality"; I would call it consensus. You don't do that to a child. Period.

I give Whaley credit for agreeing to what he admitted was a "no-brainer" deal that fell into his lap. But he doesn't deserve more credit than that, at least for that deal. It sure has been terrific for the Bills, though. Hughes is everything May-have-been wasn't.

I don't entirely blame the Bills for drafting E.J. I was pessimistic at the time because I thought they might have been so enamored with his physical attributes that they were deliberately overlooking the problems that caused other teams to pass on him--the same mentality, in reverse, that appears to have caused the Bills to pass on Russell Wilson. But I realize you have to roll the dice on qb's. But that is just what has bummed me out since then---the Bills went all in on this iffy (i.e., not Luck or Manning) prospect. Just like they went all in on Fitzpatrick. It's like they sit on their hands for years then suddenly panic and lunge at whoever is right in front of them at the time. Just in the last few years they've passed on Nassib, Tannehill, Kaepernick, Wilson, Glennon, Dalton, Manziel... and, yes, Geno Smith and Gabbert and a host of mediocrities, too. My point is that they should have been drafting qb's every year--maybe two a year--until they really had someone. It's ok to draft a bust; every team has done so. But it's NOT ok to draft an iffy prospect, decline to bring in competition, then basically cut off your chief recourse in case he's a bust. Even if the Watkins turns out to be terrific, it was still an appalling move to give up the 2015 first round pick for him when the qb spot is unsettled. Think how selfish that move was on the part of Whaley. He figured he'll be fired anyway if Manuel is a bust, so why not go all in with a splashy wr? He isn't gambling with HIS future--he's already committed to Manuel--he's gambling with the BILLS' future, adding still another year of purgatory for the Bills fans if the gamble doesn't work out. Maybe this is just the legacy of Ralph Wilson playing out its last act: one last mediocre front office and coaching staff doing its mediocre thing. But what a cruel little gift Whaley will be giving us and his successor on his way out. He not only leaves a mess but takes away all the cleaning supplies as he leaves. A nice big FU to all of us.

What he said. It seems to me the best qb's throw both a lot of int's and td's their first few seasons. Then gradually the int's fall off as they learn to read defenses better. The mediocre qb's throw few of either because they're timid and so never learn much. Kelly drove me crazy with his interceptions, even in his prime. But he never stopped going for it. At the least E.J. should air it out in the preseason.

A lot of competent coordinators would have struggled with our qb's and the injury to Spiller, to say nothing of the left guard debacle. My beef with Hackett is the hurry-up offense, a "me-too" gimmick that has nothing to do with the personnel here--on the contrary. You have green qb's, a shaky line and a new offense and you use a hurry up? Way to pin back those clueless db's and confused pass rushers! Hackett might be a decent coordinator some day with another team, but only because he's learning on the job at the Bills' expense. But, hey, you get what you pay for.

You know, it goes both ways with the new rules about db's and contact. If EJ would take some shots downfield instead of checking down virtually every time (so it seems), he might at least get some interference calls. He's been way too cautious for a young qb. Yes, we'll complain about int's, but I'll take them if it means more action and fewer punts.

If you want to feel even worse, recall that Whaley was trying frantically to trade the second round pick for Carlos Hyde, who evidently is looking terrific in camp. (I do like the Bryce Brown pickup, though.) By the way, one problem with moving Cyrus K. to guard is his height: strong as he is, it's easy for a DT to get under the pads of someone that tall, which is why you don't see many 6'7" guards or centers in the NFL. The Cordy Glenn pick was brilliant, and picking Eric Wood has worked out well, but otherwise the story of the Bills line is getting by with mediocrity: Pears, Legursky, Brown, Urbick and now Williams, who may work out but was average at best with the Bears and Rams. So it's depressing to see Cyrus K. and Richardson struggling. A fine set of receivers and running backs isn't much help when the OL can't pass protect and open lanes. My hopes are pinned on a Glenn-Williams-Wood-Hairston-Pears/Henderson line, but I realize that this working out is a long-shot. When was the last time the Bills had a terrific line, hands down?

That's conventional wisdom, not to invest too much in one position, but it's not a law or rule, and in the Bills' case, the smart thing is to sign Hughes to a long-term deal. They have very little money invested in the quarterback position (especially compared to what Brady and Manning are being paid), so there should be plenty of room. Plus, after this season, it may be easier to replace the soon-to-be-overpaid Mario than Hughes, a young player on the rise. Sign your young players, Bills. You've taken two steps forward: forget the three steps back for once.

Listen to us. Swap out Manuel's name for Rob Johnson, Todd Collins, J.P Losman, Trent Edwards and all the other failed Bills QBs since Kelly and it's the same pattern of exchanges: "He sucks," "Be patient," "He really sucks," "It's too early to judge, you're an idiot," "I'm pessimistic," "Yeah, but what about that one lovely throw?" "He's not going to make it," "It's the O-line and receivers, not him," "Give him time." "Another wasted four years," "You're a fool, what about all the other late bloomers," "I was right all along--he sucks," "Yeah, well, good for you, jerk." I think we've forgotten what it's like to have a first-rate quarterback on the team. There was a lot of trash about Bledsoe and Flutie, but there was also big time excitement about them (and Kelly at his worst) that never came out with these others--or with Manuel. Be honest--have you ever been really, deep down excited about Manuel? Intellectually, we know he will continue to develop and may--who knows?-- be quite good in the end. Viscerally, we know better. We know what is going to happen.

Sorry, I'm not being clear. What I mean is that I'm concerned that if Henderson continues to develop this year, Whaley et al will be tempted to let Glenn sign elsewhere because his asking price (especially compared to a seventh rounder) will be too high and they recognize a replacement in Henderson. To be fair, this regime has not shown the tendency to value savings over building talent that we've seen for years here. My worry is the flip side of my excitement that the Bills might be building not just a decent line but a first-rate one. Maybe I should have expressed it that way. Too many years of seeing fears come true, I guess.

My fear now is that the front office will think, "Hey, why re-sign Cordy Glenn when we have a nice prospect at left tackle in Henderson?" It could end up being fortuitous that Kujo is struggling if it makes the decision makers hesitate to thin out the line. But maybe I'm overreacting. I'm still depressed they let Jonas Jennings go...

Well, you go with what works. If your opponent adjusts to the up-tempo, you do slow it down. You don't keep going three over a quarter or more and hope things change. The fast-paced offense is precisely what this team does not need. Last year was absurd. A rookie quarterback, a shaky offensive line, young receivers...and Hackett installs a hurry up? Not much different this year. The hurry up worked for the Superbowl Bills because a) they were all veterans and new each other very well; and b) it took the league by surprise. Neither condition is in place this year. With an inexperienced offense and strong defense, you want a ball-control offense, maybe a fast pace at times under the right conditions. Hackett and Marrone are making a mistake.

It is depressing. I used to have a friend record games for me and send them in the mail, but that was years ago. I hear one can find games streaming online in real time (pirated), but I can't find them on game day. I do see replays of key plays on ESPN, but never whole games. Take it as a measure of my loyalty to the Bills that I've been following them very closely for decades while rarely watching more than two games a year (I'm in Pats* country). Maybe it is pathetic, clicking Refresh every five seconds, but there it is. Thanks for the kind and informed replies.

Is Nathaniel Hackett as poor a coordinator as he seems? I have to follow the Bills online and rarely see a game, but my impression is that he is way over his head, a small-time college coach basically faking it and hoping no one notices. Is it that bad? Yes, he had to deal with young quarterbacks, but I saw (or rather read) no flare, no surprises, no imagination. He reminded me of an offensive version of Dave Wannstedt. Was it that bad?

I'm happy about this group, too. But with EJ in only his second year, Watkins a rookie, Woods and Goodwin still developing and no chemistry yet between anyone, this will likely be just a growing year, with us talking "exciting potential!" again next year at this time. I have slightly higher hopes for the defense, but it's tempered by the new scheme Schwartz is bringing in. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with it, but it involves another pretty major change, which means a "growing year" there, too. Someday I'd like to see a coordinator have enough self esteem to come in and keep the same scheme if it works rather than changing it for the sake of being able to claim it's his if it works out, rather than his predecessor's. The team is damned if the scheme is very successful (and the coordinator leaves a la Pettine, with a brand new scheme brought in to confuse the players) AND if it's awful, because it's awful. What you want is a pretty good coordinator who stays four or five years. But of course that damns you, too, since pretty good is not the way to get to the playoffs. Sorry for the cynicism. Fourteen years is long, long time.

Well, I think such a big line has the potential to wear out defenses, but there's a reason that some of the best O-lines have been on the small side, like Denver's during the Elway era. When you go up against very quick defensive lineman like Kyle Williams, it's more important to be equally quick that powerful. Same goes for size: a 6-8 guy can be bullrushed by a strong 6-2 guy if he doesn't really bend his knees, which is hard to do consistently. This is why I was heartened by video of Cyrus K. recovering from such a bullrush after initially being pushed way back. A final reason bigger isn't necessarily better: the pulling game. Remember the Super Bowl Bills using the Redskins counter-trey? If you have mobile guards especially, you have a lot of options. In short, I'm more worried than pleased by Whaley's preference for big linemen. I just hope he isn't single minded about it, assuming bigger = effective, especially after the Colin Brown travesty last year and his first response: plugging in a player whom everyone agrees has been mediocre (Chris Williams) but is big.

Yeah, but it's not entirely true, is it? He was joking when he said he would be "pissed" if Watkins dropped a lot of balls, since he was a first-round draft pick, but he clearly wasn't entirely joking. Of course it matters where the players are coming from; players drafted early get every chance to succeed while later picks and free agents have to be extraordinary. Such cliches, such garbage the coaches and GM's routinely put out! Seantrel Henderson has "one shot." Right. Until he's cut and another team gives him "one shot." I don't think these people are deliberately lying; they're just not talented that way. A reporter sticks a microphone in your face and you find yourself spewing meaningless cliches. You have to judge them by results.

I wonder if one key reason they were set on Sammy was precisely because he does so much damage with short passes--remember that they were also trying to trade up for Carlos Hyde, a power runner. Maybe what's going on is that they know that E.J. needs time to develop, so they're trying to give him short-term help. Look at the O-linemen they're drafting: all power guys. Whether or not E.J. is the long-term answer, these moves will give him the best chance to succeed in the next two years. Look for a lot of eight men in a box.

Nice welcome to the board. It's his first post. What's wrong with you?

I do like the pick: character, skills, potential.... But--hello?--what about guard? I dearly hope OBD isn't assuming Chris Williams, the OED entry under "Mediocrity" is the answer at guard. Yankey, the top-rated guard in the draft according to some, sitting there and they pass? Unless they have this kid pegged for safety, I'm bummed they didn't go with the big body. My gut-level fear is that once again the front office thinks OG just isn't important, even with last year's horror show fresh in everyone's memory.

I agree. I think Whaley et al wake up sweating with images of Blount in their heads. I don't blame them. That was an appalling display; reminded me of the last Super Bowl against Dallas. Unfortunately, they may not be fretting about Gronk anymore and the new generation of tight ends and pass-catching running backs. Rivers, Spikes, this kid... pass coverage is not a strength with any of them (I really don't like Rivers--he and Chris Williams=other people's trash, imo). I realize it's tough to find every-down players, especially in the third round, but we might be talking about needing another Kiko this time next year. Until then (of course they're not done yet), at least the Bills will be more ready for the Blounts of the world.