stevie johnson

[Kelly the Dog]

Come on man...stop inflating his TD's unless you are counting ones he should of had (IE, JETS game). Stevie had 7 TD's last year. Trust me, they dont lock Stevie up he is not signing in Buffalo for what he signed for. I would give that credit to the Front Office of the Bills vs. Stevie. Manning up after the fact means ZERO when it comes to a team sport...He deserves respect if he makes the catch, stops the stupid penalties and continues to produce

You're losing credibility very fast, if you had any. Steve Johnson would have made considerably more on the open market had he tested it, considering the contracts of Meachem, Laurent Robinson, and Vincent Jackson.

[John from Riverside]

I should have looked at his total TD numbers.....also that is the difference between a fan like me and a fan like you.....I will admit when I am wrong on something.....you will hang onto a arguement to the point of embarrisment. 7 TD's is not bad either......he was injuried to the latter half of the season and had 10 in the previous year correct?

 

WR's drop balls.....nobody took TO's status away from him when he dropped passes because his overall production of outstanding in his career......he needs to stop with the stupid penalties.

 

Are you trying to say he would not have gotten more on the open market?

[Booger]

I should have looked at his total TD numbers.....also that is the difference between a fan like me and a fan like you.....I will admit when I am wrong on something.....you will hang onto a arguement to the point of embarrisment. 7 TD's is not bad either......he was injuried to the latter half of the season and had 10 in the previous year correct?

 

WR's drop balls.....nobody took TO's status away from him when he dropped passes because his overall production of outstanding in his career......he needs to stop with the stupid penalties.

 

Are you trying to say he would not have gotten more on the open market?

 

He definitely would have gotten a lot more...but with his production history, penalty history and overall upside he would not have been worth more than what the Bills paid. Both sides did well in the deal.

[John from Riverside]

again....it does not matter what you think he was worth.....only what it would have taken to keep the player. The only WR I wanted in this FA more then Stevie was Dwayne Bowe....and he was franchised quickly.

 

its interesting.....because Bowe dropped balls at times too.....but KC locked him up quick

[Kelly the Dog]

He definitely would have gotten a lot more...but with his production history, penalty history and overall upside he would not have been worth more than what the Bills paid. Both sides did well in the deal.

So you think other teams who would be willing to spend 40 million + on him would be wrong about him, too?

[Booger]

You're losing credibility very fast, if you had any. Steve Johnson would have made considerably more on the open market had he tested it, considering the contracts of Meachem, Laurent Robinson, and Vincent Jackson.

 

 

How do I lose credibility when I agree with that? So you think he would have gotten less? You dont think the Bills front office had anything to do with the Stevie Johnson deal getting done before Free Agency started? You do realize that teams put a deal on the table for a specified amount of time and if that time is exceeded the deal is off. My guess is they put Stevie to the test. You have 48 hours to "accept" otherwise Stevie would have tested the market. It is a game sometimes when it comes to negotiations.

 

I dont see how I lose creditbility when:

 

1. I correct the TD's from 10 to 7

2. Agree with the deal and that Stevie would have made more on the open market

3. Feel that "Manning up" after the fact means ZERO when it comes to a team game. Dont make the stupid mistake to begin with ESPECIALLY after you have been warned. That is being 100% selfish

 

I guess the truth hurts?

 

So you think other teams who would be willing to spend 40 million + on him would be wrong about him, too?

 

Do you think teams were wrong with Garcon, Robinson and or Meecham spending what the spent?

 

Yes, would have been way wrong.

[Jeffery Lester]

Stevie Johnson is the first true #1 wide receiver since E. Moulds. Lee Evans was never a #1. Stevie runs all of the routes. He is always running wide open in opposing teams secondary. He does drop a few balls this is true. This is the maddening part of his game. He does not need anyone to come in and be a #1 wide out. The Bills do not want to draft a player to be a #1. They have said it themselves numerous times. They want someone to stretch the field. A #2 wide receivers job. Buffalo is finally starting to develop and retain some real talent. Lets not B***h and complain about it. GO BILLS

[Kelly the Dog]

How do I lose credibility when I agree with that? So you think he would have gotten less? You dont think the Bills front office had anything to do with the Stevie Johnson deal getting done before Free Agency started? You do realize that teams put a deal on the table for a specified amount of time and if that time is exceeded the deal is off. My guess is they put Stevie to the test. You have 48 hours to "accept" otherwise Stevie would have tested the market. It is a game sometimes when it comes to negotiations.

 

I dont see how I lose creditbility when:

 

1. I correct the TD's from 10 to 7

2. Agree with the deal and that Stevie would have made more on the open market

3. Feel that "Manning up" after the fact means ZERO when it comes to a team game. Dont make the stupid mistake to begin with ESPECIALLY after you have been warned. That is being 100% selfish

 

I guess the truth hurts?

When you said "Trust me, they dont lock Stevie up he is not signing in Buffalo for what he signed for." I thought you meant he would sign for less on the open market. I misinterpreted what you meant.

 

Seriously, answer me this I understand both sides of the argument. Which number do YOU HONESTLY think is a better indication of a player's production--- if he starts two years and has 17 TDs in the two years for an average of 8.5. Or if he plays two years and has 10 the first and 7 the second so the 7 is a better indication. I'm also not talking about a guy who is aging and in decline.

 

I personally think the average of the two years is a much better indication. I do, however, understand the other argument.

[deep2evans]

He definitely would have gotten a lot more...but with his production history, penalty history and overall upside he would not have been worth more than what the Bills paid. Both sides did well in the deal.

 

lol jesus christ, can you stop saying "penalty history"? he's made a few boneheaded decisions trying to make a name for himself. but by all accounts, he's a great guy, a family man, and a hard worker. there's no reason he shouldn't be able to move past that and take on a leadership role for this organization.

 

also, the !@#$ you know about his "overall upside"? he's had erratic QBing due to crappy players and injuries, and no legitimate talent at the other WR spot to take any coverages away. he's not a speed demon, and doesn't catch every pass thrown his way, but he's an elite route runner and gets open more than any WR i've watched in some time. with about 3-4 exceptions, a player's upside is strictly defined by the players around him and the system they're in. you add a healthy fitz for 16 games and a michael floyd to the offense and suddenly his "upside" goes up quite a bit.

[John from Riverside]

How do I lose credibility when I agree with that? So you think he would have gotten less? You dont think the Bills front office had anything to do with the Stevie Johnson deal getting done before Free Agency started? You do realize that teams put a deal on the table for a specified amount of time and if that time is exceeded the deal is off. My guess is they put Stevie to the test. You have 48 hours to "accept" otherwise Stevie would have tested the market. It is a game sometimes when it comes to negotiations.

 

I dont see how I lose creditbility when:

 

1. I correct the TD's from 10 to 7

2. Agree with the deal and that Stevie would have made more on the open market

3. Feel that "Manning up" after the fact means ZERO when it comes to a team game. Dont make the stupid mistake to begin with ESPECIALLY after you have been warned. That is being 100% selfish

 

I guess the truth hurts?

 

 

Your twisting words around....usually happens when someone is losing a debate but wont let go of it.....it is not whether he got the money but whether you felt he was WORTH the money.....none of these players ae worth the money they get it is a comparative worth when in relation to what other players are getting at the same time on the open market.....whether you think they are worth it is not relevent....it IS relevent as to what it takes to retain the talent.

 

The correction of 10 TD's to 7 is just a stat you bothered to look up...it doesnt change the fact that your take is weak

 

Nobody can defend stevie's TD celebration mistake.....nobody.....nothing that can be done about it now. But the bills season didnt ride on that one play.

 

What truth do you think you are putting out there for us?

 

 

 

Do you think teams were wrong with Garcon, Robinson and or Meecham spending what the spent?

 

Yes, would have been way wrong.

[Kelly the Dog]

Do you think teams were wrong with Garcon, Robinson and or Meecham spending what the spent?

 

Yes, would have been way wrong.

No, I think it is the going rate for guys. The Chargers were desperate for a WR. Robinson has a lot of potential. Garcon is the one that I have no idea what he is worth. The point is that other teams in the NFL would have likely paid SJ 40-50 million on the open market for one reason, they think he is productive #1 WR.

[Booger]

When you said "Trust me, they dont lock Stevie up he is not signing in Buffalo for what he signed for." I thought you meant he would sign for less on the open market. I misinterpreted what you meant.

 

Seriously, answer me this I understand both sides of the argument. Which number do YOU HONESTLY think is a better indication of a player's production--- if he starts two years and has 17 TDs in the two years for an average of 8.5. Or if he plays two years and has 10 the first and 7 the second so the 7 is a better indication. I'm also not talking about a guy who is aging and in decline.

 

I personally think the average of the two years is a much better indication. I do, however, understand the other argument.

 

I can see that both ways as well...my only fear there is that from week 6 on (10 weeks) he had a total of 3 TD's. Yes the offense broke down, but 3 TD's over the last 10 weeks is not comforting

 

Funny there John...Kelly admitted his mistake. Stop trying to gang up there tough guy.

[deep2evans]

BTW, Stevie had 3 penalties last year. Three. bahhhh his "penalty history" is so debilitating to the offense!!! what are we gunna do next year!!

[Kelly the Dog]

I can see that both ways as well...my only fear there is that from week 6 on (10 weeks) he had a total of 3 TD's. Yes the offense broke down, but 3 TD's over the last 10 weeks is not comforting

Fair enough. I don't think fans realize how productive 10 TDs in a season for a WR is. There was only one other in 50 years of Bills history. This year there were only 6 WR who had 10 or more. In 2010 there were 10. In 2009 there were 6. In 2008 there were 6.

 

That is elite. You seem to just disregard it. But the point of the game for a WR is to catch passes and score touchdowns.

[Booger]

Fair enough. I don't think fans realize how productive 10 TDs in a season for a WR is. There was only one other in 50 years of Bills history. This year there were only 6 WR who had 10 or more. In 2010 there were 10. In 2009 there were 6. In 2008 there were 6.

 

That is elite. You seem to just disregard it. But the point of the game for a WR is to catch passes and score touchdowns.

 

Kind of makes Scott Chandler elite as well...at least for a TE

[D'love]

Don't feed the troll.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

It makes no sense. Especially when you consider that our QB is basically a high paid Journeyman type (with all due respect to Fitzy), Stevie has been uber productive. He's a #1 in my book.

 

your avatar violates the TOS for untastefulness.

[b-unit]

the same people that are tearing into stevie would be the same people that if they met him in person telling him how good he is. and this year i would say he did own revis island he bought it straight cash

 

 

 

Receivers vs. Darrelle Revis And Rest Of The NFL

Week Receiver vs. Revis (Rec-Yds-TD) Avg vs. rest of NFL TD

1 Andre Johnson, Texans 4-35-0 7-105 9

2 Randy Moss, Patriots 4-24-0 5-86 12

4 Marques Colston, Saints 2-33-0 5-70 9

6 Terrell Owens, Bills 3-13-0 4-76 4

10 Mike Sims-Walker, Jaguars 3-49-1 4-54 7

11 Randy Moss, Patriots 5-34-1 5-86 12

12 Steve Smith, Panthers 1-5-0 5-70 7

13 Terrell Owens, Bills 3-31-0 4-56 4

15 Roddy White, Falcons 4-33-0 5-75 10

16 Reggie Wayne, Colts 3-33-0 7-82 10

17 Chad Ochocinco*, Bengals 0-0-0 5-70 9

[biglukes]

It's funny, the complaint is always that the Bills don't have enough good players. So what happens? People come out and try to devalue the ones we do. As somebody put it earlier in the thread; anyone who plays for the Bills needs to be taller, faster, stronger, and make less money than they do to be any good. If Stevie left, the same people talking about how he's so average would be moaning about how we let such a good player get away. If he'd played for another team they'd probably love him. The fashionable take seems to be: If a player plays for the Bills he a) sucks, b) has no other options, or c) is overpayed.

[Fan in Chicago]

Stevie has put up some pretty impressive numbers the past two years especially considering the lack of another viable WR on the team. Evans basically did not exist in 2010 and in 2011, there was hardly a second WR who could compete for the ball in every down.

I think if (when) we draft an impact WR, we will see some incredibe numbers from Stevie.

Edited April 15, 2012 by Fan in Chicago