section122 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 See anywhere where I defend Rogers? I defend people like Rogers because I think that there is zero difference between Hogan and Roosevelt and Elliot. You could have picked up any of those guys. I just believe that you take chances on talent. It worked with Peters and failed with Jasper. I still haven't seen a strong case against my roster building philosophy. I think it is funny that you bemoan not taking chances but that is exactly what they have done. You listed Darick, Peters, and Jasper. They all got shots with the Bills. The Bills figured out quickly that he wasn't going to work out. So they did exactly what you wanted them to do. They gave him a chance. In fact they did it with Kiko last year and Seantrel this year. They have taken risks on talented guys. They just cut the cord on Rogers. It appears for now that it was the right move. As for Hogan, Roosevelt, and Elliot blah blah blah your JAGS, if Rogers was worth a spot he would have beaten them. He didn't. So what are the Bills to do? Find another "diamond in the rough"? Or reward the guy who knows your system because he was in camp all year. I get your point. I really do. The problem with it is that the Bills have been doing what you are saying is the best way to go. Except for some reason cutting Rogers (after proving multiple times on multiple teams that he isn't worth it) is your shining example of poor management. There are many many better examples than the cutting of Da'Rick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 I think it is funny that you bemoan not taking chances but that is exactly what they have done. You listed Darick, Peters, and Jasper. They all got shots with the Bills. The Bills figured out quickly that he wasn't going to work out. So they did exactly what you wanted them to do. They gave him a chance. In fact they did it with Kiko last year and Seantrel this year. They have taken risks on talented guys. They just cut the cord on Rogers. It appears for now that it was the right move. As for Hogan, Roosevelt, and Elliot blah blah blah your JAGS, if Rogers was worth a spot he would have beaten them. He didn't. So what are the Bills to do? Find another "diamond in the rough"? Or reward the guy who knows your system because he was in camp all year. I get your point. I really do. The problem with it is that the Bills have been doing what you are saying is the best way to go. Except for some reason cutting Rogers (after proving multiple times on multiple teams that he isn't worth it) is your shining example of poor management. There are many many better examples than the cutting of Da'Rick. having read pretty much all his posts on the subject hes not torching the bills long term, hes saying that in this decision even in hindsight he wouldve preferred to take the shot. this specific decision. he can not agree with this, and still like all kinds of other moves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 having read pretty much all his posts on the subject hes not torching the bills long term, hes saying that in this decision even in hindsight he wouldve preferred to take the shot. this specific decision. he can not agree with this, and still like all kinds of other moves. Training camp and preseason is "the shot". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) Training camp and preseason is "the shot". and thats where the two of you disagree. kirby (and i dont think hes wrong) is simply arguing that you could drag that shot out as far as you want with absolutely no consequence, while ending it early could actually hurt your roster. really, no one has argued that point with him beyond "what if you lose the locker room" Edited September 30, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 having read pretty much all his posts on the subject hes not torching the bills long term, hes saying that in this decision even in hindsight he wouldve preferred to take the shot. this specific decision. he can not agree with this, and still like all kinds of other moves. I get all that but how long should they have taken the shot for? They took a shot on him by bringing him into camp. He proved that he wasn't worth the spot he was occupying on the roster and so they parted ways. This is what I struggle with his argument. How long would have been acceptable? Is this latest instance just more proof that he doesn't get it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) I get all that but how long should they have taken the shot for? They took a shot on him by bringing him into camp. He proved that he wasn't worth the spot he was occupying on the roster and so they parted ways. This is what I struggle with his argument. How long would have been acceptable? Is this latest instance just more proof that he doesn't get it? he surely came with a learning curve, and doesnt seem to be progressing along it well at all. just a matter of weighing raw talent vs consequence. hes pretty talented, and there was little risk to giving more time... its a judgement call. additionally, knowing there would be a curve there, i probably came into the Da'rick experiment expecting him to mess up some stuff along the way (but with zero tolerance on drug type issues). we see that talent vs consequence ratio as falling differently. thats all. Edited September 30, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 and thats where the two of you disagree. kirby (and i dont think hes wrong) is simply arguing that you could drag that shot out as far as you want with absolutely no consequence, while ending it early could actually hurt your roster. really, no one has argued that point with him beyond "what if you lose the locker room" How does ending it early hurt the roster though? If you know it isn't working why keep at it? This regime has proven to be quick and decisive on matters. EJ getting the hook is just the latest example, cutting Rogers was one, cutting Brown last season was another. It does hurt the depth of the roster by keeping a guy that doesn't do anything for you which is what we all (I think anyway) agree on. Where we disagree is that a player like Hogan who will contribute on special teams. The disagreement is whether Hogan or Rogers contributes more. Rogers won't cause Marrone to lose the locker room but what value does a player have that contributes nothing but is a physical specimen. Big deal he had 1000 yards receiving in the SEC. His head isn't screwed on straight. Cobi Hamilton is a player that actually led the SEC in receiving, he was DRAFTED by the Bengals and is now on the Eagles practice squad. The hand wringing over Rogers is too much in my and many others opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) How does ending it early hurt the roster though? If you know it isn't working why keep at it? This regime has proven to be quick and decisive on matters. EJ getting the hook is just the latest example, cutting Rogers was one, cutting Brown last season was another. It does hurt the depth of the roster by keeping a guy that doesn't do anything for you which is what we all (I think anyway) agree on. Where we disagree is that a player like Hogan who will contribute on special teams. The disagreement is whether Hogan or Rogers contributes more. Rogers won't cause Marrone to lose the locker room but what value does a player have that contributes nothing but is a physical specimen. Big deal he had 1000 yards receiving in the SEC. His head isn't screwed on straight. Cobi Hamilton is a player that actually led the SEC in receiving, he was DRAFTED by the Bengals and is now on the Eagles practice squad. The hand wringing over Rogers is too much in my and many others opinions. i think the handwringing amounts to a lot less than you are giving credit for. kirby and i, and a few others, have simply stated the philosophy that we wouldve followed with him. im pretty sure none of us lost sleep. if Darick went on to succeed, it would have been an asset missing from our roster. we dont think hogan has a shot at being that type of player. theres no risk cutting hogan, the risk of cutting rogers was if he turned out good. Edited September 30, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 he surely came with a learning curve, and doesnt seem to be progressing along it well at all. just a matter of weighing raw talent vs consequence. hes pretty talented, and there was little risk to giving more time... its a judgement call. we see that talent vs consequence ratio as falling differently. thats all. I think this management group has done better than most other recent groups with exactly this. They have brought in several problem players and given them a chance. Off the top of my head in the last 2 years: Mike Williams, Duke Williams, Seantrel Henderson, Darick Rogers, and Kiko. If they prove worth their salt or "get with the program" they are given a chance to prove themselves. From the outside looking in we aren't privy to everything that goes on behind the scenes. Again it appears that this was the right call and it also appears that the Bills are giving those that DESERVE it more time to sort it out due to their size, speed, whatever. i think the handwringing amounts to a lot less than you are giving credit for. kirby and i, and a few others, have simply stated the philosophy that we wouldve followed with him. im pretty sure none of us lost sleep. I'm pretty sure Kirby lost some sleep when Hogan made the team again This is also the 3rd Rogers thread and the first garnered 50+ pages. People were VERY upset about him being cut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 I think this management group has done better than most other recent groups with exactly this. They have brought in several problem players and given them a chance. Off the top of my head in the last 2 years: Mike Williams, Duke Williams, Seantrel Henderson, Darick Rogers, and Kiko. If they prove worth their salt or "get with the program" they are given a chance to prove themselves. From the outside looking in we aren't privy to everything that goes on behind the scenes. Again it appears that this was the right call and it also appears that the Bills are giving those that DESERVE it more time to sort it out due to their size, speed, whatever. i get it, and why i said im not flaming the team over this one choice. i simply didnt agree with it. and thats ok. This is also the 3rd Rogers thread and the first garnered 50+ pages. People were VERY upset about him being cut. about 95% of the threads were simply the discussion we just had on a loop. over and over. and over. I'm pretty sure Kirby lost some sleep when Hogan made the team again he may have - fair enough haha but i think many of the "anti darick" crowd were remarkably upset that we didnt fall in line with the team on the cut. THAT getting people so riled up is way stranger in my book than trying to discuss the roster building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) I think this management group has done better than most other recent groups with exactly this. They have brought in several problem players and given them a chance. Off the top of my head in the last 2 years: Mike Williams, Duke Williams, Seantrel Henderson, Darick Rogers, and Kiko. If they prove worth their salt or "get with the program" they are given a chance to prove themselves. From the outside looking in we aren't privy to everything that goes on behind the scenes. Again it appears that this was the right call and it also appears that the Bills are giving those that DESERVE it more time to sort it out due to their size, speed, whatever. I'm pretty sure Kirby lost some sleep when Hogan made the team again This is also the 3rd Rogers thread and the first garnered 50+ pages. People were VERY upset about him being cut. Ha ha, I just don't think that he will ever be good. I actually don't hate Hogan. I just don't understand keeping anybody that will never help you. NoSaint has done a great job explaining the situation. It wasn't ever about Rogers and to your point the Bills have done really well with risk reward guys. Kaufman is another example of a guy that maybe could have developed. He has a large frame and by most accounts good hands. Randell Johnson is another great example. A raw athlete that may take some time. If he doesn't ever turn into a player you can always find guys capable of being your 6th LB. You can't always find guys that can develop into starters. To answer your question on how long is enough, when you have an asset that you need to protect instead of him. The example this year would be if it came down to Rogers or Easley for that last spot. I would sacrifice Rogers' long term potential for Easley's elite ST play. Jordan Gay is actually the perfect example. Jacquis (sp) Smith was let go because the contributions that Gay can make as a KOS were deemed greater. I 100% agree. The real example is that if Wynn and Lawson (to pick a couple) go down you can pick up a guy that isn't all that different from Smith. Edited September 30, 2014 by Kirby Jackson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 I just don't buy that. I've been around enough locker rooms to know how these guys are wired. It's a business. The players get this better than anyone. What you have done in the past matters (both good and bad). They understand why a guy who once led the SEC in receiving gets a longer leash than Naaman Roosevelt. It's the same reason that Cyrus made the team. He certainly didn't earn that spot. Aaron Maybin, John McCargo, Torrell Troupe and James Hardy each played multiple seasons. Did they deserve it? No, but you take a chance on developing talent. You can always find others. Again, THIS ISN'T (nor has ever been) about Rogers. It is just a roster building philosophy. And I submit it was EXACTLY that philosophy that got Rogers cut in the first place. Marrone and staff, especially in their first year, served notice that all the talent in the world doesn't mean squat if you are gonna take short cuts in practice and in meeting rooms. I won't use the term idiot, but it was CLEAR Rogers was often unprepared both on the field and off. He showed little grasp of the concepts and was often lazy to boot. I don't see how a "prospect" like that fits anyone's idea of a lucid roster building philosophy. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 i think the handwringing amounts to a lot less than you are giving credit for. kirby and i, and a few others, have simply stated the philosophy that we wouldve followed with him. im pretty sure none of us lost sleep. if Darick went on to succeed, it would have been an asset missing from our roster. we dont think hogan has a shot at being that type of player. theres no risk cutting hogan, the risk of cutting rogers was if he turned out good. That is a big "if" Considering the history of highly talented, but troubled college athletes, this guy managed to get kicked out of a major program and couldn't sniff another major program to return to. Didn't endear to any teams leading up to the draft. Had a crappy attitude on the pro team that gave him a shot. Had a horrible camp and a non-descript preseason outing. Didn't bother with special teams. Was beaten in the depth chart by three other UDFAs. After allegedly learning his lesson with his new team, saw his catches dwindle as a slow footed walk-on took his reps away. Came into his second camp unprepared. Barely made the roster. Got caught while DUI. Cut from team, and possibly from league. So tell me at which point should a team extend a bigger chance to him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 That is a big "if" Considering the history of highly talented, but troubled college athletes, this guy managed to get kicked out of a major program and couldn't sniff another major program to return to. Didn't endear to any teams leading up to the draft. Had a crappy attitude on the pro team that gave him a shot. Had a horrible camp and a non-descript preseason outing. Didn't bother with special teams. Was beaten in the depth chart by three other UDFAs. After allegedly learning his lesson with his new team, saw his catches dwindle as a slow footed walk-on took his reps away. Came into his second camp unprepared. Barely made the roster. Got caught while DUI. Cut from team, and possibly from league. So tell me at which point should a team extend a bigger chance to him? The minute Colts coaches benched him for the entire second half of the biggest game of the year vs. NE* in the playoffs should have removed ANY doubt for his dwindling number of supporters around here. He had a bad first half, often running incorrect and lazy routs that actually DREW coverage towards intended receivers. Luck was visibly pissed off and he was yanked as a result. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 How's he doing this year? Has he made a difference for the Colts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 His talent got him a shot. They had him in and made the decision that he probably wasn't going to become a successful pro, and lo and behold THEY WERE RIGHT. They made the right decision about THIS player. You can talk about your "roster building philosophy", but they were applying that kind of philosophy when they brought him in. Training camp was enough for them to figure it out, and again, THEY WERE RIGHT. Another troubled player will no doubt come along, and get a shot, and the team might decide he is worth it. They felt Da'Rick wasn't worth it, and THEY WERE RIGHT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 His talent got him a shot. They had him in and made the decision that he probably wasn't going to become a successful pro, and lo and behold THEY WERE RIGHT. They made the right decision about THIS player. You can talk about your "roster building philosophy", but they were applying that kind of philosophy when they brought him in. Training camp was enough for them to figure it out, and again, THEY WERE RIGHT. Another troubled player will no doubt come along, and get a shot, and the team might decide he is worth it. They felt Da'Rick wasn't worth it, and THEY WERE RIGHT. Maybe Da'Rick was still sad because Marrone fired him and that's why he started acting out. This is all Marrone's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 Maybe Da'Rick was still sad because Marrone fired him and that's why he started acting out. This is all Marrone's fault. I blame Whaley and Nix for drafting him higher than I had him rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) That is a big "if" Considering the history of highly talented, but troubled college athletes, this guy managed to get kicked out of a major program and couldn't sniff another major program to return to. Didn't endear to any teams leading up to the draft. Had a crappy attitude on the pro team that gave him a shot. Had a horrible camp and a non-descript preseason outing. Didn't bother with special teams. Was beaten in the depth chart by three other UDFAs. After allegedly learning his lesson with his new team, saw his catches dwindle as a slow footed walk-on took his reps away. Came into his second camp unprepared. Barely made the roster. Got caught while DUI. Cut from team, and possibly from league. So tell me at which point should a team extend a bigger chance to him? I'm about ready to let it be again.... i get your argument, and simply disagree in this case of hogan vs darick- we will all survive quite alright even if we agree to disagree. It's a "big if" but I think you'd be hard pressed to help a team less than hogan does - ruvell Martin, I guess? You disagree when weighing it- So be it. The real reason I'm replying is an fyi for you for evaluating future troubled guys- if they get booted they have to transfer and a transfer to a d1 school has to sit a year. Many go to low tier schools to complete a single season to get to nfl draft eligibility, since you don't have to sit out the season. In many cases the ones that don't make it back to another big program are the ones thought to be the best nfl prospects with the least to prove on the field. The mid tier prospects will then transfer back to a d1 school the following year if they don't think they are ready to declare. There are matters of opinion in there I don't agree with, but like I said, will let the debate go. Edited September 30, 2014 by NoSaint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 30, 2014 Share Posted September 30, 2014 (edited) And that's the rub. Didn't Da'Rick get booted after his sophomore season? In that case, there should have been a slew of either top tier or bottom tier Division I programs vying to grab him for the senior year if there were no concerns. Yet he was nowhere on the radar. So, this discussion is only about Da'Rick being an idiot and not about Bills unwilling to give a shot to a kid with a checkered past. Maybe Stevie, Kiko and Duke can send a shout out to this thread. Edited September 30, 2014 by GG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts