Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) i know we are a little obsessed on here and rag on the national writers who are uninformed about every little detail... But I found a lot of inaccuracies in the article. Mostly that they did little to improve the OL. Two new guards and all new coaches? Most would describe a 3rd round pick and the FA signing of a guy 31 other teams didn't want "little" The Bills are banking on that, plus development of the previous draft's 2nd and 7th round "sleeper" pick as being "enough" PS please don't shoot the messenger - I'm just pointing out how we'd probably see it if we were assessing a team we were about to play. "They had one of the worst OLs in football last year and all they did was sign a guy who'd been out of football for 18 months and draft a guard in the 3rd round? Pfui! We will feast on their QB and smother their run game like blankets! BWAHAHAHAHA! Edited September 7, 2015 by Hopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. K Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I didn't interpret his comment that way. I think it was more just a general statement on how the Bills have been using their 1st round picks. While I think based on what we saw from EJ in preseason it's too early to call him a total bust, I have never like the pick and as of right now, our last 3 picks have amounted to one starter and a backup QB who, IMO, isn't ready to step into the starting role yet. The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins. In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 This was a weird part for me too. I took it as "all we really have to show for our last 3 first round picks is Sammy, because EJ is a backup/doesn't play." I think that's what he meant, but he worded it terribly. I agree that's what he probably meant, but it's strange reasoning. I mean, if our 2nd round pick from 2014, Kouandjio, is a backup/doesn't play does it mean we effectively spent 2 2nd round picks on Miller? The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins. In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome. Good point Dr K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 So, basically, the difference for the Bills is whether Tyrod Taylor (and his backup) are better than Alex Smith (and his backup) or Mark Sanchez (and his backup) I'd say that's about right. But there's another possibility: Tyrod is not as good as Alex Smith, or even as good as Sanchez. Letting Cassel go was kind of a big deal since it eliminated the Orton Option -- if Tyrod starts poorly, there's no experienced veteran mediocrity to turn to in the hope of salvaging a playoff run. As I said, I kind of like that -- it's all in on Tyrod, no decent Plan B, swing for the fences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 I agree that's what he probably meant, but it's strange reasoning. I mean, if our 2nd round pick from 2014, Kouandjio, is a backup/doesn't play does it mean we effectively spent 2 2nd round picks on Miller? No. But it would mean all we have to show for our last 2 second rounders is Darby. He's not saying "spent." I think that's where you're confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The first rounder in 2013 got traded down,, which led to EJ PLUS Kiko in the second round with the extra pick. Kiko got traded for McCoy. So out of the 2013, 2014, and 2015 first round picks the Bills got EJ, McCoy, and Watkins. In my opinion the jury is still out on EJ. I suppose you could say it's also out on how the other two will work out, but I don't think on the face of it this was a bad outcome. Yes, he could have included the other pick and shown how it included the McCoy trade. Frankly, there's probably very few people outside of Buffalo that remember that scenario. Like I said, I agree that EJ can't be considered a bust yet, but in an article about the Bills record this year, you can only judge by who is on the field. So far, that first round pick has not returned value for the Bills. It doesn't have to mean it never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Most would describe a 3rd round pick and the FA signing of a guy 31 other teams didn't want "little" The Bills are banking on that, plus development of the previous draft's 2nd and 7th round "sleeper" pick as being "enough" Except that (a) said vet has made the Pro Bowl and was not signed due to off field issues and not due to his play and (b) he could actually watch Miller play in 3 preseason games and realize that he's an upgrade over our guards last year, but that might take some effort. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Yes, he could have included the other pick and shown how it included the McCoy trade. Frankly, there's probably very few people outside of Buffalo that remember that scenario. Like I said, I agree that EJ can't be considered a bust yet, but in an article about the Bills record this year, you can only judge by who is on the field. So far, that first round pick has not returned value for the Bills. It doesn't have to mean it never will. But I think we have to discount McCoy since, as the free agent market played out, the Bills didn't get any surplus value by trading Kiko for him. Murray signed for the same amount (actually less when you factor in guaranteed money) with Philly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Tuesday Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Exact quote from article: "the Bills have basically used their last three first-rounders to come away with Watkins and nothing more" He's saying they spent one first on EJ and two on Watkins and only have Watkins. 3 picks, one player. It's a shot at EJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 He's saying they spent one first on EJ and two on Watkins and only have Watkins. 3 picks, one player. It's a shot at EJ. So trading down for the extra pick that netted Kiko, who was flipped for McCoy, is nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) But I think we have to discount McCoy since, as the free agent market played out, the Bills didn't get any surplus value by trading Kiko for him. Murray signed for the same amount (actually less when you factor in guaranteed money) with Philly. I see where you're coming from, but it's not apples to apples. McCoy wasn't a FA and even if he was, there's a no guarantee he would have come to Buffalo. The fact is, that pick got us McCoy. So trading down for the extra pick that netted Kiko, who was flipped for McCoy, is nothing? Again, I don't think he purposefully left that out. My guess is he just didn't do his homework on Kiko's history. It doesn't change the outcome of those 3 picks he did mention. Edited September 7, 2015 by Acantha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) I found this article very illogical! They got rid of Fred is a negative and then replaced him with McCoy? Wah He is a numbers guy and yet the Bills DVOA on FO was 9th last year before improving the coaching staff. Last Place? SRS on Football Ref has the Bills as plus 5 pts last year, before improving the OL as we know they have. Done little to improve it? Aaron Kromer, Greg Roman? Their pythagorean record said they underachieved and should have been 10-6 LAST YEAR! I think the floor is pretty high for the Bills for the simple reason their defense is consensus top shelf. If the offense gives them anything more than last year they could do much better than 10-6. Simple regression tells you that the offense should improve. Edited September 7, 2015 by The Thurmanator Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Exact quote from article: "the Bills have basically used their last three first-rounders to come away with Watkins and nothing more" The part I had in quotations was also an exact quote from the article....and was the part that was originally being discussed (2nd paragraph in Bills section from memory). The part that you quoted means exactly what it says. I think the point that many are missing here is....what does it matter how badly the Bills might have mismanaged in putting the team together? It is the talent on the field that counts towards whether they are good or not....not how many mistakes, cap issues, or wasted draft picks it took to get them on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The part I had in quotations was also an exact quote from the article....and was the part that was I think the point that many are missing here is....what does it matter how badly the Bills might have mismanaged in putting the team together? It is the talent on the field that counts towards whether they are good or not....not how many mistakes, cap issues, or wasted draft picks it took to get them on the field. Yea, that was the confusing part to me. It came across as "moves I disagree with" and some of these moves didn't even happen this offseason. It doesn't really talk about on the field production and talent except what happened last year under a different coach and a different QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 My biggest problem with the article is the primary focus on numerous items that don't relate to the product on the field: 1. Extending McCoy might be a bad idea and strap the team in the future, but it is hard to argue it is not an upgrade ON THE FIELD. 2. Drafting Watkins at the cost of a 2015 pick might have been the wrong move because of who we missed out on, but ON THE FIELD his is talented and promising. 3. Drafting Manuel might have been a mistake, but he isn't being shoehorned into a starting position he doesn't deserve despite the fact that showed some promised in Year 3. ON THE FIELD, Tyrod is the starter and to ignore Greg Roman's successful past with a similar style QB is intellectually dishonest. Bringing up the EJ pick three years ago has no bearing on this team's upcoming season. In fact, that Tyrod sat on the bench for several years in the NFL suggests his performance may surprise relative to his 2011 college stats. 4. The casual dismissal the "the defense is excellent, but how much better can it get" ignores that the defense is amongst the best defenses of this century for the past two years. ON THE FIELD, the defense will help this team win games. Maybe the Bills will be 4-12, but this article doesn't even try to tackle the actual product ON THE FIELD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Surprising that on that list the Buffalo Bills are the only team to have a winning record in 2014. A team like Tampa Bay, who's starting a rookie QB and has a suspect defense, isn't on the list. There are some teams that were bottom dwellers in 2014 who could end up being bottom dwellers again. The NY Giants, Atlanta Falcons, St. Louis Rams and Chicago Bears were all pretty bad. What proof is there that they have improved? I think the Bills are an easy/lazy choice for the author as they have been bad previously. NYG, Atlanta, Bears, and Rams all have QB's that have produced in one way or another in the league. The Bills do not. The O-line criticism is somewhat fair. Incognito was out of the league and Miller is a third round pick. To us that is a major upgrade over last year. To everyone else it may seem more of the same. Most people on this board are genuinely worried Wood might be the weak link. I agree Glenn in a contract year is going to be a star. Henderson should be better and there is some depth there if he is not. If Taylor/Manuel don't perform 5-11 or 6-10 is posisble. I just don't see it though. I see 10-6, maybe 11-5 if they beat Indianapolis. They should be able to ball control and hit deep strikes frequently. If I'm Rex I play more conservative on defense. They have the talent to stop them dropping 7 in coverage. They may or may not have the talent to get into a high scoring game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 No I didn't read it here on TBD - so please edit your post. MULTIPLE talking heads on NFLN (not that they are terribly bright either) have said that. AND NOT the BEST at EACH of 21/22 - the best/among the best in TOTAL 21/22, obviously. Just one link easy to Google - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000493967/article/seahawks-jets-and-eagles-among-nfls-most-talented-teams Bills #2. I know what you wrote., and quoted it. Even "among the best 21/22" is a stretch not even supported by Bucky Brooks (8 "blue chips" on the roster). People getting down on a pretty thoughtful commenter like Barnwell and then citing goofballs like Bucky Brooks to knock the Grantland piece are destroying their own arguments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstencel Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Wow made mistake of clicking link and reading that article. Never heard of the site before, and put a block on it so never waste my time going there again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) come on guys stop bashing the inept media!!! /sarc I remember buying some football rag one preseason long ago and thought the articles and predictions were too optimistic - apparently a ploy to get hopeful fans who long for positive news to buy their magazine. I added up all the wins and losses predicted and somehow NFL franchises were going to win about 57% of their collective games. Maybe some contests against the CFL had been scheduled that year. That's when I realized the national media is more interested in making money than saying anything particularly insightful or accurate. I've taken predictions with a huge grain of salt ever since. Edited September 7, 2015 by hondo in seattle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Wow made mistake of clicking link and reading that article. Never heard of the site before, and put a block on it so never waste my time going there again. Holy cow..... And you have to block yourself from going to certain sites? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts