BillsDiehard Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Matthews, Jones, Boldin, Holmes is better than Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, Salas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Scheme fit? We better not be trying for a pass longer than 8 yards, with 0 YAC. Zay, Boldin and Matthews are all slot guys. I know Taylor's OVER THE MIDDLE problems have been over stated but this looks like the exact wrong mix to help him. They all fit Peterman's strengths perfectly! Peterman getting 2nd team reps also fits into the Rodak "setting up Tyrod for failure" concept. A poor start for the Bills and I fully expect Peterman to get his chance by November. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ndirish1978 Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I like how everyone here complains about how we never actually do anything to make this team anything better than a .500 team. They finally make a move that should get us a QB and everyone is furious we're not going to have another 7-9 season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Really ?!?! List of Bills head coaches in this millennium : Wade Phillips : 1998-2000 Greg Williams : 2001-2003 Mike Mularkey : 2004-2005 Dick Jauron : 2006-2009 Perry Fewell : 2009 Chan Gailey : 2010-2012 Doug Marrone : 2013-2014 Rex Ryan : 2015-2016 Anthony Lynn : 2016 Sean McDermott : ????? So if you (old school) were in McDermott's shoes, you'd feel totally secure, eh? I sure would! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I sure would! Uh huh. Of course you would. No doubt you'd sleep equally at ease as a Bills GM. The last decade : Marv Levy : 2007 Russ Brandon : 2008-09 Buddy Nix : 2010-12 Doug Whaley : 2013-17 Brandon Beane : ?????? Average term : 2.5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 They all fit Peterman's strengths perfectly! Peterman getting 2nd team reps also fits into the Rodak "setting up Tyrod for failure" concept. A poor start for the Bills and I fully expect Peterman to get his chance by November. Odds of this happening have likely increased since the Watkins trade. One thing overlooked in this is how Tyrod has a tendency to be more hesitant throwing to receivers he doesn't have a LOT of chemistry with. We saw it last year when the receiving core was depleted. Which receivers is Tyrod going to have great chemistry with in the early games this season? Will the Bills have any receivers that Tyrod trusts enough to just let the ball fly and allow the receiver to make a play? My opinion - maybe Boldin because of his and Tyrod's history together and because of Boldin's vast experience and history of proving himself - Probably no other receivers on this team though. In early games we could see a very skitsy Tyrod who wants to hold the ball too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Moulds on my A** Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 I like how everyone here complains about how we never actually do anything to make this team anything better than a .500 team. They finally make a move that should get us a QB and everyone is furious we're not going to have another 7-9 season Everyone and I mean everyone I spoke to outside of Bills Fandom said these trades were awesome and that they felt the Bills were finally trying to clean up and extinguish the dumpster fire of which we FAN the flames every year in QB purgatory. Do I agree? To an extent. I hate how much we gave up for Sammy and it seems like they would've had to tag him if he had a monster year, where he'd then likely play with less motivation. The sins of our father makes winning that much harder mentality it gone with the Sammy and Darby trades. I don't think either wanted to be here and I can't blame him. Now Sammy needs to put up or shut up. If he fails it's not our problem anymore. That I can live with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Gun Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Uh huh. Of course you would. No doubt you'd sleep equally at ease as a Bills GM. The last decade : Marv Levy : 2007 Russ Brandon : 2008-09 Buddy Nix : 2010-12 Doug Whaley : 2013-17 Brandon Beane : ?????? Average term : 2.5 years. Some people can handle pressure some can't, I can and you keep questioning me on this matter seems to suggest you can't. eh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Odds of this happening have likely increased since the Watkins trade. One thing overlooked in this is how Tyrod has a tendency to be more hesitant throwing to receivers he doesn't have a LOT of chemistry with. We saw it last year when the receiving core was depleted. Which receivers is Tyrod going to have great chemistry with in the early games this season? Will the Bills have any receivers that Tyrod trusts enough to just let the ball fly and allow the receiver to make a play? My opinion - maybe Boldin because of his and Tyrod's history together and because of Boldin's vast experience and history of proving himself - Probably no other receivers on this team though. In early games we could see a very skitsy Tyrod who wants to hold the ball too long. A lot. And even if it's not Peterman, barring some unforeseeable breakout by Tyrod this year - particularly on that learning to anticipate receivers coming open/timing routes thing - he won't be back next year. So trying to build an offense around his special talents would have been a waste unless they thought they were very likely to make the playoffs, which any rational observer would have to disagree with. So all of this fits together in some weird way ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Matthews, Jones, Boldin, Holmes is better than Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, Salas... Matthews : A borderline starter, already on the way to the bench when his team unloaded him on the Bills. Notorious for drops Jones : A rookie Boldin : A treasure, but 37 years old and at the end of his career Holmes : A backup notorious for drops. With Watkins instead of Matthews, this would be a pretty impressive group, a mix of premier talent, young promise and seasoned experience. With Matthews instead of Watkins, this is three slot receivers & a back-up. Three Twos and a backup. No known deep threat. No clear Number One. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Matthews : A borderline starter, already on the way to the bench when his team unloaded him on the Bills. Notorious for drops Jones : A rookie Boldin : A treasure, but 37 years old and at the end of his career Holmes : A backup notorious for drops. With Watkins instead of Matthews, this would be a pretty impressive group, a mix of premier talent, young promise and seasoned experience. With Matthews instead of Watkins, this is three slot receivers & a back-up. Three Twos and a backup. No known deep threat. No clear Number One. One could come to the conclusion that the new regime thinks that talented receivers are a dime a dozen. Or perhaps they believe that having elite talent at receiver is not a meaningful factor in winning Superbowls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figster Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 One could come to the conclusion that the new regime thinks that talented receivers are a dime a dozen. Or perhaps they believe that having elite talent at receiver is not a meaningful factor in winning Superbowls. Julio Jones is not the reason his team lost the Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 One could come to the conclusion that the new regime thinks that talented receivers are a dime a dozen. Or perhaps they believe that having elite talent at receiver is not a meaningful factor in winning Superbowls. Who's the last elite receiver to win a Super Bowl? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Who's the last elite receiver to win a Super Bowl? Chris Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grb Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Chris Hogan Touché ! But we're bouncing between extremes. Yes, an elite receiver doesn't carry a team. But a lot of people here seem to think the exact opposite - that all receivers are interchangeable regardless of skill level. Speaking of extremes : My opinion of Matthews above wasn't entirely fair - he isn't that bad, just a drop in talent from Watkins..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 Touché ! But we're bouncing between extremes. Yes, an elite receiver doesn't carry a team. But a lot of people here seem to think the exact opposite - that all receivers are interchangeable regardless of skill level. Speaking of extremes : My opinion of Matthews above wasn't entirely fair - he isn't that bad, just a drop in talent from Watkins..... With the acquisition of a good QB, the difference between Watkins and Matthews is negligible. Which is what the trade facilitates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 (edited) With the acquisition of a good QB, the difference between Watkins and Matthews is negligible. Which is what the trade facilitates. No it doesn't. Trading Tyrod could have forced the acquisition of a different quarterback. - still no guarantee you get a better one. Trading Sammy Watkins facilitates you having a less explosive passing attack. It in no way facilitates you getting a better QB - not this year or next year or ever. Your logic is fubar. Edited August 14, 2017 by PolishDave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 No it doesn't. Trading Tyrod could have forced the acquisition of a different quarterback. - still no guarantee you get a better one. Trading Sammy Watkins facilitates you having a less explosive passing attack. It in no way facilitates you getting a better QB - not this year or next year or ever. Your logic is fubar. You don't think a second round pick helps in the draft? You guys are really getting this upset over 4 catches and 66 yards/game, huh...still waiting on that long list of elite receivers who won Super Bowls. And less explosive passing attack...LOLOL. There hasn't been a less explosive passing attack in the league over the time Watkins has been here in Buffalo. I'm halfway convinced the people moaning about losing our 'explosive passing attack' haven't watched the Bills play since the '90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PolishDave Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 You don't think a second round pick helps in the draft? You guys are really getting this upset over 4 catches and 66 yards/game, huh...still waiting on that long list of elite receivers who won Super Bowls. And less explosive passing attack...LOLOL. There hasn't been a less explosive passing attack in the league over the time Watkins has been here in Buffalo. I'm halfway convinced the people moaning about losing our 'explosive passing attack' haven't watched the Bills play since the '90s. That second round pick isn't getting you a QB that is likely better than the one you have now. And its not going to be enough trade ammo to get you to be the first team picking QB. If you want to have a dominant offense - you need to have some players who are dominant at their position. The Bills just traded one away. That makes them less competitive. It makes it harder for the offense to become dominant. Pretty simple logic if you ask me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted August 14, 2017 Share Posted August 14, 2017 That second round pick isn't getting you a QB that is likely better than the one you have now. And its not going to be enough trade ammo to get you to be the first team picking QB. If you want to have a dominant offense - you need to have some players who are dominant at their position. The Bills just traded one away. That makes them less competitive. It makes it harder for the offense to become dominant. Pretty simple logic if you ask me. 'I can't believe they traded Sammy Watkins! There goes our explosive passing offense!' Again, LOLOL at calling Watkins 'dominant at his position'. Nope. And have you looked at QBs selected after the first round lately? Come on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts