Go on record regarding the trades

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

This move sucks for the future, not the past. The hope is actually that the team acquires a real QB, has better coaching , and Tom Brady retires. A Watkins ( healthy of course) would be a big piece of any turnaround. Why set the bar low based on the team's previous suckitude?

Point ----------------------->

________Your head

Edited August 13, 2017 by joesixpack

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

.....a new gang in town from Administration to FO to coaching is charged with erasing 17 years of futility......sure as hell will be those in favor of moves and those vehemently against.....nature of the beast......but would you rather have any of the previous administrations post Polian in place or roll the dice with a new gang that sure as hell wants to prevent YEAR 18 from happening, whether you agree or disagree with their decisions?..and NO ONE will certainly agree with all decisions.......900 Jim Jones followers drank HIS kool-aid...uh oh..............

[disco]

This is the sunk cost fallacy, and it's part of the reason Whaley ended up getting fired. I respect the view, I am sure the Rams staff still believes in Goff - they pretty much have to. But a truly rational and objective third party would look at Goff's awful play last year and conclude the Rams should start thinking about moving on. They need to think about what happens if Goff blows this year, and what they will need to replace him in 2018. A high 2nd rounder is tremendous lost value for them but I am sure the Rams think they will be good so they don't see it that way. No guarantee Sammy signs long-term which would make this a historically bad trade.

Ha it's sunk cost fallacy to YOU because you've decided Goff won't be the future. For the Rams, they've executing a plan centered on Goff and you can't blame them for believing in that plan and wanting a big play threat to support it.

 

By the way, who says it's going to be a high 2nd round pick?

[Wayne Cubed]

Ha it's sunk cost fallacy to YOU because you've decided Goff won't be the future. For the Rams, they've executing a plan centered on Goff and you can't blame them for believing in that plan and wanting a big play threat to support it.

 

By the way, who says it's going to be a high 2nd round pick?

Yea, I mean you should obviously give up on a QB you drafted 1st overall after 7 starts.

[Scott7975]

If my QB was Jared Goff I would be pissed. Trading a high 2nd round pick in a QB heavy draft, for a receiver in a contract year with an injury history. That's pretty much indefensible if you ask me. It's a Whaley-lite move. Say what you want about the trade from the Bills side, I think it is far worse objectively from the Rams side.

After spending 6 picks to get Goff I really don't think the Rams would be going QB next year regardless. I don't care how bad Goff is.

Tell me one guy since Pat Williams that we were forced to let go (not elected to)? I will argue this point until I am blue in the face. The Bills went through this offseason with Glenn and Dareus restructures sitting in their pockets. They could have signed anyone that they wanted without any issue.

Its almost never a good idea to restructure. All that does is push bigger cap problems into the future and make it more difficult to get away from. See the Clay restructure. A team is almost always better off eating the cap hit now and let it tail off in the future. The only time this isn't the case is if the team is good enough to compete for a SB and need cap room to get that one more guy.

Edited August 13, 2017 by Scott7975

[Kirby Jackson]

After trading 5 picks to get Goff I really don't think the Rams would be going QB next year regardless. I don't care how bad Goff is.

 

Its almost never a good idea to restructure. All that does is push bigger cap problems into the future and make it more difficult to get away from. See the Clay restructure. A team is almost always better off eating the cap hit now and let it tail off in the future. The only time this isn't the case is if the team is good enough to compete for a SB and need cap room to get that one more guy.

I don't disagree that it isn't ideal but with the rising cap it isn't hurting anyone. They just push it off forever. They never let it catch up. The cap isn't restricting anything at the moment.

[NoSaint]

Exactly its not sustainable just as I stated quite a bit. Either the player gets cut, traded, accepts a lesser contract, or released. Going out of your way to pay something to a player that will cause your team to be less of a winner because you cant afford other players isnt a very smart thing to do. For example see the saints.

Signing galette and Graham and nearly immediately having to move them created monstrous dead money. If we signed Sammy and cut or traded him within a year (and did the same with someone like Gilmore) it'd be much more akin to the Saints troubles.

[HappyDays]

After spending 6 picks to get Goff I really don't think the Rams would be going QB next year regardless. I don't care how bad Goff is. .

I get it, but that's the definition of the sunk cost fallacy. It isn't sensible. We played the same game with EJ and it cost us.

Yea, I mean you should obviously give up on a QB you drafted 1st overall after 7 starts.

I didn't say give up. See this is why you don't like the Sammy trade, it's all black and white to you. Smart teams need to be realistic about the present AND the future. I'm not suggesting the Rams tank because of Goff's rookie season. But being realistic he has a very small probability of succeeding from this point on. Trading what is likely to be a high 2nd round pick isn't smart when you aren't sure about the QB. Especially when the position you're trading for is dependent on having a competent QB, and that player is in a contract year.

[oldmanfan]

I stopped reading after it said Sammy Watkins was a huge problem.

God forbid you'd try to educate yourself

[Boatdrinks]

Signing galette and Graham and nearly immediately having to move them created monstrous dead money. If we signed Sammy and cut or traded him within a year (and did the same with someone like Gilmore) it'd be much more akin to the Saints troubles.

Gilmore wasn't going to be retained because the contract wasn't going to be value for a CB, especially in this D. The team's strategy at the CB position is obviously to draft , have at a reasonable price for 4-5 years then replace. Except for a Revis in his prime, CB is not the ticket to a championship. Passing the football is more important. SW was going to be a Bill for a reasonable number in 2017 and2018 with the fifth year option. This team has far too few stars to be approaching any kind of cap trouble.

[Wayne Cubed]

I get it, but that's the definition of the sunk cost fallacy. It isn't sensible. We played the same game with EJ and it cost us.

 

I didn't say give up. See this is why you don't like the Sammy trade, it's all black and white to you. Smart teams need to be realistic about the present AND the future. I'm not suggesting the Rams tank because of Goff's rookie season. But being realistic he has a very small probability of succeeding from this point on. Trading what is likely to be a high 2nd round pick isn't smart when you aren't sure about the QB. Especially when the position you're trading for is dependent on having a competent QB, and that player is in a contract year.

What does what I said have to do with the Sammy trade and seeing it in black and white? Im sorry I don't follow that analysis at all. And I don't like the Sammy trade because you don't dump young players in a rebuild, IMO you dump vet players who won't be around when the team actually does turn around.

 

I'm not sure if you are aware, but a lot of players have a very small probability of succeeding. You've seen 7 games of Goff and made your decision. The Rams haven't and probably won't make their decision on Goff in the next 2 seasons so losing a 2nd next year for a player that will help Goff isn't a massive deal. They want to surround there player they invested in with talent. Like the Raiders did, like the Bucs did, like the Titans have done, like the Eagles have. You know teams do attempt help their young QBs?

 

And who says they aren't sure about Goff? He's played 7 games. You aren't sure about Goff, that's your opinion. You have no idea what the current FO of the Rams think of Goff.

 

You know what else isn't smart? Making decisions on NFL players 7 games into their career.

[Scott7975]

I don't disagree that it isn't ideal but with the rising cap it isn't hurting anyone. They just push it off forever. They never let it catch up. The cap isn't restricting anything at the moment.

Sounds good on paper but the cap never forgives. It catches you at some point because at some point the player becomes old. For instance Dallas restructured the hell out of Tony Romo. His cost to the team last year was almost 21 mil to ride the bench. This year it would have been almost 25 mil but he retired. That turned the hit to almost 11 mil this year and 9 mil next year. All for a player they wont have. It may not seem like a lot but there is a lot you can do with 10 mil in cap space. That's 41 mil over 3 years for a player they either couldn't use, didn't use, or wont even be on the team.

 

We have already done that with Clay. You are talking Dareus and Glenn as well. The dead cap space from 3 restructured players of that salary combined would decimate this team. What if this team wanted to dump Dareus and or Clay right now? They couldn't without serious penalty. Dareus with a restructure would be the most ludicrous contract in NFL history. Especially for a player that is one puff away from sitting out 10 games.

 

After saying all that your original point was they could sign Watkins if they wanted to. You are correct there. They could give him any contract they wanted to and did it without restructuring anyone. I am not sure what the Bills new office is thinking with this trade. There has to be something behind the scenes that no one knows about because the trade was stupid otherwise.

I get it, but that's the definition of the sunk cost fallacy. It isn't sensible. We played the same game with EJ and it cost us.

 

I didn't say give up. See this is why you don't like the Sammy trade, it's all black and white to you. Smart teams need to be realistic about the present AND the future. I'm not suggesting the Rams tank because of Goff's rookie season. But being realistic he has a very small probability of succeeding from this point on. Trading what is likely to be a high 2nd round pick isn't smart when you aren't sure about the QB. Especially when the position you're trading for is dependent on having a competent QB, and that player is in a contract year.

 

Yeah I understand your line of thinking and for the most part agree. Cut bait and move on when the answer is obvious. That's just not what the NFL does though. For instance... the Bills should have cut bait with EJ, not traded anything away to draft Sammy, and stayed put while drafting Carr. Imagine this team right now with Carr.

[HappyDays]

What does what I said have to do with the Sammy trade and seeing it in black and white? Im sorry I don't follow that analysis at all. And I don't like the Sammy trade because you don't dump young players in a rebuild, IMO you dump vet players who won't be around when the team actually does turn around.

 

I'm not sure if you are aware, but a lot of players have a very small probability of succeeding. You've seen 7 games of Goff and made your decision. The Rams haven't and probably won't make their decision on Goff in the next 2 seasons so losing a 2nd next year for a player that will help Goff isn't a massive deal. They want to surround there player they invested in with talent. Like the Raiders did, like the Bucs did, like the Titans have done, like the Eagles have. You know teams do attempt help their young QBs?

 

And who says they aren't sure about Goff? He's played 7 games. You aren't sure about Goff, that's your opinion. You have no idea what the current FO of the Rams think of Goff.

 

You know what else isn't smart? Making decisions on NFL players 7 games into their career.

It is possible to not give up on your QB without selling out on the future in the even that he fails. We've been asking for the Bills to make moves like this for years. Plan ahead, recoup something instead of letting someone walk for nothing. Don't sell out to give yourself a slightly better chance of the wildcard (which is what the Rams are essentially doing).

[Rocky Landing]

I would not have done it, nor would I have had the cajones to do it. I don't like it right now. My viewpoint may change of course as it all plays out. If the team is better because if it (by wins - I don't care about WR stats) and they gained valuable draft assets in the process - then of course I will look back and applaud it.

I respect your open-mindedness. But, honestly, how do you even make that judgement? In what universe will we be able to look back on the season, and say, "I guess we were better without that elite WR talent, after all...?" If we go 10-6, and make the playoffs, who's to say we wouldn't have won another game with a better #1 WR?

 

If Watkins snaps the bone in his foot, I suppose we will have made the right choice. But, even in the event of a different injury, it would still be speculative.

[Wayne Cubed]

It is possible to not give up on your QB without selling out on the future in the even that he fails. We've been asking for the Bills to make moves like this for years. Plan ahead, recoup something instead of letting someone walk for nothing. Don't sell out to give yourself a slightly better chance of the wildcard (which is what the Rams are essentially doing).

Selling out the future? Did I miss something?? Did the Rams give up a 1st in 2018 and a future 1st in 2019?

 

They gave up a 2nd round pick for a starting WR with elite talent. The chances of that second round pick turning into Watkins are even slimmer than your thoughts on Goffs potential.

 

Plan ahead and recoup? So don't sign any of the players you drafted?

 

You know what else Bills fans have been asking for for years? Talented players and retaining said talented players.

[NoSaint]

Gilmore wasn't going to be retained because the contract wasn't going to be value for a CB, especially in this D. The team's strategy at the CB position is obviously to draft , have at a reasonable price for 4-5 years then replace. Except for a Revis in his prime, CB is not the ticket to a championship. Passing the football is more important. SW was going to be a Bill for a reasonable number in 2017 and2018 with the fifth year option. This team has far too few stars to be approaching any kind of cap trouble.

I think the point flew right by

[BillsFan4]

Perfectly said

One more thing on the trade a lot of people like it because Sammy was going to be hard to sign. They had the tag to use twice. They controlled his rights. Additionally the Bills have loads of cap space and will have a roster full of guys on rookie deals. They aren't hindered or restricted by the cap at all. That point is totally irrelevant. The Bills could have elected to make Sammy the highest paid player in the NFL and wouldn't have had to make one roster decision because of it. They just decided that they weren't going to re-sign him.

Additionally, you have Matthews entering FA next year. He's probably looking at $10M+ a year. It's not like there is massive savings there. Would you rather have Matthews at $10M a year or Watkins at $12M?

The whole "signability" thing is a lie. Nothing was preventing the Bills from signing him just like nothing will prevent them from signing Matthews.

Isn't the franchise tag for Sammy next year roughly $15-$17M or am I wrong? If so, the Bills are projected to have $26M in cap space next year according to spotrac. Tagging Sammy leaves them $9 - $11M to fill out an entire roster. I don't see that as oodles of cap space or as having the ability to make Sammy the highest paid player in the NFL. Making him the highest paid player in the NFL would literally eat up that entire $26M leaving the Bills $0.

 

From everything Watkins has said, I see zero reason to assume they could get him signed for $12M per year, either. He wants to change the entire pay structure of the NFL as per his words.

[BillsFanM.D.]

Since this is all about being on the record:

 

1. I hate the Watkins trade. If the 2018 draft were today, would you not spend a first (late first at worst) to draft a 24 year old Sammy Watkins. What future are we planning for when you trade that guy? I don't get it at all. He'll be special and this trade will be 'bad' down the road.

 

2. I liked the Darby trade. I think in our current D (assuming our front four is as advertised) allows for more pedestrian corner play. Even if we did not acquire Gaines, I have no beef trading a 'solid' starter in Darby for a 'solid' starter in Matthews....plus a pick.

 

As a final image, I almost threw up when I saw that photoshopped pic of Watkins in a Rams uni. I don't get it. The Julio Jones comparisons (injuries and talent) make me very anxious.

 

I hope Mr. Beane proves me wrong.

 

 

Point one is totally irrelevant - yes I would draft a 24 yr old SW in the first if he was under a rookie contract and the injuries were not there.

 

I would not draft a 24 yr old SW with the known injury history and knowing you need to sign him at 13-15 million a year contract with the injury history.

 

You trade the guy to get a younger version that is price controlled for 4 or 5 years and fits the scheme you want to run.

 

The Julio Jones comparison is great if we had Matt Ryan and a passing offense, but that is not what we are doing this year or probably next year - so get something and move on.

 

We can disagree. Point one is about the value the Bills got back in return. I.e. the topic of this thread. Do I (and everyone else) like it or not? I think they got pedestrian return for what I think is elite talent. The contract/potential contract is an issue but it then becomes about value.

 

Your presumption of replacing elite talent is interesting. In fact, your third point is a huge leap of faith. It'd be great if we could flip our roster every three years and never worry about spending any money to retain great players. We can just keep drafting and finding elite players all the time. That's always easy. Draft 'luck' is a different topic....but you can keep your second rounder and your corner. I'lI keep Watkins for this year and next at the very least....but probably longer. I know tough decisions have to be made with the cap etc. This, however, is one I would have never had to face. I was stunned when they did not pick up his option....and I was moreso when they traded him. (As an aside....another poster pointed out, they likely 'hurt' his trade value by not picking up that option).

 

Let me know when this 'younger version' (Again...sammy is 24) arrives....and we can also watch how Sammy's career unfolds.

 

My opinion is that Watkins will be great. I could be wrong.....but that's the joy of going on the record. Im guessing you think he's average as your premise requires him to be easily and readily replaced.

 

Time will tell. I wish Mr. Watkins well and hope we do, in fact, find equal talent.

[oldmanfan]

I respect your open-mindedness. But, honestly, how do you even make that judgement? In what universe will we be able to look back on the season, and say, "I guess we were better without that elite WR talent, after all...?" If we go 10-6, and make the playoffs, who's to say we wouldn't have won another game with a better #1 WR?

 

If Watkins snaps the bone in his foot, I suppose we will have made the right choice. But, even in the event of a different injury, it would still be speculative.

.

 

I don't like the trade. But an argument can be made that the Lions offense improved without CJ.

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

Isn't the franchise tag for Sammy next year roughly $15-$17M or am I wrong? If so, the Bills are projected to have $26M in cap space next year according to spotrac. Tagging Sammy leaves them $9 - $11M to fill out an entire roster. I don't see that as oodles of cap space or as having the ability to make Sammy the highest paid player in the NFL. Making him the highest paid player in the NFL would literally eat up that entire $26M leaving the Bills $0.

 

From everything Watkins has said, I see zero reason to assume they could get him signed for $12M per year, either. He wants to change the entire pay structure of the NFL as per his words.

I couldn't fathom any smart front office making him the highest paid WR. People throw around his name with top 5 WR like it's a fact, the results show he isn't even the fifth best WR from his own draft class...

 

He's an electric twitchy athlete with great hands. So are a lot of other guys. And there's at least 10-15 WRs who have blown his production out s the water, even those with less than optimal QBs and offenses.

[Turk71]

The Rams have a good defense and alot of weapons on offense...including maybe the best RB in football.

 

Another silly statement by you

Wait a minute, so the best rb in football averaged 3.2 ypc and scored 6 tds last year and other people are making 'silly statements'???

[BillsFan4]

I cannot wrap my head around the fact that so many folks around here support these moves. I just don't understand it. I wonder if Buffalo sports fans and residents are so beaten down that they just assume that good players don't want to be in Buffalo, so it's just a matter of time before the good ones leave and "don't let the door hit you on the way out" if you even hint at being unhappy.

 

Or maybe Bills fans have simply forgotten what it's like to be competitive on Sundays and have focused all of their energies and fantasies on the offseason and NFL Draft, so that they'd rather gear up for a super exciting draft weekend than have to watch their team fall short year after year during the actual season.

 

Mark my words: the Bills are going to spend years - YEARS - trying to acquire another talent the likes of Sammy. To trade away an explosive, game-altering, defense-intimidating player in the prime of his career, after all that has been invested in marketing him and healing him and integrating him - it's just lunacy to me.

 

And wait until you see all of the 4-yard rollout passes to fullbacks and plodding lead-handed receivers this season - folks are gonna start to turn on this trade, I firmly believe. This is going to be a boring, slow, easily-defended offense designed to limit mistakes.

 

This is Jauron Ball 2.0. They're building a roster full of saints and soldiers, that's great, but where is the TALENT?

 

 

One of the least-efficient WRs in the league.

Now I'm not saying i love the trade or whatever but I'm willing to give it time and see what McD/Beane are able to build here.

 

Here's what it ultimately boils down to for me -

 

The Bills are my team. They will be no matter who the owner/coach/GM is. I have absolutely ZERO control over the moves they make. So I can choose to try and rationalize the moves, try and figure out what they were thinking and make sense of them to myself. Or I can freak out. Since I have zero control and I prefer not to freak out over something I can't control, I rationalize the moves and do my best to see the vision of the team and try to support it.

 

I am the type that prefers to try and go with the flow. These things are going to happen whether I want them to or not and it doesn't matter if I like the moves. They happened. So I choose to try and look for the best of the situation.

 

It has nothing to do with being beaten down by losing or any of that stuff you mentioned.

[GoBills808]

Now I'm not saying i love the trade or whatever but I'm willing to give it time and see what McD/Beane are able to build here.

 

Here's what it ultimately boils down to for me -

 

The Bills are my team. They will be no matter who the owner/coach/GM is. I have absolutely ZERO control over the moves they make. So I can choose to try and rationalize the moves, try and figure out what they were thinking and make sense of them to myself. Or I can freak out. Since I have zero control and I prefer not to freak out over something I can't control, I rationalize the moves and do my best to see the vision of the team and try to support it.

 

I am the type that prefers to try and go with the flow. These things are going to happen whether I want them to or not and it doesn't matter if I like the moves. They happened. So I choose to try and look for the best of the situation.

 

It has nothing to do with being beaten down by losing or any of that stuff you mentioned.

I don't think anyone loved losing Watkins. Sometimes when it's time it's time. So whatever, deal with it. The staff's trying to build a winner.

 

I hated seeing Jackson go, but that's life.

[BillsFan4]

Exactly. The cap isn't 80 mil anymore, for those not paying attention. And save the talk about SB winning teams. They generally have those cap issues you know, AFTER they actually win a SB and everyone wants to get paid.

So it kind of sounds like you agree that it's silly that the Bills have these cap issues without even sniffing the playoffs then?

 

And that it's also silly to pay all these guys tons of money before they've really done anything in the league (like Sammy) and put the Bills in cap jail again after just barely stating to dig out of it this offseason?

 

Lol. I know this is not what you were saying, but that's kind of what I took from your post...

 

 

There is no reason that the Bills should have been so up against the cap the last couple years under Rex/Whaley. They went on a spending spree Rex's first year and used up just about all the Bills available cap space IIRC.

 

The Bills absolutely did have cap issues last season and entering this offseason, especially with the number of free agent players they had. That's part of the reason they had to cut good players and let other good players walk. IIRC they had like $19M to sign something like 26 free agents. It's part of the reason why they had to rely so heavily on bringing in cheap players and UDFA's.

 

I'm sure they could have found a way to make Sammy's numbers work, but not without having to make more painful moves elsewhere across the roster, hurting the quality of multiple other positions across the team.

Thing is, whether we like it or not, we are nowhere near a Sammy Watkins away from being a competitive playoff team. They have massive needs across most of the entire roster and not a ton of cap space to work with ATM. The cap is getting better because of moves made this offseason, though.

[26CornerBlitz]

@mikerodak

Jim Kelly said Sunday that Tyrod Taylor losing Sammy Watkins is "like me losing Andre Reed," but urges Bills fans to "stay on the wagon."

[zonabb]

Don't know, not in the prediction game here. I liked Sammy's potential and don't like losing him. Does the loss make them worse, we'll see. I would bet in the end, in a few years, the net gain from more draft picks, along with the production of the two players in return assuming they stay, is greater than Sammy and Darby alone. This is a net gain question. Simply do the two players plus the two picks collectively make the team better than they would be? Can't predict that but it seems likely.

[mjt328]

As a whole, I didn't like the moves.

 

I understand the concept of "rebuilding" the roster. But it makes very little sense to trade away some of your youngest star players during a rebuild. It makes more sense to shop players like LeSean McCoy, Kyle Williams or Ritchie Incognito. If a rebuild is successful, a front office should plan on being competitive within 2-3 years. It makes more sense to shop guys that won't be around, or may not be effective that far down the road. I fail to see how Sammy Watkins and Ronald Darby fit that mold.

 

The value we got in return for Watkins was not nearly enough. If that pick (probably late 30s or early 40s) is used on a replacement, the chances we get someone with Watkins' talent is very low. If our plan is to package the pick in a draft move next year, I don't think that extra 2nd Rounder is going to be the vital piece that makes it happen or kills it. The Eagles/Jordan Matthews trade was comparable value. This one was a rip-off, which only looks promising to fans using the "Madden mentality" of overvaluing draft picks. It also makes the decision to decline his 5th Year Option look extra foolish, because we probably would have gotten a better trade offer with an extra contract year involved.

 

If the Bills were worried about re-signing Watkins, then I fail to see the value in obtaining two players in the last years of their contract. Matthews is probably looking at a deal similar or higher than Robert Woods, who was ridiculously overvalued in free agency. Smart teams let players like this walk. So the Bills are left in a lose-lose situation.

 

People keep talking about positioning for a Quarterback. I guess that makes some sense. But there are still WAY TOO MANY unknown factors that could completely destroy this plan. We still don't know which prospects will be declaring. Not a single 2018 top QB prospect is a senior. There is a great chance Sam Darnold stays in school. We don't know what scouts will actually think of these prospects by April. Maybe some of these top guys crash and burn over the next 12 months like Matt Barkley or Jake Locker. Not to mention, we don't know what draft positioning will look like. If the Jets, Browns, 49ers are sitting in the Top 3 spots, what are the chances they would trade with us? What if the Chargers, Jags, Rams, Redskins, etc., etc. are sitting there? I like having ammo, but that extra 2nd and 3rd Rounder is going to be pennies in the grand-scheme of things.

 

I have a feeling that in 12 months, Sammy Watkins will be a Pro-Bowler, Jordan Matthews will be on his third team, the Bills still won't have a premier QB prospect, and our front office will be trying to hype a massive new draft class full of unproven rookies as the saviors of our franchise.

Edited August 13, 2017 by mjt328

[Augie]

Now I'm not saying i love the trade or whatever but I'm willing to give it time and see what McD/Beane are able to build here.

Here's what it ultimately boils down to for me -

The Bills are my team. They will be no matter who the owner/coach/GM is. I have absolutely ZERO control over the moves they make. So I can choose to try and rationalize the moves, try and figure out what they were thinking and make sense of them to myself. Or I can freak out. Since I have zero control and I prefer not to freak out over something I can't control, I rationalize the moves and do my best to see the vision of the team and try to support it.

I am the type that prefers to try and go with the flow. These things are going to happen whether I want them to or not and it doesn't matter if I like the moves. They happened. So I choose to try and look for the best of the situation.

It has nothing to do with being beaten down by losing or any of that stuff you mentioned.

There you go! I chose not to make myself crazy over this. I'll wait and see how it turns out, because that's all I can do. My son is here at the moment, and he's freaking out for the both of us, and it's hard to stomach. It's hard for me to counter his arguments, because I get it. Keep your best players. He thinks the Eagles were fools to let Shady go too.

[Marv's Neighbor]

No need to "go om record," they didn't ask me! Watkins did seem to have a "glass" foot, and Darby wasn't that consistent, so as Chris Rock said about OJ, "he did it, but I understand!"

[Section242]

Selling out the future? Did I miss something?? Did the Rams give up a 1st in 2018 and a future 1st in 2019?

 

They gave up a 2nd round pick for a starting WR with elite talent. The chances of that second round pick turning into Watkins are even slimmer than your thoughts on Goffs potential.

 

Plan ahead and recoup? So don't sign any of the players you drafted?

 

You know what else Bills fans have been asking for for years? Talented players and retaining said talented players.

 

 

Exactly. Draft picks are valuable until the draft. I wouldn't disagree that the Bills need depth players. I would say they traded up for Jones and Dawkins, so what are they doing?

 

It's easier to say nobody wants to be here and sell low to justify them leaving.

 

I'd rather the Bills go full out tank then doing what they're doing.

[stinky finger]

Agree. We burned the first bridge by not taking the fifth year. Then we get rid of him for questionable value in return. If they hit home runs in the 2018 Draft I'm sure I'll feel better but right now this sucks. I'm also convinced Sammy will be a Patriot next year.

 

I'm sorry. I must've missed how the talks went between Bills brass and Sammy re: 5th year. You have the inside? Spill it.

 

And no, no way Sammy goes to Pats. They won't pay want he'll want. Poor value and they don't need him.

[26CornerBlitz]

 

I'm sorry. I must've missed how the talks went between Bills brass and Sammy re: 5th year. You have the inside? Spill it.

 

And no, no way Sammy goes to Pats. They won't pay want he'll want. Poor value and they don't need him.

 

They don't need Sammy with the guys they already have on offense, but then again they do seem to have an affinity for Bills' players as evidenced by the acquisitions of Hogan, Gillislee, and Gilmore.

[stinky finger]

 

They don't need Sammy with the guys they already have on offense, but then again they do seem to have an affinity for Bills' players as evidenced by the acquisitions of Hogan, Gillislee, and Gilmore.

No doubt - amazing what good coaching can do.

 

Sammy is a luxury not needed on that team. He's not necessary to win.

[3rdand12]

No doubt - amazing what good coaching can do.

 

Sammy is a luxury not needed on that team. He's not necessary to win.

Interesting take

[stuvian]

The trades make good football sense for a new regime. Having suffered through the decade of fail I wonder how many more reorganizations I'll have to live through

[Doc]

The moves don't make sense in conjunction with the other moves the team has made. Why bring in Boldin? Why have Taylor on the roster? They've gotta be worse than the Jets or 9ers to get their guy at QB. Don't sell 24 year old players and say you're building for the future. He should've been part of the future. It's hard to sell another rebuild when they've gone 17 years without making the playoffs. McDermott's different Beane is different, just like Gailey, Nix, Marrone, Jauron, Rex were different when they were hired.

 

If Tyrod is cut tomorrow I would agree with the moves more. If they're trading out of drafting a QB in the draft then trading their most talented player I want the team to get their guy. Not the guy whose leftover after the 9ers and Jets pick. These moves are clearly about getting a QB. Don't try to hide it with Taylor. I can't not root for the Bills and will hope they win on Sundays, yet after the season winning those 6 or so games will be a setback for the franchise.

Do you know how old Jordan Matthews and EJ Gaines are?

[stinky finger]

Interesting take

I would contend that Brandon Cooks is overkill.

 

With Brady behind center he'll make Hogan, Mitchell and of course Edelman look like the 3 amigo's. Not to mention Gronk.

 

Lol - Cooks. How many Wrs can say they've left the likes of Brees and IMPROVED who's pitching to them?!?

Edited August 14, 2017 by inaugural balls

[3rdand12]

I was thinking more about High end WRs being a a luxury.

When Bills picked Watkins, i did think. Why? EJ really isn't ready to use that weapon yet.

Cooks is just Belichick being bored and messing with teams. Much like Gillislee is thumbing their nose to Buffalo.

 

I would love to have Cooks here honestly. jealous of those basterdos

[GunnerBill]

I saw this thread on Friday.... but didn't quite know how I felt. A weekend later (with necessary horse racing and football (soccer) distractions) and to be honest.... I am still not sure I know.

 

So rather than gather my thoughts into a coherent view here are in bullet for are my views:

 

- I was never sold on Darby's fit in this defense.

- I was in favour of the Bills targeting Matthews earlier in the offseason (as a Woods replacement).

- I still believe Sammy Watkins has the talent to be a top 5 receiver in this league.

- EJ Gaines had a nice rookie season before injuries derailed his career.... it is not beyond the realm of possibility that with a fresh start he gets back to his best.

- This leaves the Bills a worse team for 2017 than they were before.

- I think they are serious when they say they are still trying to win this year.

- This looks like a route to 6-10.

- I believe that whatever happens they are going to be taking a shot at a QB in 2018.

[entropyrules]

If the players that came back in the trade were not at the tail end of their contracts I would agree the trades were reasonable given the Bill's current situation as a perennial 500 team. But both those players will be gone at the end of the season and all the trades will show is a 2nd and 3rd both of whom will now be used to draft replacements for Watkins and Darby.

 

Having said all that if the front office begins to dump more veterans in an effort to totally re-stock then at least that's a direction taking them out of their current state of mediocrity. Its the lack of a total strategic plan which is bothersome. I can't wait to proven wrong and see Beane/McDermott take the Bills to the playoffs next year.