Woods, watkins TDs

[Scott7975]

1 minute ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Their offense is sophisticated though. He may not have Goff go through several progressions, that is what he is talking about. He makes his decision before the snap most of the time. But they have all kinds of formations and movement and exotic plays and playcalls. It's the opposite of a simple offense. He just doesn't put much on Goff's plate. he just says run the play and throw it to the guy they are not watching. Plus, the offense is a lot different the way they run it now from four-five games ago. They seem to do a lot more. It was incredible yesterday.

FWIW I am not trying to knock their offense at all.  Nor Goff.  Would love to have that offense here.

[oldmanfan]

12 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Exactly. Goff looks underneath and usually goes there with the ball because it's open. He takes a few deep shots to Watkins but has missed on many of them. He missed one earlier in the Giants game but went back to it and hit the TD. Production is a two way street. Forcing the ball to Watkins because they traded for him would be a solution in search of a problem. The Rams are apparently fine with Watkins current role in the offense, and why wouldn't they be? 

I would suspect a more even numbers distribution between Rams receivers if Sammy was as open as some think.  It wouldn't be forcing him the ball if he was open that much.

[Boatdrinks]

He's not open every play, obviously. He's drawing much of the coverage on clear out routes. Goff definitely overlooks him or just doesn't go toward the better coverage guys. By " forcing" I mean skipping an open guy earlier in the progression. Goff isn't a savvy vet a la Roethlisberger , who will see one on one coverage and just take a shot. Goff clearly doesn't have that kind of feel with Watkins yet, as shown by his preference to look for Kupp most of the time. Bottom line what you think ( or I for that matter) means jack squat to the Rams. If they felt a dire need to get the ball more often to Sammy they would make it happen. One look at McVays reaction after Sammys TD says it all. They know what he's being asked to do in the scheme and everything is working so why change it? 

[oldmanfan]

I wouldn't change a thing if I were the Rams.  But it will probably cost Sammy some money.

[Jon in Pasadena]

I'm not the hugest Watkins fan, but I note that on Woods's 33-yd TD  Sammy totally murdered the CB lined up opposite him (knocked him on his *ss)  then got downfield and got just enough of the safety to wreck his balance and let Woods sprint past.  Gotta give him props for that. 

[Scott7975]

10 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

He's not open every play, obviously. He's drawing much of the coverage on clear out routes. Goff definitely overlooks him or just doesn't go toward the better coverage guys. By " forcing" I mean skipping an open guy earlier in the progression. Goff isn't a savvy vet a la Roethlisberger , who will see one on one coverage and just take a shot. Goff clearly doesn't have that kind of feel with Watkins yet, as shown by his preference to look for Kupp most of the time. Bottom line what you think ( or I for that matter) means jack squat to the Rams. If they felt a dire need to get the ball more often to Sammy they would make it happen. One look at McVays reaction after Sammys TD says it all. They know what he's being asked to do in the scheme and everything is working so why change it? 

There isn't any reason to change it.  I think the point is... is Watkins worth having at a high dollar contract as just a decoy or 1 to 2 target a game guy?  I don't think so.

 

Honestly if Watkins had to miss any time, I don't think their offense would miss a beat.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Scott7975

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

There isn't any reason to change it.  I think the point is... is Watkins worth having at a high dollar contract as just a decoy or 1 to 2 target a game guy?  I don't think so.

 

Honestly if Watkins had to miss any time, I don't think their offense would miss a beat.

 

I've watched a number of their games and I think it would make a significant difference.........without Watkins there is no reason to not compress the defense on the short to intermediate routes and that allows the front 7 to do more damage against their run game and pressure Goff.

 

They might not need a Sammy Watkins caliber player to keep the safeties back but they would still need a very good deep threat.....which they otherwise do not have.    Woods and Goff would be fish out of water running the routes Sammy runs.

 

My guess is that the Rams will let Sammy go in the offseason and be all over Martavis Bryant or Josh Gordon..........Rams have significant salary cap issues.......they are up against it as it is..... and because of the drug related low market value on big time talents like Bryant and Gordon it would be easier to replace Watkins than a guy like Aaron Donald who also needs to get paid.

[SoTier]

7 hours ago, teef said:

his injuries are still part of the problem.  i don't care why he has a lack of targets or a lack of production.  it's on sammy.  he's even been arguably been put into a better situation this year, and he still can't get it done.  i think he has it in him to be great, but at some point he needs to own this.

 

Then talk about his injuries as a factor in deciding to trade him!    Don't claim that he's "inconsistent" which indicates that a WR doesn't play the position well and is unreliable.

 

6 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

Watkins is a quality WR with talent. If one watches the Rams games, they will see he gets open and Goff rarely looks his way. He could be used more, but the Rams have lots of weapons. Sammy was never going to be worth two first rounders unless he was Jerry Rice. The only reason it is still a topic is that the Bills have yet to establish a consistent and effective passing attack. If that was happening, no one including myself ( as a Watkins fan) would be thinking about it any more. It's the NFL and players come and go. The Bills don't have an offensive lineup similar to the Rams, so it's impossible to look at whatever is happening in LA as what would happen if SW was in Buffalo. We will see what happens with the addition of Benjamin  and the return of Clay. 

 

Good post.  My concern about getting rid of Woods and Watkins stems from the fact that the Bills left themselves with no viable WR who can stretch the field.  That may come back and bite them in the arse yet even this season, although so far they haven't suffered too badly.  

 

I think Benjamin is a good addition but he's not the kind of WR who terrifies DBs.  Neither is Zay Jones.   The Bills might make the playoffs this season without a downfield burner but if they continue to develop and hope for more than just making the playoffs, they're going to have add a WR good enough to break games open.

 

 

1 hour ago, JR in Pittsburgh said:

 

The “new guy” bit is a bit old now. Watkins is a vet. He’s been there now for like 12 weeks. I would expect his production to be much better for a true “no. 1 WR.”

 

This sounds like all the gleeful pot shots that so many Bills fans took at Jason Peters and Marshawn Lynch during their initial seasons after they were traded to Philly and Seattle respectively.   Both players were overpaid, spoiled scrubs "who didn't want to be here" and the Bills FO was filled with bonafide personnel geniuses for getting rid of them according to so many Bills fans.  Well, fast forward 7 or 8 years and both are going to be HOFers ... and they won't be going in as Bills thanks to those geniuses in the Bills FO. 

 

It's a tad early to judge the outcome of the Watkins trade ... just as it's unlikely that Benjamin is going to play as well this year as he's likely to play next year for the Bills (assuming they sign him) after he's had OTAs, minicamp, and TC.

 

Edited November 7, 2017 by SoTier

[26CornerBlitz]

Robert Woods Postgame Interview 11-5 (2:33)

Quote

Rams WR Robert Woods speaks with the media following the team's Week 9 win against the Giants.

 

Sammy Watkins Postgame Interview 11-5  (2:16)

Quote

Rams WR Sammy Watkins speaks with the media following the team's Week 9 win against the Giants.

 

[BADOLBILZ]

25 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This sounds like all the gleeful pot shots that so many Bills fans took at Jason Peters and Marshawn Lynch during their initial seasons after they were traded to Philly and Seattle respectively.   Both players were overpaid, spoiled scrubs "who didn't want to be here" and the Bills FO was filled with bonafide personnel geniuses for getting rid of them according to so many Bills fans.  Well, fast forward 7 or 8 years and both are going to be HOFers ... and they won't be going in as Bills thanks to those geniuses in the Bills FO. 

 

It's a tad early to judge the outcome of the Watkins trade ... just as it's unlikely that Benjamin is going to play as well this year as he's likely to play next year for the Bills (assuming they sign him) after he's had OTAs, minicamp, and TC.

 

 

 

 

Premature victory laps.

 

 

[P51]

2 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

 

 Can't look at catches without looking at targets. Watkins is still the " new guy" and had zero practice time with Goff before August. Yes, SW was traded for as a #1. You still have to look at what the Rams are asking him to do within the offense. Watch the Rams games and decide if he's getting open or not. 

 

Fantastic post ??

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

3 hours ago, Kelly the Dog said:

If you were the coach of the Rams, and traded for Sammy Watkins - and he was drawing coverage all over the field - which he is - and if you say he is not you are lying - and your team was moving up and down the field at will almost every game - and putting up 30-50 points - and had one of the league's best offenses - would you tell your QB to target our #1 guy more or do what we have been doing. Their offense is sick. There is no reason to force him the ball.

You’re right— I wouldn’t tell Goff to just target watkins more. But I also wouldn’t re-sign watkins. It’s a total misallocation of resources to pay a WR “WR 1 $” if he is catching 1 ball let game and just being used to draw coverage away from other guys.

 

[Billsfan1972]

11 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

 

 Can't look at catches without looking at targets. Watkins is still the " new guy" and had zero practice time with Goff before August. Yes, SW was traded for as a #1. You still have to look at what the Rams are asking him to do within the offense. Watch the Rams games and decide if he's getting open or not. 

Yes great post and someone who has watched the Rams.  

 

They have lost two games this year and generally mirror the Bills in that they play well with the lead and great blowing teams out and not asking much of Goff.  When the game gets tight it will be interesting to watch how they react (lousy vs. Seattle and a loss to Washington).  

 

In terms of catches & targets Watkins is 121 in the league and that is criminal.

[ganesh]

On 11/5/2017 at 2:21 PM, joesixpack said:

 

Right?

 

Never mind that Watkins hadn't scored since week 3.

 

 

And he had one catch for the whole game.

[The Now Moment]

If you trade a second round pick and a solid corner for a number 1 receiver, you'd expect him to be more productive and not be the decoy in an offense.  I understand he can make that offense better by drawing coverage but how much do you pay a decoy these days?  I am not sure.  If I am trading for a wideout, I'd rather bring in a guy that will be more productive.  Do we really think he's happy there?  He's a wide receiver who's clamored for his targets and hasn't gotten them.  To me, they made a dumb move trading for him and not targeting him more.  However you want to slice it, Sammy hasn't put up the Julio Jones type production.  Isn't that what we traded two first round picks for?  If the Rams traded for him just to play him as a decoy, he's not resigning there and they traded some hefty assets for having a player 1 year.  JMO.  I'm not saying Sammy is terrible, he's a gifted player but his production compared to what teams have traded to acquire him, is less than encouraging.  Fact is, Sammy is not needed in that offense, just a player with speed that can stretch the field.  

Edited November 7, 2017 by Buffalo30

[JMF2006]

No one argues the talent,just the price.

 

Your looking at 22m+ in 2 Wrs not very cap friendly.

 

[teef]

6 minutes ago, JMF2006 said:

No one argues the talent,just the price.

 

Your looking at 22m+ in 2 Wrs not very cap friendly.

 

agreed.  i certainly can't speak for everyone, but i don't ever think it was a question of talent or ability.  i think sammy can put up monster numbers somewhere, but the trick is him finding that home.  i just don't think the bills would ever have been that place.  because there's been some early success, i think we forget that this staff has made decisions for the future.  to get a second round pick for the guy may really help in the long run.  this team isn't even close to being a final product yet.  

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

 

Isn't it interesting how so many apologist Bills fans can overlook drastic improvements made by other teams when they deal them their star players?

 

That offense is just smoking the opposition.........they made the imposing Jags look kinda' helpless on their own turf a couple weeks ago...........but yeah I am sure they are lamenting trading for Watkins.

 

Meanwhile Bills receiving corps thru first 1/3 of the season was as bad as the NFL has seen in 20 years.

[Kelly the Dog]

12 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Isn't it interesting how so many apologist Bills fans can overlook drastic improvements made by other teams when they deal them their star players?

 

That offense is just smoking the opposition.........they made the imposing Jags look kinda' helpless on their own turf a couple weeks ago...........but yeah I am sure they are lamenting trading for Watkins.

 

Meanwhile Bills receiving corps thru first 1/3 of the season was as bad as the NFL has seen in 20 years.

A big part of that is coaching though. They run great plays and McVay calls a good game and puts players in positions to succeed.