reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 1 hour ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Not at this stage. Oops I rounded down.05 % which is what I have been saying for a long time. He needs a top 10 ball hawking Defense to win. How do you factor in the 1/2 game we had to throw away because coach needed to make a statement? Actually, I checked my work and it's really .539. So you only rounded down .4% I factored in the Charger debacle as a D didn't show up. But of course Nate Peterpan and Hotrod didn't help them very much. But still. NO one says they couldn't have not rolled over and gave up so many TDs. Our D has got to be the laziest bunch of snowflakes around. The other team scores a TD or two and they melt, or so the legend goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 50 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said: I'm not sure what you mean..... Live up to expectations or get ready to step aside. The repercussions can be dire. Now look at where we sit. Your guess is as good as mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wily Dog Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 18 minutes ago, JohnC said: Gotham Bill, I have a high regard for you but you have missed the points I have made regarding this new regime taking over for the Whaley regime (a GM you have for a very long time scathingly criticized). It's very apparent to me that Pegula hired McDermott because he presented a comprehensive plan that was diametrically different from the Whaley approach to building a roster. The organization has been completely blown up by the new staff. Whaley and all his hires, including all of the scouts, were dismissed. While Whaley and the HCs that the owners hired were often at odds philosophically and personality wise the new HC had the authority to hire his own GM. So that is an obvious example of an organization in alignment instead of in dissonance. As I have said right from the start of the new staffing this is a major rebuilding job from addressing the roster and the cap distribution. Gilmore, Watkins and Dareus are examples of not only shedding players for scheme reasons but also for cap reasons. The new HC wants players who want to be in Buffalo and he wants players who are committed. The primary strategy to restock the roster is through the draft. Last year the team traded down in the first round to get an extra first round pick this year. Watkins was dealt for a second round pick and a starting CB. Ragland, who I believe is going to be a good player in a more conducive scheme, was dealt for a third round pick in this year's draft. The strategy is to accumulate picks and use them to fill holes with younger and cheaper players and to better position for a high level qb prospect in this year's draft. The argument that the Bills have to tank or not makes little sense to me. Why not try to be competitive in the short run while in the long run build a more talented and sustaining roster? You change the culture by being reasonably competitive. The Browns have demonstrated how not to rebuild a roster. If you totally blow up the roster without having some residual talent you don't get anywhere. The Browns also have demonstrated what not to do by passing on high quality qb prospects (as have the Bills) and extend the period of time for a search for a franchise qb. The Browns passed on either Goff or Wentz a couple years ago and they passed on Watson who could have been had with their second first round pick last year. Securing that position is an essential requirement to being successful. As far as the Taylor vs Peterman argument I have simple response: I simply don't give a shiiiit. Neither are franchise qbs and neither will ever be. Too much energy is wasted on that meaningless topic for players that will get you nowhere. It's clear that Whaley and McDermott have very different football visions. However, both came to the same conclusion on the running qb as a franchise qb. While you might look at the Bills organization as being inept in being either a tank team or a competitive team I have a very different perspective. In my mind this is a stripped down team that is overachieving. You may complain about that but I'm not. I give the HC credit for keeping this less than average talented team in the playoff hunt. I realize how challenging this rebuilding process is. While others lament and are in a state of despair I am enthusiastically embracing it.It is a pathway that should have been taken years ago. I hope this response might give you a better understanding on how I see things developing with this woebegone franchise. This is a synopsis of exactly what the Bill's are going to do and what they have done. I would disagree with only one point and i could be wildly wrong , In stating that Peterman cannot be a Franchise QB , I do not believe he has had enough time and games to prove anything.We should look toward next year and beyond for our nirvana. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 7 minutes ago, Wily Dog said: This is a synopsis of exactly what the Bill's are going to do and what they have done. I would disagree with only one point and i could be wildly wrong , In stating that Peterman cannot be a Franchise QB , I do not believe he has had enough time and games to prove anything.We should look toward next year and beyond for our nirvana. We may disagree on Peterman's potential but what is obvious is that this organization has already made a determination on Taylor. I agree with their judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wily Dog Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 1 hour ago, JohnC said: We may disagree on Peterman's potential but what is obvious is that this organization has already made a determination on Taylor. I agree with their judgment. I totally agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Arnold Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 5 hours ago, reddogblitz said: However cutting a decent QB after a good season where we're close is so Bills. Worked so well in 2000, 2004, and 2014.. Is Taylor having a good season? If the Bills had the 18th best record in the NFL, would you consider that a "good season"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 3 hours ago, Wayne Arnold said: Is Taylor having a good season? If the Bills had the 18th best record in the NFL, would you consider that a "good season"? I'm not sure what you're saying, but presently the Bills have the 4th best record in the AFC. Patsies** 9-2 stealers 9-2 Jacksonville 7-4 Titans 7-4 That's it, there are no other AFC teams with a better record. 9 have worse records. I really don't care about some goofy QB ranking. Give me the Ws. We're .539 with Hotrod with a bad defense most of the time. When the D has played well this year we're .750. We're close. Let's try to fix up that D and win this thing. Edited December 1, 2017 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bing Bong Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 On 11/30/2017 at 8:22 AM, ShadyBillsFan said: Sarcasm?? FWIW - Copypaste hates and I mean he really hates Nate. That was Peterman "throwing players open". AKA throwing quickly and inaccurately for no reason. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTier Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 On 11/29/2017 at 8:29 PM, BADOLBILZ said: That's not the way football works John. There have been weeks where you have to wonder how the Bills hung in defensively against a number of teams they've played.........but they did because they play football one series at a time. That's how the Bills have managed to win or be in most of their games. They are out-talented most weeks and yet have managed to win more than they've lost by playing one series-at-a-time Jauron Ball. The philosophy behind it is that bad teams.......which a 3-6 team has been........will beat themselves if you don't help them. You can pretend the Chargers are actually an immensely better team....like the Patriots.....but they aren't. I will add that the Chargers have staked their current claim to being a "hot team" on beating the Bills with Peterman and beating the Cowpies without Elliott and without their LT Smith. This week they get to play the winless Browns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 59 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably. Instead of being a mediocre team who doesn’t make the playoffs we could have been a bad team who doesn’t make the playoffs. If it means we have a better shot at drafting a good QB then I can live through a worse than usual season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said: We had people banging the drum to start EJ for 2 years and now Peterman. Anyone that believes either of those is a better option is an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. That doesn’t mean we can’t upgrade from Tyrod, but those guys are way worse. What do you think the Bills record would be if they had started EJ and Peterman since the start of 2015? My guess is that they would have beaten the Dolphins twice and the Colts in 2015, the Cardinals, Patriots, Rams, 49ers and Browns last year and the Jets and Raiders this year. That would have them at 10-33 over that span. That’s a .233 win percentage. Tyrod has a .538 win percentage in a Bills uniform with the same guys. Again, upgrading this offseason is something that we are all fine with. Pretending that he is as bad as EJ or Peterman is ridiculous. Let’s stop using those two interchangeably. Better for what? To scrape out some games to 8-8 this year? Probably not. To find the QB of the future while losing on our way to a top pick? Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: Better for what? To scrape out some games to 8-8 this year? Probably not. To find the QB of the future while losing on our way to a top pick? Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better. To give the team a chance to win. The Bills haven’t been trying to tank. This year you could argue that they were as a lot of the talent has been jettisoned. At the same time why bring back Tyrod, Shady and Kyle? Why would you extend Wood? The Bills went half pregnant this year. I don’t believe in “winning now and winning into the future.” They work against each other in my opinion. You either try to win or tank and get your QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said: To give the team a chance to win. The Bills haven’t been trying to tank. This year you could argue that they were as a lot of the talent has been jettisoned. At the same time why bring back Tyrod, Shady and Kyle? Why would you extend Wood? The Bills went half pregnant this year. I don’t believe in “winning now and winning into the future.” They work against each other in my opinion. You either try to win or tank and get your QB. I agree. Some folks think we can win now and win later. I don't think we'll accomplish either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) 25 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: You either try to win or tank and get your QB. I am certainly not a fan of tanking as the draft results of perennial basement dwellers has been less than stellar. There are other reasons too (and I am sure you have thought of all of these Kirby): - Its about who you draft when you are on the board more so then where you draft. While the success rate of top-10 picks @ QB are better, it is still not a science and recent history has shown that competent QBs can be found after Round 1 - Most QB-hungry teams have a terrible record to begin with (duh) and have had changes to the coaching staff. It is tough for a new coach to sell a tanking season to the fans. See McAdoo - Financially it is a bad choice for the owners and they have to be totally on board to sacrifice a lucrative season in the hopes of future glory - You do face the race-to-the bottom scenario when you may tank and still not be in a position to draft the QB you want Having said all that, this is a great season to end up with a top-5 or top-10 pick, if you are desperate for a QB Edited December 2, 2017 by Fan in Chicago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 1 minute ago, Fan in Chicago said: I am certainly not a fan of tanking as the draft results of perennial basement dwellers has been less than stellar. There are other reasons too (and I am sure you have thought of all of these Kirby): - Its about who you draft when you are on the board more so then where you draft. While the success rate of top-10 pics @ QB are better, it is still not a science and recent history has shown that competent QBs can be found after Round 2 - Most QB-hungry teams have a terrible record to begin with (duh) and have had changes to the coaching staff. It is tough for a new coach to sell a tanking season to the fans. See McAdoo - Financially it is a bad choice for the owners and they have to be totally on board to sacrifice a lucrative season in the hopes of future glory - You do face the race-to-the bottom scenario when you may tank and still not be in a position to draft the QB you want Having said all that, this is a great season to end up with a top-5 or top-10 pick, if you are desperate for a QB Good post!! It’s definitely a tricky situation especially in football. You need to build a lot back up once you’ve been gutted. It’s not like the NBA where you can tank, draft a franchise player, and be good 3 months later. You need way more talent around you. If you’ve noticed the teams that turned it around with a franchise QB (Philly & Rams) they both traded up for those guys. They had a talent base in place. The year before the the Bucs bottomed out and kept the pick. They are still a bad team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 4 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said: Good post!! It’s definitely a tricky situation especially in football. You need to build a lot back up once you’ve been gutted. It’s not like the NBA where you can tank, draft a franchise player, and be good 3 months later. You need way more talent around you. If you’ve noticed the teams that turned it around with a franchise QB (Philly & Rams) they both traded up for those guys. They had a talent base in place. The year before the the Bucs bottomed out and kept the pick. They are still a bad team. Jax turned it around by tanking. So did the Titans. The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders Panthers got Cam. Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding) Lions got Stafford. All in the last 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 1 minute ago, jmc12290 said: Jax turned it around by tanking. So did the Titans. The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders Panthers got Cam. Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding) Lions got Stafford. All in the last 10 years. Jacksonville has picked in the top 5 for about a decade. I don’t know how we can classify that tanking as working. They still don’t have a QB. The Titans are in the same boat. They MAY have their franchise guy but it’s certainly debatable. The Texans tanked when Watt went out for the season. He might have been the single best player in football at that point. They are good when healthy. They still haven’t won a thing though. When did KC tank? When they drafted Eric Fisher 1st overall? That has nothing to do with why they are better. Panthers I agree with. The Colts are the PERFECT example of why it’s tough to tank in football. They got a guy that most thought was the best prospect since Peyton. They haven’t won a damn thing and are pretty much a trash football team. I would agree on the Lions too. It has benefitted them for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 6 minutes ago, jmc12290 said: Jax turned it around by tanking. So did the Titans. The Texans tanked one year and turned it around to being a good team. KC was a basement dweller and turned it into yearly postseason contenders Panthers got Cam. Colts got Luck (recent struggles with health notwithstanding) Lions got Stafford. All in the last 10 years. Another awful, awful take by jmc. Jax tanked for 5 straight years and got Blake Bortles and now their salary cap is bloated.(Rams also tanked for 5 years and got nothing out of it from 2007-2011). Marcus Mariotta has been awful. Titans aren't really any better than the Bills and worse at the QB position by a considerable amount. Texans didn't tank........they traded up with Cleveland to get Watson. Remember? Bills could have just selected Watson. KC got Eric Fisher for tanking......that was a complete fail........they turned it around by hiring Reid and acquiring Alex Smith for picks. Cam and Luck are outstanding but they are the exceptions and have not been anywhere near the consistent level of a Manning, Brady, Rodgers etc. Stafford will enter his TENTH season in Detroit next year with a career losing record as a starter. He's proof that you can get what you want in tanking and still not be a contender over the course of the next decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts