Reggie Ragland's play for the chiefs

[Real McClappy]

5 hours ago, GG said:

 

Talent was lost, but the team's record also indicates that the talent was over rated at least and overpaid at most.

 

IDK about overpaid other than Dareus and not paying Gilmore a new contract?

 

We could have used these guys and possibly had a better record. It's the direction the coaching staff wanted to go so I must "trust the process"  even though I'm not happy with a few of the moves. 

 

Most will be filled with the draft next April  or FA. Our LB core needs some serious help and Ragland could have been a nice run stuffer to have on this squad with a rookie contract.

 

Robey-Coleman

Woods (Easily worth a new contract)

Ragland
Lee

Goodwin

Watkins (Was still on rookie contract thru 2017)

Darby

Hunter

Z. Brown (might have cost, would have been worth it IMO)

 

 

Edited December 12, 2017 by Real McCoy

[Alaska Darin]

 

194
298
146
191
163

 

Rush yardage totals the BILLS have given up since week 7 (I left out the KC game because Andy Reid inexplicably just abandoned the run despite our inability to stop, well, anyone else).  You know why we give up so many yards on the ground?  Our LBers (outside of the new draftees) have been pretty much terrible.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

 

IDK about overpaid other than Dareus and not paying Gilmore a new contract?

 

We could have used these guys and possibly had a better record. It's the direction the coaching staff wanted to go so I must "trust the process" though even though I'm not happy with a few of the moves. 

 

Most will be filled with the draft next April  or FA.

Our LB core needs some serious help and Ragland could have been a nice run stuffer to have on this squad with a rookie contract.

 

Robey-Coleman

Woods (Easily worth a new contract)

Ragland
Lee

Goodwin

Watkins (Was still on rookie contract thru 2017)

Darby

Hunter

Z. Brown (might have cost, would have been worth it IMO)

 

Good post. 
 

I do have the caveat that McDermott came here with the goal to change the culture.  You can't change the culture without changing minds.  And you can't change minds without sending some minds resistant to change out of the building, and bringing in fresh thoughts. 

 

Still, it kind of strains credulity that these guys were all "phone it in" bed-heads who needed a change of scene.

Overall it does worry me to have the "not a fit to our scheme" philosophy, because the team that must acquire specific types of talent is always going to be at a competitive disadvantage to the team that can acquire the best talent and figure out how to utilize it to best effect.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

3 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

 

IDK about overpaid other than Dareus and not paying Gilmore a new contract?

 

We could have used these guys and possibly had a better record. It's the direction the coaching staff wanted to go so I must "trust the process" though even though I'm not happy with a few of the moves. 

 

Most will be filled with the draft next April  or FA.

Our LB core needs some serious help and Ragland could have been a nice run stuffer to have on this squad with a rookie contract.

 

Robey-Coleman

Woods (Easily worth a new contract)

Ragland
Lee

Goodwin

Watkins (Was still on rookie contract thru 2017)

Darby

Hunter

Z. Brown (might have cost, would have been worth it IMO)

 

 

 

NRC was replaced by L.Johnson who I thought has been pretty good this year.

 

Woods was a UFA.  Got a big deal.  Goodwin was a UFA.  

 

Hunter has 3 catches this year.  Holmes has out-performed him.  

 

Z. Brown didn't get a big deal, perhaps it was a fit issue.  They brought in Hodges, and he didn't make the team.

 

Ragland was always a step behind in preseason regarding coverage.  Scheme fit was talked about before the pads went on, and he definitely struggled.

 

Darby was hurt for half the year and so was matthews so... wash there and we netted a 3rd.

 

Watkins hasn't done much and is a guarantee to hit UFA in 2018.  Gaines has been really good when he's on the field.  I think Watkins was the one guy who really could've helped this offense a ton, but they must be after a QB hard in 2018 if they were willing to move him. 

 

You didn't mention Dareus, and i think we all hoped the lightbulb would turn on and he would become the guy he needed to be.  He did not, and we moved him to maximize the cap space we could net for 2018.  

 

[Doc]

3 hours ago, Real McCoy said:

 

IDK about overpaid other than Dareus and not paying Gilmore a new contract?

 

We could have used these guys and possibly had a better record. It's the direction the coaching staff wanted to go so I must "trust the process" though even though I'm not happy with a few of the moves. 

 

Most will be filled with the draft next April  or FA.

Our LB core needs some serious help and Ragland could have been a nice run stuffer to have on this squad with a rookie contract.

 

Robey-Coleman

Woods (Easily worth a new contract)

Ragland
Lee

Goodwin

Watkins (Was still on rookie contract thru 2017)

Darby

Hunter

Z. Brown (might have cost, would have been worth it IMO)

 

I'd have kept Seymour, re-signed Zach Brown, and not traded Dareus.  The rest were guys who didn't show much until they left. 

[26CornerBlitz]

Just now, dneveu said:

 

NRC was replaced by L.Johnson who I thought has been pretty good this year.

 

Woods was a UFA.  Got a big deal.  Goodwin was a UFA.  

 

Hunter has 3 catches this year.  Holmes has out-performed him.  

 

Z. Brown didn't get a big deal, perhaps it was a fit issue.  They brought in Hodges, and he didn't make the team.

 

Ragland was always a step behind in preseason regarding coverage.  Scheme fit was talked about before the pads went on, and he definitely struggled.

 

Darby was hurt for half the year and so was matthews so... wash there and we netted a 3rd.

 

Watkins hasn't done much and is a guarantee to hit UFA in 2018.  Gaines has been really good when he's on the field.  I think Watkins was the one guy who really could've helped this offense a ton, but they must be after a QB hard in 2018 if they were willing to move him. 

 

You didn't mention Dareus, and i think we all hoped the lightbulb would turn on and he would become the guy he needed to be.  He did not, and we moved him to maximize the cap space we could net for 2018.  

 

 

7 TDs is not doing much? 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

11 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

7 TDs is not doing much? 

 

Fair enough I looked more at yardage and catches so "touche" - however, does he re-sign there in 2018?  58 targets and 34 catches through 13 games.  I think his agent looks at that and cringes.  He wants 10 targets a game...

 

If they manage to manipulate the comp pick formula they should get a 2019 end of round 3rd for him.  We got a 2018 2nd and Gaines who has been pretty good.  

[SaviorPeterman]

I've been hearing whispers from some sources of mine that the Bills are going to regret not finding a place for Ragland in McD/Frasier's defense.

 

Ragland has entrenched himself as a starter with the Chiefs this year and appears to be 100% back from his injury. He's also been a bright spot on a pretty bad Chiefs defense this year.

 

Still don't understand why this new regime was so eager to unload all our recent draft picks and getting very little in return. It's one thing to distance yourself from the previous regime but it's another to make hasty decisions just for the sake of getting rid of guys.

Edited December 12, 2017 by SaviorPeterman

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

40 minutes ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I've been hearing whispers from some sources of mine that the Bills are going to regret not finding a place for Ragland in McD/Frasier's defense.

 

Ragland has entrenched himself as a starter with the Chiefs this year and appears to be 100% back from his injury. He's also been a bright spot on a pretty bad Chiefs defense this year.

 

Still don't understand why this new regime was so eager to unload all our recent draft picks and getting very little in return. It's one thing to distance yourself from the previous regime but it's another to make hasty decisions just for the sake of getting rid of guys.

I would've liked to see if he could grow into something here... but they got a pretty decent return.  The trade up makes the value worse.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:

I've been hearing whispers from some sources of mine that the Bills are going to regret not finding a place for Ragland in McD/Frasier's defense.

 

Ragland has entrenched himself as a starter with the Chiefs this year and appears to be 100% back from his injury. He's also been a bright spot on a pretty bad Chiefs defense this year.

 

Still don't understand why this new regime was so eager to unload all our recent draft picks and getting very little in return. It's one thing to distance yourself from the previous regime but it's another to make hasty decisions just for the sake of getting rid of guys.

 

I dunno about your "whispers", but I agree that at times, it has seemed as though McBeane have been interested in getting rid of guys for the sake of getting rid of guys.

[3rdand12]

23 hours ago, BuffaloBillsMagic1 said:

Guy was  coming off major knee surgery.  Should have waited until he was 100% fit.  Did not like them trading him as at Alabama he was great.

 

yes, this. not hindsight for me. have not followed him since gone away. I sure was looking forward to see him destroying  some A gaps. And I think he and Brown may have worked well with our safeties and secondary really. < Thats hindsight though

[Alphadawg7]

4 hours ago, dneveu said:

I would've liked to see if he could grow into something here... but they got a pretty decent return.  The trade up makes the value worse.

 

The biggest thing about the Ragland trade was that we never once as a Bills organization got to see what he could do on the field.  He was coming back from a serious injury and was a bit behind, but so freaking what, you wait and have patience for talent.  This was a first round graded prospect we stole in the 2nd, and invested to trade up to get who had not even had one snap on an NFL field due to an unfortunate rookie injury.  They should have at least tried to be patient and let him come all the way back.  

 

I still hate the Watkins trade, although I can live with the net return of a 2nd and Gaines since Gaines has had value.  I would 100% still take Watkins over that 2nd and Gaines though, especially since we already have enough other draft assets to trade for a higher pick if needed to get our future QB.  There was literally no reason to trade Watkins in terms of getting a QB.  We had 2 firsts, a 2nd and 2 thirds not to mention lower picks and picks the following year all to create a package to get our QB.  Hell we may not even need to trade up to get the guy they want.  

 

Dareus one though I can't live with, absolutely hate the trade.  Let me clarify, I don't hate we traded him...I hate that we not only gave him away, but we essentially traded Both Dareus and a high draft pick and only got back a 6th rounder.  Why you might ask...becasue our DL is now crap, and he MUST be replaced and we will need to CERTAINLY invest a 3rd round pick or better, and likely a 2nd or even a first depending how the draft goes in relation to getting a QB because its one of our biggest holes now.  And when you factor in its quite possible we are drafting to replace Kyle Williams too, its an even bigger issue.  So the net return is losing Dareus, creating a hole we MUST fill with a quality draft pick and ONLY getting a 6th rounder which won't help us fill that hole.  

 

Darby was another I wasn't thrilled about, but the trade felt fair in compensation at the time although I am starting to wonder if Jordan is even on this roster next year.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Alphadawg7

[3rdand12]

9 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

The biggest thing about the Ragland trade was that we never once as a Bills organization got to see what he could do on the field.  He was coming back from a serious injury and was a bit behind, but so freaking what, you wait and have patience for talent.  This was a first round graded prospect we stole in the 2nd, and invested to trade up to get who had not even had one snap on an NFL field due to an unfortunate rookie injury.  They should have at least tried to be patient and let him come all the way back.  

 

I still hate the Watkins trade, although I can live with the net return of a 2nd and Gaines since Gaines has had value.  I would 100% still take Watkins over that 2nd and Gaines though, especially since we already have enough other draft assets to trade for a higher pick if needed to get our future QB.  There was literally no reason to trade Watkins in terms of getting a QB.  We had 2 firsts, a 2nd and 2 thirds not to mention lower picks and picks the following year all to create a package to get our QB.  Hell we may not even need to trade up to get the guy they want.  

 

Dareus one though I can't live with, absolutely hate the trade.  Let me clarify, I don't hate we traded him...I hate that we not only gave him away, but we essentially traded Both Dareus and a high draft pick and only got back a 6th rounder.  Why you might ask...becasue our DL is now crap, and he MUST be replaced and we will need to CERTAINLY invest a 3rd round pick or better, and likely a 2nd or even a first depending how the draft goes in relation to getting a QB because its one of our biggest holes now.  And when you factor in its quite possible we are drafting to replace Kyle Williams too, its an even bigger issue.  So the net return is losing Dareus, creating a hole we MUST fill with a quality draft pick and ONLY getting a 6th rounder which won't help us fill that hole.  

 

Darby was another I wasn't thrilled about, but the trade felt fair in compensation at the time although I am starting to wonder if Jordan is even on this roster next year.

In short, this regime still mystifies me.
 But i am going to give leeway as he seemingly is a fully involved H Coach and learning on the go.
we always argue about patience and being patient or not  here. This is one, both  Sean and Brandon , time i feel patience really is worthwhile. 

 

 I am truly intrigued as to what the off season looks like. I expect turnover and look forward to the changes. That will be telling about the direction  imho
 

[BringBackOrton]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

The biggest thing about the Ragland trade was that we never once as a Bills organization got to see what he could do on the field.  He was coming back from a serious injury and was a bit behind, but so freaking what, you wait and have patience for talent.  This was a first round graded prospect we stole in the 2nd, and invested to trade up to get who had not even had one snap on an NFL field due to an unfortunate rookie injury.  They should have at least tried to be patient and let him come all the way back.  

 

I still hate the Watkins trade, although I can live with the net return of a 2nd and Gaines since Gaines has had value.  I would 100% still take Watkins over that 2nd and Gaines though, especially since we already have enough other draft assets to trade for a higher pick if needed to get our future QB.  There was literally no reason to trade Watkins in terms of getting a QB.  We had 2 firsts, a 2nd and 2 thirds not to mention lower picks and picks the following year all to create a package to get our QB.  Hell we may not even need to trade up to get the guy they want.  

 

Dareus one though I can't live with, absolutely hate the trade.  Let me clarify, I don't hate we traded him...I hate that we not only gave him away, but we essentially traded Both Dareus and a high draft pick and only got back a 6th rounder.  Why you might ask...becasue our DL is now crap, and he MUST be replaced and we will need to CERTAINLY invest a 3rd round pick or better, and likely a 2nd or even a first depending how the draft goes in relation to getting a QB because its one of our biggest holes now.  And when you factor in its quite possible we are drafting to replace Kyle Williams too, its an even bigger issue.  So the net return is losing Dareus, creating a hole we MUST fill with a quality draft pick and ONLY getting a 6th rounder which won't help us fill that hole.  

 

Darby was another I wasn't thrilled about, but the trade felt fair in compensation at the time although I am starting to wonder if Jordan is even on this roster next year.

This makes zero sense because we would have to replace him if we traded him no matter what we got back.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, 3rdand12 said:

In short, this regime still mystifies me.
 But i am going to give leeway as he seemingly is a fully involved H Coach and learning on the go.
we always argue about patience and being patient or not  here. This is one, both  Sean and Brandon , time i feel patience really is worthwhile. 

 

 I am truly intrigued as to what the off season looks like. I expect turnover and look forward to the changes. That will be telling about the direction  imho
 

 

I pretty much feel the same...its odd, I haven't been thrilled and down right hated some decisions, yet still somehow have confidence in them lol.  

25 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

This makes zero sense because we would have to replace him if we traded him no matter what we got back.

 

Let me explain...we did NOT get back something of value to use towards replacing him.  The odds are nearly impossible we are going to fill that hole with a 6th round pick.  Sure, the 6th round has produced a guy like Brady, but the odds of getting that hole filled with a 6th rounder is almost zero.  Had we at least gotten back a 3rd or higher, then at least we received an asset we can invest into replacing him.  But we did NOT get such an asset, meaning we have to spend our already existing assets to fill a hole we created that netted nothing essentially in return.   

 

Now had we gotten a 2nd or even a 3rd, then at least we wouldn't be spending one of our existing 2nd or 3rd round picks trying to fill this hole.  Instead, we got a lousy 6th which is more likely going to net a ST contributor at best and not a DT that anchor our line.  And make no mistake about it, DL is one of our biggest needs now, especially since we might have TWO holes to fill as there is no guarantee Kyle will be here next year and he's is winding down anyway.

[LABILLBACKER]

7 hours ago, dneveu said:

 

Fair enough I looked more at yardage and catches so "touche" - however, does he re-sign there in 2018?  58 targets and 34 catches through 13 games.  I think his agent looks at that and cringes.  He wants 10 targets a game...

 

If they manage to manipulate the comp pick formula they should get a 2019 end of round 3rd for him.  We got a 2018 2nd and Gaines who has been pretty good.  

The Rams hardly target him, just like in Buffalo. Eventually Sammy is going to a team that targets him like the Falcons target Julio....as for Ragland he doesn't fit the goal McD has of finding another Kueckly...

[BringBackOrton]

33 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

I pretty much feel the same...its odd, I haven't been thrilled and down right hated some decisions, yet still somehow have confidence in them lol.  

 

Let me explain...we did NOT get back something of value to use towards replacing him.  The odds are nearly impossible we are going to fill that hole with a 6th round pick.  Sure, the 6th round has produced a guy like Brady, but the odds of getting that hole filled with a 6th rounder is almost zero.  Had we at least gotten back a 3rd or higher, then at least we received an asset we can invest into replacing him.  But we did NOT get such an asset, meaning we have to spend our already existing assets to fill a hole we created that netted nothing essentially in return.   

 

Now had we gotten a 2nd or even a 3rd, then at least we wouldn't be spending one of our existing 2nd or 3rd round picks trying to fill this hole.  Instead, we got a lousy 6th which is more likely going to net a ST contributor at best and not a DT that anchor our line.  And make no mistake about it, DL is one of our biggest needs now, especially since we might have TWO holes to fill as there is no guarantee Kyle will be here next year and he's is winding down anyway.

No one was giving a 2nd or 3rd for a malcontent with a bloated contract.

[Alphadawg7]

4 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

No one was giving a 2nd or 3rd for a malcontent with a bloated contract.

 

Hence why we should have kept him 

[BringBackOrton]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Hence why we should have kept him 

Then you don't agree with trading him at all.

 

That makes sense.

[Alphadawg7]

4 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Then you don't agree with trading him at all.

 

That makes sense.

 

Thats exactly what I said in the OP you responded.  I hate the trade.  I was ok with trading IF we got something back to help fill the hole it created.  I absolutely hated trading him for a measly 6th because not only did we not get something back to help replace him, we now MUST replace him and its going to force us to use a good draft pick to TRY and do so...and we might still miss on that pick and need to invest more as well.  

 

So yes, I don't agree with the trade.  I could live with it had we at least recouped assets to contribute to his replacement though and we didn't.  He was coming off his best game under this regime, was finally healthy and fit...let him play the remainder of the season to at least up his value before we unload him.  There was no reason to dump him in a fire sale for just a 6th.  

Edited December 13, 2017 by Alphadawg7