Jump to content

La Canfora: Bills Betting "Big" on Allen and Edmunds


Recommended Posts

Buffalo Bills are Betting Big on Physically Gifted Rookies Josh Allen and Tremaine Edmunds

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. -- The first thing you notice is their sheer mass. The hulking dude in the red No. 17 jersey hovering above almost everyone else in the offensive huddle. And then, across the practice field, the specimen wearing No. 49 in white, the quarterback of the defensive huddle, who seems to be from a different gene pool at times, a teenager sticking out among the grown men.
 
The future of the Buffalo Bills -- one agonizingly sculpted out of a series of trades and transactions dating back to last summer -- rests quite prominently on these two sets of shoulders. One belonging to Josh Allen, the quarterback who the Bills moved up to seventh overall to select a few weeks back. The other belongs to Tremaine Edmunds, the wunderkind linebacker who just turned 20 whom the Bills moved up to 16th overall to select. Both are raw, physically imposing prospects whose development will define the bold and ambitious regime of coach Sean McDermott and general manager Brandon Beane.

 

5-31: Jason La Canfora, CBS Sports, on One Bills Live (14:52)

 

New Bills QB Josh Allen has impressed thus far at OTAs in Buffalo (2:56)

 

Bills high on Tremaine Edmunds (1:25)

Edited by 26CornerBlitz
  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 26CornerBlitz changed the title to La Canfora: Bills Betting Big on Allen and Edmunds
32 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

Buffalo Bills are Betting Big on Physically Gifted Rookies Josh Allen and Tremaine Edmunds

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. -- The first thing you notice is their sheer mass. The hulking dude in the red No. 17 jersey hovering above almost everyone else in the offensive huddle. And then, across the practice field, the specimen wearing No. 49 in white, the quarterback of the defensive huddle, who seems to be from a different gene pool at times, a teenager sticking out among the grown men.

 

Hulking?  He is tall but 240 is NOT a lot that big.  At his height you expect him to be at least 230.  Almost all of his tackles are taller than him.

LaConjecture is conjecturing again not reporting.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Limeaid said:

 

Hulking?  He is tall but 240 is NOT a lot that big.  At his height you expect him to be at least 230.  Almost all of his tackles are taller than him.

LaConjecture is conjecturing again not reporting.

 

Does towering work for you? :lol:

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a story theme more geared to the rest of the NFL market.  What is obvious to us is mostly ignored by everyone else.   This sets the narrative that its almost impossible for the Bills to be successful over the next 5 years without being right about these two picks.  That sounds right to me.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

The Bills "betting big" on two first rounders that they traded up for??? No way!

 

Like all first round pics pan out?   Sammy Watkins says hello...

 

 

Edited by Lurker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Like all first round pics pan out?   EJ Manuel and Sammy Watkins say hello...

DPG's comment does not appear to imply certitude Allen and Edmunds will "pan out."  Nothing more than a sarcastic comment on the obvious nature of La Canfora's assertions.  

Edited by Dr. Who
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allen was hardly perfect in Thursday's session, and his accuracy will remain the most discussed and dissected part of his game. Several balls skidded low and in the grass during the 11-on-11 drills -- Allen made a point to come over to veteran Rod Streater and pat him on the back after one series of plays in which the quarterback's play was shaky.

 

This is what worries me the most and I hope they have a plan to correct it, if that's possible. QBs with area code accuracy can only take you so far in the NFL. Either we fix it or we build an offense with very few short throws.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, billsfan5121 said:

The only way I would consider this to be more than an obvious statement is if he is suggesting that they are counting on them big this year.  That of course is more about Allen than Edmunds.

 

In the article, he mentions the idea that the Bills may be in for a bit of a down year. Its more about the future.

 

56 minutes ago, Lurker said:

 

Like all first round pics pan out?   Sammy Watkins says hello...

 

 

 

What does that have to do with the point of my post?

 

53 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

DPG's comment does not appear to imply certitude Allen and Edmunds will "pan out."  Nothing more than a sarcastic comment on the obvious nature of La Canfora's assertions.  

 

Exactly

Edited by Drunken Pygmy Goat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

The Bills "betting big" on two first rounders that they traded up for??? No way!

Top half of the 1st, too. I am buying the hype, drinking the koolaid. I swear, with Russ Brandon gone, this draft, and the fact God Wills It, on our side...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

This is what worries me the most and I hope they have a plan to correct it, if that's possible. QBs with area code accuracy can only take you so far in the NFL. Either we fix it or we build an offense with very few short throws.

 

This part stood out to me a bit:

 

There were a lot of short passes and screens -- not too much to show off Allen's powerful arm

 

I assume the reason for this is that proper ball placement on short throws was one of the bigger knocks on Allen, so it makes sense for the staff to make that a focal point early on. Everyone knows about his arm strength. No need to put too much work in that area so soon, especially since the majority of passes in the NFL are within 20 yards of the LOS. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Limeaid said:

 

Hulking?  He is tall but 240 is NOT a lot that big.  At his height you expect him to be at least 230.  Almost all of his tackles are taller than him.

LaConjecture is conjecturing again not reporting.

Cam is 6'5 245.  Josh is  6'5 240

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

The Bills "betting big" on two first rounders that they traded up for??? No way!

 

I had no idea!  Thank goodness for quality journalism that keeps us informed!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

 

Yet another guy that views completion percentage as a direct reflection of accuracy. I have a hard time giving these guys credit when they do this, as well as bringing up completion percentages of college QBs from 20-40 years ago. I don't care that he was a scout. 

 

And he writes for a website with poor editing. 

Edited by Drunken Pygmy Goat
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

 

Yet another guy that equates completion percentage as a direct reflection of accuracy. I have a hard time giving these guys credit when they do this, as well as bringing up completion percentages of college QBs from 20-40 years ago. I don't care that he was a scout. 

 

And he writes for a website with poor editing. 

 

He's attributing the inaccuracy issue to bad footwork which leads to lower completion %.  Totally valid point.

 

I'll be eagerly waiting for DPG pieces with all relevant content and zero errors since you seem to be such a critic.  ;)

Edited by 26CornerBlitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

He's attributing the inaccuracy issue to bad footwork which leads to lower completion %.  Totally valid point.

 

I'll be eagerly waiting for DPG pieces with all relevant content and zero errors since you seem to be such a critic.  ;)

 

Sorry, just seems like another lazy, regurgitated piece to me, Greg.

 

Why bring up Vick, Kelly, and Favre? Simply because they had poor completion percentages in college, just like Allen? Did they, too, have footwork issues that led to those numbers? I'm sure they did at times, just like pretty much every QB ever, but there's no mention of that in the article, in relation to their completion percentages. Could be that the talent around them played a role, among other things, not to mention that the game was different back then.

 

Comparing QBs from different eras is foolish, especially when comparing numbers. I get the point he (you?) was trying to make, but I feel like I've read this article before, several times, from several different journalists. Got a click from me, though...

 

And he didn't provide any examples, or what may have led to bad footwork on a given play. And he also didn't attribute all bad throws to bad footwork. Not saying that he should have, but what were the issues on those plays, if not footwork? Do those issues support his article in any way, or were they conveniently left out???

 

I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. I'm just tired of reading the same things, I guess. 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

 

Sorry, just seems like another lazy, regurgitated piece to me, Greg.

 

Why bring up Vick, Kelly, and Favre? Simply because they had poor completion percentages in college, just like Allen? Did they, too, have footwork issues that led to those numbers? I'm sure they did at times, just like pretty much every QB ever, but there's no mention of that in the article, in relation to their completion percentages. Could be that the talent around them played a role, among other things, not to mention that the game was different back then.

 

Comparing QBs from different eras is foolish, especially when comparing numbers. I get the point he (you?) was trying to make, but I feel like I've read this article before, several times, from several different journalists. Got a click from me, though...

 

And he didn't provide any examples, or what may have led to bad footwork on a given play. And he also didn't attribute all bad throws to bad footwork. Not saying that he should have, but what were the issues on those plays, if not footwork? Do those issues support his article in any way, or were they conveniently left out???

 

I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers. I'm just tired of reading the same things, I guess. 

 

No feather ruffling here.  At this juncture, you aren't going to get much ground breaking analysis from analysts who critique Allen so I'm not sure what you expect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

No feather ruffling here.  At this juncture, you aren't going to get much ground breaking analysis from analysts who critique Allen so I'm not sure what you expect. 

 

Yeah, it's that time of year. Chalk it up to me yelling at clouds.

 

Btw, I appreciate what you do here. If there's anything posted on the internet, you (and Yolo) are quick to post them here. 

Edited by Drunken Pygmy Goat
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cliff's Notes version:

 

Buffalo Bills are Betting Big on Physically Gifted Rookies Josh Allen and Tremaine Edmunds

ORCHARD PARK, N.Y. -- Football players are really big. First round draft picks are important and the people who pick them expect them to do well.
 

5-31: Jason La Canfora, CBS Sports, on One Bills Live (14:52)

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

Wow bashing a journalist again.  You guys are so original. Maybe you can spend some time bashing a random bill now.  

 

No one is bashing him.

 

We're just bashing the fluff garbage that he wrote.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ShadyBillsFan said:

So, that makes this “revelation” breaking news?

 

My 5 year old grandson could have made the same assessment.  

But he didn't. Proving once again:

 

LaConjecture>Your 5 Year Old Grandson 

 

At least in reporting NFL Conjecture.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...