How Much Did The Bills Actually Improve the OL? PFF Rankings 2018 vs. 2019 Comparison

[PrimeTime101]

8 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

You sure about that?  

 

Did you actually look at the FACTS & DATA?  Or are you simply spouting off?  

 

 

You can break it down by game log too, it's no better.  

 

In fact, Allen only played well against the Fins. 

 

5 TDs, 3 INTs for 455 Yards (228 avg.)  

 

In the other 10 games he had 5 TDs, 9 INTs for 1,619 Yards (162 avg.)   He played OK passing vs. the Vikes but not superlatively.  

 

You can see the differences for yourself.  

 

Manuel's Red Zone numbers were much better too.  

 

Allen:  12 of 26 (42%, bottom-dwelling low BTW), 79 Yards, 4 TDs (2 of which were in that last Miami game), 5 1st Downs, 3.0 YPA, 6.1 Adj. YPA

Manuel:  10 of 21 (47.6%), 71 Yards, 6 TDs, 10 1st-Downs, 3.4 YPA, 9.1 Adj. YPA  

 

That last Miami game literally doubled Allen's Red Zone numbers.  He had a mere 2 Red Zone TDs in 11 games prior, worst by a country mile of any starting QB in the league.  

 

Here's a little help for you.  

 

In the Red Zone ...

 

Allen was 5.6% worse in Compl. %

Allen was nearly half-a-yard worse in YPA and 3.0 worse in Adj. YPA. 

Allen's TD% rate was 15.4% which was nearly half of Manuel's 28.6%.  And 15.4% sucks anyway, it's bottom-dwelling.  

 

Frankly, if we want to be frank, Allen's passing in general and Red Zone games were horrific and worse than ANY other starter the league prior to that week 17 emotionally charged Miami game.  

 

As I've said, if he plays like he has vs. Miami next season we can expect to see 40 TDs & 24 INTs.  

 

If he plays like he did in the other 10 games we can expect to see 8 TDs & 15 INTs.  

 

Unfortunately we're not going to have that emotionally charged element present in any of those games this season.  Again, being frank, in the other 11 games of his he was horrific as a passer, statistically/metrically speaking.  

 

He was 152 for 294 (51.7%), for 1,850 Yards, 7 TDs, 11 INTs, with a sack-rate of 8.4, same as Manuel, which is high, particularly or a mobile QB.  

 

I'm quite sorry that you thiink that those numbers are better than Manuel's rookie numbers.  If you don't think that needs massive improvement tho I'm really  not sure what to tell you.  It's far from even average though much less Franchise Caliber.  

 

But those are the FACTS.  

Raw numbers without context/content. Manuel's WR's were Stevie Johnson, Robert Woods, Goodwin, Graham, Hogan. Who did Josh Allen have for WR?

 

[Reader]

4 hours ago, mjt328 said:

 

I enjoy reading Pro Football Focus.  But their grades are just like any other statistic, and should not be taken as gospel.

For instance, Tre'Davious White was the 88th ranked cornerback in the NFL last year.  Most of the Bills fans who watch him every week think White should have been in the Pro Bowl.  Yet his PFF score was lower than almost every CB on our roster, including Phillip Gaines (who we cut mid-season).

 

In terms of upgrading the O-Line, there weren't too many options on the market who blew away PFF's grading system.

Trent Brown, Matt Paradis, Roger Saffold and Ju'Wuan James were also "above average" in 2018, according to the PFF scoring system.  Daryl Williams was average.  Along with Morse, those guys were the premier free agent options according to virtually everyone who covers the NFL.  If you are basing everything off PFF grades alone, there is nothing Beane could have done to earn your approval.

 

At the end of the day, every free agent is someone who was considered expendable by their previous team.  For whatever reason.  Unless it's purely a money/salary cap issue, you will almost never see premium, All-Pro, Top 5 players on the market.  Many are coming off injuries (Morse) or declining because of age.  Some were improperly used and coming off poor seasons (Spencer Long).  Very often, the ones who get the biggest contracts are inconsistent and overrated - and the only ones who know it are the teams letting them walk.  That doesn't mean free agents aren't valuable and can't make an impact.  It's just more proof that the Draft is where a front office needs to focus on truly upgrading the roster.  Free agency is about filling holes with solid veteran depth.

 

In my opinion, Beane is playing the free agency game correctly.  He's filling holes across the roster with solid players.  But he's also got his eyes on the future, knowing our long-term success depends on drafting well and then having the cap room to re-sign our own guys (like White, Milano) when they come up in a few years.  Teams like the Jets are blowing all of their cap space on a few players, and will not be able to keep the bulk of this roster intact for longer than 1-2 years.

 

 

 

To add to this, PFF is really the only service that attempts to grade players in a systematic manner and they are still figuring out a lot of information as well. Like you said, PFF is a great guide, but is learning as it goes.

 

Scheme can affect PFF grades significantly as well. The year after Mario and Bradham left Rex's scheme, both improved by about 30 points on PFF's scale. With any luck our new O-line coach will serve as a significant upgrade.

[Ronin]

Just now, PrimeTime101 said:

Raw numbers without context/content. Manuel's WR's were Stevie Johnson, Robert Woods, Goodwin, Graham, Hogan. Who did Josh Allen have for WR?

 

Depends upon whom you ask.  Last year before the season began everyone was raving about Benjamin and Jordan, and Jones.  I'm constantly reading how Jones is good and how Foster's a beast, a real steal.  

 

So which is it?  Lay that out first and we can discuss further.  

 

Otherwise, can't you look it up?  I'm not seeing any great set of receivers that particular season.  Maybe do that homework yourself?  

 

Woods was a rookie.  I'm constantly reading here how what to me was a predictable bust in Jones needs three years to develop.  So which is it?  

Graham and Goodwin?  LOL  Graham isn't even playing anymore and if you think that either was better than what we had, well, not sure what to tell you.  Neither are considered good.  Goodwin has about 2K yards in six seasons and was also a rookie then.  

 

Johnson, Chandler?  Is that your argument?  

 

Either way, the narratives all fit together to make sense or they don't.  Can't take the things you like from one and discard the others.  

 

IMO Foster is overrated, Jones is a 4/5, and that McBeane botched it bigtime in trading for both Jordan and Benjamin.  If you agree with that, then at least admit those shortcomings, which feed into the bigger picture here.  

If you dont' agree with that then it's a very difficult argument to suggest that Manuel had it better with a handful of WRs that aren't anything today other tha Woods who was a rookie then.  

 

[Kelly the Dog]

28 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

LMAO 

 

I fully understand.  But opinions like yours are so much more valuable apart from any real data, metrics, or objective analysis.  

 

Yeah yeah.  

 

LOL  

 

Face it, you didn't do any homework prior to making any statements.  Meanwhile, I'll pencil you in for insisting that throwing half as many TDs as INTs is something other than concerning.  

If you asked 100 scouts, coaches, GMs, and personnel directors to "prove" which of the two rookies was the best pure passer, EJ or Josh Allen, 100 of them would watch tape of the games and make their determination based on multiple factors, many of which I articulated. If you asked 100 idiots and message board warriors to "prove" which of the two rookies was the best pure passer, a bunch of them would do what you did. That's a fact. Look it up.

[Ronin]

38 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Who did Josh Allen have for WR?

 

Oh, to answer your question directly, he had: 

 

Benjamin, who's had more career yards in fewer seasons than any receiver you mentioned from 2013.  

Holmes who's about mimicked Goodwin.  

Foster who's rookie season was about what Woods' was.  

Johnson, who's done nothing in the NFL with two other teams since then, one of those teams having a great QB.  

Chandler whose career doesn't even match Clay's.  

Hogan whose single best career, in NE with Brady, is barely better than Foster's rookie season.  

 

Not seeing a significant difference there.  The other thing that you dismiss, which is clearly the case, is that many of our WRs didn't perform better simply  because Allen didn't see them (or what, couldn't find them) when they were open.  

 

I realize that that's the turd on top of the toaster that no one wants to admit is there, but it is, at least for the time being.  

 

To suggest that somehow Manuel had anything even approaching an above-average cast of receivers is to lack objectivity and honesty in this discussion.  

 

Either way, here are the career totals of all of the WRs from 2013 that you've mentioned:  

 

2,610 Yards, 18 TDs, 7 seasons

2,137 Yards, 12 TDs, 6 seasons

794 Yards, 4 TDs, 4 seasons (out of the league for four seasons now) 

4,764 Yards, 34 TDs, 8 seasons (this is the star of the group, averaging fewer than 50 yards-per-game career and 4 TDs/season, now out of the league for four seasons)  

4,451 Yards, 23 TDs, 6 seasons (only successful to any significant extent on a team with a very good QB on a team with the 5th leading passing game, who was a rookie in 2013)  

 

Only one of those 5 has averaged over 800 yards/season and prior to playing in LA last season he averaged below 700 yards/season.  

Otherwise none of those WRs has averaged over evey 600 yards/season.  

 

There's nothing prolific in that group when we consider that Woods was a rookie in 2013, sorry.  Two of the five are no longer playing despite their still being well into their playing-age range with neither older than 32 now.  Woods remains to be seen, but he's only had great success this past season, again, on a prolific passing team, his six seasons prior to that were not impressive.  Much as in NE it could very well be that the success of their passing game has a whole lot more to do with Goff than with their WRs.  Even Cooks did better than he did in NO and no one's going to argue that Goff is better than Brees right now.  It obviously means something that he posted his best season on the Rams' offense with Goff throwing tho.  

Edited March 20, 2019 by TaskersGhost

[HappyDays]

33 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

I'm constantly reading how Jones is good

 

No you aren't.

 

5 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

Holmes who's about mimicked Goodwin.  

 

This is really incredible.

Edited March 20, 2019 by HappyDays

[Ronin]

9 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

If you asked 100 scouts, coaches, GMs, and personnel directors to "prove" which of the two rookies was the best pure passer, EJ or Josh Allen, 100 of them would watch tape of the games and make their determination based on multiple factors, many of which I articulated. If you asked 100 idiots and message board warriors to "prove" which of the two rookies was the best pure passer, a bunch of them would do what you did. That's a fact. Look it up.

 

So 100 Scouts would admit that tossing 10 TDs and 12 INTs is good?  

 

Mmmm, OK, if you say so.  

 

I suppose that they'd say that he was good in the Red Zone too.  

 

Argue as you may, this isn't worth my time.  It's ridiculous, you speaking for "100 scouts, coaches, GMs, and personnel directors," many of whom have already contradicted your ridiculous position.  

[ColoradoBills]

1 hour ago, TaskersGhost said:

You sure about that?  

 

Did you actually look at the FACTS & DATA?  Or are you simply spouting off?  

 

 

You can break it down by game log too, it's no better.  

 

In fact, Allen only played well against the Fins. 

 

5 TDs, 3 INTs for 455 Yards (228 avg.)  

 

In the other 10 games he had 5 TDs, 9 INTs for 1,619 Yards (162 avg.)   He played OK passing vs. the Vikes but not superlatively.  

 

You can see the differences for yourself.  

 

Manuel's Red Zone numbers were much better too.  

 

Allen:  12 of 26 (42%, bottom-dwelling low BTW), 79 Yards, 4 TDs (2 of which were in that last Miami game), 5 1st Downs, 3.0 YPA, 6.1 Adj. YPA

Manuel:  10 of 21 (47.6%), 71 Yards, 6 TDs, 10 1st-Downs, 3.4 YPA, 9.1 Adj. YPA  

 

That last Miami game literally doubled Allen's Red Zone numbers.  He had a mere 2 Red Zone TDs in 11 games prior, worst by a country mile of any starting QB in the league.  

 

Here's a little help for you.  

 

In the Red Zone ...

 

Allen was 5.6% worse in Compl. %

Allen was nearly half-a-yard worse in YPA and 3.0 worse in Adj. YPA. 

Allen's TD% rate was 15.4% which was nearly half of Manuel's 28.6%.  And 15.4% sucks anyway, it's bottom-dwelling.  

 

Frankly, if we want to be frank, Allen's passing in general and Red Zone games were horrific and worse than ANY other starter the league prior to that week 17 emotionally charged Miami game.  

 

As I've said, if he plays like he has vs. Miami next season we can expect to see 40 TDs & 24 INTs.  

 

If he plays like he did in the other 10 games we can expect to see 8 TDs & 15 INTs.  

 

Unfortunately we're not going to have that emotionally charged element present in any of those games this season.  Again, being frank, in the other 11 games of his he was horrific as a passer, statistically/metrically speaking.  

 

He was 152 for 294 (51.7%), for 1,850 Yards, 7 TDs, 11 INTs, with a sack-rate of 8.4, same as Manuel, which is high, particularly or a mobile QB.  

 

I'm quite sorry that you thiink that those numbers are better than Manuel's rookie numbers.  If you don't think that needs massive improvement tho I'm really  not sure what to tell you.  It's far from even average though much less Franchise Caliber.  

 

But those are the FACTS.  

 

11 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Oh, to answer your question directly, he had: 

 

Benjamin, who's had more career yards in fewer seasons than any receiver you mentioned from 2013.  

Holmes who's about mimicked Goodwin.  

Foster who's rookie season was about what Woods' was.  

Johnson, who's done nothing in the NFL with two other teams since then, one of those teams having a great QB.  

Chandler whose career doesn't even match Clay's.  

Hogan whose single best career, in NE with Brady, is barely better than Foster's rookie season.  

 

Not seeing a significant difference there.  The other thing that you dismiss, which is clearly the case, is that many of our WRs didn't perform better simply  because Allen didn't see them (or what, couldn't find them) when they were open.  

 

I realize that that's the turd on top of the toaster that no one wants to admit is there, but it is, at least for the time being.  

 

To suggest that somehow Manuel had anything even approaching an above-average cast of receivers is to lack objectivity and honesty in this discussion.  

 

Either way, here are the career totals of all of the WRs from 2013 that you've mentioned:  

 

2,610 Yards, 18 TDs, 7 seasons

2,137 Yards, 12 TDs, 6 seasons

794 Yards, 4 TDs, 4 seasons (out of the league for four seasons now) 

4,764 Yards, 34 TDs, 8 seasons (this is the star of the group, averaging fewer than 50 yards-per-game career and 4 TDs/season, now out of the league for four seasons)  

4,451 Yards, 23 TDs, 6 seasons (only successful to any significant extent on a team with a very good QB on a team with the 5th leading passing game, who was a rookie in 2013)  

 

Only one of those 5 has averaged over 800 yards/season and prior to playing in LA last season he averaged below 700 yards/season.  

Otherwise none of those WRs has averaged over evey 600 yards/season.  

 

There's nothing prolific in that group when we consider that Woods was a rookie in 2013, sorry.  Two of the five are no longer playing despite their still being well into their playing-age range with neither older than 32 now.  Woods remains to be seen, but he's only had great success this past season, again, on a prolific passing team, his six seasons prior to that were not impressive.  Much as in NE it could very well be that the success of their passing game has a whole lot more to do with Goff than with their WRs.  Even Cooks did better than he did in NO and no one's going to argue that Goff is better than Brees right now.  It obviously means something that he posted his best season on the Rams' offense with Goff throwing tho.  

 

5 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

So 100 Scouts would admit that tossing 10 TDs and 12 INTs is good?  

 

Mmmm, OK, if you say so.  

 

I suppose that they'd say that he was good in the Red Zone too.  

 

Argue as you may, this isn't worth my time.  It's ridiculous, you speaking for "100 scouts, coaches, GMs, and personnel directors," many of whom have already contradicted your ridiculous position.  

 

 

You have convinced me.

Josh Allen and the 5th the Bills got for McCarron to KC for EJ Manuel.

Git-er-dun Beane!

[Ronin]

5 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

No you aren't.

 

 

This is really incredible.

 

What's incredible is suggesting that Allen's passing line was good.  

 

What's incredible is suggesting that the 2013 WRs on team, considering that two were rookies and none were 1st-round draft picks, two of which are out of the league for several seasons despite them still being well within playing age, and of the 30 or so season-years only four times have they collectively logged over 1,000 yards, were anything other than a very average lot at best or more likely a below-average lot.  

 

But I get it, same as everyone talked about Spiller and Watkins to name a couple, and Dion Dawkins last season going into this past one, etc., etc., etc., people always see greatness before it actually arrives.  It's a typical human response.  

[PrimeTime101]

6 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

What's incredible is suggesting that Allen's passing line was good.  

 

What's incredible is suggesting that the 2013 WRs on team, considering that two were rookies and none were 1st-round draft picks, two of which are out of the league for several seasons despite them still being well within playing age, and of the 30 or so season-years only four times have they collectively logged over 1,000 yards, were anything other than a very average lot at best or more likely a below-average lot.  

 

But I get it, same as everyone talked about Spiller and Watkins to name a couple, and Dion Dawkins last season going into this past one, etc., etc., etc., people always see greatness before it actually arrives.  It's a typical human response.  

Continue to act like a troll and maybe some day you will become one. Welcome to the ignored list. This topic is about the OL not QB. Stay on topic.

Edited March 20, 2019 by PrimeTime101

[Ronin]

1 minute ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

 

 

 

You have convinced me.

Josh Allen and the 5th the Bills got for McCarron to KC for EJ Manuel.

Git-er-dun Beane!

 

No convincing necessary.  I have nothing to do with the forthcoming outcome.  Allen could be the next Brady or whomever, or he could also be the next EJ Manuel.  

 

I'm merely reacting to some of the absurd narratives here.  So many people already penciling Allen in as a future great QB when his short-medium game is bottom-dwelling, except for those throwing any and all objective data out the window and relying exclusively on the end-all-to-be-all "eye test," or having the  "It factor" as in Manuel's case, and when the basis for a franchise QB can essentially be defined upon that QB's short-medium game.  

 

I'd LOVE for Allen to "be the one" for the next decade and a half.  

 

Unfortunately it's not up to me.  I'm simply pointing out both the commonalities that all franchise QBs possess contrasted with Allen's present shortcomings in that way.  

 

His ability to reconcile those hinges not one iota on anything that I put out.  What's difficult for others to grasp, apparently, is that it also doesn't depend upon their opinions either.  

[Kelly the Dog]

7 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

 

 

 

You have convinced me.

Josh Allen and the 5th the Bills got for McCarron to KC for EJ Manuel.

Git-er-dun Beane!

Well, he's proven to be the better pure passer by stats. There is no need to watch these guys.

 

I have heard that most of the top NFL teams are now going to paid by the hour scouts, up to three hours per week, who just work Sunday and Monday mornings, online, looking at the stats from the college and pro games to determine who the teams draft, sign, re-sign, etc. It saves a ton of money on travel costs!

[PrimeTime101]

2 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

No convincing necessary.  I have nothing to do with the forthcoming outcome.  Allen could be the next Brady or whomever, or he could also be the next EJ Manuel.  

 

I'm merely reacting to some of the absurd narratives here.  So many people already penciling Allen in as a future great QB when his short-medium game is bottom-dwelling, except for those throwing any and all objective data out the window and relying exclusively on the end-all-to-be-all "eye test," or having the  "It factor" as in Manuel's case, and when the basis for a franchise QB can essentially be defined upon that QB's short-medium game.  

 

I'd LOVE for Allen to "be the one" for the next decade and a half.  

 

Unfortunately it's not up to me.  I'm simply pointing out both the commonalities that all franchise QBs possess contrasted with Allen's present shortcomings in that way.  

 

His ability to reconcile those hinges not one iota on anything that I put out.  What's difficult for others to grasp, apparently, is that it also doesn't depend upon their opinions either.  

 

They are entitled to there opinions as you are. If you don't like others opinions that stop reading them and slamming them for having one that you don't agree with. Your the same person that thought the world would end when we got Josh. Get over yourself.

[Ronin]

1 minute ago, PrimeTime101 said:

Continue to act like a troll and maybe some day you will become one. Welcome to the ignored list. This topic is about the OL not QB. Stay on topic.

 

What, for commenting on something that someone said?  

 

If it's off-topic it's because someone else sent it there and I responded.  Perhaps take it up with them. 

 

And yes, please, by all means, put me on your "ignore" list.  Seriously, I'm begging you.  I would absolutely LOVE it is everyone that posts nothing but opinionated tripe put me on their ignore list.  Saves me the hassle of doing the same. 

 

I enjoy good well-researched back-n-forth, not ill-substantiated and opinionated emotionally-charged gibberish.  

 

So again, please, do so.  I'm more than content to discuss this amont the 20 or so posters that I find want to actually discuss things on an intellectual level.  That applies to everyone.  

[ColoradoBills]

2 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

Well, he's proven to be the better pure passer by stats. There is no need to watch these guys.

 

I have heard that most of the top NFL teams are now going to paid by the hour scouts, up to three hours per week, who just work Sunday and Monday mornings, online, looking at the stats from the college and pro games to determine who the teams draft, sign, re-sign, etc. It saves a ton of money on travel costs!

 

I'm convinced again!

[Ronin]

Just now, PrimeTime101 said:

 

They are entitled to there opinions as you are. If you don't like others opinions that stop reading them and slamming them for having one that you don't agree with. Your the same person that thought the world would end when we got Josh. Get over yourself.

 

Anything that I post is well-substantiated.  People get upset when the facts don't line up with their opinions.  All I ask, a big thing apparently, is that people substantiate their positions.  

 

Case in point, I posted a simple table above and one poster, who's on ignore now, posting absolutely nothing but pure conjecture and opinions as to why the data was wrong.  

 

I mean seriously, you may want to take it up with those types. 

[PrimeTime101]

1 minute ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

What, for commenting on something that someone said?  

 

If it's off-topic it's because someone else sent it there and I responded.  Perhaps take it up with them. 

 

And yes, please, by all means, put me on your "ignore" list.  Seriously, I'm begging you.  I would absolutely LOVE it is everyone that posts nothing but opinionated tripe put me on their ignore list.  Saves me the hassle of doing the same. 

 

I enjoy good well-researched back-n-forth, not ill-substantiated and opinionated emotionally-charged gibberish.  

 

So again, please, do so.  I'm more than content to discuss this amont the 20 or so posters that I find want to actually discuss things on an intellectual level.  That applies to everyone.  

All you are is a flamer. You take the stats and you twist them for your own good. I got news for you.. #'s PFF's mean nothing unless you look at the whole picture. So go ahead with hating on people that love Josh Allen and think he is our next best thing. Flaming is what you do best right?

1 minute ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Anything that I post is well-substantiated.  People get upset when the facts don't line up with their opinions.  All I ask, a big thing apparently, is that people substantiate their positions.  

 

Case in point, I posted a simple table above and one poster, who's on ignore now, posting absolutely nothing but pure conjecture and opinions as to why the data was wrong.  

 

I mean seriously, you may want to take it up with those types. 

So the fact that the EJ's rookie stats look a little better makes sense right? your being silly in your thinking.

3 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Anything that I post is well-substantiated.  People get upset when the facts don't line up with their opinions.  All I ask, a big thing apparently, is that people substantiate their positions.  

 

Case in point, I posted a simple table above and one poster, who's on ignore now, posting absolutely nothing but pure conjecture and opinions as to why the data was wrong.  

 

I mean seriously, you may want to take it up with those types. 

Right because you are god, you are right and everyone around you is always wrong when you try to prove them otherwise. Keep running with it. see how it ends.

[Ronin]

Just now, PrimeTime101 said:

All you are is a flamer. You take the stats and you twist them for your own good. I got news for you.. #'s PFF's mean nothing unless you look at the whole picture. So go ahead with hating on people that love Josh Allen and think he is our next best thing. Flaming is what you do best right?

 

That's funny, I'd suggest that you're the one doing the flaming here.  

 

To start, I haven't quoted PFF in this string today and what you're recently responded to.  

 

Secondly, loving or hating Allen has nothing to do with it.  I love the kid to be honest.  I can separate the fact that his passing skills are nowhere near average at present tho, unlike yourself and others that you think you speak for.  

 

Discussing objectively is what I do best.  Posts with no objectivity, hating on other posters with no objective info otherwise, AHEM, such as yours above, would appear to be flaming types.  Just sayin' if we're going to call it what it is.  Once again, I'm reacting to your flame.  Trying to be objective. 

 

Funny too how you know that "I hate Allen" when I'm fully on record here stating the complete opposite.  So regarding flaming, come again.  

 

Either way, do me a favor and put me on ignore, then you won't have this issue.  Right?  ... Right?  

[PrimeTime101]

1 minute ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

That's funny, I'd suggest that you're the one doing the flaming here.  

 

To start, I haven't quoted PFF in this string today and what you're recently responded to.  

 

Secondly, loving or hating Allen has nothing to do with it.  I love the kid to be honest.  I can separate the fact that his passing skills are nowhere near average at present tho, unlike yourself and others that you think you speak for.  

 

Discussing objectively is what I do best.  Posts with no objectivity, hating on other posters with no objective info otherwise, AHEM, such as yours above, would appear to be flaming types.  Just sayin' if we're going to call it what it is.  Once again, I'm reacting to your flame.  Trying to be objective. 

 

Funny too how you know that "I hate Allen" when I'm fully on record here stating the complete opposite.  So regarding flaming, come again.  

 

Either way, do me a favor and put me on ignore, then you won't have this issue.  Right?  ... Right?  

You said Quote "I wanted the other Josh BADLY and think Rosen will be better then Allen but Allen is on my team so I will root for Allen"

 

hmmm.

[Kelly the Dog]

22 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

You said Quote "I wanted the other Josh BADLY and think Rosen will be better then Allen but Allen is on my team so I will root for Allen"

 

hmmm.

Facts are the new Fake News.