John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You make such compelling arguments.

 

 

 

 

From the head coach:

 

When you look at the position he plays, and you’ve heard me say this before, it’s the most unselfish position on the football field, the defensive tackle position, in particular the one-technique, which is typically where he plays,” McDermott said. “A lot of the time he frees up, the way the game works is he frees up the linebackers to make plays by absorbing and taking on double teams and what not. I thought our run defense inside, which is where Star works, was mostly solid [Sunday]. Outside, we could’ve done some things better but inside, I think for the most part he played a solid game.”

[Augie]

34 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I just don’t believe any of this.

 

You can have that belief, without being a jerk. That’s a step above. 

[Gugny]

4 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Sammy had 114 yards on 8 targets in the championship game.... It's just a matter of staying healthy with him. 

 

There is no perhaps. He'd be the best WR on this roster by a mile.

 

He'd be the most talented.  The best would play through discomfort.  Sam is a selfish prick who COULD be a great WR.

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

He'd be the most talented.  The best would play through discomfort.  Sam is a selfish prick who COULD be a great WR.

 

I’ll wish the best for everyone, including Sammy. I hope his words after leaving the Bills are sincere. I hope he can realize all his potential. 

[Gugny]

4 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I’ll wish the best for everyone, including Sammy. I hope his words after leaving the Bills are sincere. I hope he can realize all his potential. 

 

Potential.  That's what he's been since he was drafted.  He quit on the Bills vs. the Jags in London.  He was crap to me since then.  Glad he's gone.

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Potential.  That's what he's been since he was drafted.  He quit on the Bills vs. the Jags in London.  He was crap to me since then.  Glad he's gone.

 

For mentioning the Bills vs Jags in London, I wish that Royale’s brother will mistake you for his GF.......if you know what I mean.....

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Cripple Creek said:

No, it is one reason.

 

And the others are? 

[Royale with Cheese]

47 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You make such compelling arguments.

 

 

 

 

 

You brought up hypotheticals.

I brought up they haven’t done anything to replace him.  

 

We needed DT help last year...we draft Phillips.  

 

Jordan Phillips gets put out on the street.  Comes to Buffalo at week 5.  Plays 26% of the plays on defense.  Gets a 1 year $4.5 million dollar contract.  That’s not who they are pushing to take snaps away from Star.

 

Star is going to start and play roughly 50% of the snaps.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Royale with Cheese

[Gugny]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And the others are? 

 

I hate to speak for CC, but I'm sure he's in bed by now.  I think his point is that - no matter how great a young QB looks after his first couple seasons, a lot can change/happen.

 

Injuries are obviously one thing.  But perhaps after a year or two of tape, other teams figure out how to effectively defend them.  Maybe the QB's team loses high quality receivers and replaces them with less talent.  Maybe the O line changes.  Or the defense.  Or the coaching staff.

 

It's not unfair to say that, in order for most QBs to be successful, some stars have to align.  I think Mahomes is the real deal, but let's face it - he had a LOT of talent (players and coaches) supporting him last year.

 

I may not be accurately representing what CC is trying to say, but that's how I feel.

 

 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

5 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Because he was paid half of what Dareus made, 5 years later...

 

Star clogs holes, that’s his job.  Dareus at a shade below $100 million is supposed to be a wrecking ball.  Did you think they made the same money or something?

 

I remember hearing the same stuff about Dareus before and after the draft that I’m hearing about Star now. His impact won’t always show up on the stat sheet. Dareus was clearly traded for attitude reasons. He is a better player than star though. 

[Patrick Duffy]

6 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

The nonsense was you attacking another poster for daring to rate the Bills current WR corps as being of significantly lesser stature than most other teams' WR groups before the season starts.  NOBODY knows how anything in the upcoming season is going to turn out but EVERYBODY makes predictions, you included, and it's all based on taking what teams/coaches/players have done in the past and guessing what they'll do in the future.  I'm sure that if the poster had claimed that the Bills had a top ten WR corps now that they added Beasley and Brown, you wouldn't complain that "they can't be [one of the best] in the league in a season that has not started."  

 

The Bills WRs were so poor last year that they could improve significantly and still be in the bottom third of the league.  Beasley and Brown could both have career years and the WR corps as a whole could still be a bottom feeder unit if Jones and Foster don't play well.

 

 

 

If the Bills had chosen to keep Cordy Glenn, they would have had two decent OTs.  They could have played Glenn at LT and put Dawkins at RT, but McDermott and Beane either never expected that without Incognito next to him, Dawkins' play would plummet or they didn't care.  They could have also invested more than 1 late fifth round pick and some UDFA and waiver wire refugees in the OL in the 2018 draft.

 

They might have also tried to work with Incognito ... like not demanding he take a pay cut. It seems to me that they might have wanted to push incognito out the door once Wood was gone.  Maybe they only kept him because he was Woods' buddy.   "Encouraging" Incognito to retire might have very well been the right call but not doing so could have been a possibility. 

 

FTR, the Bills did not have a "terrible cap problem" in 2017 until they traded Dareus, lost Wood to injury/retirement, and then traded Glenn and had to eat the remainder of the guaranteed portions of those contracts.    They might have incurred dead cap money because of trading Taylor, too.  I think it would have been pretty hard for Beane to promise to "fix" a problem that didn't exist when he was interviewing for the GM position.

 

 

 

 Again, saying ***** that didn't happen. What is it with posters like you? Amazing!. The person you say I "attacked" DID NOT MAKE A PREDICTION. He sated it as a FACT that referred them in the bottom THIS season that HAS NOT STARTED YET. If it would have been just a prediction then I wouldn't have pointed it out in the 1st place. Of course we all make predictions, but you can't call a prediction a "fact" when it has not even happened yet.

 

And YES you were comparing those WR,s you listed, or implying that I was comparing the two, which again is nonsense jibberish that never happened. Do you even read what you type? Serous question. Hard to believe that you do with some of the stuff I see you post.

 

Looks like that seems to be very hard for you to understand for some reason. Maybe the caps can help you read it better, and it's sad that you go making stuff up to try and justify your silly, nonsense of a pitiful argument.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Patrick_Duffy

[Nihilarian]

7 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Because he was paid half of what Dareus made, 5 years later...

 

Star clogs holes, that’s his job.  Dareus at a shade below $100 million is supposed to be a wrecking ball.  Did you think they made the same money or something?

 

 He was the No. 3 overall pick in 2011, and in his six-plus years, he did not live up to his draft status. Dareus was a good player for Buffalo, and he was selected to two Pro Bowls, but he was never the difference-maker the Bills hoped he would be, and then he became a drain on the budget when former general manager Doug Whaley stupidly gave him a $96 million contract extension that included $60 million in guaranteed money.

 

Trading Dareus enabled the Bills to offload his massive salary, and while they ate some dead cap money, they rid themselves of a player who just didn’t seem totally bought into Sean McDermott’s process, nor his defense. Oh, and there was the off-field nonsense they would no longer have to be worried about. 

 

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/2018/01/05/buffalo-bills-marcell-dareus-trade-jacksonville-jaguars-nfl-playoffs/1005697001/

 

 

[Cripple Creek]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And the others are? 

Time, games, success. Greatness is defined over time.

[Royale with Cheese]

5 hours ago, Chemical said:

 

I remember hearing the same stuff about Dareus before and after the draft that I’m hearing about Star now. His impact won’t always show up on the stat sheet. Dareus was clearly traded for attitude reasons. He is a better player than star though. 

 

So what you hear means it’s the truth or something?

 

The reason Dareus was paid twice as much 4 years ago is because he was supposed to be a 2 dimensional player.  He blows up plays in both the run and the pass.  Since he signed his huge contract, he just fills holes.  

Now Dareus had to restructure that deal to a two year, $20 million dollar contract with just $5 million guaranteed.

 

Before his big contract, he was a top 2-3 DT in the league.... Now, he’s not even in the top 25.  He was traded for attitude and lack of production with the money he was making.

 

Dareus and Stars roles aren’t the same so comparing them is apples to oranges.

 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

13 hours ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

First off, I never said that "you" said it, you quoted me about the subject so I explained. Secondly, the poster that I was originally referring  to once again ,stated it as a fact. 

 

To answer your IMO awkward question, a draft is held for teams to get better and younger players,  depending on needs and how much cap room they have (amazed I am explaining this). The other part about passed performances is players change, they get better and they get worse (thought that was quite obvious also)

 

Don't know how you manage to get picking names out of a hat with my previous post, I'm baffled by that one. Anyways, I don't know where your trying to go with this because my previous post was about the poster who stated the WR core was already bottom of the league when the season hasn't started. I made that perfectly clear, all this other stuff you're talking about, I have no idea how you got that out of my post.

 

Anyways, feel like I'm just repeating myself and talking to air. So I'm going to move and and just let you spin your tires here. Have a good 1.

 

I don't know what planet you're from, but here on earth people do use the past to predict the future with a decent amount of certainty in many cases.  Your whole argument with the other poster is you that just because they were lousy last year, until they play this season, you have no idea how they'll be.  So teams draft players based on how they played the prior season with a different set of rules and a playing in a completely different environment.  But they still somehow use that data to draft.  Based on your comments though past performance means nothing so then as I suggested why not just pick names from a hat.  Just as much chance as getting it right according to you.

 

In January you turn on the TV and listen to the weather and they say a high of 23, do you think we don't know that, it could be 90 today.  Granted a much higher change of it being cold in January than the Bills receivers not improving some. Though I'd say there's a better chance of having a warm day in January than the current Bills receivers finishing the year in the top 5.

 

I don't recall the exact words the poster said that you are arguing he stated it as a fact, but that's a stretch.  It's hard for anyone to say more than 2 words about anything without it coming out as if they are stating a fact, but in reality 90% of the time it is more of an opinion so really no all that bothered by him stating it as a "fact".  Just like the weatherman who states it will be 23 today and he's stating in a factorial manor and instead it's 25, does that mean he's completely clueless, I don't think so.  Do I think the group will improve yes, top 5 no, and honestly would be less surprised to see no improvement than top 5.

 

So enjoy your time on whatever illogical planet you're from that uses no past history to predict the future.  Good luck with that!

[Cripple Creek]

5 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

I don't know what planet you're from, but here on earth people do use the past to predict the future with a decent amount of certainty in many cases.  Your whole argument with the other poster is you that just because they were lousy last year, until they play this season, you have no idea how they'll be.  So teams draft players based on how they played the prior season with a different set of rules and a playing in a completely different environment.  But they still somehow use that data to draft.  Based on your comments though past performance means nothing so then as I suggested why not just pick names from a hat.  Just as much chance as getting it right according to you.

 

In January you turn on the TV and listen to the weather and they say a high of 23, do you think we don't know that, it could be 90 today.  Granted a much higher change of it being cold in January than the Bills receivers not improving some. Though I'd say there's a better chance of having a warm day in January than the current Bills receivers finishing the year in the top 5.

 

I don't recall the exact words the poster said that you are arguing he stated it as a fact, but that's a stretch.  It's hard for anyone to say more than 2 words about anything without it coming out as if they are stating a fact, but in reality 90% of the time it is more of an opinion so really no all that bothered by him stating it as a "fact".  Just like the weatherman who states it will be 23 today and he's stating in a factorial manor and instead it's 25, does that mean he's completely clueless, I don't think so.  Do I think the group will improve yes, top 5 no, and honestly would be less surprised to see no improvement than top 5.

 

So enjoy your time on whatever illogical planet you're from that uses no past history to predict the future.  Good luck with that!

Are you sure you're in the right thread? @Mike in Horseheads does provide daily weather reports.  Maybe you should talk to him.

[Thurman#1]

14 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

If the Bills had chosen to keep Cordy Glenn, they would have had two decent OTs.  They could have played Glenn at LT and put Dawkins at RT, but McDermott and Beane either never expected that without Incognito next to him, Dawkins' play would plummet or they didn't care.  They could have also invested more than 1 late fifth round pick and some UDFA and waiver wire refugees in the OL in the 2018 draft.

 

They might have also tried to work with Incognito ... like not demanding he take a pay cut. It seems to me that they might have wanted to push incognito out the door once Wood was gone.  Maybe they only kept him because he was Woods' buddy.   "Encouraging" Incognito to retire might have very well been the right call but not doing so could have been a possibility. 

 

FTR, the Bills did not have a "terrible cap problem" in 2017 until they traded Dareus, lost Wood to injury/retirement, and then traded Glenn and had to eat the remainder of the guaranteed portions of those contracts.    They might have incurred dead cap money because of trading Taylor, too.  I think it would have been pretty hard for Beane to promise to "fix" a problem that didn't exist when he was interviewing for the GM position.

 

 

 

 

Yes, as you point out, if they'd kept Cordy Glenn he might well have started. But as I have pointed out again and again and again ... no matter how much you want to pretend that we didn't have a cap problem, we did. You want to put your hands over your ears and say, "Nonny, nonny, nonny, not listening, no cap problem," that's fine. But we did. Choose to miss the point if you must, but we did, and that's the main reason Glenn was traded.

 

That and of course one of the main reasons we were rebuilding was because we were in pathological need of a possible franchise QB, and the Glenn trade put us in a much better position to get Josh Allen.

 

And yeah, they might have worked with Incognito. If they'd wanted to take on a guy who was showing signs of a massive breakdown. They didn't. Pretty much everyone here but you is fine with that decision.

 

The cap problem was hanging over this team like a thunderhead from Whaley's term here. He'd spent like a team in the last year of a Super Bowl window to produce a mediocre roster that managed seven wins.

 

And I'm not guessing that Beane promised that in the interview. It's been widely reported that he promised to fix the cap at his interview. Again, you want to hide your head in the sand about their cap problems, that's fine, but you'll miss stuff, as you are now, and it will be very obvious to everyone around you.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Mike in Horseheads]

4 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said:

Are you sure you're in the right thread? @Mike in Horseheads does provide daily weather reports.  Maybe you should talk to him.

You can call me Al

 

 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

Time, games, success. Greatness is defined over time.

 

And nobody has yet defined them as great. You said you were suspicious. That suggests you have seen something to believe their performance levels won't last. When I have questioned you on that your answer was "they might get injured." So beyond that what gives you pause to be suspicious? 

[BADOLBILZ]

11 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

You brought up hypotheticals.

I brought up they haven’t done anything to replace him.  

 

We needed DT help last year...we draft Phillips.  

 

Jordan Phillips gets put out on the street.  Comes to Buffalo at week 5.  Plays 26% of the plays on defense.  Gets a 1 year $4.5 million dollar contract.  That’s not who they are pushing to take snaps away from Star.

 

Star is going to start and play roughly 50% of the snaps.

 

 

What I brought up was Lotulelei's anemic production and untenable contract..........that's not a hypothetical........it happened.

 

And btw.........yet again you stumble over statistics in this thread...........Phillips played 39% of his teams defensive snaps in 2018(versus Star's 47% and Phillips 38%).    You literally pointed out that he didn't start playing for Buffalo until week 5 then cited the % of snaps he played out of Buffalo's 16 games?    I'm not even sure what your point was bringing it up but........again you just don't seem to understand how stats work and what they mean.

 

My take is this.........Lotulelei is the most one dimensional and least productive of the Bills top 3 veteran DT's......and the other two aren't that good.

 

The only thing he does well at this point is not miss games to injury..........but barring significant injuries if he doesn't play a lot better he could start missing games due to lack of impact.   Which would be an absurdly poor result for a 2018 free agent pickup with a fully guaranteed $11.5M cap hit in 2019.

[Thurman#1]

19 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Thanks for defending me, Thurm.  I gave up because its hopeless arguing about it.  

 

Even if it WERE true, which it isn't, that no coach has ever been mediocre or worse for four years and then succeeded, it wouldn't prove anything about McDermott.  The sample size of previous head coaches who fit the criteria is too small to establish any kind of hard and fast rule.   

 

They are literally making up stuff to prove they're correct.  

 

Point is, they're arguing a point that can be known only looking backward.  McD is not a.success until he is one, but the fact that he may not have succeeded yet doesn't mean he won't succeed.  They have an opinion, and you and I can respect that.  I won't waste my time on people who can't or won't acknowledge that they are only opinions and are not certainties.  

 

 

This really should be my approach, Shaw. 

 

It's what I would do if I saw someone doing this in person. I should probably shake my head sadly and walk on. I'm not sure I'm a good enough person to do that here on the net. It is the smart move, though, no doubt.

[SoTier]

12 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

I hate to speak for CC, but I'm sure he's in bed by now.  I think his point is that - no matter how great a young QB looks after his first couple seasons, a lot can change/happen.

 

Injuries are obviously one thing.  But perhaps after a year or two of tape, other teams figure out how to effectively defend them.  Maybe the QB's team loses high quality receivers and replaces them with less talent.  Maybe the O line changes.  Or the defense.  Or the coaching staff.

 

It's not unfair to say that, in order for most QBs to be successful, some stars have to align.  I think Mahomes is the real deal, but let's face it - he had a LOT of talent (players and coaches) supporting him last year.

 

I may not be accurately representing what CC is trying to say, but that's how I feel.

 

 

 

Except that young QBs who have two successful seasons, the second one significantly better than the first, just don't seem to crash and burn.  Some -- perhaps most -- don't ever get much better, but they don't fall apart.  The only two I can think of in the last ten or fifteen years who might fit this description are Josh Freeman and Jameis Winston, but they were never as good as Mahomes or Watson.

 

Mahomes and Watson were both excellent franchise quality QBs in 2018.  If one or both don't ever get any better, they'll still be better than most of the QBs currently in the NFL.  

[BADOLBILZ]

4 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

So what you hear means it’s the truth or something?

 

The reason Dareus was paid twice as much 4 years ago is because he was supposed to be a 2 dimensional player.  He blows up plays in both the run and the pass.  Since he signed his huge contract, he just fills holes.  

Now Dareus had to restructure that deal to a two year, $20 million dollar contract with just $5 million guaranteed.

 

Before his big contract, he was a top 2-3 DT in the league.... Now, he’s not even in the top 25.  He was traded for attitude and lack of production with the money he was making.

 

Dareus and Stars roles aren’t the same so comparing them is apples to oranges.

 

 

 

Actually Dareus has played mostly nose tackle(0-tech) for Buffalo and Jax since he signed that Bills contract.

 

In the 1-technique for his entire career Lotulelei has been better positioned to make tackles and plays in the backfield than Dareus has been since Rex moved him to NT.

 

 Dareus was tremendous in his partial season at the 1-tech for Buffalo in 2017 and of course the impact of his loss was massive in the subsequent two months.

 

Star just fell off a cliff last year.    He wasn't that good in 2017 which is why the signing was almost universally panned as one of the worst if not the worst value of the 2018 crop.......but he was BAD on the field in 2018.

 

I've heard excuses about Edmunds...........but if Edmunds struggles would have lead to anything it would have been more attempts by Lotulelei to make plays.    It was the exact opposite.......he simply couldn't impact OL and disengage.......he was running in quick sand all season.    I entirely expected some physical excuses but apparently he just sucked.

 

 As for Dareus..........it's my understanding that he will return to starting at the 3T position this year for the first time since his 2014 first team all pro season.   Contrary to what Bills fans want to think Dareus has been playing well in Jacksonville and his base salaries weren't prohibitive the first couple seasons...........he had to re-do his deal because the backloaded base salary portion of his Bills contract came up.    

[Cripple Creek]

50 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And nobody has yet defined them as great. You said you were suspicious. That suggests you have seen something to believe their performance levels won't last. When I have questioned you on that your answer was "they might get injured." So beyond that what gives you pause to be suspicious? 

I’m not going to go back and dig out posts. Feel free. I have seen them play. I feel more confident in Mahomes’ continued success than I do Watson. If you want anything more specific than that, sorry mate, can’t help you there. 

[Thurman#1]

10 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

What I brought up was Lotulelei's anemic production and untenable contract..........that's not a hypothetical........it happened.

 

And btw.........yet again you stumble over statistics in this thread...........Phillips played 39% of his teams defensive snaps in 2018(versus Star's 47% and Phillips 38%).    You literally pointed out that he didn't start playing for Buffalo until week 5 then cited the % of snaps he played out of Buffalo's 16 games?    I'm not even sure what your point was bringing it up but........again you just don't seem to understand how stats work and what they mean.

 

My take is this.........Lotulelei is the most one dimensional and least productive of the Bills top 3 veteran DT's......and the other two aren't that good.

 

The only thing he does well at this point is not miss games to injury..........but barring significant injuries if he doesn't play a lot better he could start missing games due to lack of impact.   Which would be an absurdly poor result for a 2018 free agent pickup with a fully guaranteed $11.5M cap hit in 2019.

 

 

No, "it" didn't happen. That's your interpretation of what actually happened. "Anemic," "untenable," those are your words, with nothing particular to back them up. There's no reason whatsoever to think that Star isn't doing just what they want, or that they're not perfectly happy to pay him the money they gave him.

 

Fair enough about your take in the third paragraph. One-dimensional? Yeah, fair enough. Least productive? Nah. My take is that they're getting what they want from him. They need a guy in the middle to do what he does. It's not like they didn't know what they were getting. McDermott had worked hands-on with the guy for four years in Carolina. He knew who Lotulelei was and what he could do. But your idea that he could start to miss games due to lack of impact is made up out of whole cloth with nothing to base it on but your opinion.

 

And with Lotulelei in the middle, McDermott's built an excellent young defense that's been really productive and efficient. They need a guy to do what he does in McDermott's defense. If they didn't, they wouldn't have acquired him. And they think what he does is worth what they are paying him, which is why they gave him that contract.

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

44 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

No, "it" didn't happen. That's your interpretation of what actually happened. "Anemic," "untenable," those are your words, with nothing particular to back them up. There's no reason whatsoever to think that Star isn't doing just what they want, or that they're not perfectly happy to pay him the money they gave him.

 

Fair enough about your take in the third paragraph. One-dimensional? Yeah, fair enough. Least productive? Nah. My take is that they're getting what they want from him. They need a guy in the middle to do what he does. It's not like they didn't know what they were getting. McDermott had worked hands-on with the guy for four years in Carolina. He knew who Lotulelei was and what he could do. But your idea that he could start to miss games due to lack of impact is made up out of whole cloth with nothing to base it on but your opinion.

 

And with Lotulelei in the middle, McDermott's built an excellent young defense that's been really productive and efficient. They need a guy to do what he does in McDermott's defense. If they didn't, they wouldn't have acquired him. And they think what he does is worth what they are paying him, which is why they gave him that contract.

 

“Getting what they want from him”  those are your words with nothing in particular to back them up. 

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

“Getting what they want from him”  those are your words with nothing in particular to back them up. 

I quoted McD above about them getting what they wanted.

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

I’m not going to go back and dig out posts. Feel free. I have seen them play. I feel more confident in Mahomes’ continued success than I do Watson. If you want anything more specific than that, sorry mate, can’t help you there. 

 

They are both really good and will continue being really good. The eye in the sky doesn't lie. 

[GunnerBill]

3 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Actually Dareus has played mostly nose tackle(0-tech) for Buffalo and Jax since he signed that Bills contract.

 

In the 1-technique for his entire career Lotulelei has been better positioned to make tackles and plays in the backfield than Dareus has been since Rex moved him to NT.

 

 Dareus was tremendous in his partial season at the 1-tech for Buffalo in 2017 and of course the impact of his loss was massive in the subsequent two months.

 

Star just fell off a cliff last year.    He wasn't that good in 2017 which is why the signing was almost universally panned as one of the worst if not the worst value of the 2018 crop.......but he was BAD on the field in 2018.

 

I've heard excuses about Edmunds...........but if Edmunds struggles would have lead to anything it would have been more attempts by Lotulelei to make plays.    It was the exact opposite.......he simply couldn't impact OL and disengage.......he was running in quick sand all season.    I entirely expected some physical excuses but apparently he just sucked.

 

 As for Dareus..........it's my understanding that he will return to starting at the 3T position this year for the first time since his 2014 first team all pro season.   Contrary to what Bills fans want to think Dareus has been playing well in Jacksonville and his base salaries weren't prohibitive the first couple seasons...........he had to re-do his deal because the backloaded base salary portion of his Bills contract came up.    

 

The only bit of this I would question is "fell off a cliff." His 2016 and 2017 seasons were pretty bad as well. I don't think he has been on a cliff to fall off since his rookie year.

 

I do love it when people try and make excuses by explaining to me like I am 5 what his role is on the team. Yes. I know what he is suppose to do. The problem is I also see what he actually does.... or doesn't. 

[Cripple Creek]

48 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

They are both really good and will continue being really good. The eye in the sky doesn't lie. 

Then come back to me in 5 years and give me a good na na na na na. Also, consider quitting your day job.

[Patrick Duffy]

7 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

I don't know what planet you're from, but here on earth people do use the past to predict the future with a decent amount of certainty in many cases.  Your whole argument with the other poster is you that just because they were lousy last year, until they play this season, you have no idea how they'll be.  So teams draft players based on how they played the prior season with a different set of rules and a playing in a completely different environment.  But they still somehow use that data to draft.  Based on your comments though past performance means nothing so then as I suggested why not just pick names from a hat.  Just as much chance as getting it right according to you.

 

In January you turn on the TV and listen to the weather and they say a high of 23, do you think we don't know that, it could be 90 today.  Granted a much higher change of it being cold in January than the Bills receivers not improving some. Though I'd say there's a better chance of having a warm day in January than the current Bills receivers finishing the year in the top 5.

 

I don't recall the exact words the poster said that you are arguing he stated it as a fact, but that's a stretch.  It's hard for anyone to say more than 2 words about anything without it coming out as if they are stating a fact, but in reality 90% of the time it is more of an opinion so really no all that bothered by him stating it as a "fact".  Just like the weatherman who states it will be 23 today and he's stating in a factorial manor and instead it's 25, does that mean he's completely clueless, I don't think so.  Do I think the group will improve yes, top 5 no, and honestly would be less surprised to see no improvement than top 5.

 

So enjoy your time on whatever illogical planet you're from that uses no past history to predict the future.  Good luck with that!

 

I stopped reading after the first 3 sentences and I'm surprised I let myself get that far. You are clearly missing the entire point that I was saying and I'm not wasting my time with you. So again, carry on with yourself. Have fun.

[mannc]

5 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

I’m not going to go back and dig out posts. Feel free. I have seen them play. I feel more confident in Mahomes’ continued success than I do Watson. If you want anything more specific than that, sorry mate, can’t help you there. 

Weak.

[Patrick Duffy]

7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Yes, as you point out, if they'd kept Cordy Glenn he might well have started. But as I have pointed out again and again and again ... no matter how much you want to pretend that we didn't have a cap problem, we did. You want to put your hands over your ears and say, "Nonny, nonny, nonny, not listening, no cap problem," that's fine. But we did. Choose to miss the point if you must, but we did, and that's the main reason Glenn was traded.

 

That and of course one of the main reasons we were rebuilding was because we were in pathological need of a possible franchise QB, and the Glenn trade put us in a much better position to get Josh Allen.

 

And yeah, they might have worked with Incognito. If they'd wanted to take on a guy who was showing signs of a massive breakdown. They didn't. Pretty much everyone here but you is fine with that decision.

 

The cap problem was hanging over this team like a thunderhead from Whaley's term here. He'd spent like a team in the last year of a Super Bowl window to produce a mediocre roster that managed seven wins.

 

And I'm not guessing that Beane promised that in the interview. It's been widely reported that he promised to fix the cap at his interview. Again, you want to hide your head in the sand about their cap problems, that's fine, but you'll miss stuff, as you are now, and it will be very obvious to everyone around you.

 

Agree with everything here basically. Just also wanted to point out about the bolded that I think that was more the case with Richie than not. I think they know and knew a lot more going on with Richie behind then scenes that some people may think. I think they were very close with the Richie issues and that it helped them make the decision that they ultimately decided to make with him.

 

And I for one agree with them. I liked him and think he was a heck of a player, but to me, he was clearly one of those players that you kinda had to keep a close eye on and be aware of what goes on with him.

 

[Augie]

While this has been interesting, I’d be curious to see what a poll looks like. In general, with all things considered, do you or do you not approve of the GM and HC?  YES or NO? I’d be eager to see what that looks like. I like our direction. I’m pleased. Is everything perfect? Of course not! But I’m pleased with where I think we are headed. 

 

 

(Someone more savvy and less lazy than myself is welcome to undertake that! ?)

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

Then come back to me in 5 years and give me a good na na na na na. Also, consider quitting your day job.

 

Don't worry I will. As for my job I enjoy it, so I think I will stick to it, thanks for the advice though. 

[oldmanfan]

44 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

If the Bills are a 6-8 win team the next two years with Allen remaining healthy there is no way these guys see a 5th year.... there will be very few if any still on the process bandwagon.

 

 

 

And if they're in the playoffs each year they're heros.  Why do you want them to fail?

[BADOLBILZ]

On 6/14/2019 at 8:19 AM, thebandit27 said:

 

Just as an FYI--it would have been Mahomes.

 

 

 

Terry Pegula and Whaley being in on Mahomes..........and McD(and presumably Beane from his office in Carolina) wanting to buy a vowel instead......... is one of those stories that becomes more important if "the process" goes off course in 2019.

 

After the early success of Mahomes and Watson it's going to be hard to accept more mediocrity or losing in exchange for just modest improvement from Allen in year 2...........he's not going to throw 50 TD passes but he needs to look VERY GOOD.........which likely isn't made easier by the modest assembly of weapons. 

 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

17 hours ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

 Again, saying ***** that didn't happen. What is it with posters like you? Amazing!. The person you say I "attacked" DID NOT MAKE A PREDICTION. He sated it as a FACT that referred them in the bottom THIS season that HAS NOT STARTED YET. If it would have been just a prediction then I wouldn't have pointed it out in the 1st place. Of course we all make predictions, but you can't call a prediction a "fact" when it has not even happened yet.

 

And YES you were comparing those WR,s you listed, or implying that I was comparing the two, which again is nonsense jibberish that never happened. Do you even read what you type? Serous question. Hard to believe that you do with some of the stuff I see you post.

 

Looks like that seems to be very hard for you to understand for some reason. Maybe the caps can help you read it better, and it's sad that you go making stuff up to try and justify your silly, nonsense of a pitiful argument.

 

Name me 5 teams that definitely have a worse wr corps on paper. 

 

We we went from worst WRs to maybe not worst. 

 

Last season we opened the year against the Ravens no one here seemed to be too concerned about facing John Brown AND Crabtree. 

 

The Dallas Cowboys were making national headlines for neededing WR help because they ONLY had Beasley and some scrubs. So they traded for Amari Cooper and their offense instantly improved. 

 

Your perception of Brown and Beasley is clearly being skewed by the fact that the Bills signed them. 

 

If they both ended up on the Jets are you honestly concerned for their two meetings a year?

[oldmanfan]

27 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

Just a hypothetical. 

 

I don't want them to fail, but it's ok to be skeptical. 

Why do all your hypotheticals assume the worst?  

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Why do all your hypotheticals assume the worst?  

 

 

19 years in a row where the team hasn't been in contention?

 

Say all you want about the management not being the same or whatever...........but it starts at the top and the Pegula's have owned the Sabres and Bills for a combined 12 full seasons and have 1 skin-of-teeth playoff appearance to show for it.

 

It's definitely warranted to be skeptical of an anemic track record like that.