John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

And my response would be that they brought in plenty too many OLs too. They like competition. And had two receivers last year they thought fit in with their long-term plans as more than bubble guys or development plays, in Zay and Foster. Of course they brought in competition and numbers. And Zay could play slot and the others might move around depending how things fall out.

 

Well Beasley is gonna play the Y (slot) I think that is all but a given. Zay is basically in a competition for the Z. If John Brown wins the X then Zay will start at the Z. My suspicion though is that Foster will win the X and then it will be at best a timeshare at the Z between Brown and Jones. But I think those who feel that Zay showed considerable progress last year (he was better, but not enough better) have to concede that is plausible the Bills felt differently given the way they acted in the offseason. 

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, SoTier said:

Well said!          Unfortunately, you will be crucified here for daring to say that maybe the emperor in his new suit looks very much like a guy in a birthday suit.

 

In the era of the salary cap, reasonable rookie salaries, and expensive veteran players, the time frame for building a team has been shortened considerably, and that means that teams have to be aces on player evaluations so that they don't let Stephon Gilmore or Robert Woods walk in FA without having youngsters already on the roster who can step in or continually waste draft picks trading up for Day 2 and Day 3 prospects.   They cannot build an OL via FA nor can they afford to trade away really talented players for used athletic equipment because they're difficult to deal with.

 

Almost all the  good teams -- teams that have regularly gone to the playoffs and won there, including several of the recent Super Bowl participants and winners -- in the last two decades that had a several poor seasons and changed coaches/gms have made turnarounds within two or three seasons of bringing in the new leadership because they opted to build on their existing talent rather than start from scratch.   Off hand, I can't think of any team in the last decade or two that  completed a successful rebuild that took 4 or 5 years just to see positive results.

We get where you're coming from.  You don't like the approach they're taking, so everything they do is wrong.  Which is fine, but you then lump the current management with previous regimes, talk about how Pegula is just money hungry and so on.  You are not being crucified any more than the person you are criticizing (like me) is being criticized.  So you may just want to get off your high horse. 

 

Some of the teams you mention (such as the Rams) have retooled, but to do so they are going all in on a fairly narrow window.  When Goff gets his big payday, they are going to have to shed other guys at other positions, and they have traded away a lot of draft picks to load up for the window they now have.  if that gets them a title, good for them.  But long term they could be headed for trouble.

 

Beane and McDermott have a different plan.  They want to build something that is not only competitive but sustainable over the long term.  To do that, one of the things Beane wanted to absolutely get control of was his cap situation.  They did not want to be saddled with expensive cap hits for guys like Dareus or Watkins that they did not see as  guys that would be part of the kind of sustained success they wanted.  So they took the hit, and now they are in the position to use the cap dollars hey have on the guys they see as worth the $$.  That is their plan.  Yes, you may not like the plan, I get that.  But let's see how the plan plays out.  They now have their your leaders on both sides of the ball in Allen and Edmunds, and their continued development will be key.  They have other fairly young solid pieces in guys like Milan, White (who is just as good if not better than Gilmore IMHO), Hyde and Poyer, Dawkins as examples.

 

You wanted them to keep what Rex had put together?  really?  I'll give you Watkins, I would still like to have him.  But Dareus?  Taylor?  Come on now.

 

 

[Thurman#1]

21 minutes ago, SoTier said:

Well said!          Unfortunately, you will be crucified here for daring to say that maybe the emperor in his new suit looks very much like a guy in a birthday suit.

 

In the era of the salary cap, reasonable rookie salaries, and expensive veteran players, the time frame for building a team has been shortened considerably, and that means that teams have to be aces on player evaluations so that they don't let Stephon Gilmore or Robert Woods walk in FA without having youngsters already on the roster who can step in or continually waste draft picks trading up for Day 2 and Day 3 prospects.   They cannot build an OL via FA nor can they afford to trade away really talented players for used athletic equipment because they're difficult to deal with.

 

Almost all the  good teams -- teams that have regularly gone to the playoffs and won there, including several of the recent Super Bowl participants and winners -- in the last two decades that had a several poor seasons and changed coaches/gms have made turnarounds within two or three seasons of bringing in the new leadership because they opted to build on their existing talent rather than start from scratch.   Off hand, I can't think of any team in the last decade or two that  completed a successful rebuild that took 4 or 5 years just to see positive results.

 

 

 

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand again, you're just ... not ... getting it.

 

Most of those shortened team builds you're talking about are the ends of three, four or five-year builds. Again, look at the GM. They'd generally been there quite a while, building and building.

 

Rebuilds are tough. They're painful. And the first two years are guaranteed to suck. If you've got a potential franchise QB, as your examples did ... sure, reload. It can absolutely go faster that way. But if you want to reload, don't do it with a cap in shreds, Tyrod at QB, with a roster core built around two quirky schemes - Roman's and Ryan's - run by coaches you've just fired. Because of course, that would be a massive handicap to start a reload with.

 

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

28 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

I'm sorry.....did my little dash of hyperbole make your head spin around to the point where you took it literally? OK, I'll rephrase it and make it easier to comprehend.

 

Watkins (who once again I did not want the Bills to draft) is more talented than Zay at every phase of the wr position and it isn't close. The Bills seemed to agree at one point when it cost them 2 first round picks and a 4th to acquire his services.

 

Watkins, injuries notwithstanding is a super talented wr. Jones is just ok imo, at least up until now.

 

Jmo and once again I'm sorry for the confusion and the nervous frustration my post seem to cause.

 

 

 

Thanks for clearing out the hyperbole, buddy. Now clear out the bull#### as well and you might really have something. Just for your info, two points:

 

1) Money matters, no matter how much you would like to ignore it. Sammy must thank his stars it does because he's gotten it in massive amounts without earning it.

2) Opinions and facts are not the same things. And even when uninjured, Watkins has simply not been productive on a scale anywhere near expectations, draft value or contract value.

 

What Watkins has at this point isn't talent. it's potential talent, unrealized even while being thrown to by Mahomes and Goff, two of the best in the league. It's theoretical talent.

 

Honestly, I like Watkins, always have. I hope he turns things around. But trading him made total sense, financially and in acquiring picks that helped bring in Allen. But also has made sense in terms of Sammy's production.

 

And if you're frustrated and confused, don't feel embarrassed. It happens.

Edited June 27, 2019 by Thurman#1

[K-9]

16 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Thanks for clearing out the hyperbole, buddy. Now clear out the bull#### as well and you might really have something. Just for your info, two points:

 

1) Money matters, no matter how much you would like to ignore it. Sammy must thank his stars it does because he's gotten it in massive amounts without earning it.

2) Opinions and facts are not the same things. And even when uninjured, Watkins has simply not been productive on a scale anywhere near expectations, draft value or contract value.

 

What Watkins has at this point isn't talent. it's potential talent, unrealized even while being thrown to by Mahomes and Goff, two of the best in the league. It's theoretical talent.

 

Honestly, I like Watkins, always have. I hope he turns things around. But trading him made total sense, financially and in acquiring picks that helped bring in Allen. But also has made sense in terms of Sammy's production.

 

And if you're frustrated and confused, don't feel embarrassed. It happens.

Per the bold, I think there’s a difference between earning it and justifying it. You’re right in that Sammy’s raw production may not suggest he’s earned it, but his enormous potential certainly justifies it. Sammy has shown many glimpses of the talent that made him the best WR prospect coming out. It is understandable why teams would choose to invest in that potential moving forward, especially those teams that aren’t dependent on him to be the focal point of their pass offense. If he can only stay healthy, he will have a great year. Big if, but I can see why a team would take the gamble.

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Per the bold, I think there’s a difference between earning it and justifying it. You’re right in that Sammy’s raw production may not suggest he’s earned it, but his enormous potential certainly justifies it. Sammy has shown many glimpses of the talent that made him the best WR prospect coming out. It is understandable why teams would choose to invest in that potential moving forward, especially those teams that aren’t dependent on him to be the focal point of their pass offense. If he can only stay healthy, he will have a great year. Big if, but I can see why a team would take the gamble.

 

Really good point and important distinction. Well said K-9. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

45 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Thanks for clearing out the hyperbole, buddy. Now clear out the bull#### as well and you might really have something. Just for your info, two points:

 

1) Money matters, no matter how much you would like to ignore it. Sammy must thank his stars it does because he's gotten it in massive amounts without earning it.

2) Opinions and facts are not the same things. And even when uninjured, Watkins has simply not been productive on a scale anywhere near expectations, draft value or contract value.

 

What Watkins has at this point isn't talent. it's potential talent, unrealized even while being thrown to by Mahomes and Goff, two of the best in the league. It's theoretical talent.

 

Honestly, I like Watkins, always have. I hope he turns things around. But trading him made total sense, financially and in acquiring picks that helped bring in Allen. But also has made sense in terms of Sammy's production.

 

And if you're frustrated and confused, don't feel embarrassed. It happens.

 

Especially considering old age and likely multiple head traumas.

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Huge? Hardly. But yeah, it's a difference but not in money per year, which is what I was comparing. 

 

And the devil is in the details. Cooks is likely to be there three years before they have a good chance to cut him. Yeah, on signing Cooks only got $20 mill guaranteed. But on the opening day of the league year this March just passed, another $21 mill was guaranteed for Cooks. 

 

Not significantly different over the first three years, and Cooks is pretty much a sure thing to be there for three years unless they want to pay $21 mill in dead cap.

A guaranteed number that is 50 percent greater is actually quite significant. Money per year is not a good measure; if Cooks is a middling player after year 3, he'll never see the conditionally promised money in years 4 and 5. If he remains elite or near-elite, he'll likely see it, but his salary won't be adjusted to reflect the changed cap situation. If Watkins is elite after year 3, he'll see a lot more money than Cooks in years 4 and 5 because the salary cap will go up significantly. It is actually quite arguable that Watkins got the better deal, but that's of course contingent on him performing. If he does, he'll be a FA at age 28 and in line for a big 3-year contract that'll probably pay him 20-25 million per (with a lot of the new money guaranteed) assuming the current annual rate of increase in the cap number. 

 

It's a "prove it" league, of course, but the players who do prove it are often better off with a 3-year deal than a 5-year deal, especially if the 3-year deal has a bigger guarantee. I'm surprised more people can't see this. 

Edited June 27, 2019 by dave mcbride

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Well Beasley is gonna play the Y (slot) I think that is all but a given. Zay is basically in a competition for the Z. If John Brown wins the X then Zay will start at the Z. My suspicion though is that Foster will win the X and then it will be at best a timeshare at the Z between Brown and Jones. But I think those who feel that Zay showed considerable progress last year (he was better, but not enough better) have to concede that is plausible the Bills felt differently given the way they acted in the offseason. 

 

With all this talk of X, Y, and Z, was thinking maybe we should throw them a curve and got with a YYZ offense instead.

 

 

[SoTier]

19 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Well Beane and McDermott felt it was needed.

Just because you as a fan with very little information of what’s really taking place inside those doors, feels the rebuild wasn’t necessary doesn’t mean you’re right.

 

Yes, all hail the supreme knowledge from a rookie HC and a rookie GM who was in charge of administrative personnel and logistics, not player personnel, from his years as an assistant GM in Carolina.

 

19 hours ago, eball said:

 

Title:  THE AGENDA

 

Subtitle:  "Why I don't care if the Bills become good because they didn't do it the way I wanted them to!"

 

I've already said it many times, if the Bills succeed I'll be glad to eat crow, but I don't think McDermott is the guy to do it.   I'm not sure that Beane is either.

 

19 hours ago, teef said:

 

fair enough.  and yes it is peculiar.  the ones who have complained the most about sammy are absolutely the ones who leaning towards the side of constant drama and negativity.  you are one of those posters.  they're the same ones that refuse to admit that sammy has been nothing but a disappointment, and still lament letting sammy go wan't a mistake.  the mistake was not properly replacing sammy.  they tried but failed.  still doesn't mean they should have paid sammy an absurd amount of cash for such little production.   on top of that...let's be honest.  if sammy was on this team with the numbers he put up, you're the exact type of poster who would be on her pounding the table how this team doesn't know how to spend.  

 

I never said that Watkins wasn't a disappointment.   They didn't have to find a replacement for Watkins after they traded him -- if somebody on the Bills had been smart enough to re-sign Robert Woods -- and don't give me the line that he wasn't interested in re-signing.   For enough money, he would have re-signed. 

 

When and where have I ever complained about the Bills paying too much money to a player???   I consider Nathan Peterman a waste of a draft pick and a waste of a roster spot.  Kelvin Benjamin was a waste of the third round pick and a roster spot.  I've called both Vlad Ducasse and Russell Bodine bottom feeder OLers but I never begrudged them the money they're paid.  

 

I disliked the Dareus trade because I think that McDermott wanted him gone for personality differences, and Beane accomplished that without regard to his talent or the cap implications or the fact that the Bills had no one to replace him.  A GM's job is to take all those things into account and do what's best for the team, and I think Beane traded Dareus because it was better for McDermott's ego rather than it being better for the team. 

 

Oh, and before all the McDermott defenders point to all their examples of how they couldn't work with players or people, etc, I'll say "suck it up".  Before I changed careers, I spent 9 years teaching in Buffalo schools.   Teachers don't get to pick and choose their students.  They suck it up and deal with the kids they have in their classes or they do something else. 

 

17 hours ago, Rico said:

And if they hadn't determined he was a loser, that's what might have happened.

 

One has to wonder just how you developed your expertise in identifying losers.  Do you see one in the mirror every morning?

 

BTW, Jason Peters, Marshawn Lynch, and Stephon Gilmore all say "hi" -- all "losers" with "All Pro" on their resumes and Super Bowl rings on the fingers.

 

14 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

And Star is the walrus

 

Snoring between the pipes.

 

13 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

A couple people in the thread also think Mitch Morse was a bad signing because he has a history of concussions. 

 

A bad signing, no, but it's a gamble because unlike many other kinds of injuries -- like Cordy Glenn's foot issues that some posters whined about -- concussions can't be "fixed".  They tend to make players who have one likely to have more -- and more serious ones that take longer to heal.  Morse has had 2 as a pro IIRC.  He may have others in HS or in college.

 

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

We get where you're coming from.  You don't like the approach they're taking, so everything they do is wrong.  Which is fine, but you then lump the current management with previous regimes, talk about how Pegula is just money hungry and so on.  You are not being crucified any more than the person you are criticizing (like me) is being criticized.  So you may just want to get off your high horse. 

 

Some of the teams you mention (such as the Rams) have retooled, but to do so they are going all in on a fairly narrow window.  When Goff gets his big payday, they are going to have to shed other guys at other positions, and they have traded away a lot of draft picks to load up for the window they now have.  if that gets them a title, good for them.  But long term they could be headed for trouble.

 

Beane and McDermott have a different plan.  They want to build something that is not only competitive but sustainable over the long term.  To do that, one of the things Beane wanted to absolutely get control of was his cap situation.  They did not want to be saddled with expensive cap hits for guys like Dareus or Watkins that they did not see as  guys that would be part of the kind of sustained success they wanted.  So they took the hit, and now they are in the position to use the cap dollars hey have on the guys they see as worth the $$.  That is their plan.  Yes, you may not like the plan, I get that.  But let's see how the plan plays out.  They now have their your leaders on both sides of the ball in Allen and Edmunds, and their continued development will be key.  They have other fairly young solid pieces in guys like Milan, White (who is just as good if not better than Gilmore IMHO), Hyde and Poyer, Dawkins as examples.

 

You wanted them to keep what Rex had put together?  really?  I'll give you Watkins, I would still like to have him.  But Dareus?  Taylor?  Come on now.

 

 

 

Ummm ....  McDermott and Beane trashed the OFFENSE, dude, which was respectable if not great under Ryan.    It was the DEFENSE that Ryan put on the field that sucked ... and McDermott and Beane kept more of those guys than he did on the offense.  Dareus is better than Loutelei and Taylor is infinitely better than Peterman. 

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2019 by SoTier

[teef]

1 minute ago, SoTier said:

 

Yes, all hail the supreme knowledge from a rookie HC and a rookie GM who was in charge of administrative personnel and logistics, not player personnel, from his years as an assistant GM in Carolina.

 

 

I've already said it many times, if the Bills succeed I'll be glad to eat crow, but I don't think McDermott is the guy to do it.   I'm not sure that Beane is either.

 

 

I never said that Watkins wasn't a disappointment.   They didn't have to find a replacement for Watkins after they traded him -- if somebody on the Bills had been smart enough to re-sign Robert Woods -- and don't give me the line that he wasn't interested in re-signing.   For enough money, he would have re-signed. 

 

When and where have I ever complained about the Bills paying too much money to a player???   I consider Nathan Peterman a waste of a draft pick and a waste of a roster spot.  Kelvin Benjamin was a waste of the third round pick and a roster spot.  I've called both Vlad Ducasse and Russell Bodine bottom feeder OLers but I begrudge them the money they're paid.  

 

I disliked the Dareus trade because I think that McDermott wanted him gone for personality differences, and Beane accomplished that without regard to his talent or the cap implications or the fact that the Bills had no one to replace him.  A GM's job is to take all those things into account and do what's best for the team, and I think Beane traded Dareus because it was better for McDermott's ego rather than it being better for the team. 

 

Oh, and before all the McDermott defenders point to all their examples of how they couldn't work with players or people, etc, I'll say "suck it up".  Before I changed careers, I spent 9 years teaching in Buffalo schools.   Teachers don't get to pick and choose their students.  They suck it up and deal with the kids they have in their classes or they do something else. 

 

 

One has to wonder just how you developed your expertise in identifying losers.  Do you see one in the mirror every morning?

 

BTW, Jason Peters, Marshawn Lynch, and Stephon Gilmore all say "hi" -- all "losers" with "All Pro" on their resumes and Super Bowl rings on the fingers.

 

 

Snoring between the pipes.

 

 

A bad signing, no, but it's a gamble because unlike many other kinds of injuries -- like Cordy Glenn's foot issues that some posters whined about -- concussions can't be "fixed".  They tend to make players who have one likely to have more -- and more serious ones that take longer to heal.  Morse has had 2 as a pro IIRC.  He may have others in HS or in college.

 

 

Ummm ....  McDermott and Beane trashed the OFFENSE, dude, which was respectable if not great under Ryan.    It was the DEFENSE that Ryan put on the field that sucked ... and McDermott and Beane kept more of those guys than he did on the offense.  Dareus is better than Loutelei and Taylor is infinitely better than Peterman. 

 

 

 

i'm not gonna lie.  i've just kinda stopped reading your stuff.   it's just very, very depressing.  take the bridge kind of depressing.

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

Almost all the  good teams -- teams that have regularly gone to the playoffs and won there, including several of the recent Super Bowl participants and winners -- in the last two decades that had a several poor seasons and changed coaches/gms have made turnarounds within two or three seasons of bringing in the new leadership because they opted to build on their existing talent rather than start from scratch.   Off hand, I can't think of any team in the last decade or two that  completed a successful rebuild that took 4 or 5 years just to see positive results.

 

In today's NFL with salary cap and expensive veteran contracts, if you go the tear down and rebuild router you BETTER be ready to make a serious run in year 3 or year 4 at the very latest. After that, rookie contracts start to expire that must be either retained or new expensive guys acquired or draft rookies good enough to start.  Decisions will have to be made on the Tredvian Nightmare as he enters the final year of his rookie contract next year for example.

 

I don't see it working in 2019 NFL.   

 

This is year 3.  We're behind in the rebuild timeline unless we totally break out this year.

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Yes, all hail the supreme knowledge from a rookie HC and a rookie GM who was in charge of administrative personnel and logistics, not player personnel, from his years as an assistant GM in Carolina.

 

Your ability to decipher is pain painstakingly bad.  

 

You don't even know what a rookie HC is!  Here you are arguing that you never brought up rookie HC's!  And these replies are 4 hours apart!

 

[SoTier]

2 minutes ago, teef said:

i'm not gonna lie.  i've just kinda stopped reading your stuff.   it's just very, very depressing.  take the bridge kind of depressing.

 

If it's "fluff", how can it be "very, very depressing" -- unless you secretly fear I'm right?

[SWATeam]

Just now, reddogblitz said:

 

In today's NFL with salary cap and expensive veteran contracts, if you go the tear down and rebuild router you BETTER be ready to make a serious run in year 3 or year 4 at the very latest. After that, rookie contracts start to expire that must be either retained or new expensive guys acquired or draft rookies good enough to start.  Decisions will have to be made on the Tredvian Nightmare as he enters the final year of his rookie contract next year for example.

 

I don't see it working in 2019 NFL.   

 

This is year 3.  We're behind in the rebuild timeline unless we totally break out this year.

Did we not make the playoffs in year 1?

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Yes, all hail the supreme knowledge from a rookie HC and a rookie GM who was in charge of administrative personnel and logistics, not player personnel, from his years as an assistant GM in Carolina.

 

 

I've already said it many times, if the Bills succeed I'll be glad to eat crow, but I don't think McDermott is the guy to do it.   I'm not sure that Beane is either.

 

 

I never said that Watkins wasn't a disappointment.   They didn't have to find a replacement for Watkins after they traded him -- if somebody on the Bills had been smart enough to re-sign Robert Woods -- and don't give me the line that he wasn't interested in re-signing.   For enough money, he would have re-signed. 

 

When and where have I ever complained about the Bills paying too much money to a player???   I consider Nathan Peterman a waste of a draft pick and a waste of a roster spot.  Kelvin Benjamin was a waste of the third round pick and a roster spot.  I've called both Vlad Ducasse and Russell Bodine bottom feeder OLers but I never begrudged them the money they're paid.  

 

I disliked the Dareus trade because I think that McDermott wanted him gone for personality differences, and Beane accomplished that without regard to his talent or the cap implications or the fact that the Bills had no one to replace him.  A GM's job is to take all those things into account and do what's best for the team, and I think Beane traded Dareus because it was better for McDermott's ego rather than it being better for the team. 

 

Oh, and before all the McDermott defenders point to all their examples of how they couldn't work with players or people, etc, I'll say "suck it up".  Before I changed careers, I spent 9 years teaching in Buffalo schools.   Teachers don't get to pick and choose their students.  They suck it up and deal with the kids they have in their classes or they do something else. 

 

 

One has to wonder just how you developed your expertise in identifying losers.  Do you see one in the mirror every morning?

 

BTW, Jason Peters, Marshawn Lynch, and Stephon Gilmore all say "hi" -- all "losers" with "All Pro" on their resumes and Super Bowl rings on the fingers.

 

 

Snoring between the pipes.

 

 

A bad signing, no, but it's a gamble because unlike many other kinds of injuries -- like Cordy Glenn's foot issues that some posters whined about -- concussions can't be "fixed".  They tend to make players who have one likely to have more -- and more serious ones that take longer to heal.  Morse has had 2 as a pro IIRC.  He may have others in HS or in college.

 

 

Ummm ....  McDermott and Beane trashed the OFFENSE, dude, which was respectable if not great under Ryan.    It was the DEFENSE that Ryan put on the field that sucked ... and McDermott and Beane kept more of those guys than he did on the offense.  Dareus is better than Loutelei and Taylor is infinitely better than Peterman. 

 

 

 

And I’ll just add, no matter how much you don’t want to hear it, Robert Woods was GONE the moment the season ended. For two main reasons: he wanted to go home and play AND he was tired of playing with Taylor as his QB. 

 

We now return to your regularly scheduled YukFest.

[reddogblitz]

Just now, SWATeam said:

Did we not make the playoffs in year 1?

 

We did, but did we not go 6-10 and look bad doing it last year?

 

Hats of Coach McDermott and GM Beane to get the monkey off our back.  

[teef]

Just now, SoTier said:

 

If it's "fluff", how can it be "very, very depressing" -- unless you secretly fear I'm right?

it's not that.  it's more that your posting is terrible.

 

if someone repeatedly came on here and said, "without a doubt, the bills are going to win the superbowl.  allen is guaranteed to be the mvp, and the bills will be the number one offense!", i couldn't take them seriously.  you're on the exact opposite end of it.  everything you write and describe is so extraordinarily slanted to the bad, that you're not worth taking seriously either. there's no balance, there's no objective thought, there's no real reasoning.   just anger and bitterness.  it's not worth debating with you, nor is it worth taking the few seconds to read what your wrote.  nothing about fluff, rainbows and unicorns as you like to describe.  just total trash posting.  see?

[BADOLBILZ]

16 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

LOL...Goff struggled with the deep ball. I guess he’s struggles with the deep ball only with Watkins but doesn’t with Cooks.

 

Only Sammy can be a decoy to run people off.  Julio Jones, AB, OBJ....they all can run and run people off but they aren’t used that way.  Geezus...enough with the pathetic excuses for his lack of production.

 

https://theramswire.usatoday.com/2018/01/10/nfl-los-angeles-rams-jared-goff-stats-deep-passes-ranking/

 

https://brickwallblitz.com/2019/02/22/the-2018-19-deep-ball-project-part-3-3/

 

And you’re #4...I have no idea what you’re talking about.  I simply said the Bills Brass thought it was better to rebuild.  I don’t feel every situation is the same.  Get it?

 

 

I'm not bothering to open those links........I watched most of the Rams games in both years and Goff improved significantly as a thrower of the deep ball last year.    Clearly he had worked on it.   The Falcons recognized the weakness and employed a "Fitz" defense on him and that was the end of the Rams 2017 season.  So it was an absolute necessity to improve in that area.    He routinely under threw Watkins in 2017.......the tape don't lie.    

 

Your work in this thread has just been bad...........like 3 posts of bad stats that even you had to admit were bogus.   Using dumb phrases to make it seem like McBeane's choices weren't actually choices.    I literally quoted you word for word and you are telling me you have no idea what I am talking about.

[vorpma]

On 4/27/2019 at 6:21 AM, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

....and here I thought Pegula would heed the advice of TBD posting pundits and fire them both......

OldTime AFLGuy rocks!! Just wait till the usual weigh in comparing Jauron to the current HC, the "fire everybody" crowd will awaken!