Christian McCaffrey rumors

[HOUSE]

Why contending teams should avoid trading for McCaffrey

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10052658-why-nfl-contenders-should-avoid-trading-for-carolina-panthers-rb-christian-mccaffrey

[JoshAllin]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

 

The Jets are 4-2 because of Breece Hall.  Who we should have been moving up into late RD 1 to get after the Elam pick.  We'd have Hall over Cook and no need for CMC.  

 

Well didn't Breece fumble in his first game as well? If he played here, the bills staff would just cut his production down to 99% and give him garbage time reps. Who knows Cook could be flying with the jets if switched. Elam was the better fit for this team

[Einstein's Dog]

51 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

But anyone devaluing what CMC would bring to this offense is kidding themselves  I am a fan of Devin, and I have defended him many times against the over exaggerated crap he gets around here.  But even I know CMC potentially makes our offense historically good and damn near unstoppable.  

 

And for the record...the guy you responded to wasn't comparing a DE to a RB.  He was comparing the situations.  Going from a good to great player significantly moved the needle on defense in upgrading from Hughes to Von.  He was saying upgrading from Devin to CMC could have the same significant impact for the offense.  

 

And for the record:  I do not think we trade for McCaffrey.  I think Beane called, found the price to be too rich, and that was that.  They will most likely find another suitor willing to give more than Beane is.  And I am totally fine with Devin, but also fine and would be excited if we surprised and did land CMC.

I'm in agreement with you.  I like Devin, just think CMC would elevate the offense.  Would take it to an insane level.

 

Appreciate your recognizing and responding to the attempted shift of the point.

 

I, too, don't think the trade will happen.  It was always a longshot.  I think Beane has never been a pursuing a strict one year rental, he would want at least this 1/2 year and all of next year intended.  That makes it more difficult.

 

Hope KC doesn't get him.

[QLBillsFan]

27 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

Why contending teams should avoid trading for McCaffrey

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10052658-why-nfl-contenders-should-avoid-trading-for-carolina-panthers-rb-christian-mccaffrey

Nailed it! Big cap $ for oft injured player. Carolina wants multiple #1’s. DS and Cook who will develop are fine without the above headaches. Beane plays the now and future game and this does not align. 

[Solomon Grundy]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

The Jets are 4-2 because of Breece Hall.  Who we should have been moving up into late RD 1 to get after the Elam pick.

Could've picked Breece in the 1st and Tariq Woolen in 2nd

[Big Blitz]

33 minutes ago, motorj said:

Well didn't Breece fumble in his first game as well? If he played here, the bills staff would just cut his production down to 99% and give him garbage time reps. Who knows Cook could be flying with the jets if switched. Elam was the better fit for this team

 

 

Absolutely it was the right pick - our secondary is looking loaded for years.  I was and still am good with it no matter how good Breece is.   

 

I wanted him so bad in RD 2 or if we could move up into late round 1 from pick 63 but I'm sure price was too high....or was it?

 

Pick 63 and Bernard (RD 3) for Hall at pick 33-35 I'd have done that.  Would that have been enough?

 

Our draft would have been this:

 

Elam 

Hall 

*No Bernard we trade 3rd RD pick*

Shakir

Araiza (but no way we draft a punter here after trading the 3rd RD pick)

Benford 

Tanuta

 

[ChevyVanMiller]

45 minutes ago, HOUSE said:

Why contending teams should avoid trading for McCaffrey

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/10052658-why-nfl-contenders-should-avoid-trading-for-carolina-panthers-rb-christian-mccaffrey

The problem with that theory is that the Bills can pick him up for this season only. As I understand it he can be cut after the season with the Bills taking just a minimal cap hit. Now, a rental player is not worth one 1st, let alone multiples, so the Panthers would have to be willing to settle for a much smaller draft bounty.

[Billz4ever]

2 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

They may be least important......that doesn't mean you don't want a great one.  

 

 

The Jets are 4-2 because of Breece Hall.  Who we should have been moving up into late RD 1 to get after the Elam pick.  We'd have Hall over Cook and no need for CMC.  

 

RBs like this change games.  We don't have to do anything different on O.  We don't have to run it more.  We just have to be efficient.  Singletary and CMC combo would be fantastic.  

 

CMC isn't 23 year old CMC anymore but he's still elite.  

We barely give the Rookie we drafted any playing time. We don't need to be dropping first round picks on 1/2 season rental RBs.

47 minutes ago, motorj said:

Well didn't Breece fumble in his first game as well? If he played here, the bills staff would just cut his production down to 99% and give him garbage time reps. Who knows Cook could be flying with the jets if switched. Elam was the better fit for this team

And clearly the bigger need and as the season has progressed, that became even more evident with the injuries in the secondary.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Billz4ever

[Mrbojanglezs]

He will be a chief 

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

39 minutes ago, Mrbojanglezs said:

He will be a chief 

You may be right, but I don’t think they need him. They can get the same back for their buck out of McKinnon. I don’t know why they don’t get him more touches. 

[Bills!Win!]

I can’t wait until November 1st when we don’t have to read about these rumors anymore 

[SACTOBILLSFAN]

1 hour ago, Solomon Grundy said:

Could've picked Breece in the 1st and Tariq Woolen in 2nd

I mean, drafting would be easy if they could do it over after 6 weeks. Elam will be far more valuable than Hall could ever dream of being. 

[cba fan]

1 hour ago, ChevyVanMiller said:

The problem with that theory is that the Bills can pick him up for this season only. As I understand it he can be cut after the season with the Bills taking just a minimal cap hit. Now, a rental player is not worth one 1st, let alone multiples, so the Panthers would have to be willing to settle for a much smaller draft bounty.

incorrect. Any team trading for CM has a small cap hit this year of half of his 1 mill yearly salary (depending on what week the trade happens)

but if cut in off season new team has mega dead cap hit of 15 to 18 mill. Exact number unknown as spotrak site does not update trade numbers until after a trade.

 

[The Firebaugh Kid]

3 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

Will the CMC rumors make it to as many pages as the Khalil Mack, Zach Ertz, or Bryant Johnson?

Bryant Johnson. God we were desperate back then. What a Billsy name. Lol

[John from Riverside]

9 minutes ago, cba fan said:

incorrect. Any team trading for CM has a small cap hit this year of half of his 1 mill yearly salary (depending on what week the trade happens)

but if cut in off season new team has mega dead cap hit of 15 to 18 mill. Exact number unknown as spotrak site does not update trade numbers until after a trade.

 

It’s just my opinion at this just doesn’t make any sense for us do you have to give up draft compensation on top of trying to figure out how you’re even going to pay him in the future all the while we have our own free agents that we really can’t afford to lose like Gabe Davis

[That's No Moon]

41 minutes ago, Bills!Win! said:

I can’t wait until November 1st when we don’t have to read about these rumors anymore 

Let's be honest, it's the bye week, if it doesnt happen this week it's not going to

1 hour ago, ChevyVanMiller said:

The problem with that theory is that the Bills can pick him up for this season only. As I understand it he can be cut after the season with the Bills taking just a minimal cap hit. Now, a rental player is not worth one 1st, let alone multiples, so the Panthers would have to be willing to settle for a much smaller draft bounty.

Nobody, NOBODY, is giving up multiple 1s for McCaffery.  It's good to want things, it doesn't mean you will get them. Nobody is even giving them a single 1 for him. It's just not going to happen.

[Scott7975]

4 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

In terms of capital investment, those numbers will always be highest for QB, Tackle, and DE.  No doubt about it.

 

But you can't sit here and diminish the value of a RB while Saquan Barkley is turning Daniel Jones into a winning QB and playoff QB despite him be average at best.  Saquan is carrying that offense and is a big reason why they are 5-1.  Had they traded Saquan in the offseason they would probably be 1-5 right now instead.

 

An elite RB can absolutely move the needle for a team.  I mean if you put CMC on the Bills, all the betting odds on us get even better and we are already the favorite.  Put him on KC, and they will close the gap or even become the betting favorite over us.  Put him on SF and they suddenly look like the team to beat in the NFC.  

 

Should a team build around a RB, of course not, that is a much harder way to win in the modern NFL.  It's possible, but you are going to need a great OL and a great Defense and a solid QB just to have a chance.  

 

But anyone devaluing what CMC would bring to this offense is kidding themselves  I am a fan of Devin, and I have defended him many times against the over exaggerated crap he gets around here.  But even I know CMC potentially makes our offense historically good and damn near unstoppable.  

 

And for the record...the guy you responded to wasn't comparing a DE to a RB.  He was comparing the situations.  Going from a good to great player significantly moved the needle on defense in upgrading from Hughes to Von.  He was saying upgrading from Devin to CMC could have the same significant impact for the offense.  

 

And for the record:  I do not think we trade for McCaffrey.  I think Beane called, found the price to be too rich, and that was that.  They will most likely find another suitor willing to give more than Beane is.  And I am totally fine with Devin, but also fine and would be excited if we surprised and did land CMC.

 

When you have an average QB then you pay a game changing RB.  When you have an elite QB you pay a game changing receiver.  CMC isnt going to make a big enough difference to justify the cost of him with the QB we have.  There are a few teams that have an elite RB.  Tell me how many of them get to the superbowl in todays NFL.

 

If you are paying for an elite RB then thats an elite receiver that you can't pay. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Scott7975

[BADOLBILZ]

3 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

In terms of capital investment, those numbers will always be highest for QB, Tackle, and DE.  No doubt about it.

 

But you can't sit here and diminish the value of a RB while Saquan Barkley is turning Daniel Jones into a winning QB and playoff QB despite him be average at best.  Saquan is carrying that offense and is a big reason why they are 5-1.  Had they traded Saquan in the offseason they would probably be 1-5 right now instead.

 

An elite RB can absolutely move the needle for a team.  I mean if you put CMC on the Bills, all the betting odds on us get even better and we are already the favorite.  Put him on KC, and they will close the gap or even become the betting favorite over us.  Put him on SF and they suddenly look like the team to beat in the NFC.  

 

Should a team build around a RB, of course not, that is a much harder way to win in the modern NFL.  It's possible, but you are going to need a great OL and a great Defense and a solid QB just to have a chance.  

 

But anyone devaluing what CMC would bring to this offense is kidding themselves  I am a fan of Devin, and I have defended him many times against the over exaggerated crap he gets around here.  But even I know CMC potentially makes our offense historically good and damn near unstoppable.  

 

And for the record...the guy you responded to wasn't comparing a DE to a RB.  He was comparing the situations.  Going from a good to great player significantly moved the needle on defense in upgrading from Hughes to Von.  He was saying upgrading from Devin to CMC could have the same significant impact for the offense.  

 

And for the record:  I do not think we trade for McCaffrey.  I think Beane called, found the price to be too rich, and that was that.  They will most likely find another suitor willing to give more than Beane is.  And I am totally fine with Devin, but also fine and would be excited if we surprised and did land CMC.

 

 

The disconnect here is that you think winning a few random regular season games on the strength of running the ball and playing good defense is "moving the needle" toward winning a Super Bowl.

 

It's not.

 

That's been proven time and again over the last 25 years.

 

Playoffs come........defensive business decisions stop happening........run games get shut down regardless of what All Pro you have in your backfield and teams that have built themselves around giving a stud RB touches find themselves a fish out of water.    See New Orleans time and again with Alvin Kamara.......the "other" McCaffrey.

 

Now if a stud RB gets released at midseason and is willing to come aboard knowing he may only get 6-8 touches per game.........I'm OK with that.

 

But if you trade a 1st or 2nd round pick......or heaven forbid MORE........for a twice busted-up f*cking RB?    You are not only stupid but you are OBLIGATED to make that look like a productive transaction.

 

And in the case of McCaffrey.........he has no guaranteed money left on his contract.   This is essentially his walk year.    It would be a potentially huge personal sacrifice for him to risk coming to a team and putting up modest numbers in limited opportunities and then hit the free agent market.    

 

As for what the poster was comparing.........its called comparing apples to oranges.   It's an utterly ridiculous comparison.  

 

Everyone knew they needed and didn't have a finishing pass rusher.    

 

The GM even said so.   REPEATEDLY.

 

Has the GM said "we don't have a big time RB and we need one of those"???

 

 I thought not.    

 

 

 

[Thurman_34]

I would only like to see a trade if KC gets someone for the stretch run. We need to be able to out score them if necessary 

[bobobonators]

If we spend any more than a 3rd Rd draft pick to trade for a RB who will take the ball away from the most dynamic player in the NFL - Allen - I will put a hole in a wall. 
 

2 Priorities every season, and 2 main priorities for next 10+yrs : 

OL to protect Allen.

WR to highlight Allen. 
 

All this other talk is nonsense. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by bobobonators

[HalftimeAdjustment]

7 minutes ago, bobobonators said:

If we spend any more than a 3rd Rd draft pick to trade for a RB who will take the ball away from the most dynamic player in the NFL - Allen - I will put a hole in a wall. 
 

2 Priorities every season, and 2 main priorities for next 10+yrs : 

OL to protect Allen.

WR to highlight Allen. 
 

All this other talk is nonsense. 

 

Right now we should be looking for at most some OL selectively and maybe a Safety. I wouldn't give up anything for a player right now unless we see a depth need and the cost is modest.

[bobobonators]

4 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

In terms of capital investment, those numbers will always be highest for QB, Tackle, and DE.  No doubt about it.

 

But you can't sit here and diminish the value of a RB while Saquan Barkley is turning Daniel Jones into a winning QB and playoff QB despite him be average at best.  Saquan is carrying that offense and is a big reason why they are 5-1.  Had they traded Saquan in the offseason they would probably be 1-5 right now instead.

 

An elite RB can absolutely move the needle for a team.  I mean if you put CMC on the Bills, all the betting odds on us get even better and we are already the favorite.  Put him on KC, and they will close the gap or even become the betting favorite over us.  Put him on SF and they suddenly look like the team to beat in the NFC.  

 

Should a team build around a RB, of course not, that is a much harder way to win in the modern NFL.  It's possible, but you are going to need a great OL and a great Defense and a solid QB just to have a chance.  

 

But anyone devaluing what CMC would bring to this offense is kidding themselves  I am a fan of Devin, and I have defended him many times against the over exaggerated crap he gets around here.  But even I know CMC potentially makes our offense historically good and damn near unstoppable.  

 

And for the record...the guy you responded to wasn't comparing a DE to a RB.  He was comparing the situations.  Going from a good to great player significantly moved the needle on defense in upgrading from Hughes to Von.  He was saying upgrading from Devin to CMC could have the same significant impact for the offense.  

 

And for the record:  I do not think we trade for McCaffrey.  I think Beane called, found the price to be too rich, and that was that.  They will most likely find another suitor willing to give more than Beane is.  And I am totally fine with Devin, but also fine and would be excited if we surprised and did land CMC.

I respectfully disagree. You bring Saquan here and you’re forced to take the ball away from a player who is better than Saquan, in Allen. This offense is supposed to go through Allen. The Giants offense is supposed to go through Saquan.
 

Of course Saquan would make the Giants and 49ers of the world better - they have garbage QB’s. Its logical that giving a better player more touches is a good thing. Same with Hall and Wilson on the Jets. Wilson is trash. If it was up to the Jets, Hall would run the ball 100x a game. 
 

In short, I LOVE Saquan and CMC is a stud. My post isn’t to diminish them it’s to accent what would happen to this offense if they came to Buffalo. I WANT Allen throwing the ball 40-50x a game.
 

Is this offense better with Allen throwing the ball less? Thats a legitimate question. We have been clamoring for a stud QB for 25yrs and we have arguably the most dynamic player in the NFL at QB and here we are discussing how we need a RB to balance things out. Lol. No we don’t. We need another WR and an improved OL for Allen to destroy the league. A league, which by the way, happens to be designed for the pass, not the run. Perfect timing finally for us! 
 

We have to go all-in on Allen on the OL and at WR. RB can be a revolving door until we land a gem in rds 3-5 eventually. 

Edited October 19, 2022 by bobobonators

[BADOLBILZ]

9 minutes ago, Thurman_34 said:

I would only like to see a trade if KC gets someone for the stretch run. We need to be able to out score them if necessary 

 

 

The Bills should have blown the Chiefs out on Sunday.............if they had a receiver that was proven good enough to keep Flubs McKenzie on the bench THAT would have likely added 14 points and created a lot of extra momentum.   And had they had that guy in the Rams game it probably wouldn't have been as close as long and maybe they get a chance to kick a field goal at the end of the Miami game.   Hopefully Shakir steps into that role or they add an outside receiver and play Diggs A LOT more in the slot.......where he is lethal.........instead of Lil' Dummy.  

 

That being the case and not factoring in the unknown like injuries..........it's hard to envision KC making a move that would close the talent gap AND be enough to beat the Bills in Buffalo if they aren't turning the ball over(be it literally or on downs).

[NoSaint]

48 minutes ago, Scott7975 said:

 

When you have an average QB then you pay a game changing RB.  When you have an elite QB you pay a game changing receiver.  CMC isnt going to make a big enough difference to justify the cost of him with the QB we have.  There are a few teams that have an elite RB.  Tell me how many of them get to the superbowl in todays NFL.

 

If you are paying for an elite RB then thats an elite receiver that you can't pay. 

his one perk is he is a very good wr and much cheaper than a halfway decent wr 

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

The Bills should have blown the Chiefs out on Sunday.............if they had a receiver that was proven good enough to keep Flubs McKenzie on the bench THAT would have likely added 14 points and created a lot of extra momentum.   And had they had that guy in the Rams game it probably wouldn't have been as close as long and maybe they get a chance to kick a field goal at the end of the Miami game.   Hopefully Shakir steps into that role or they add an outside receiver and play Diggs A LOT more in the slot.......where he is lethal.........instead of Lil' Dummy.  

 

That being the case and not factoring in the unknown like injuries..........it's hard to envision KC making a move that would close the talent gap AND be enough to beat the Bills in Buffalo if they aren't turning the ball over(be it literally or on downs).

I know you aren’t a fan of backs being a premium, but putting that aside, I do think CMC is likely a better slot WR than McKenzie, not even qualifying him with lowering the bar for a running back. Like you could plug him into Mckenzies role full time and be an upgrade, with flexibility to pick up carries 

[Aussie Joe]

12 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

The Bills should have blown the Chiefs out on Sunday.............if they had a receiver that was proven good enough to keep Flubs McKenzie on the bench THAT would have likely added 14 points and created a lot of extra momentum.   And had they had that guy in the Rams game it probably wouldn't have been as close as long and maybe they get a chance to kick a field goal at the end of the Miami game.   Hopefully Shakir steps into that role or they add an outside receiver and play Diggs A LOT more in the slot.......where he is lethal.........instead of Lil' Dummy.  

 

That being the case and not factoring in the unknown like injuries..........it's hard to envision KC making a move that would close the talent gap AND be enough to beat the Bills in Buffalo if they aren't turning the ball over(be it literally or on downs).

 

The Bills do their shopping for Receivers on Day 3 of the Draft .. so just wait and see who they are taking in Round 4/5 next year to replace your mate ,,, it will likely be somebody pretty good...

 

 

Edited October 19, 2022 by Aussie Joe

[NewEra]

There are two ways to look at a trade for mccaffery.  This seasons success and future success. 
 

this season success-  is it worth trading a pick for a better chance at winning the super bowl this year?  Then cutting him after winning a Lombardi with no ties to a crazy contract for him.  With Lombardi in hand- you’ve accomplished the goal partly because of the CMC insurance policy that was purchased.  It would hurt the future as we’d be short a pick.  But sometimes that’s the price one has to pay.  Ask the Rams.  Sucks losing von—- but they won one. If this is the plan- I understand and love the idea.  Gotta win one and our 2nd and 3rd rd picks are kinda lame anyway.  
 

Future success-  do we want to tie ourselves to a huge RB contract in the future while we have several players that will be demanding big raises in the future.  Should we replace a core player for an injury plagued big money RB?  I think it’s unnecessary.  We don’t need a super star RB to win multiple Super Bowls. 
 

personally, I love watching a great RB get after it- Saquon, I’d might be tempted to keep long term, but it would be a HUGE gamble and one I don’t think Beane would entertain.  If Dorsey did a good job with the play calling- we might never punt.  CMC is great, but I definitely wouldn’t want him on a long term contract over 10m a year.  As a one year rental, if we have up a 2nd or a 3rd, I wouldn’t mind doubling down.  I w would understand trading a pick for upgrades at WR, RB or OL in order to help win this year.  Coming up short this year would be a debacle 

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

his one perk is he is a very good wr and much cheaper than a halfway decent wr 

 

 

He's not a WR.......let alone a very good one........that's just a false narrative.

 

Too many Bills fans are envisioning a return to the days of Thurman Thomas.........who averaged almost 11 yards per reception picking on big, slow LB's over the first 5 years of his career (which is basically when he hit the wall).  

 

Thurman actually had a higher yards per reception in his second season than Stefon Diggs did in HIS.

 

Christian McCaffrey is good by todays RB standards but he only gets you about 8 yard per reception.    That's it.   That is NOT to be confused with WR production in the NFL.   A halfway decent receiver does more than that.

 

RB's are not WR's...........not James Cook.........not McCaffrey or Kamara..........and not Breece Hall once he gets enough games under his belt to matter.

[NewEra]

33 minutes ago, bobobonators said:

If we spend any more than a 3rd Rd draft pick to trade for a RB who will take the ball away from the most dynamic player in the NFL - Allen - I will put a hole in a wall. 
 

2 Priorities every season, and 2 main priorities for next 10+yrs : 

OL to protect Allen.

WR to highlight Allen. 
 

All this other talk is nonsense. 

1 priority this year-  win the super bowl.  Not many teams are trading OL upgrades.  If we want a WR, add a FA.  

[bobobonators]

4 minutes ago, NewEra said:

1 priority this year-  win the super bowl.  Not many teams are trading OL upgrades.  If we want a WR, add a FA.  

Sorry I didn’t mean trade for OL/WR. I mean offseason priorities. 

[BADOLBILZ]

22 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I know you aren’t a fan of backs being a premium, but putting that aside, I do think CMC is likely a better slot WR than McKenzie, not even qualifying him with lowering the bar for a running back. Like you could plug him into Mckenzies role full time and be an upgrade, with flexibility to pick up carries 

 

The better question is if McKenzie is better suited to be a RB.   Because McKenzie is a hack as a slot receiver and really shouldn't be any higher on any teams depth chart than WR6.   Every time you give him the ball.......or allow him to field it on special teams.........you are putting it in harms way.   That negates the ability to gain separation on the least of a teams pass defenders........which is often the guy assigned to him.    If I were game planning against the Bills he'd be who I want the ball to be funneled to.   I don't think it's coincidental that it went down that way in KC.  Teams know.   He kills drives. 

[Solomon Grundy]

21 minutes ago, NewEra said:

There are two ways to look at a trade for mccaffery.  This seasons success and future success. 
 

this season success-  is it worth trading a pick for a better chance at winning the super bowl this year?  Then cutting him after winning a Lombardi with no ties to a crazy contract for him.  With Lombardi in hand- you’ve accomplished the goal partly because of the CMC insurance policy that was purchased.  It would hurt the future as we’d be short a pick.  But sometimes that’s the price one has to pay.  Ask the Rams.  Sucks losing von—- but they won one. If this is the plan- I understand and love the idea.  Gotta win one and our 2nd and 3rd rd picks are kinda lame anyway.  
 

Future success-  do we want to tie ourselves to a huge RB contract in the future while we have several players that will be demanding big raises in the future.  Should we replace a core player for an injury plagued big money RB?  I think it’s unnecessary.  We don’t need a super star RB to win multiple Super Bowls. 
 

personally, I love watching a great RB get after it- Saquon, I’d might be tempted to keep long term, but it would be a HUGE gamble and one I don’t think Beane would entertain.  If Dorsey did a good job with the play calling- we might never punt.  CMC is great, but I definitely wouldn’t want him on a long term contract over 10m a year.  As a one year rental, if we have up a 2nd or a 3rd, I wouldn’t mind doubling down.  I w would understand trading a pick for upgrades at WR, RB or OL in order to help win this year.  Coming up short this year would be a debacle 

Now your getting my drift!! Couldn't have stated it better

[Solomon Grundy]

40 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

The Bills should have blown the Chiefs out on Sunday.............if they had a receiver that was proven good enough to keep Flubs McKenzie on the bench THAT would have likely added 14 points and created a lot of extra momentum.   And had they had that guy in the Rams game it probably wouldn't have been as close as long and maybe they get a chance to kick a field goal at the end of the Miami game.   Hopefully Shakir steps into that role or they add an outside receiver and play Diggs A LOT more in the slot.......where he is lethal.........instead of Lil' Dummy.  

 

That being the case and not factoring in the unknown like injuries..........it's hard to envision KC making a move that would close the talent gap AND be enough to beat the Bills in Buffalo if they aren't turning the ball over(be it literally or on downs).

They have one, Khalil Shakir. The problem is McDermott and his loyalty. Which is all good to a point. I consider myself a loyalist, but if I can upgrade I will. 

[NewEra]

5 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:

Now your getting my drift!! Couldn't have stated it better

I’ve always felt this way.  Not sure if this comment is related to Breece Hall or not, but I don’t think Breece Hall is Saquon Barkley type good.  Barkley may be the Josh Allen of RBs…. But the usually hurt version.  Special, special player-  Hall is more of a Kamara good imo.  Dam good, but no one will ever compare him with the all time greats good.  Always thought Kenneth Walker was the best back in the class. He looked it on Sunday, 12 forced missed tackles.  Hall was second on the day, with 5. 😉 

5 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:

They have one, Khalil Shakir. The problem is McDermott and his loyalty. Which is all good to a point. I consider myself a loyalist, but if I can upgrade I will. 

We’ll find out about the loyalty in the next week or so.  He gave Dirty a chance to keep his spot after shakir showed he’s up to the task.  I respect that he didn’t take his starting job away after an injury.  That said, dirty failed and he lost his job Vs KC imo. And I’m happy about that.  He should return to his niche role and let Shakir take over full time.  I love that kid. 

[BADOLBILZ]

3 minutes ago, Solomon Grundy said:

They have one, Khalil Shakir. The problem is McDermott and his loyalty. Which is all good to a point. I consider myself a loyalist, but if I can upgrade I will. 

 

 

I don't think it's just McDermott's loyalty.   He's shown a healthy disdain for McKenzie's carelessness.   But I think part of the deal with bringing him back was knowing that his teammates love him and badly want him to succeed and it might rock the apple cart a bit if they bench him without giving him enough rope to do the job himself.   Yeah, they likely have concerns about Shakir's readiness..........but this is common with young, non-1st round WR's........they tend to ride the pine early in seasons and then teams start expanding their role.    Hopefully it's that way with Shakir.   If not, they need to acquire help to push Lil Dummy down the depth chart enough so that his playing time is sporadic enough that opposing defense's can't gameplan to funnel the action toward danger-prone Dirty.    

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Scott7975 said:

 

When you have an average QB then you pay a game changing RB.  When you have an elite QB you pay a game changing receiver.  CMC isnt going to make a big enough difference to justify the cost of him with the QB we have.  There are a few teams that have an elite RB.  Tell me how many of them get to the superbowl in todays NFL.

 

If you are paying for an elite RB then thats an elite receiver that you can't pay. 

Im not talking about paying an elite RB.  I said there is no denying it would boost our offense even higher.  
 

CMC would also only cost us $600k or so this year.  And can be cut with no cap hit next year if Beane didn’t want to pay him.  
 

Again, I don’t think it’s gonna happen, but money isn’t really an issue here if the intention is to elevate chances for just this year.  

[Scott7975]

2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Im not talking about paying an elite RB.  I said there is no denying it would boost our offense even higher.  
 

CMC would also only cost us $600k or so this year.  And can be cut with no cap hit next year if Beane didn’t want to pay him.  
 

Again, I don’t think it’s gonna happen, but money isn’t really an issue here if the intention is to elevate chances for just this year.  

 

He would also cost at least a first round draft pick.  I dont think the Panthers are kidding when they say they dont want to get rid of him but still would for something outrageous.  Also, I dont think its accurate that the Bills can just cut him next year with no cap hit.  Someone else already posted on this.

 

Singletary is getting good production in both running and passing.  CMC is not going to be leagues better to warrant a first round draft pick or even a second for a half year rental.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Scott7975

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

The disconnect here is that you think winning a few random regular season games on the strength of running the ball and playing good defense is "moving the needle" toward winning a Super Bowl.

 

It's not.

 

That's been proven time and again over the last 25 years.

 

Playoffs come........defensive business decisions stop happening........run games get shut down regardless of what All Pro you have in your backfield and teams that have built themselves around giving a stud RB touches find themselves a fish out of water.    See New Orleans time and again with Alvin Kamara.......the "other" McCaffrey.

 

 

Except that’s just not true.  In the last 25 years…a team with a great D and run game as the strength of their teams won the SB 11 times.  

To name some:  

Manning won his last ring on a run game and defense as the worst passer in the NFL that year and worst QB performance in a Super Bowl win in NFL history.  
 

Russel Wilson won a SB as a game manager before he became a great QB behind a dominant run game and dominant defense.  And would have won back to back had they run instead of pass at end of the game.  
 

Big Ben won a SB on the back of a dominant run game and defense before he became a great passer later in his career.  
 

New England won their first 3 Super Bowls as a great defense and running team with squat at WR before Brady became a high production QB.
 

Ravens won the SB with Trent Dilfer and a dominant run game and dominant defense.  
 

Giants won multiple SBs this way.  
 

None of this matters.  I’m not saying let’s become a run team or even to trade for CMC.  Heck I’m one of Devin’s biggest defenders and supporters here.  I’m just correcting this inaccurate claim you just made that it’s never happened in the last 25 years.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Alphadawg7

[NewEra]

12 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Except that’s just not true.  In the last 25 years…a team with a great D and run game as the strength of their teams won the SB 11 times.  

To name some:  

Manning won his last ring on a run game and defense as the worst passer in the NFL that year and worst QB performance in a Super Bowl win in NFL history.  
 

Russel Wilson won a SB as a game manager before he became a great QB behind a dominant run game and dominant defense.  And would have won back to back had they run instead of pass at end of the game.  
 

Big Ben won a SB on the back of a dominant run game and defense before he became a great passer later in his career.  
 

New England won their first 3 Super Bowls as a great defense and running team with squat at WR before Brady became a high production QB.
 

Ravens won the SB with Trent Dilfer and a dominant run game and dominant defense.  
 

Giants won multiple SBs this way.  
 

None of this matters.  I’m not saying let’s become a run team or even to trade for CMC.  Heck I’m one of Devin’s biggest defenders and supporters here.  I’m just correcting this inaccurate claim you just made that it’s never happened in the last 25 years.

I agree with most of what you’re saying throughout.  The only problem with this logic is thinking that adding a star running back will give us a great running game.  I don’t think that’s the case.  The panthers don’t have a great run game.   
 

Derrick Henry and the titans have the 6th worst rush offense.  
Najee on the 7th worst

Mixon on the 8th worst

Mccaffery on the 9th worst

ekeler on the 10th worst

Dalvin on the 12th worst

 

 

[Scott7975]

36 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Except that’s just not true.  In the last 25 years…a team with a great D and run game as the strength of their teams won the SB 11 times.  

To name some:  

Manning won his last ring on a run game and defense as the worst passer in the NFL that year and worst QB performance in a Super Bowl win in NFL history.  
 

Russel Wilson won a SB as a game manager before he became a great QB behind a dominant run game and dominant defense.  And would have won back to back had they run instead of pass at end of the game.  
 

Big Ben won a SB on the back of a dominant run game and defense before he became a great passer later in his career.  
 

New England won their first 3 Super Bowls as a great defense and running team with squat at WR before Brady became a high production QB.
 

Ravens won the SB with Trent Dilfer and a dominant run game and dominant defense.  
 

Giants won multiple SBs this way.  
 

None of this matters.  I’m not saying let’s become a run team or even to trade for CMC.  Heck I’m one of Devin’s biggest defenders and supporters here.  I’m just correcting this inaccurate claim you just made that it’s never happened in the last 25 years.

 

In the last 25 years is ancient history football, not todays football.  Its the same reason that the Ravens arent getting there.  Lamar Jackson is the best athlete on the field but he isnt a good enough passer.  King Henry isnt getting a ring with Ryan Tannehil.  Zeke Elliot was amazing until he got paid and they lost players. As good as the Giants are doing, they are not going to win a superbowl with that team. etc etc etc.  I said todays NFL. Your nearest superbowl was 2015 with the greatest mind in football at QB.  Yeah his arm was done but if you dont think his intelligence and some key throws didnt help win that game you are wrong.  The rest of those superbowls are ancient.  

 

For some reason I thought you quoted me but my message still applies.

Edited October 19, 2022 by Scott7975

[BADOLBILZ]

45 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Except that’s just not true.  In the last 25 years…a team with a great D and run game as the strength of their teams won the SB 11 times.  

To name some:  

Manning won his last ring on a run game and defense as the worst passer in the NFL that year and worst QB performance in a Super Bowl win in NFL history.  
 

Russel Wilson won a SB as a game manager before he became a great QB behind a dominant run game and dominant defense.  And would have won back to back had they run instead of pass at end of the game.  
 

Big Ben won a SB on the back of a dominant run game and defense before he became a great passer later in his career.  
 

New England won their first 3 Super Bowls as a great defense and running team with squat at WR before Brady became a high production QB.
 

Ravens won the SB with Trent Dilfer and a dominant run game and dominant defense.  
 

Giants won multiple SBs this way.  
 

None of this matters.  I’m not saying let’s become a run team or even to trade for CMC.  Heck I’m one of Devin’s biggest defenders and supporters here.  I’m just correcting this inaccurate claim you just made that it’s never happened in the last 25 years.

 

 

Don't forget the Bucs........didn't big name washout and bargain acquisition Leonard Fournette have a good game in the SB versus KC?

 

With the exception of Seattle..........who had the best defense of this current century..........none of those teams you mentioned were lead by a star RB........and it's probably NOT a coincidence that the league drastically altering the rules to make it safer/easier to pass the ball in 2010 has really accelerated the declining impact of star RB's to basically ZERO now.

 

Now if you want to make the argument that a great OL can move the needle on championship hopes.............sure............but those are basically extinct(along with the RB who produces year-after-year until age 30).

 

The game has evolved and the record shows that.