Isabella shows moves, will he make the roster?

[PBF81]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

But it does matter to them.

 

Does it?  

 

On one hand we have no idea who the coaches are going to cut, and they obviously keep their cards close to their vests.  

 

On the other, we already know in advance, that a WR that's done all but nothing in five seasons, averaging much fewer than 200s yards and 1 TD per season, despite having a relatively negligible cap hit, has zero chance of being cut should Isabella be kept on?  

 

The premise floated is that Khalil and Shorter cannot backup Diggs/Davis.  IMO that's absurd.  And Khalil as a rookie posted what Sherfield's averaged in five seasons.  And Khalil has posted more catches and yards as a rookie in the playoffs than Sherfield has in five seasons, which is none, he has no postseason catches.  

 

I also do not see them cutting their 5th-round pick at WR this year either.  If they do then questions need to start being asked about picks like that.  

 

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

 

 

[NickelCity]

I think we keep 6 receivers, and Isabella will be #6.

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, Doc said:

The same as in Buffalo.  The Bills signed him to the 53 with Daboll as OC and kept him the following year.  Obviously that must been with Daboll's blessing.

 

I'm sure it was, but you said he used him more, which is false.  He used him less.  

 

So whether or not Daboll is going to create a new FB roster spot for him over there remains to be seen.  

 

We're not even sure he'll be cut.  IMO there's a reasonable chance.  Gunner sees it differently.  

 

Time will tell.  I'm sure that whatever the team does this season, it's going to be with an emphasis on improving Allen's passing game, reducing his running the ball, etc.  The drafting of Kincaid and Torrence spells that out, at least as I see it.  

 

 

[Einstein]

7 minutes ago, SCBills said:

Honestly, why not just cut Matakevich if we want to keep Isabella?

 

We would incur a $2.5M dead cap hit if we cut Matakevich. Just something to keep in mind.

 

 

[SCBills]

Just now, Einstein said:

 

We would incur a $2.5M dead cap hit if we cut Matakevich. Just something to keep in mind.

 

 

Yea.. it would simply be due to us valuing Isabella over him, as Isabella doesn’t cost much. 

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

I suspect if you tracked every short yardage conversion elsewhere on the field he would have a bigger role. They also use him as I have said to get favourable matchups. And again.... the argument isn't that he is a top 5 full back in the NFL. He is a pretty good special teams player, and particularly in punt coverage has value because he can play 3 different positions on punt team including personal protector. But I wouldn't say he is top 5 in the NFL as a STer either. Nor would I argue he is a top 5 blocking tight end. 

 

The point is EVERY roster has 1 or 2 offensive players at either FB or TE who are mainly on the team to block. Some have two. Very few of those teams get the value out of that / those players that the Bills get out of Gilliam on special teams. Take my Eagles example. They kept two blocking tight ends and no fullback. But even adding the % of STs snaps those two TEs played together comes to less than what Gilliam played on teams for the Bills. So most need at least two players - an offensive skill position blocker and a special teams player - and sometimes 3 guys to do what Gilliam does for Buffalo. That is his value. Not that he does a single thing brilliantly, but that he actually SAVES them a roster spot for a position player who will put up some stats either on offense or defense because of his multi-functionality. 

 

As I say, most fans don't understand special teams. Most fans don't like 'skill' position blockers. It is what it is. But Gilliam does 3 jobs to a reasonable standard and it lets them use their other spots on guys who catch, run, and tackle (on the defensive side). 

 

BTW, I'm still waiting for the evidence that you used to garner all of that.  Not to be snarky at all, I'm truly interested in seeing it.  

 

Knowing you, there's gotta be something besides "the coaches said" that's behind this.   Please share.  I'd love to take the time to see it, truly.  

 

 

[Doc]

9 minutes ago, Einstein said:

What is going to doom Shavers is that he doesnt do anything else particularly well.

 

Shorter has the potential to be a good receiver and an elite tall endzone threat. That plus his experience in ST, I believe, will earn him a spot.

Shavers... all he has is the special teams. That's why he wasn't drafted. On a roster as deep as the Bills is, that's not enough. 

 

Shorter isn't making any waves at receiver either from what I can gather.  

 

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

I'm sure it was, but you said he used him more, which is false.  He used him less.  

 

So whether or not Daboll is going to create a new FB roster spot for him over there remains to be seen.  

 

We're not even sure he'll be cut.  IMO there's a reasonable chance.  Gunner sees it differently.  

 

Time will tell.  I'm sure that whatever the team does this season, it's going to be with an emphasis on improving Allen's passing game, reducing his running the ball, etc.  The drafting of Kincaid and Torrence spells that out, at least as I see it. 

 

Huh?  Gilliam joined the Bills in 2000.  Daboll was OC in 2018.  He used him how he used him.

[Big Turk]

Unlikely. PS candidate with call up potential.

[SCBills]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Shorter isn't making any waves at receiver either from what I can gather.  

 

 

Huh?  Gilliam joined the Bills in 2000.  Daboll was OC in 2018.  He used him how he used him.

I don’t think anyone is really expecting Shorter to show a ton this year.  
 

He’s an incredibly raw prospect with size and speed.  
 

My only worry with cutting Shakir or Shorter is that we would only have Diggs, Harty and one of those two under contract for next year at WR.  
 

We’d be looking at half of our WR room

and 70% of our DL rotation not under contract past this season. 
 

Ultimately I trust Beane to figure it out, but I’m not sure we want to create more holes than necessary, knowing that next year we have a lot of one year deal guys and expiring contracts coming up … all the while entering the season over the cap. 

[ColoradoBills]

Currently 5 WRs are locks with Shorter as #6.  The path for Andy Isabella making the team is for him to look great at KRs AND playing very

well at WR.  If that happens then Isabella would need to dress on Sundays for his KR spot.  That means Shorter would sit often (red shirted).

Without a mysterious injury to Shorter to start the season, I see the chances of Isabella making the squad currently as under 50%.

 

Let's keep an eye on him the next 2 weeks (starting in a few hours).

 

OT:  I understand Gilliams's usefulness in his past role BUT in my mind, there is a chance he could be cut.  Knox has lined up often in the backfield

this camp and with the other youngsters having ST skills, I don't have him as a lock.  I do think he probably makes the team.

Quintin Morris played a lot of ST last year too, so there could be some overlap in skills.

 

I know how much ST's are favored with this staff BUT I can see a chance of one of the big 3 (Gilliam, Matakevich and Neal) being let go.

Once again, probably not, but it wouldn't surprise me.

[PBF81]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

Huh?  Gilliam joined the Bills in 2000.  Daboll was OC in 2018.  He used him how he used him.

 

I just pointed out that Daboll used him less than Dorsey did.  

 

3 carries in two seasons?  For a 3 yards?  

 

Zero targets or catches?  

 

As pointed out, Gilliam wasn't in on a single rushing TD play last season.  So your argument is that he was in on a bunch of them under Daboll?  
 

I'll pose the same question to you that I posed to Gunner, where's the actual evidence that he's more than JAG?  

 

Daboll's going to cut another spot and install a FB when he didn't bother to even try one out this season and didn't use one last year?  I suppose it's possible, but again, why is everyone so high on Gilliam?  He clearly contributes little to scoring, is only in on every sixth offensive play.  He ranked 17th in snaps taken offensively.  Immediately behind him were Hart and Crowder, the latter of which saw only a handful of games.  

 

IDK, maybe you're right, if we even cut him, he'll end up on the Giants.  I'm simply questioning the logic other than Daboll picking up every offensive player that we might release that played under him here.  

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

12 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

We would incur a $2.5M dead cap hit if we cut Matakevich. Just something to keep in mind.

 

 

 

He has a void year in his contract so some of the dead cap would carry over next year.

[Rubes]

I think it probably comes down to which of the two, between Isabella and Shorter, are more likely to make it through waivers so they can be stashed on the PS. From what I read, I think Shorter would probably get snatched up before Isabella. My guess is Isabella makes it onto the PS this year and possibly gets called up.

 

[That's No Moon]

23 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

Wasn't his QB just the #4 pick in the draft? I also remember talking about Shorter's upside as a 5 star recruit at Penn State, where he did next to nothing before transferring to Florida where he also didn't do a ton.

[Cash]

2 hours ago, transient said:

Definitely a bruiser, but Gash did have 1300+ yds and 13 receiving TDs in his career… over half of that with the Bills. He was enough of a threat to catch teams off guard. 

I’d argue that he caught teams off guard precisely because he WASN’T much of a threat, but point taken. Those were some lean years when we were getting excited about our FA signings at FB. (And yes, I was one of the people excited when we signed Gash.)

 

FWIW, I think Gilliam would be much more productive in the passing game than Gash if given the opportunity, and wouldn’t mind seeing him get a few more looks in the pass game. He’s nowhere near the Larry Centers level though - Centers is arguably the best receiving back of all time, RBs included.

[wppete]

Really hope we find a way to keep Isabella and Shorter on this roster. 

[SCBills]

8 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Wasn't his QB just the #4 pick in the draft? I also remember talking about Shorter's upside as a 5 star recruit at Penn State, where he did next to nothing before transferring to Florida where he also didn't do a ton.

Richardson was definitely not drafted for his college production. 

[Rocky Landing]

2 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

There are at least 9 WRs on the roster right now that will be on rosters this year.  Some of our 3rd and 4th stringers are going to get snapped up after cuts.

Every fanbase in the league believes their WR depth is such that there are multiple receivers who will be snatched up after cuts. (Even Patriots* fans!) But, I think the truth is that when you're looking that far down the depth chart, teams are more comfortable with the guys that have learned their playbook, and system, and are adequate in ST-- even if there are options on the waiver wire that are a little bit better.

[NickelCity]

Shorter seems like a redshirt candidate. Those pesky hamstrings...

[Process]

Keep him as #6 over Shorter. Shorter, who hasn't shown anything, goes to the PS.

 

Or better yet just keep all 7 guys.

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Rocky Landing said:

Every fanbase in the league believes their WR depth is such that there are multiple receivers who will be snatched up after cuts. (Even Patriots* fans!) But, I think the truth is that when you're looking that far down the depth chart, teams are more comfortable with the guys that have learned their playbook, and system, and are adequate in ST-- even if there are options on the waiver wire that are a little bit better.

We’ll see.  The guys we have are big WRs that can work in the red zone.  I expect several in practice squads.

[BillsfaninChicago]

I didn’t realize it but he was taken with the pick that the dolphins wasted trading with the Cardinals for the other Josh. That makes me like him more on our roster!

[AuntieEm]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I'll make a friendly wager with you that Gilliam doesn't make it at his current contact, if he does, he'll be brought back at something much closer to vet min.  

 

He defines expendable.  

 

 

 

Then how come he's hardly ever on the field?  

 

And what's so special about him as a FB that can't be found on waivers after cuts?  

 

 

 Or likely stashed on ps so if needed they call him up.  Why pay him to be a cheerleader on the bench.  Bad look not paying the Jill's in retrospect if that is the case.

[PBF81]

9 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Wasn't his QB just the #4 pick in the draft? I also remember talking about Shorter's upside as a 5 star recruit at Penn State, where he did next to nothing before transferring to Florida where he also didn't do a ton.

 

So you're claiming that Richardson was among the better QBs in the SEC last season and that UF's passing game was robust if not what, among the best in the SEC then?  
 

Is that what I'm understanding in your reply to what I said.  Which was ... 

 

Quote

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

 

In short, NPI, you seem to think that given his circumstances at UF, Shorter's got a lower ceiling than his stats, and to at least some extent his draft capital, suggest?  

 

Do you think that maybe "he didn't do a ton" at UF because he had a QB that was erratic, had poor mechanics and decision-making, and ranked near the bottom of the SEC for passers?   Or don't you think that had anything to do with it?  Shorter was a freshman and sophomore at PSU, and despite that he still was the third leading WR on their team as a soph, and a team that's almost always heavy on TE use, as it was then as well.  Just sayin'.  

 

Trying to understand your point here. 

 

 

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

39 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Shorter isn't making any waves at receiver either from what I can gather.  

 

Oh come on. He's a rookie. Did we expect him to light TC on fire ?

 

This is a tough fan base

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, AuntieEm said:

 Or likely stashed on ps so if needed they call him up.  Why pay him to be a cheerleader on the bench.  Bad look not paying the Jill's in retrospect if that is the case.

 

I can't speak to the PS, I only care about the 53.  And I would argue, that if he's truly as good as his proponents here say he is, then he won't last long on our PS squad either.  

 

I'm suggesting that with the drafting of Kincaid & Torrence, the team is changing its offensive approach slightly, and that it won't nearly include the FB/Gilliam as much, particularly since he doesn't catch, and that therefore he's expendable, perhaps with a FB that does catch more but may not be quite as good a blocker.   

 

Again, so far the only argument that I can see in favor of his use here is that he's in on the "big body" plays, but it was pointed out that he wasn't in on any of our short TD runs.  Next up was that he's in on the short-yardage plays otherwise.  Maybe, but until we look at those plays in action I'm far from convinced.  

 

We had a mere 34 plays on 3rd-and-short (1-3 yards) all season.  Of those, 27 converted.  We have no idea how many Gilliam was involved in and those were supposed to be his specialty.  At least nothing has been posted.   

 

I'm simply not seeing the need this season on what appears to be more of a spread offense in the making.  I could be way off on that, as I'm incredibly optimistic and bullish on the Offense this season, more so than anyone else that I can see.  Either way, I'm not seeing a significant role for a blocking FB on this team, particularly with the signing of Harris, who granted, isn't Gilliam in blocking, but who can block well nonethelss.  

 

 

[That's No Moon]

10 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

So you're claiming that Richardson was among the better QBs in the SEC last season and that UF's passing game was robust if not what, among the best in the SEC then?  
 

Is that what I'm understanding in your reply to what I said.  Which was ... 

 

 

In short, NPI, you seem to think that given his circumstances at UF, Shorter's got a lower ceiling than his stats, and to at least some extent his draft capital, suggest?  

 

Do you think that maybe "he didn't do a ton" at UF because he had a QB that was erratic, had poor mechanics and decision-making, and ranked near the bottom of the SEC for passers?   Or don't you think that had anything to do with it?  Shorter was a freshman and sophomore at PSU, and despite that he still was the third leading WR on their team as a soph, and a team that's almost always heavy on TE use, as it was then as well.  Just sayin'.  

 

Trying to understand your point here. 

 

 

My point is people have spent an awful lot of time already waiting on Justin Shorter's potential. At some point he actually needs to do something.

 

Also, if we are going to use his QBs as an excuse, he's not going to be on the field with a QB better than Anthony Richardson this preseason so congrats, that is already baked in.

[JoPoy88]

4 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I don't disagree as he's the only FB on the roster, so if they keep one, he's it, but I'd wager against it, heavily, at his current contact value of $2M.  

 

If they really want a FB he's the only option now.  

 

But it's a bit of a reach to think that there won't be another FB on the market after cuts that can do what Gilliam does.  To imagine otherwise it's too suggest that he's somehow special.  

 

Are you saying that he is special?  If not, then that seems to fit the definition of expendable.  

 

Agree with you on Isabella however.  

 

We'll find out soon.  

 

 

Problem is there aren’t many alternative FBs floating around nowadays, and even if there were readily available cheaper replacements, none of them would be able to come in off the street after cuts and learn the system and do all the things that Gilliam does for them right away. 

[GunnerBill]

56 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

BTW, I'm still waiting for the evidence that you used to garner all of that.  Not to be snarky at all, I'm truly interested in seeing it.  

 

Knowing you, there's gotta be something besides "the coaches said" that's behind this.   Please share.  I'd love to take the time to see it, truly.  

 

 

 

The evidence is I have seen it the years he has been here. I don't have an exact breakdown of the plays written down to share with you. But I'd advise you start wit the two regular season KC wins. Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both.

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

My point is people have spent an awful lot of time already waiting on Justin Shorter's potential. At some point he actually needs to do something.

 

He's a rookie.  What the ...  

 

LOL 

 

 

8 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Also, if we are going to use his QBs as an excuse, he's not going to be on the field with a QB better than Anthony Richardson this preseason so congrats, that is already baked in.

 

So in your world the quality of a QB's passing game has little to do with how well WRs perform.  Alright, noted.  

 

I would quickly add that the WRs that have worked with Brady and other much better QBs would likely differ from you on that.  

 

Either way, my point is simply that if Isabella's kept around, and I have no idea whether he will be or not, IMO the one to get cut would be Sherfield.  

 

What people seem to be overlooking in the matter is that teams often talk up certain players in camp, and I'm sure give them good reps to shine, in hopes of trading them.  Who knows whether Sherfield is one of them or not.  We do not at this point in time.  We may never know.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

Does it?  

 

On one hand we have no idea who the coaches are going to cut, and they obviously keep their cards close to their vests.  

 

On the other, we already know in advance, that a WR that's done all but nothing in five seasons, averaging much fewer than 200s yards and 1 TD per season, despite having a relatively negligible cap hit, has zero chance of being cut should Isabella be kept on?  

 

The premise floated is that Khalil and Shorter cannot backup Diggs/Davis.  IMO that's absurd.  And Khalil as a rookie posted what Sherfield's averaged in five seasons.  And Khalil has posted more catches and yards as a rookie in the playoffs than Sherfield has in five seasons, which is none, he has no postseason catches.  

 

I also do not see them cutting their 5th-round pick at WR this year either.  If they do then questions need to start being asked about picks like that.  

 

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

 

 

 

Shakir can't back up Diggs and Davis. They tried to tell us that last summer then when it came to games they chose Jake Kumerow and the corpse of John Brown rather than put him wide. He is a slot receiver if he has any chance at this level.

 

Maybe Shorter can.... but a raw 5th round rookie who has done next to nothing in camp and didn't have a target last week? Hell of a gamble.

 

I'll take the friendly wager on Sherfield making the 53. It's nailed on.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, julian said:

In fairness, how many fullbacks even still exist in the NFL ? 

 

The teams that don't keep full backs keep blocking tight ends in their place. They have changed how they do it but not the overall balance.

[HappyDays]

4 hours ago, Chaos said:

Ever year is different, but in the playoffs last year would you rather the Bills have had Isiah Hodgkins,

 

Oh enough with Isaiah Hodgins. He would not have made a lick of difference against the Bengals. He is going to spend his career bouncing around different teams as the 5th or 6th WR on the depth chart. Nothing wrong with that career but waiving him was not a huge whiff on our part.

 

We signed Beasley because Crowder was injured and Josh had no faith in McKenzie or Shakir to be where he expected them to be. This year that spot will mostly be held by Kincaid and Harty who are both massive upgrades on the slot options we had last year (pending Harty staying healthy).

 

Gilliam is very important because he fills three roster spots in one. You aren't considering the opportunity cost of losing him. We would have to keep other less talented players to fill his roles. So that would leave less room on the roster for depth WRs, not more.

 

If it comes down to it keeping Isabella over Shorter is an easy decision. Why would we even need to consider cutting Gilliam?

[HappyDays]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I know you'll disagree, but if Isabella makes the roster, I see Sherfield getting cut.  

 

 

 

The guy that came off the field against the Colts at the same time as Gabe Davis has exactly a 0% chance of getting cut.

[Brand J]

20 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Oh enough with Isaiah Hodgins. He would not have made a lick of difference against the Bengals. He is going to spend his career bouncing around different teams as the 5th or 6th WR on the depth chart. Nothing wrong with that career but waiving him was not a huge whiff on our part.

I don’t know about that. He’s currently a starter on the G Men. At worst, he’ll be a WR4 for them and I’d say won’t become a journeyman 5th or 6th receiver.

[PBF81]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The evidence is I have seen it the years he has been here. I don't have an exact breakdown of the plays written down to share with you. But I'd advise you start wit the two regular season KC wins. Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both.

 

Through the years?  Two years?   Well, OK.  

 

OK, so you went and found two games in which he had his 1st and 4th highest snap counts.  Taking your advice, I reviewed 20 minute highlight video.  

 

2021:  

 

On Allen's first designed run Sing blocked for him, Gilliam not on the field.  

Second play, in motion, dropped into the flat, didn't even directly draw a defender.  Inconsequential on that play.  

Third play, Allen run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fourth play, designed trick play, Allen run for a TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fifth play, Gilliam entirely against the grain, whiffing on the block inconsequentially.  

Next relevant play, Moss with about a 10-yard run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next three plays big pass plays, last one for a TD.  Gilliam not on the field. 

Huge pass play to Diggs deep, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed screen to Moss for 15, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next play, deep to Knox for a 53 TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Allen on what appears to be a designed run for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Gilliam lined up as TE, blocks, sheds, wide open in the flat, Allen to Knox deep for 41.  

Allen 11-yard pass to Sanders, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Beasley for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen scrambles for 4 and a 1st, Gilliam not on the field. 

Screen to Moss for 16, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Davis for 16 and another 1st, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed UTM run by Allen for 12, Gilliam not on the field.  

Tight formation, Allen to Sanders for an 8-yard TD, Gilliam not on the field.  

 

I suspect that a third of Gilliam's snaps were on our last drive clearly just trying to kill the clock and insurmountably up at that point.  

 

Either way, on the entire highlight video Gilliam was on the field for only three plays, inconsequential on every single one, as in could have been any JAG that did what he did.  He clearly wasn't getting any particular respect from Reid's D.  

 

I'm not sure it's worthe reviewing the 2022 game, but maybe I will.  Either way, if he was somehow instrumental it wasn't clear.  Either way, he certainly didn't have much of an impact much less a "big impact" as you stated.  You did say in both games, so I'm not sure there's any sense in my reviewing the other one at this point.  

 

You've called me out for posting more opinionated stuff than facts, and I've even acquiesced, such as when I was playing a little fast and loose with history going back to 2017-2020 re: our analysis of the LBs.  I'm going to suggest the same here, cordially of course.  On plays where the vast majority of our yards and all scores came from, Gilliam had exactly zero impact much less any "big impact."  

 

 

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Shakir can't back up Diggs and Davis. They tried to tell us that last summer then when it came to games they chose Jake Kumerow and the corpse of John Brown rather than put him wide. He is a slot receiver if he has any chance at this level.

 

Maybe Shorter can.... but a raw 5th round rookie who has done next to nothing in camp and didn't have a target last week? Hell of a gamble.

 

I'll take the friendly wager on Sherfield making the 53. It's nailed on.

 

My friendly wager offer was regarding Gilliam not making the 53 at his current $2M contract value.  We're on for that.  

 

My take on Sherfield is clearly linked to if Isabella makes the 53.  If he does, then yes, friendly wager that Sherfield is the one he beats out.  I'm not sure that we have another WR on the team that would take Sherfield's place after Isabella though.  If Isabella is cut, I fully expect Shefield to be on the 53.  

 

 

Edited August 19, 2023 by PBF81

[BananaB]

I have trouble seeing him make the final roster week 1. I could see him getting called up and possibly making an impact if guys in front of him don’t produce. That’s if we can sneak him on PS

Edited August 19, 2023 by BananaB

[PBF81]

17 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

The guy that came off the field against the Colts at the same time as Gabe Davis has exactly a 0% chance of getting cut.

 

Let's see how things line up tonight.  I could not disagree with you more on game 1 of preseason.  

 

It's funny, because every year there are surprise cuts around the league.  

 

I don't see Shorter or Khalil going anywhere.  As stated, if they do, then Beane needs further scrutiny.  Either way, if Shorter and Khalil do stay, and if, a big if, Isabella makes the 53, my money says that Sherfield is out.  

 

IMO they're trying to pump up his value in camp and practice for a trade.  Sure, I could be 100% wrong.  Time will tell.  It's purely opinion.  

 

 

[Brand J]

9 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

My take on Sherfield is clearly linked to if Isabella makes the 53.  If he does, then yes, friendly wager that Sherfield is the one he beats out.  I'm not sure that we have another WR on the team that would take Sherfield's place after Isabella though.  If Isabella is cut, I fully expect Shefield to be on the 53.  

I said earlier if Isabella makes the team, it guarantees there’ll be at least one surprise cut. The numbers make it so. However, that cut won’t come at the expense of Sherfield. It’s not my conversation, so sorry for jumping in here, but I’ll take you up on that wager if you’d like, $50 or $100. 

[BullBuchanan]

5 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I'll make a friendly wager with you that Gilliam doesn't make it at his current contact, if he does, he'll be brought back at something much closer to vet min.  

 

He defines expendable.  

 

 

 

Then how come he's hardly ever on the field?  

 

And what's so special about him as a FB that can't be found on waivers after cuts?  

 

 

It was already mentioned but he gives you high level ST play and blocking TE depth. You'd have to carry multiple players that would waste roster spots and cost more overall than one of him.