The 2023 - ??? Edmunds Report

[ngbills]

The funny thing about this board is everything has to be extreme. The Bills did not sign Edmunds so he has to suck, be worse than Bernard, Bears are stupid, etc. It cant be that he is a good player, the Bills would have love to keep him, just were not wanting to spend $20M on him or any MLB. If they signed him we would still have an anti-Edmunds group but many that now say he is not worth the money or Bernard is fine would be celebrating how we got him for less than Roquan Smith. Its ok for him to be good and not be on the Bills anymore. 

[gobills404]

Day in the life of @FireChans

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, gobills404 said:

Day in the life of @FireChans

Lmao

[DCofNC]

4 hours ago, Captain Hindsight said:

Moss looked good. I was surprised it was him, but he looks like a solid NFL back right now

He was never less than that here, but he got dinged up a lot and never had any quality that made him stand out.  He was running behind a garbage line, in a pass first offense, with an equally talented, yet slightly more exciting back as competition to start.   I think a HEALTHY Moss, in a scheme that lets him get in the flow of the game, can be a good back.  He doesn’t have super elite traits, but he’s by all accounts a hard worker, with a lot of knowledge of the game.   Being real, he’s one of the top 64 athletes in the world at the position, he has talent, he just needs better circumstances than the truly unique guys.  Given the opportunity, I see no reason he couldn’t be a consistent 1000 yard guy.  He’s got average speed, good size, good power, average hands and average vision.  That’s enough to make a career of it.  
 

Keep in mind, the Bills are running the ball more and better this year, not because of the backs nearly as much as because the scheme and the line are more geared to it.  Cook sure wasn’t this good last year, you know both of the back-ups have mid-level ceilings and they are all getting some pretty good chunk yards. The difference between Cook’s explosiveness vs Motor is noticeable, but the first step and vision aren’t much different, Cook can just take it to the house where DS was going to get caught. 

1 hour ago, ngbills said:

The funny thing about this board is everything has to be extreme. The Bills did not sign Edmunds so he has to suck, be worse than Bernard, Bears are stupid, etc. It cant be that he is a good player, the Bills would have love to keep him, just were not wanting to spend $20M on him or any MLB. If they signed him we would still have an anti-Edmunds group but many that now say he is not worth the money or Bernard is fine would be celebrating how we got him for less than Roquan Smith. Its ok for him to be good and not be on the Bills anymore. 

This has a lot of merit.  He had his best year in the contract year, good for him.  He still is more potential/hype than production, but maybe he will have the right opportunity to convert some of that to production for the Bears.  Now, to me, the Bears are idiots to ditch Roquon over money and sign Edmunds to that deal, but that’s their problem.

[Buffalo03]

On 8/27/2023 at 10:58 AM, LABILLBACKER said:

So glad we didn't pay him

When we extended Oliver, at first I was like "I would have rather given that money to Edmunds". After seeing how Oliver has played through 2 games, I'm glad I was wrong about that

[That's No Moon]

5 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

When we extended Oliver, at first I was like "I would have rather given that money to Edmunds". After seeing how Oliver has played through 2 games, I'm glad I was wrong about that

The issue with Oliver is he's streaky. He needs to show it over extended periods in a season, not flashes.

[Bill from NYC]

Wait, hold on a sec.....Do all of the above posts indicate that despite the heat he took, @BADOLBILZ was actually "right" about Edmunds for the last few years?

 

Never mind, that's impossible, right?

 

Carry on.

[Buffalo03]

1 minute ago, That's No Moon said:

The issue with Oliver is he's streaky. He needs to show it over extended periods in a season, not flashes.

I agree. I'm hoping it was just a defensive issue. The D seems to be much better pressure wise under Mc D than it did with Frazier. I'm hoping he can thrive in the change

[Virgil]

Has anyone trolled the Chicago boards to see how they feel Edmunds is doing?  I imagine all the focus is on Fields, but I would still be curious

[34-78-83]

28 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Wait, hold on a sec.....Do all of the above posts indicate that despite the heat he took, @BADOLBILZ was actually "right" about Edmunds for the last few years?

 

Never mind, that's impossible, right?

 

Carry on.

He was most definitely right, but for some reason (I know bc I was one of them too) MANY presumed he meant that Edmunds was a poor player judging by the pile on effects that would happen around these posts you speak of for the last few years, but that's not what he was saying. 

[JayBaller10]

11 minutes ago, Virgil said:

Has anyone trolled the Chicago boards to see how they feel Edmunds is doing?  I imagine all the focus is on Fields, but I would still be curious

Someone had linked Edmunds posts a few days back. It’s going about how you probably think it is. Fans questioning the amount of money he signed for, asking where’s the impact, saying he’s a clear downgrade from Roquan, etc. One of the comments I laughed at went something like “I know he’s supposed to be a coverage linebacker, but what or who is he covering exactly?” 😂 We need some Bills fans to go over there and troll them with “he’s making a difference, you all just can’t see it and don’t know what you’re watching.” I’m sure that would ignite the fires even more. 

[Thrivefourfive]

The Bears have Fields and Edmunds! Field Generals on both sides of the ball!! Blah

 

Edmunds was an okay pick. He started and played above average…all things considered, for a number of years. And the team won. It just didn’t work out long term. It happens sometimes. I’m glad he’s not an over paid Bill.

 

Comparing him to the entire Chiefs team winning the Super Bowl x2 is… um… funny. 

Time to move on from Edmunds. He wasn’t a bad guy. He’s from a football family. I’m not sure what’s to go on and on about here. 
 

The pick had all the best intentions, and was actually serviceable in a very important way. So far from a bust anyway you look at. 

[GaryPinC]

17 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Dude. My god. A) it was 35 yards and b) #53 was covering him, not Edmunds. Hate Edmunds all you want, but please, please don’t make stuff up out of whole cloth to advance a pretty friggin’ dumb crusade built out of misguided spite. It’s unbecoming, as all crusades are. Material evidence: 

.

 

Review your material evidence more closely.  In particular, watch the replay.  Look where Edmunds lines up.  3 receivers to the right.  Ball is snapped, Love's eyes drift right for a second, which Edmunds reads and shifts slightly right to cover the developing post pattern.  So far so good.  Love then swings his eyes left, plants slightly left and hits the left slant pattern.  At these exact moments, Edmunds inexplicably over-commits to covering a pattern farther right,  clearing out and opening up the zone Aaron Jones trucks through for the TD.  Even though the QB and running back were both showing left.

 

This is your high paid, veteran, stud MLB stupidly taking himself out of the play.  Jordan Love would have had to seriously pivot right to open his body up for a pass that direction and he never did that.  His eye fake wasn't even very good, but Edmunds has no instincts for the game.  He couldn't even catch up in pursuit he took himself out so badly.  

 

A most likely outcome of this play should have been Jones gets the completion and Edmunds tackles him for a short/moderate gain.  But thanks to Edmunds, it wasn't.

 

Firechans isn't making things up, he is right.  You are wrong.  This is a great example why many of us don't respect Edmunds as a top-paid linebacker.  I hope you try to see the complexities of the game more.  

[dave mcbride]

6 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

 

Review your material evidence more closely.  In particular, watch the replay.  Look where Edmunds lines up.  3 receivers to the right.  Ball is snapped, Love's eyes drift right for a second, which Edmunds reads and shifts slightly right to cover the developing post pattern.  So far so good.  Love then swings his eyes left, plants slightly left and hits the left slant pattern.  At these exact moments, Edmunds inexplicably over-commits to covering a pattern farther right,  clearing out and opening up the zone Aaron Jones trucks through for the TD.  Even though the QB and running back were both showing left.

 

This is your high paid, veteran, stud MLB stupidly taking himself out of the play.  Jordan Love would have had to seriously pivot right to open his body up for a pass that direction and he never did that.  His eye fake wasn't even very good, but Edmunds has no instincts for the game.  He couldn't even catch up in pursuit he took himself out so badly.  

 

A most likely outcome of this play should have been Jones gets the completion and Edmunds tackles him for a short/moderate gain.  But thanks to Edmunds, it wasn't.

 

Firechans isn't making things up, he is right.  You are wrong.  This is a great example why many of us don't respect Edmunds as a top-paid linebacker.  I hope you try to see the complexities of the game more.  

Um, no. #53 is supposed to cover Jones regardless. He failed. We also have no idea how the Bears' coaches were directing Edmunds to play in that formation. WRs are usually a greater threat than RBs, so maybe he was directed to shade toward that? I don't know, and neither do you. What we do know is that a) contra the original claim, it wasn't a 75-yard TD completion, and b) the person eating dust at the end and cursing himself for his poor coverage of Jones was not Tremaine Edmunds. Everything else is guesswork because we have no idea how the defense was being directed to deal with that formation. We also know that Aaron Jones averaged 6.7 yards per reception last season, so it could be the case that going into the game he was viewed as a standard-issue dump-off option that was less of a threat in the grand scheme of things than the receivers. 

 

I am not sure I am right about this possible scenario, but I am sure that you don't know for sure either. That's why all of this feels to me like yet another installment in what is a pretty dumb crusade against a player who had a good season for the Bills last year.  

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

6 hours ago, gobills404 said:

Day in the life of @FireChans

Simply amazing

[BillsfaninSB]

Can we get a thread going for Devon Singletary?

[bigduke6]

wasnt upset when Edmunds left tbh.   dont hate him,  didnt love him when he was here but he was fine.   ive been watching the Bears games and he's exactly what he was here.   a space eater who plays soft,  has little actual instincts.   i had a discussion with a coupla Bears fans when they landed him,  warned them that you're not going to see him making impact plays.   if the D doesnt use him correctly he wont do anything.  hes a very good zone LB on passing downs,  bout it.   run instincts are terrible,  and he cannot rush the passer, and absolutely cannot use leverage on tackles.   get used to watching him fall backwards while tackling and making tackles past the 1st down marker.   glad he got paid,  glad it wasnt here.

[balln]

2 minutes ago, bigduke6 said:

wasnt upset when Edmunds left tbh.   dont hate him,  didnt love him when he was here but he was fine.   ive been watching the Bears games and he's exactly what he was here.   a space eater who plays soft,  has little actual instincts.   i had a discussion with a coupla Bears fans when they landed him,  warned them that you're not going to see him making impact plays.   if the D doesnt use him correctly he wont do anything.  hes a very good zone LB on passing downs,  bout it.   run instincts are terrible,  and he cannot rush the passer, and absolutely cannot use leverage on tackles.   get used to watching him fall backwards while tackling and making tackles past the 1st down marker.   glad he got paid,  glad it wasnt here.

This x 1000

 

 

[BillsFan130]

3 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

 

Review your material evidence more closely.  In particular, watch the replay.  Look where Edmunds lines up.  3 receivers to the right.  Ball is snapped, Love's eyes drift right for a second, which Edmunds reads and shifts slightly right to cover the developing post pattern.  So far so good.  Love then swings his eyes left, plants slightly left and hits the left slant pattern.  At these exact moments, Edmunds inexplicably over-commits to covering a pattern farther right,  clearing out and opening up the zone Aaron Jones trucks through for the TD.  Even though the QB and running back were both showing left.

 

This is your high paid, veteran, stud MLB stupidly taking himself out of the play.  Jordan Love would have had to seriously pivot right to open his body up for a pass that direction and he never did that.  His eye fake wasn't even very good, but Edmunds has no instincts for the game.  He couldn't even catch up in pursuit he took himself out so badly.  

 

A most likely outcome of this play should have been Jones gets the completion and Edmunds tackles him for a short/moderate gain.  But thanks to Edmunds, it wasn't.

 

Firechans isn't making things up, he is right.  You are wrong.  This is a great example why many of us don't respect Edmunds as a top-paid linebacker.  I hope you try to see the complexities of the game more.  

Nice breakdown/post buddy 

[FireChans]

3 hours ago, dave mcbride said:

Um, no. #53 is supposed to cover Jones regardless. He failed. We also have no idea how the Bears' coaches were directing Edmunds to play in that formation. WRs are usually a greater threat than RBs, so maybe he was directed to shade toward that? I don't know, and neither do you. What we do know is that a) contra the original claim, it wasn't a 75-yard TD completion, and b) the person eating dust at the end and cursing himself for his poor coverage of Jones was not Tremaine Edmunds. Everything else is guesswork because we have no idea how the defense was being directed to deal with that formation. We also know that Aaron Jones averaged 6.7 yards per reception last season, so it could be the case that going into the game he was viewed as a standard-issue dump-off option that was less of a threat in the grand scheme of things than the receivers. 

 

I am not sure I am right about this possible scenario, but I am sure that you don't know for sure either. That's why all of this feels to me like yet another installment in what is a pretty dumb crusade against a player who had a good season for the Bills last year.  

Okay so maybe 53 is only supposed to cover Jones on the outside, and if he goes inside, Edmunds is supposed to take him. 
 

I mean, if we are allowed to just make up whatever we want about the play, let’s do it.