GoBills808 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 38 minutes ago, NewEra said: Good luck with that. Anything can happen….but that’s not happening imo. Seems to me they’re going to roll with what they got plus maybe a 2nd 3rd tier FA if one happens to come available and take less money than they thought. Bottom line- it doesn’t matter if our WR group is better than last years as long as our TE group is better, our RB group is better and our OL is at least as good. Not to mention our coaches. I think there’s too much infatuation with WRs in this fan base. They matter, don’t get me wrong….but let’s not act like having an elite War unit is needed to win a SB. You don't need an elite QB to win a super bowl either but it helps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, GoBills808 said: You don't need an elite QB to win a super bowl either but it helps Yeah….elite players help….as I said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, NewEra said: Yeah….elite players help….as I said The wideout issue is team specific I believe great offensive scheme and coaching alleviates the need for the kind of guy OP is talking about Short of that you need elite receiving talent ie real #1 caliber receiver Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Who Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 2 minutes ago, NewEra said: We had Diggs for 3 elite seasons prior to this year. All same results in the playoff losses. He was beyond irrelevant He was. I don't know if that speaks to WR1 generally, or Diggs, however. I'm willing to entertain a different offensive strategy where targets and emphasis are diversified. Still think Beane should have done more to improve the WR room. (And of course, maybe he will, by the time the season starts.) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 minute ago, GoBills808 said: You don't need an elite QB to win a super bowl either but it helps How many elite WRs did Brady win super bowls with? Mahomes the last 2 seasons? The eagles? I just don’t think elite WRs have any correlation with winning super bowls. Great QB play+ coaching and defense 1 minute ago, Dr. Who said: He was. I don't know if that speaks to WR1 generally, or Diggs, however. I'm willing to entertain a different offensive strategy where targets and emphasis are diversified. Still think Beane should have done more to improve the WR room. (And of course, maybe he will, by the time the season starts.) I agree. I was hoping the same. I just don’t think trading Diggs was in his original plan this offseason. When free agency started, I think Diggs was in his plans. Then the tweet happened. Final straw- jmo. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, NewEra said: How many elite WRs did Brady win super bowls with? Mahomes the last 2 seasons? The eagles? I just don’t think elite WRs have any correlation with winning super bowls. Great QB play+ coaching and defense I would count gronkowski and Kelce as functional equivalents The Bills only have 1/3 of your equation come playoff time...that balance has to be made up somewhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 hour ago, oldmanfan said: Nope. If I knew I wouldn’t ask the question. So what you're saying is that you can't name a single #1 WR in the league nor have any idea what it might mean to be one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewEra Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) 1 hour ago, GoBills808 said: I would count gronkowski and Kelce as functional equivalents The Bills only have 1/3 of your equation come playoff time...that balance has to be made up somewhere Maybe it’s kincaids turn to be that elite TE. If not this season, soon. If the defense stays healthy and von doesn’t stink, we just need to execute. if not this year, then next. We aren’t ever going to go all in. Last year was the closest we’ll ever see imo Edited April 29 by NewEra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 Just now, NewEra said: Maybe it’s kincaids turn to be that elite TE. If not this season, soon. If the defense stays healthy and von doesn’t stink, we just need to execute. Loved what I saw out of Kincaid last yr but he's still a ways off from best TE of all time conversations When I say we need a legit #1 guy I mean I think the Bills need it, not that you generally can't win a SB without one. Imo this specific team w all their attributes benefits most from a wideout of that caliber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dat Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 After the game, when reporters ask what he was thinking on all his touchdowns his only response is… by Crom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TwistofFate Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 3 hours ago, oldmanfan said: I keep reading how we have to go find a true #1 WR. That begs the question: what is a #1 WR? A guy that makes X catches a year? Demands double teams? What? I ask because the team we keep trying to beat, the team who has won several Lombardis in recent years, doesn’t seem to have a #1 WR. So how do they win? They have a #1 TE. Does that count? Is so than can Kincaid count as ours? A Wr that demands double coverage nearly all the time because 1 on 1 matchups you get burned. The flip side is to have multiple quality wrs that may not be a true 1 but can win because of mismatches and scheme. This is where we are going imo. No single GREAT weapon, but multiple good weapons everywhere. How do you defend death by 1000 cuts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sven233 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 1 hour ago, ganesh said: could he be a RB who can catch the ball ? I don't think so really. I man, you could make the argument for a guy like Christian McCaffrey being the closest thing to a RB that is a true #1 type of target, but honestly, it's not the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted April 29 Author Share Posted April 29 21 minutes ago, Bangarang said: So what you're saying is that you can't name a single #1 WR in the league nor have any idea what it might mean to be one? I can name some that are the best on their team. But what defines a # 1 WR is not universal as you can see from answers here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 The most successful teams of the last decade (Pats and Chiefs) did it with a #1 TE. For better or worse, the Bills have transitioned to that type of personnel grouping. The DK Duo is gonna be the main driver of mismatches in the passing game. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 (edited) 2 hours ago, Low Positive said: Ravens just this last year. No one had over 900 yards receiving and only Flowers had over 600. They won 13 games. It was Lamar that strikes the fear. https://www.espn.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/bal/baltimore-ravens I'm not sure the Ravens are a good example. They're one of three NFL teams (two very successful) who have more rush attempts than pass attempts. In fact, the Ravens were #30 in the league for passing attempts. The other two are the SF49'ers (#32 for passing attempts) and the Bears were #27. So a team can be successful in the NFL that way, obviously, but can they be a successful, high powered passing offense that way? The 49'ers legitimately were - #4 for passing yards despite #32 for passing attempts. The Ravens, not so much - bottom 3rd of the league. The 49ers do spread it around pretty well, but I would argue that Aiyuk with 105 targets is their #1. Still they had 4 guys with >80 targets, so maybe they kind of make your case - I think defenses are far more scared of Christian McCaffery than they are of Aiyuk. I would still argue on the Ravens, low-powered as their passing offense was, Zay Flowers was the #1. He had 40% more targets and more than twice the receptions of anyone else. Edited April 29 by Beck Water Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoBills808 Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 3 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I can name some that are the best on their team. But what defines a # 1 WR is not universal as you can see from answers here. Tyreek Hill Jefferson Adams Lamb Evans Cooper Chase Brown Kupp Previously Hopkins and Julio Jones Guys w the tools to succeed above scheme or QB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Water Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 12 minutes ago, sven233 said: I don't think so really. I man, you could make the argument for a guy like Christian McCaffrey being the closest thing to a RB that is a true #1 type of target, but honestly, it's not the same thing. No, it's not the same thing, but I think a person could make a legit case that McCaffery is the player on the 49ers that is most responsible for keeping opposing DCs awake late. > 2000 Yds from scrimmage in a single season will do that. 2nd place would probably be Deebo Samuel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruceVilanch Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 2 hours ago, Governor said: Randy Moss was the last true #1. Prime Julio was pretty good Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangarang Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 32 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I can name some that are the best on their team. But what defines a # 1 WR is not universal as you can see from answers here. The premise of this thread is one poor attempt at some gotcha moment. I'm going to assume you're intentionally being obtuse and are actually smart enough to have an idea what makes someone a #1 WR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChans Posted April 29 Share Posted April 29 2 hours ago, Bangarang said: You know what a #1 receiver is without having it defined for you. This is like asking what a franchise QB is and saying we could get by with a guy like Tyrod because Nick Foles won a SB at one point. It’s like that pornography ruling. You know it when you see it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.