SoonerBillsFan Posted yesterday at 07:13 PM Posted yesterday at 07:13 PM 4 hours ago, Simon said: It doesn't even have to be boundary talent. If Kincaid can get his head out, the Bills can stress defenses enough between the hashes to create a lot of opportunities for the slot. Agreed, but for him "living here all offseason" no one is mentioning him in OTA reports Quote
BillsFanForever19 Posted yesterday at 08:12 PM Posted yesterday at 08:12 PM 58 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said: Agreed, but for him "living here all offseason" no one is mentioning him in OTA reports Hilarious timing.... Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted yesterday at 09:04 PM Posted yesterday at 09:04 PM 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: 160 targets for Shakir? hey why not 200! a grand total of 2 NFL WRs had 160 or more targets last year. There is no reality where he would get 160 on the Bills or any other team in the league. These extrapolation exercises are alway pointless. I didn’t say give him 160 targets…you said there is no chance he could reach 1200-1400 IF he did. And clearly that’s a silly premise Quote
Mr. WEO Posted 7 hours ago Posted 7 hours ago 17 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said: I didn’t say give him 160 targets…you said there is no chance he could reach 1200-1400 IF he did. And clearly that’s a silly premise you are simply providing a math equation. in his last year in Buffalo, for instance, Davis would have had over 1500 yards with 160 targets. Last year McConkey would have had 2300 yards, Jameson Williams would have had 2750! so, yes, I agree that 160 targets X 8.21 yards per target = 1313 yards. not a point worth making Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: you are simply providing a math equation. in his last year in Buffalo, for instance, Davis would have had over 1500 yards with 160 targets. Last year McConkey would have had 2300 yards, Jameson Williams would have had 2750! so, yes, I agree that 160 targets X 8.21 yards per target = 1313 yards. not a point worth making You said there was "no chance" and denied the math equation, I simply corrected the sillyness of the premise there was "no chance". Its all it was, nothing more, literally referred to it as a "simple math" equation multiple times. At no point did I advocate for him to get 160 targets, and quite honestly I wouldn't advocate for anyone to get 160 targets again in this offense. Other people who just want to argue skewed what was said and tried to turn into a bunch of other things...as usual because that is what they always do. Edited 5 hours ago by Alphadawg7 Quote
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.