Buddo

Now you are being ridiculous.

I've yet to see any evidence that he has been replaced by anything special, which is the point after all.

This is sooth. Doesn't mean I can't think they might be wrong though.

The POV comes from the simple fact that O'Leary has performed in the actual NFL, and had some moderate success - the sort of moderate success you can associate with a 2nd/back up TE. Lee has been around the NFL, and a bunch of different teams, for the same amount of time as O'Leary, (from 2015) and has 1 career reception for 7 yards. I can see the upside for Croom, particularly, and Thomas might have a chance too, but when Clay inevitably has to miss a game or two, you really think you can rely on them?

. Pretty much this. If there's one guy who has been cut, who can be considered to be unlucky, it's O'Leary. Imho, he's the only guy in that room who was reliable. Clay's knees do not make him reliable, and we ave no idea how the rest of them will work out, if at all. Croom does have upside, for sure, but keeping the other two above O'Leary, doesn't seem quite right to me.

Ravens track record when drafting WRs, is pretty horrible tbh. Just stay away from their cast off WRs. Similarly the Patsies - they have trouble drafting WRs. Bills seem incapable of drafting a good TE. If we still have any sort of analytics department, I hope they are looking at what positions different teams draft well, and look at who they are releasing from those positions.

There was no Guard/Center play at all in the 1st half, when Allen was in. That's as far as I've watched for the moment, but I honestly cannot remember, more abysmal interior O-Line play than I saw in that half, going back to Losman's days - and that screams that we have problems. Groy completely missed a block on the very first series. Miller was a penalty machine and Ducasse was bull rushed straight into Allen. Bodine was being beaten like a drum, and the list could go on and on. Just about every snap, one guy out of the interior O-Line, stuffed up in one way or another. It was a hideous performance, and it never seemed to get any better, even with swapping guys around.

If Beane is now talking to the AP, I think you can assume that whatever hard evidence there is, doesn't point to Shady. The Bills (and probably the NFL) will have been looking into this for themselves, from the get go. If they can't find anything of substance, then the chances of it being a desperate money grab, get a great deal larger. I'm betting this will be a civil suit eventually, but that Shady will hire some big guns, and the woman trying it on, will be left without a pot to piss in.

I think she did, but I also believe that Shady wants to make sure she doesn't try and come back, hence continuing the eviction suit.

Presumably in the 'Fiction' Section, as the 'story' appears to change every other week. First I've heard about a bracelet getting cut off with wire cutters. Seem to be quite nice robbers. Lucky they didn't take the hand off, to get any rings and any bracelets. It would seem as though the 'dog' situation is the next ploy for sympathy, or as evidence that she was mistreated also, in that the accusation that Shady hurt his boy, was thrown out immediately by the kid's mother, who has no reason to take Shady's side.

Seems to me that Allen deserves to have better talent around him. It's one thing to bring people on slowly, it's another to hamper their development, by lumbering them with the least talented of the roster. Imho, all 3 QBs did well with what they were asked to do. Peterman got the quick timing, short throw offense, and ran it well. But I'm not sure they called more than one or two run plays. McCarron got more of what I would expect to see the Bills do come regular season, i.e. more run heavy with a fair amount, and mixture, of passing plays. Both Peterman and McCarron got generally, decent protection. Allen was left with the colander of O-Lines, WRs who either couldn't catch, or weren't quick enough (Ray Ray excepted), and ended up having to make plays for himself, because his options disappeared, almost before he made his first read. I'm not sure that those set of circumstances are helping his development, at all. McCarron and Peterman are both looking composed and comfortabe, which is a good thing. Allen looked composed, but wasn't given the opportunity to look comfortable. Give him that chance, and see what he can make of it. After watching the condensed version of the game, I was encouraged by what I saw generally, Peterman and McCarron were pretty efficient. Allen has probably the strongest arm I've ever seen, with ridiculous velocity. That velocity is what makes him such a stand out prospect. I don't necessarily want him thrown out there immediately, I'll be happy enouh if any of them are named the starter, but I think everyone needs to see where his development is, and that's only going to comeby getting pre-season series with better talent around him.

It's more about (to me) trying to find fairer solutions to general contract 'issues', and attempting to see if there can be better approaches to it. I would say that my gut feeling would be, that should the rules regarding cap relief for guys who have career ending injuries alter, then attitudes from ownership would also alter. If they can get cap relief, then I'm sure they would be far more inclined, and obviously able, to use guarantees against career ending injury in contracts, quite possibly to the benefit of both sides.

While there are obviously a whole heap of variations that both have applied in the past, and could apply in the future, the area where I would like to see guarantees be actively made, is in instances where careers are done through injury. Somewhere along the llines, the NFL needs to come up with a method whereby teams get cap relief from this. Teams are effectively getting hit twice, once by losing a player, and the second time by losing cap. Eric Wood being a prime example of the sort of situation I'm referring to - but it could be any other team in similar circumstances. If a player and his agent can manage to negotiate full guarantees, then good luck to them, and more fool the team who gives them. Far too many talented guys have got the big bucks, then simply not bothered much, or decide that because they are getting theirs, they no longer need to put out the necessary efforts in practise etc. I'm not too sure how well it might work, but I would like to see guarantees linked to incentives. So, for example, hit your incentives this year, and you get next years' money guaranteed, or a good chunk of it anyway. AS to the idea that players (especially QBs) should be looking at getting a percentage of the cap, I think that that is a nonsense. There are very few QBs who are capable, or have been capable, of taking a team on their backs without talent around them. Some teams have had some limited success despite their QB (e.g. the Bills last season).

Being able to draft possible future cornerstones on both O and D, makes for interesting times ahead - even if neither work out (although I think that's unlikely) - and should be celebrated. If both become what we hope, you could be forgiven for ignoring the rest of this draft class, because those two picks alone, will keep us as contenders for years.

We've mostly rolled over for the last however many years.

Stevie Johnson gave him plenty of difficulty. I thought he was over-hyped and overrated. Undoubtedly very good, just not as good as he thought he was. As evidenced by his retirement statement, his ego was actually larger than his talent, and he was very talented.

Tbh, I don't think that it has been an especially great achievement. You just move the big money guys who you don't think will play a part going forward. Drafting Dawkins, and Glenn's ongoing fitness issues, gave them one good 'out' in respect of Glenn, but Dawkins was found by Whaley's staff. I'd say also that as he was the 'new broom', Beane had the freedom to move players, not only from not having any attachment to them, but also, to an extent, when it came to making the deals, as other teams would be aware that we might decide to move on from certain players, and not necessarily because they were bad, but due to 'fit'. Now, I don't necessarily agree with all the moves made, we shed a lot of talent with trades etc., but I do think something had to give in respect of the cap moving on down the line. We will have a good situation for next season, but that money needs to be invested wisely - either in our own to get extensions done at decent rates, or in the FA market, for someone who is going to come in and perform. I don't really think Beane has excelled in respect of creating more cap room for next year, as the majority of this board could have said which guys to move on to get to that stage. I will give him credit for actually getting generally decent returns, for when those moves were made. Now that was an achievement.

Always thought Steratore was one of the better refs. Never seemed to make the game about him, and was generally far more consistent than others. Even when he had an off day, he appeared to get things equally wrong. The biggest danger the NFL has now in its officiating, is Riveron back in their studio. He needs to learn when to wind his neck in, especially when it comes to 'clear' evidence.

This is someone who is purely stats driven. So it's no great surprise he would go down that pessimistic route, as there aren't enough 'stats' on many of the Bills to base much of anything on. The thing I did find rather ironic, is that he's blasting Benjamin for being slow, yet ignoring the obvious 'injured' reasons for that being the case. As I said, purely 'stats' driven. Seems to me that it's a fundamental problem with NFL commentary these days, in that so much of it is driven by fantasy football stuff, which in fairness to Silva, is what I believe the article has its foundations in. Tbh, unless it's someone on the D, there likely aren't going to be many FF stars for the Bills, outside of Shady, at least that can be identified right now.

Imho, many of the rules in the cba, actually don't help the players play the game, to the best of their abilities, by silly restrictions on stuff like walkthroughs and classroom learning, you know, things that don't involve any real physical effort. Makes no sense to me, at all.

There's a little video in the OTAs thread, that you can hear the ball 'fizz' through the air when he releases it.

Until such time that you have built a team that ought to regularly contend, compensatory picks should have hardly any bearing on moves you make, to get the team to that point. Once you have got to that point with your roster, then it's sensible to keep a weather eye on the compensatories situation, especially as they are now able to be traded, but if you don't have that roster stacked, or a poor team, chasing compesatory picks, isn't going to get you there.

Good, well written article. The one thing it does confirm, that I suspected, is that the Jest knew they had 3 QB prospects they were happy with, before they made the trade up. While it almost certainly isn't something that will ordinarily be the case, they appear to have been well ahead with their QB evaluations for this class, and that meant they wee able to make their move early. The fact they got the guy they preferred out of the 3, was simply gravy, and a reward for being ready sooner than others were.

I won't ever forget that if not for 'wide right', Thurman would have SB MVP on his CV. I'll also ask the question, has any SB MVP ever come from the losing team? Much like Bruce, or Andre, one thing that does stand out about Thurman, is that he made plays when you needed him to, by and large. Ignoring some of his other numbers, or those of Bruce and Andre, I think it's the one thing that defines them as HOF players, i.e. making plays when they were needed.

Tbh, a lot of the time I don't pay that much attention to the QBs coming out, if the Bills don't look like they are going to be drafting one. There's been the odd one I really didn't like, and been proven right about (Clausen), and I think I was very leery of Newton, due to his style of play, rather than his ability. Currently Bortles would be about he most likely candidate, as he seems to be developing decently, and I thought he was way 'over drafted'. I suppose, to an extent, Tannehill falls into a similar category to Bortles. I still think he was a 'reach', but he's done better than I expected, although that may be 'Phins bias coming into play.