Ronin

Well OK, having said that then, one would think that by pure laws of averages that after say 10 seasons then that every team would be .500 or so, right? Since Whaley's been here, the only common denominator during that stretch, we are 39-57, or .406 and trending downward. At some point people need to start saying, OK, we've tried this and that under Whaley and clearly he's underperforming, it's time to move on. See the prior post to DR. At best for us, what DR was suggesting, is that in a purely odds-based system, at the end of the day over the longer term, all teams will trend towards .500. I can run an analysis, and have in the past, to show that we're on the losing side of those odds. But clearly it isn't just odds every season. Clearly how well teams are run, coached, managed, etc. factors in heavily, which is only bad news for us and Whaley. As well, the other stuff you mention, you cannot have it both ways. Luck, schedules, injuries, etc., all happen to all teams and that is something that should trend towards a central average for all teams over the long haul, for the most part. But you cannot state that as if we're the only team affected by them. That's an irrational bias. This year makes the desperation of Whaley and now Ryan make the desperation that reached for Watkins look almost benign. If it's true that these guys get pink slips if the team doesn't post a winning season, then one of the dumbest things that Pegula could have done is what he's doing. Their decison making will impact this team negatively for at least two seasons after that. The odds of a new coach and new GM to a lesser extent, seeing the talent brought on by W/R being anything close to identical to what they'd want are absurdly remote. And in the interests of sanity please, let's hope they would be different. Not to mention that players like Ragland and Brown are hardly prototypical ILBs in the modern era NFL, in fact they're quite the opposite, they're both 2-down LBs that will be required to play 3 downs. I'll suggest now that Watkins is going to limp through this season again and even miss a significant number of games. I expect him to be IR'd at some point given his injury. Either way, if that happens there's going to be so much work to do to bring this team up to competitiveness in the next couple of seasons, so much work. We'll be starting 20 seasons of playoff futility in the eyes.

I don't know about that, were the Bills "losers" in the early '90s? I wouldn't say so. Sure, we should have won one or two of those SBs, particularly the first and last, but still, one was proud to be a Bills fan. I mean should Panthers fans call their team a loser as you just did? I don't think so, their future is bright. SBs are elusive, but playing well and consistently are not, the key being good management/coaching. Also, while every team expects to win, all fans don't, some realize that their team is more rebuilding, or a "year away" kinda thing. Fans of 31 other teams besides say the Browns know that they likely aren't going anywhere this season although I'm sure you can find the counterpart to people here in their forums suggesting that they'll make the playoffs or even win the division for one or more reasons. Team, fans, media (regional), media (national), etc., all have different takes. If the players don't believe that they can make the playoffs then you question their heart, and they should believe that or they're in the wrong professions. But fans don't need to believe anything of the sort, neither does media, of that team or otherwise. There's a big difference between a coach or player saying "if we can simply go .500 this season it'll be a promising season," and a fan or writer saying that. The players' reality is different than ours. It's kind of like if you've ever played in a flag football league with former pro or collegiate players from a decent school, you're just stunned and amazed at the speed of the player etc. You think to yourself man, this guy would be great in the NFL. But if you're objective, you'll know and understand that the entire NFL is filled with such speed and even faster and better in other ways which is why that player has not made it. It's all a matter of perspective. Team personnel, particularly GM and FO, have no choice but to say the most glaringly postiive things even though people know that many of them are ridiculous statements or lies. We've seen some of that with Whaley, Ryan, and our team. For me it would be sufficient to simply know that at least there's a legitimate chance that the Bills could win the division and make a ruckus in the playoffs with perhaps a championship if the cards all fall well. I mean look at the Pats, since 2004 they've almost always been the preseason favorites to win the SB but have won it only once, and with more controversy on top of that. Even when they were 18-0 in '07 and Kraft had begun construction on "Perfection Park." Either way, no objective person looks at our team and truly believes that we're going to the playoffs much less win the division or more. It's far too disarrayed, too poorly coached, wrongly managed, etc. I mean we were the first team to take a hit from our drafting when Lawson got injured by an inert bag. All the things that teams that accomplish those goals do, i.e. draft well, coach well, organize well, we do not do well. Until we do .... As I've said, I haven't read one single article talking about how the entire inside of our D, meaning both ILBs and both of our Ss, are all not prone to good pass defense. That's enormous in today's OTM passing NFL, HUGE. Yet, apparently on one views it as a problem. They all will come later this season. Unfortunately. But the more important thing is why is it that way? Clearly whomever designed the D and oversaw the drafting, AHEM, Whaley & Ryan, either ignored that or simply don't know what they're doing. I'll defer to the latter. Given their track records to date otherwise, and in Ryan's case withouth having both Ray Lewis and Ed Reed on his team, something we'll never even come close to getting a sniff at, particularly with Whaley at the top of this debacle, there's no reason to expect otherwise, is there.

They promised playoffs. They dusted off Kelly & Co. from mothballs and paraded everyone around, promised "a bully," absolutely no one involved with the team took an alternate position. If that's not win now I have no idea what is. I agree with you that it's a "garbage notion," although I'd phrase it differently, but nonetheless, it's a pervasive media notion. I've asked numerous people with ties to the org where it came from and the best I can get is that "behind closed doors" etc., Pegula has made it clear to both Whaley & Ryan that it's playoffs "or else." I'm in agreement with you, I don't see the evidence and we know what rumors in Buffalo are worth. I also do not understand, apart from the nonsensical "same time frame" notion, the reasoning behind giving Whaley a 3-year extension that he hasn't earned. Why not put TT on the same time-frame too then for example. Just sayin'. Either way, it is a widespread notion from fans to regional to national media, that they're gone if they don't at least post a winning season. Guess we'll find out, but like you, I see no basis for it. Thanks!! Upset? Not sure I'd say "upset," it is what it is. But I guess I don't like to take a turnip and call it a Sirloin steak. I want a winning team as much as everyone, but as I view it, I'm not sure we're going to get one as long as the team gets what it wants, fannies in the seats and frankly, no reason to care. Instead it seems to me that we'll be treated to further ongoing nepotism as we're now seeing with Pegula now chumming up to Brandon on down, etc. If I had to choose words I'd say frustrating, perhaps terminally so realizing that since there are enough fans content to pay top dollar for mediocrity, that those of us that are not are stuck. Hell, I'd even settle for consistent enjoyable football, but we can't even play solid D for two straight seasons for example. IOW, I'll take 6-10 if we're in 14 of those games down to the wire. That means that maybe the next season we'll win 11 of them if things slide our way. But we're not organized/directed (coached) well, so that's unlikely to happen. Either way, the NFL is a business, owning a team is a business decision, if the business model makes almost as much when losing as it does when winning, well, I'm not sure I see much hope for true change when the decisions are clearly being made in the interests of the formerly mentioned nepotism. Again, Whaley seems to have 9 lives in an era where most GMs are lucky to have 2 with most having 1.

What people seem to forget is the promises that were made last year, by Ryan, with Whaley fully backing him, Brandon too, even Kelly & Co., about how that (2015) was our year. We've seen the results. Levy came on and stated boldly that the future is now. He promised a winning/playoff season prior to announcing a rebuild after his inaugural season. We've had a revolving door of "win-now" seasons as stated by the team's & organization's leaders, but none have materialized, and in places such as this excuses are made for them when there are no excuses, or when there shouldn't be anyway. We are in precisely that mode now. When the entire team was on red-alert last off/pre-season to the extent when they rally all of the name players from the '90s era heyday teams, then that's hardly not "win-now" and everyone was expecting that and it was promised. Here's the thing, when the team swings-and-misses like that, apart from leaving good people like Kelly & Co. with egg on their face, it suggests something. In this case, what it suggests is that those making the promises really don't know wtf they're doing which is something that many of us have known for a while. The rest only catch on after changes are made and the new boss becomes the rallying point with the old ones (Donahoe, Nix, Jauron, Gailey, etc.) all being treated like dunces with the same people doing the heralding either ignoring or apparently failing to realize that those names replaces the name(s) that they're not supporting at a prior time. That's the emotional element to the game from a fan perspective. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that, again, no moral high or low ground here, but facts are facts, and just as people ignored facts back then and have and do in an ongoing basis until such a time as it becomes emotionally expedient for them not to do so, so too the same is going on amongst the fanbase today and always will. Having said that, the reality is that this crew, particularly Brandon, Whaley, and Ryan, are clueless and have a track record of all but disaster in tow like a train on a royal wedding gown. The only one with some proven success is Ryan, but none of that has been in the last five seasons where his D's have all ranked average or well-below average in scoring, and his only success has essentially been on a team with bookoo talent led by Ray Lewis and Ed Reed anchoring the middle of his Ds. Well this just in, we don't have Ed Reed and Ray Lewis, we have the antithesis. We have a pair of 2-down ILBs in the middle in Ragland and Brown, clones of one another and neither of whom can cover the pass well, and what, we may not even know yet at SS/FS but probably Aaron Williams and Corey Graham, also two players not excelling in coverage, and none of whom even come close to sniffing the jocks of Lewis or Reed in terms of intangibles and leadership. Instead, the center of our D from immediately behind the line to the end zone has pass-coverage as a weakness. Either way, Ryan doesn't have Lewis (13-time Pro Bowler & 7-time All-Pro) and Reed (9-time Pro Bowler & 5-time All-Pro) here, which is one enormous missing ingredient given that both were like on-field coaches and together were arguably the best MLB/FS tandem in the history of the NFL. Among the four players, one being an unproven rookie, there is one Pro-Bowl and 0 All-Pros among them and that PB was 5 seasons ago on a different team entirely. File under it ain't happening. They're in the same mode that the trustees of this team have been in for the better part of 20 years now, I'm not sure that even they know. They pretend that this draft made all the difference, but seriuosly, when was the last time that rookies in a draft propelled a team from .500 to anything relevant without either other influences. It's rhetorical, just sayin', rookies typically don't make that kind of impact, and the one that we were expecting the biggest impact from, much as we expected it from Spiller and Watkins in their rookie seasons, won't even be on the field for a significant part of the early season. And you're right, they obviously were in win-now mode last season, anyone suggesting otherwise is in denial. This is Whaley's 4th season as GM. Suppose we finish less than .500 now, why should he be kept on with records of 6-10, 9-7, 8-8, and a losing season (again, assuming that it is), and 23-25 to date otherwise trending downward, which clearly shows regression, not improvement? Again, if he were the GM of the Raiders, Browns, or another team with that record I cannot imagine one single person wishing he'd come here to be our GM much less not making fun of him.

Look CB, I'm not saying this to flame or antagonize, but you really need to learn how to read. I don't have any moral outrage, what did I say, I said, literally, "I see no moral side," which means that I'm not morally outraged. Ergo, no sense in replying to a false charge. It comes down, again, as I said clearly, to a business decision for both owner and fan. Would I pay to see the Browns if I were a Browns fan? No. I'd watch for free and where I didn't have to drop $400 for my wife and I or a friend to go see the game, eat, park, and have to waste time getting out of the stadium afterwards. Any such choice rests with each person. I also don't need you challenging my fan status. I slept out overnight in the sub-freezing cold in front of Marine-Midland bank back in the day, OUTSIDE, literally, in 20-degrees, just waiting to get 2 or 4 tix, the limit, to playoff games when we were in them in the early '90s. So enough of this nonsense. No marginal fan would do that. Otherwise we disagree, I see practical little difference if any, in the way that the personnel is handled other than to say that Whaley's a whole helluva lot more risk prone with the results of those risks really not panning out in any positive way. (Manuel (BUST), Watkins (massively overrated because he can't stay healthy and isn't even the best in class), now Lawson) As well, and since you've forgotten, that listing from FO, or whereever it was from, that ranked our drafts, Whaley has the worst rankings of anyone during that time stretch. Worse than Levy, Nix, Donahoe, and even when Brandon was doing it. There are facts, your argument is largely opinion based with little to back it up other than implying that you're a real fan as opposed to others who apparently are not.

You missed the point entirely. That is a large part of the point that I made earlier. 26 misses the fact that the same people that made those decisions are the ones that DRASTICALLY overpaid for Mario which was obvious from the beginning, gave Fitzpatrick that enormous and ridiculous contract, Traded an additional 1st-rounder and 4th for Watkins, who besides not even being able to stay healthy isn't even among the top-2 possibly the top-3 WRs in his own draft class, certainly not nearly enough to warrant that trade, reached for role-player Spiller, reached massively for Manuel, and now this year with Lawson. It's nice to extract only the good, or bad for that matter, and formulate an argument that one wishes to put forth, which is what the majority here do, particularly those that support Whaley, but the reality is that we are one season away from setting an NFL ongoing record for playoff futility and we've heard the same nonsense from the same people, Brandon, Whaley, now Ryan, for years. Try as people might, there really is no defense. The only option for us as fans is whether or not to patronize the team with our money. I see no moral side in that, but consider, if people choose to do so to the extent that the team is profitable, then any incentive to win, now or ever, is entirely removed from the equation. That much is indisputable. Put another way, if the team is just as profitable, or close to it, when it wins as when it loses, then if you're the owner, or the president or GM for that matter, and you want to have a "who cares" attitude, what's to prevent it?

I have to ask, why does this perception exist? What is the concrete reason for it? I see no difference. The difference is what a new owner does to change "business as usual," and Pegula hasn't done a damn thing to change it. He's reinforced it and solidified the nepotistic relationships that do exist. He hasn't distanced himself from any of the problem in the least. We'll truly see how serious he is at the end of this season. The way things are shaping up it's going to be a monumental miracle if we can even match last season's record. Also, what does it say when we only have a chance when another player from a team in the division retires? There isn't an owner out there that has said, "I don't really care whether we win or lose as long as the seats get filled." They all "want to win" and "aren't satisfied with losing." Remember, talk is cheap and it's cheapest from people that have two goals, one for the media and one for their wallets. In our case I believe it's clearly the latter in the interests of Pegula's "One Buffalo," not "Go Bills!" concept.

That's an interesting take, but it disagrees with the popular notion that both Whaley & Ryan are gone after the season if they don't make the playoffs. I don't know what to believe on that since nothing has officially/formally been announced as such, and frankly, if Pegula couldn't see the problems coming in as the fan that he said he was, I have zero confidence that he'll see it at all any other time. It's been obviously for 15 years what the core problems are and all he did was dig in on them. I'll predict 5-11 again and that both Whaley & Ryan will both still be here next season. Let's assume that this was not a win-now year then, would that alter the take on the Draft then? Not necessarily by you, generally speaking.

We've already passed Cincy and we pass Detroit this season if we fail to make the playoffs. So we'll have the dubious honor of having both the historical longest as well as the longest current playoff drought, and there's not much reason why it will end after this season either. That is correct. As long as there are fannies in the seats the organization as a business is successful. The team can be awful, there are two standards in play here. The losers are the fans that hold winning a championship as a standard. Many here seem to merely be content with "having a team in Buffalo" although they'll tell you differently. IMO he bought the team as a piece of his collection to "renovate" downtown Buffalo ala One Buffalo. Of course he wants to win, but per Toledo Bill's comment above, he'll be just fine as long as the tix get sold even if this streak extends from 16 games to 50. Everyone wants to win. Snyder wanted to win when he bought the Redskins and snidely told the world that running and NFL team was just like running any business. He bought the team in '99 and in the 17 seasons since they've made the playoffs 5 times and are 0-5 in playoff games, 0-3 in WC games, 0-2 in Division Games as the division winners. He's been notorious for spending more than any other owner. Look what it's gotten them. Why he purchased the team, what he wants, how much money he spent/spends, whether he wants a 'czar' or not, or whether he's as concerned about the bottom-line as much as Wilson was, really don't matter in terms of the actual product on the field, do they? Seriously, think about that, none of that matters in terms of outcome. Seriously, if it did, then Snyder's Redskins would have had 5 rings on his watch given his talk, the same idiotic trade-ups, and the money they've spent on free-agents. Everyone talks about how he's doing the right things with the Sabres, but they were barely .500 this year. That's good? There's no guarantee of improvement with them either. It's not just spending, it's brains, which brings us to Rico's comment ... Right there, THAT says it all! This is the Wilson-II era, nothing more right now. Pegula talks a big game but hasn't delivered. Pegula claims to be a fan and was prior to buying the team. Even the most casual average yet attentive fan knew damn well what the problem with this team is, and Rico just summed it up. Yet, Pegula didn't do anything to resolve that except dig in on it. Intelligent? Brilliant? ... or something else? This team keeps doing the same things over and over while expecting different results. Moreover, all of the new stuff, "analytics" for example, need to run by competent people that don't just do what everyone else is doing but by people that know how to truly analyze and tailor the resulting info to the team. We have yet to see evidence that there is anyone there with that capability. It really isn't complicated, which should tell us exactly how intellectually bereft this team's braintrust truly is. I mean missing the playoffs for what now appears to be heading for two solid decades, assuming that this stuff about Whaley & Ryan being fired if they don't make the playoffs this season is to be believed, is a very difficult thing to do based on simple odds. Per above, if we don't make the playoffs this season, then we'll hold both the historical as well as current playoff futility record, with no end in sight as we keep beating our own record. I guess in the end it all comes down to who's willing to go pay to see this and who isn't. I'm not. I'll be a fan, I'll watch the games when I have time, but I'm not going to pay money and waste my precious time for such grandiose incompetence. Pegula can build his downtown empire, I don't care about that, I care about the Bills making the playoffs and playing like we did on Polian's watch. Right now we're nowhere near that. Is this a business with a product that needs to be sold? Or is it a charity that needs contributions from people under minor threat of not being called a "true fan" if they don't pony-up financial assistance so that incompetent people can be paid money that most of us only dream of in jobs where there is all but zero accountability? Whaley must have 9 lives. On any other team he isn't even there anymore and we're talking about him as if he's a buffoon. He'll never get another GM job after this one by any team that's going anywhere or that has recently.

Yes, there was. I see that you've at least done some homework. https://www.newyorkupstate.com/buffalo-bills/index.ssf/2016/05/dez_bryant_kevin_durant_can_teach_us_about_bills_wr_sammy_watkins_foot_injury.html So now what are you going to say? What's your new tack on spin? As well, don't you think that if it weren't a Jones Fracture, that Whaley & Co. would be saying "at least it's not a JF?" I do. Either way, the silence is deafening on this one and we all know that the FO is about as trustworthy as the average politician. And what, because OBD hasn't come out and said that it isn't, it isn't? ROFLMAO

Sure, and he averaged about 50 ypg and had one TD every two-and-a-half games in the 23 games prior to that. Also, we went 3-3 "down that stretch." So why are we expecting more this season with him injured and with our depth at WR now gone? Makes no sense to me. OK, as long as you're satisfied I guess. This would explain why some are more disappointed than others and perhaps why some people that take your side rage more at the end of the season.

You can expect whatever you want, but what you, I, or anyone "expects" is meaningless, wouldn't you say? Particularly dependent upon what that expectation is based upon, and given that our own organization is clearly that very last people to BILLieve about anything it's probably not wise to pin your expectations on their statements. Again, have you read up on his exact injury? About other big players that have had the same one and what happened to them? Might be wise, I think it will heavily impact your expectations. Otherwise, everyone talks about Sammy as if he's elite. Elite WRs don't barely hit 1,000 yards and average 8 TDs/season. Seems to me elite is ranking among the top-three every season. As it now stands, and to put this into some perspective, Jordan Matthews, drafted in the mid-2nd of the same draft, and with no better a QB situation, in the same two seasons has put up 1,869 yards and 16 TDs to Watkins' 2,029 and 15 TDs. So is Matthews elite? He even started 6 fewer games. IMO if we get 1,000 yards from Sammy this season, between injuries and being constantly double-covered, it'll be half a miracle.

LOL Seriously? Friendly wager: He misses at least three more games this season and is dinged up for a significant number of others. Otherwise, sure, and we were told, just a few weeks ago for that matter, that there was nothing to the notion that Shaq needed shoulder surgery. Meanwhile, this team expects everything to go swimmingly on the recovery. Have you done any research on the type of foot injury that Watkins has? I'm guessing not otherwise I don't think you'd be so confident in making such an assertion. Leave it to the Bills' crack medical staff to rush him back too early and have him miss the entire season. I guess the upside is always the 1st overall and possbily Kelly. You believe that? And at full-strength? See response above. I'm not sure either of you are aware of the nature of his injury. Besides, since when did believing the front office become a shrewd idea?

First piece I've seen even mention our WR situation. I guess now that it's become blatant the geniuses emerge out from the nooks in the woodwork. Heaven forbid that anyone is actually proactive on this kind of stuff. Then again, we wouldn't be the current Bills if anyone in the organization was. I still fail to see how this doesn't at least all but derail the offense unless Sammy's 100% heading into week 1. I mean seriously, no defense is even going to take our passing game seriously and TT & Co. can expect to see lot s of 7/8 man fronts until such a time as we beat them regularly. I guess there's always hope that Listenbee has 24 TD catches in Watkins' absence with a YPR of 60.

Here's the problem with your assessment, the things you state as positives did not add to the team this year, all those things were here last season. He didn't say we didn't have a good offseason, he said we "regressed." I'd agree. We lost more talent, at least proven talent, than we gained, until proven otherwise. If our draftees don't all step up in an unprecedented manner under Whaley then he'll have been proven correct, that we regressed. Who knows if it's 5th regression, but we'll have regressed.

Finished here guys. Not that I thought this would end differently, or that anyone would see anything other than the establishment's take which is mimicked by the braindead media, just thought I'd throw it out there. Don't worry, this will make more sense this coming fall. Bookmark it and come back to it in November. Sorry to have bothered anyone.

Well, first of all you're taking some real leaps here. Confusion, well, apparently. To start I've asked some specific questions and no one's answered them as if by not answering them the issues dissolve and go away or don't exist to begin with. My point is just what I said at least twice early on, that we did not truly address our most dire needs. We've pandered to Ryan, a loser of a coach that's had his last five seasons of scoring defenses ranked 15th, 24th, 19th, 20th, and 20th while his novice predecessor took his 24th ranked scoring D and with a departure of players similar to ours this season if not worse, turned it into the 9th ranked scoring D. The other point that I made that I thought was painfully clear was that Ryan then took what had been the 4th ranked scoring D and turned it into the 15th ranked scoring D and got 21 sacks from a unit that had what, 53 the season prior. That's a notable drop. Relatedly, another point was that of the team that logged those 53 sacks in 2014, players that got 35 of them are still with this team, which should be more than enough talent to at least have the 15th ranked scoring D. Meanwhile, we've all been spoonfed, by Ryan, the notion that he ran a hybrid of Schwartz's D last year and his. Well, OK, let's bite on that, OK. So then, since Ryan routinely dropped both DEs and DTs into coverages, and since Schwartz never did that, wouldn't it be safe to say that that particularly contribution in Ryan's D was purely his? And that if it was truly a hybrid, then if anything we should see that increase, not decrease? Still with me? Put another way, maybe it's not the defensive talent which had Hughes, Dareus, Kyle Williams, Brown, Manny Lawson, and least but hardly not last, arguably the best CB tandem in the league in Darby & Gilmore. Maybe it's Ryan, and it sounds to me as if Ryan needs world-class talent everywhere just to put together a competent D. Yet, everyone talks about how little talent we have and talks about depth as if depth on D means more than starters on O as well as a QB that's capable of at least winning some games or grooming himself for the future. And let's be real, anyone thinking that Jones has a future as a starting QB in the NFL is ignorant, and that includes our illustrious FO if they happen to believe that. No chance in hell that a QB with 5 starts and not even 200 completed passes in college, primarily as a backup, is going to start in the NFL. Everyone also ignores WR as a need, I didn't even see one analyist or "draft expert" talk about WR talent on our team, particularly given Watkins' being prone to being hurt and Woods as well to a lesser extent. The dropoff from Watkins/Woods to what, Woods/Hankerson, ... or will it be Woods/Listenbee, ... or Woods/Goodwin?, ... is cataclysmic. Our rushing game would be suffocated. I guess no one's thought that through tho. At least that's typical for us, nothing but the best for us fans. Anyway, feel free to engage on those points, but that's the argument(s). Again, did we really need D players that much over a competent backup QB which we've ingored for years? ... or a WR that's capable of nailing down a starting job, legitimately? I don't think we did and IMO unless by some strange stroke of fate we get those things, I think it's going to be painfully evident come September even if Watkins doesn't get hurt or Taylor as well. It also operates under the assumption that Taylor doesn't pull an RGIII instead of a Brady. Ryan's a cry-baby. Man up and make due with talent that many other teams don't even have on D. Do you think so? Think that's an intelligent response? How many games has Rodgers missed over his 8 seasons of starting? How many the last two seasons? Did you actually look at the WRs on their roster now? Apparently you think that Woods/Hankerson are better than their next best two. OK. Not sure what to say. Everyone's entitled to an opinion, but unless Taylor is Rodgers, the comp is irrelevant. Same for NE. Brady goes out and they have a rookie now. What are the odds that he doesn't perform or goes out tho? I'd say pretty slim. The odds that Taylor, a QB that rushes regularly, gets hurt are notably higher, wouldn't you say? Meh, maybe not. OK Funny how what I've said isn't even reiterated properly. LOL

Carolina lost Benjamin last year, who outplayed Watkins in their rookie seasons, and it didn't seem to affect them. So I guess if we apply that logic, then if Watkins gets hurt during the preseason we're headed for the Super Bowl. That sounds about right based on what I'm reading here. The logic is identical. It is what it is. What do you want me to do, beg you for some intelligent statements and answers to simple questions. [shrug] And we wonder why expectations here typically aren't met. All season long? Well, OK.

I wasn't referring to you, I was referring the wealth of people out there talking as if A, they understand this team, and B, are all saying pretty much exactly the same thing. Either way, sorry to try to engage you, I see you don't have any answers yourself. So yeah, I guess I do include you in with the rest of them. Which team has a bigger dropoff in talent from Watkins/Woods to what, Woods/??? and from Taylor to what, Jones? Manuel? Which of the other 31 teams has a bigger dropoff? Of those, which are actually in contention for a winning season much less playoffs by the same pundits out there applauding our draft? Meanwhile, Washington was depth and we still don't have that prolific edge rusher that just about everyone defending our draft said we needed prior to the draft.

That's fine, no one else is discussing it either, everyone just talks as if this team actually knows what it's doing and as if sticking our heads in the sand mitigates it somehow. So let's move on to easier stuff. What happens if Watkins goes down? What happens if Taylor goes down? What if both go down? How do you envision our offense playing under those circumstances? Is this anything that you've heard all the people applauding our draft even discuss seriously or at length in an analytical manner? I haven't seen it other than by journalists non-grata here. As I see it we won't win any more games under either scenario much more so if both go out. And Watkins as we know is injury prone. For that matter Woods had his share last season as well with both players missing a combined 9 games. That's over 25% of the WR player-games for two starting WRs.

Yeah, that's the going sentiment which everyone's uttered mindlessly without thinking. Here's another take; Last year Ryan had players on the team that had logged about 50 sacks yet got only 21 from them. Even after the departures of Mario, whom everyone said duffed it last year, McKelvin, a relatively inconsequential role player and depth player, and Bradham, a low-end starting OLB that missed a third of the season, the team still has the talent on it that logged 35 sacks in 2014 the season prior to Ryan's arrival here. Ryan got 12 from the same group. i.e., ... could be Ryan. More on that below. Meanwhile, everyone says we have no talent. We didn't really lose much besides a wilfully underachieving prima donna and two non-impact players, one that didn't even start, so why did the D go from being great in 2014 to being bereft of talent now? I'm not seeing it. I'm seeing coaching issues. IMO the Bills should have grabbed Prescott at some point and could have had him with their original 4th. As I see it the offense was in far greater need of talent. Jones starting this year, or any year IMO, is a joke and not even worth discussing. He should be entirely out of the league by 2020 easily. We know what happens w/ Manuel in there. But more importantly both our 3 and 4 WRs left and we don't have their equivalent to replace them. Sounds fine as long as Watkins and Woods stay healthy. You wanna wager anything significant that they both do? I can't imagine. Now what happens if Watkins, who's barely averaged 1,000 yards and 8 TDs in two seasons, gets hurt? Really, what happens if he say, misses 6 games? What if Taylor goes down? What happens to this team? As it is I see Watkins being double-covered like those coverages are his wife on his honeymoon. He only posted 5 100-yard games last year as it is. I don't see one WR of consequence that's going to shake things loose if that does happen. Watkins is among the worst YAC WRs as it is, contrary to why he was drafted and something that people don't seemingly want to admit. Woods isn't going to step up to the extent necessary. If Taylor goes down the only time we'll win a game is if our opponent comes into the game completely flat and even then I wouldn't bet on a win. These people that think we're going to run, run, run our way to success are not thinking things through very well. Without Taylor's rushing contribution we would have ranked 10th in rushing last season behind the Jets, Rams, and the Cowboys, none of which had prolific RBs and none of which made their season on running the ball. In fact the only one of those teams with a winning record was the Jets and they did it on a career year by Fitzpatrick, ironically, and a defense that went from 24th in scoring to 9th under a rookie coach after Ryan left, while ours did the opposite and went from 4th to 15th in scoring upon Ryan's arrival here. If you ask me Ryan's part of the problem, not part of the solution. I don't think it's the talent because Schwartz did so much more with the same talent that was her prior to our draft. But more importantly, the team will once again be relying on Taylor again to run the ball and we simply won't have the balance in the passing game to prevent Ds from cheating up on us to close those running lanes. just my two cents, but a completely different perspective than the run of the mill nonsense that everyone's spouting repetitively seemingly without thinking much beyond hopes and dreams.

It's unprecedented since Whaley's been here. The last time we had three players make an impact as rookies was the 2009 Draft with Wood, Byrd, and Levitre if Levitre counts. But we had two 1st's and two 2nd's that year and wasted the first on Maybin. After that you have to go back to maybe 2001.

LOL Touche`! Indeed. They also say the same things about draft picks every year. The hype on Goodwin was even bigger than it is for Listenbee, same for Graham, who frankly had a notably more impressive collegiate dossier than either. Preston Brown was a great value pick in the 3rd that should have been a late 1st or 2nd we were told, Bradham was really a high 2nd rounder, Kouandjio was supposed to be something instead of the nothing he is, the same things being said about Jonathan Williams were said about Johnny White who caught balls whereas Williams does not. Miller last year was supposed to be the OL steal of the 2nd round but he can't stay healthy and when he is he was not good either still leaving massive questions at RG and RT too. Whaley's history with 3rd and later picks since his hire as Dir. of Pro Personnel/Asst. GM is almost non-existent. So any picks that develop from the 3rd on are gravy anyway. In six seasons we've had both 1st and 2nd rounders hit twice, in 2012 with Gilmore and Glenn, and again in 2011 with Dareus and Aaron Williams although to a lesser extent since Williams is merely serviceable as a starter and nothing special, low-end starting material. So you're right, the odds of us getting two much less three impact players from this draft is not an odds-on proposition. I don't understand the whole draft strategy this year. All the talk prior to the draft is how we needed an edge rusher to replace Mario, well this just in but Shaq is not that player. He's more of a hybrid pass/run DE and frankly, all the experts said better suited to a 4-3 which everyone says we're not using, so that is confusing. I don't like player comparisons necessarily, but from what they're saying I'm expecting more Phil Hanson type of play than of Mario type of play, which is fine, but hardly impact. He'll hold down on "edge" job but that's about it if it all plays out well enough. As to Ragland, we now have two Preston Browns back there. Again, frankly, Brown's resume was just as impressive and his stats even more impressive and he didn't have the 'Bama D surrounding him. Either way, neither can cover, so who's got the middle? Seems to me we have a glaring coverage hole OTM, which is hardly good in the modern NFL. Factor in that we don't even have one good cover safety and the middle would appear to be wide open all the way down the field, again, hardly good in today's NFL. As to Washington and Williams, either will be backups only and only take reps from someone currently ahead of them on the depth chart, the former on D the latter on O. Everyone talks as if they know what Ryan's doing this fall when there's absolutely no concrete reason, besides rumors if those are concrete, to know. It is perplexing to be sure. Meanwhile, has the team thought for two seconds what happens if either Watkins or Taylor goes out? We're screwed if either happens. Jones is a poor-man's Tebow with worse mechanics and a completely wasted pick. Everyone here's going to be thinking even worse of him than they do about Manuel at some point.

Unfortunately Rex/Thurman didn't call too many other great games, they'll have to be much more consistent there before we talk about unseating the Pats. Once Brady's gone, even with Belicheat, the Pats are a .500 team. They don't have that much talent. I'm just curious what everyone and the media's going to say about Belicheat once that happens and he's exposed as Brady having been 90% of the reason why the Pats have been so great since Bledsoe went down there. Remember, Belicheat didn't recognize any talent in Brady, he could very well have been the next QB to leave after his original 4-year contract if Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt. Belicheat was 5-13 w/ Bledsoe and 11-3 with Brady on essentially the same team otherwise back in 2000/2001. How does one explain that other than the obvious difference. Belicheat got lucky that Bledsoe went down for the season. Otherwise Brady probably would have been lighting it up elsewhere. Belicheat's been awful with QBs. Even when he had Testeverde, Vinny was bad. The very next year he goes to Baltimore, not exactly the best coached offense at the time under Billick, and lights things up. Belicheat had that talent too but couldn't coach it up. Brady's his own coach and that for the rest of the O too. Their OC is largely a figurehead, which is why they never succeed elsewhere while Brady's offenses just keep on ticking.

Like most sports media, Brandt seems to talk out of whichever hole happens to be handiest at the time he opens it. He was tops back in the day, but his day is long over. Now he's just an out-of-touch wooden head. Besides, has the deadline passed for which Brady can no longer appeal anything forcing him to serve this suspension? If not, I suspect that they'll do just that. OTOH, I can see a downturn in Brady's play this season. His last four games last year were notably different than his average over his first 12. Coincidence? They lost 3 of those 4 when they needed at least one to keep homefield. He can handle a modest downturn and still be among the best, but anything more and the Pats really aren't that good a team w/o him. Belicheat is overrated and we'll see how he does w/o Brady, I suspect not unlike he did w/o him before Brady. Brady's 39 and while he says he'll play well into his 40s, Father Time is rarely cheated. Manning played horribly at 39. Favre too although he had one good season with the Jets from 39 to 41, but I'll take the same from Brady, one good year and two ****ty ones in the next three. Marino tanked at 38. Moon played well at 39 but tanked immediately after that. Montana and Kelly both tanked at 36. So I'd say that it's safe to say that we're going to start seeing indications that Brady's finished one way or another.