Ronin

Uhhh, Whaley himself who's now on record as having said that we'll make the playoffs and that Watkins implicitly will be the reason. Some of you seem to ignore the team's own statements. Doesn't matter what we say, does it? No, it doesn't. But when a GM Makes such promises, after going all in on a player like Whaley did for Watkins this year and Manuel last year, then it says somewhat more. Sorry you've failed to pick up on Whaley's statements which have been in the media more times than our record of playoff futility, but maybe you should look a little more closely before challenging statements like this. LOL I have no other aliases. I don't post that much and just come here from time to time, usually on a day off or when I have some time to kill. BTW, have you read that Williams has been held back for a variety of reasons throughout his pro career? I realize that once players get to Buffalo none of their negatives ever rear their ugly heads, like Manuel's inability to learn anything new, or his inability to read a defense. I'm sure that Spikes will burgeon in the passing game too now that he's here.

Why would NE regress like that? Their passing game is only going to improve and that's what carries them. Unless Brady gets injured, which has only happened once since 2001, I see them finishing at least at the same 12-4 that they were last year. Once again the NFL has seen fit to ensure that NE's two toughest games against Denver and Cincy are at home.

Here's a nice option, there's a nice (or used to be nice) Courtyard by Marriott in Penfield about three miles from Pittsford and 3 or 4 from the training camp site. It's very conveniently located on 441 which is about two minutes from the expressway which will put you anywhere you want to go in Rochester within 10 or 15 minutes. Everything you'd need is within minutes. Wegmans, food, Abbott's Custard, etc. The Pittsford Pub is less than 10 minutes straight down Washington St. Another option for great wings, try the Sports Page on Monroe Ave.

To go 12-4 under any circumstances, we would have to win four of the following games (NE twice, Denver, Detroit, Green Bay, KC, and the rest of our games. Even if that happens I still seeing us topping out at 9-7 or 10-6. We're not going to win out on a string of games against teams many of which are better than we are. Might make the playoffs though. Here's where I hang up on that though, even if Manuel can stay healthy for 16 games, he still has to be able to put 3 or 4 solid quarters together with even the slightest consistency. I don't see that happening. Not sure I see him staying healthy either. I also don't see Aaron Williams doing anywhere close to what Byrd did. IMO he was a beneficiary of circumstances last season, not a contributor to them. CJ's a role player, I'm not sure what people expect from him. With Jackson fading we need a 3-down RB, right now we don't have one after Jackson. Watkins, according to the reason why everyone says he's great, should excel immediately. What everyone is saying is that, like Spiller, he works his magic after getting the ball, which puts the traditional requirements for WRs succeeding in the NFL as secondary. Watkins will get the ball, but will he be able to turn those big plays based on his speed, agility, and moves? I'm skeptical since that's rarely the case with these types of players. Both scouts and media alike continually overlook the fact that this won't be Watson on the Tigers playing against a slate of mediocre teams in the ACC and against the equivalent of the weakest passing defenses in the NCAA. Quite the opposite in fact, it'll be more like playing FSU every week. The last player to come out for which the expectations were similar, while a RB, was Reggie Bush, and he never came close to living up to those moves that he made at USC much less to his 2nd overall draft spot. I don't see Watkins having similar success in the NFL, but it he does it shouldn't take long and there's no reason why it would "fizzle" down the stretch. If he has those skills relative to NFL defenders, he'll have them, if not, he won't develop them and he'll have to go the traditional route of improving his route running, timing, and reading of Ds, all of which are not among his strengths. I'm always very skeptical when it's "moves" and speed that is supposed to make a player great in the NFL since it very rarely works out to the extent that draft experts and fans expect it to. The close games will be about the same. Happens to every team every season. Look how many close games that the Pats have won, six or seven I think by 3 or less, but they win them. Everyone talks about the three games that we lost by 3 points or less but no one ever mentions the three games that we won by 3 points or less. It'll be the same this season for us.

Me too. I think that about five games in many are going to wish he were. The expectations being placed upon Watkins are unreasonable and those expectations are now coming from the top. Woods hasn't proven a whole lot yet, Goodwin is the role-player he was at UT, Williams should be the leading veteran receiver for the rest to look up to, but he's done the opposite and is reported to be on the bubble for even making the 53. Buffalo, land of unreasonable expectations.

If Spiller's so unstoppable, then how come he had only 2 total TDs on 235 touches last season and only 2 rushing TDs on 202 carries? Sounds pretty stoppable to me, especially for a guy that we were told once he hit open field he was gone. He was run down a bunch of times. 58 players had more rushing TDs including 8 QBs and 1 WR. Everyone had more receiving TDs since he didn't have any. He's had only 1 return TD in the NFL too, on 75 return attempts. At Clemson he had 8 return TDs on 127 attempts, one every 16 attempts, nearly five times the rate. He has an equal number of touches offensively through four years of NFL and at Clemson, 729, but at Clemson he had 43 TDs while here he has only 17, only 40% the rate. Just throwing those facts out there. LOL Fifth time's the charm? Again, 2 rushing TDs in 202 carries. So we should make sure he gets 400 carries so that he can score 4 rushing TDs. Here's the bottom line, everyone said that once Spiller got "into space" that he would take it to the house. That's clearly not the case. Everyone that's watched football for any extended number of years knows that speed does not translate to the NFL level from college nearly as well as the writers say that it will. What seems fast in college slows way down in the NFL because everyone's fast in the NFL. The truth is that Spiller's speed and moves just don't cut it for him in the NFL the way that many people said that they would much less the way that they did in college when he was playing against a whole lot of players that are presently working outside the NFL doing normal jobs. This is also why I've been issueing cautionary statements about Watkins, he's the same type of player that excelled in college primarily off of a talent differential between his team and almost every opposing team that he played in four years at Clemson in a relatively weak conference whereby the only much above average defense he ever had to face was FSU against whom he had a combined 14 receptions for 92 yards in both games combined in his Jr. and Sr. seasons. That's 7 for 46 on average as a Jr. and Sr. WR. Watkins comes from the same exact program, played against even worse talent since the ACC has gotten worse after Clemson and FSU since Spiller's days, and played under the same coach in the same or similar system. If that system weren't responsible for Clemson's success, then Boyd wouldn't have been drafted in the 6th round.

Find me some footage of good defensive teams against which Watkins had good games? Particularly pass defense.

LOL He uses Ohio State film as the example? Did you bother to look at how good OSU's passing D was prior to boasting this? It makes my point perfectly. OSU's pass D sucked elephant balls. They were ranked 6th from worst in all of college. Everyone had a heyday passing performance against them. Bowens says this: While I do believe Watkins will earn his money early in 2014 as a vertical threat, there is no question he can produce within the entire route tree. That may be fine, but he didn't produce using the entire route tree at Clemson. So not sure about this "no question" stuff. Talk is cheap. But more importantly, can Manuel deliver it? Here's another good piece; http://www.sbnation....ceiver-rankings I will agree with two points in this guy's piece about Watkins and Evans. First, that Watkins is the type of receiver that can be brought in, start straight away and become a star. Expecting him to have the same type of impact Green did for the Bengals should be the expectation. I agree that that not only should, but has to be the expectation given the way that the team acquired him now. Green's rookie season was 65, 1,057, 7. So let's just say that Watkins needs to post 60+ catches, 1,000+ yards, and 6+ TDs or his draft status will have been too much. Can we agree on that at least? Secondly, I agree with the guy on this: Evans grades out as one of the ten best players in the draft on our latest big board. He's the type of receiver who instantly makes his quarterback better. The skills he used to make plays in college all translate to the NFL. He already learned how to win when he wasn't the fastest player on the field. That's only going to help him as he transitions to the NFL and learns how to use his physical tools to out-muscle defensive backs for passes. I don't necessarily view Watkins as making his QB better. I view Watkins as posing a potential job challenging issue for a QB like Manuel though. Think about it, if Manuel doesn't automatically become far more accurate, and consistently so, and he keeps overthrowing Watkins like he did so many WRs last year on the relatively limited number of "deep" balls that he threw, or even medium balls, then they're going to be pointing the finger at Manuel initially and calling for his head. The one thing that I've not read anywhere by any credible analyst, is how Watkins' skills used in college translate well to the NFL. That has been conspicuously absent from draf previews. Mike Evans also didn't make a living out of beating up on B-rate talented teams, he absolutely lit up both Alabama and Auburn more than any other WR in recent years.

Again, no facts or data, just opinions. He was the #1 best prospect in the draft, just like Ryan Leaf, Jamarcu Russell, Drew Bledsoe, Jeff George, and Tim Couch were at one time too. Your point? What, that draft analysts are never or even often wrong? I'll beg to differ. If that's your sole counterargument ... Yeah, the experts under Whaley for 5 seasons have done such a remarkable job. They've pretty much whiffed completely on 3rd rounders and later picks. We all know that this season will be different, it always is. So was Manuel. It has absolutely nothing to do with being antagonistic. I told you, when rumors about the Bills drafting Watkins were flying, I was the first to say what a terrible pick that would be, and that was without trading up. Whaley has now put all of his eggs into one basket with Manuel's and Watkins' names on it. Does that make sense to you? Otherwise I'm analyzing while trying to marry-up the facts and data on Watkins. Draft "experts" are wrong just as often as they are right. No one ever provides post-draft success rates in calling 100 players for any draft expert for reasons. All they and you do is cite them prior to those players ever having hit the field. Remember when Bill Walsh told us all how great Trent Edwards would be in the annuls of football history? He was right as he was in predicting that Rick Mirer would do the same. What, Bill Walsh was a moron? Hardly. But clearly there was much more than just collegiate film review in projecting how well players translate to the NFL. One of them is terribly discounted here, and that's the nature of the competition faced by prospects, and the system in which they played in. It's routine that players in certain systems and not having faced top-notch competition very often don't translate well to the NFL level. Naturally we know that just because everyone discounts that here that it's all meaningless. Also, this childish notion that somehow I or any other Bills fan will be happy when our draftees flop merely insults those trying to engage in decent conversation on the topic. I'll bookmark this thread and we'll come back to it in November. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm going to stand on every word that I've said about Watkins. I expect him to struggle given his status as you guys all here insist will carry him into the NFL, and for the very reasons I've cited. Not sure what your excuse will be if that happens, and again, hopefully it doesn't, but you won't be able to use anything that I've cited to explain it if it does.

Presumably all the bids can come in before then and the high bidder annouced. The earliest that the owner can be approved is October since the owners have no plans of meeting together 'til then. Absolutely. I think we can expect it. Would it even be a breach of anything if it were?

I think that the jury's out there. I can only read what everyone says about the Sabres, and can look at the roster and standings, but despite what his defenders say about the reasons why the team has hit historical lows in the couple of short years on his watch, that still doesn't amount to competent management of the Sabres. This could very well fall into the category of "be careful what you wish for, you may get it." Say what we will about Trump, and as with everyone I think he's just blowing smoke, but I have a difficult time believing that an owner like him wouldn't make some serious "you're fired!" changes and be upset if his team were not a winner.

Agreed They'll probably make it a media spectacle with two weeks of build-up in early March of next year. Yes, just kidding. Par for the course with the NFL though. Indeed

LMAO

ROFLMAO From hero to horse so soon?

LOL I'm not sure that Williams realizes anymore how he put up 11 TDs as a rookie five seasons ago. I'd be a little more worried about the two discussing their off-field issues and Williams' inability to average more than 5 TDs/season over his last three seasons much less remain healthy or issue-free. Sure sounds like it if OTAs and mini-camp are the indicators. Sounds like Williams is pressing for a roster spot right now.

Nice of you to bring some actual facts and data to the table of this discussion. By the way 3rdand12, one more thing, that causes me to raise a question is this, we're told about how Watkins is so ridiculously fast and uncatchable, but then unlike Spiller even, why was he only marginal at best at returning KOs at Clemson, and downright putrid at returning punts there in the few that he returned? I'm having a difficult time trying to reconcile this pure speed with his complete inability to do better than what would have been 85th in ranking, tops, in KO return average if he had had enough KRs to qualify. Throw in the fact that in 27 returns in his Jr. and Sr. seasons, he didn't even have a single TD, and only had one at that in '11. Other than an 89-yard return, his longest was 39 yards and his average at Clemson was well below average by collegiate standards. In your opinion is this relevant? Because I think it is. It makes me question how well he'll play in the NFL when he isn't playing the likes of the defensive talent on NC State, BC, Maryland, Virginia, Syracuse, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, Citadel, and South Carolina State, not to mention Ohio State who had the 6th worst passing defense in the country. At least Spiller made a name for himself in returns. Watkins couldn't even perform to average levels in the return game, not even close. Don't think that's relevant? I most certainly do.

I beg to differ, we'll learn about how all of our players are on the cusp of setting the league on fire this season. Any preseason rankings that have us at a spot higher than 20th should be instantly discredited. Even 20th is generous until we prove otherwise. The burden of proof is on the team.

Let's rush out and sign him, and on top of that let's give him more money than any team would. After all, he's only 34 this season and made the Pro Bowl three years ago last and twive overall in a 10-year career. What can go wrong. I'm sure he's just as young and spry as he was in his prime. You negative ninny.

I hope you're right. Any reason to think he wont ? Of course there are, if you've done your research then you'd know what those reasons are. The draftniks laid them all out. It's hardly private knowledge. Let me ask you a question, how do you compare Clemson's offense to typical NFL offenses generally speaking, and more specifically speaking, how do you compare Clemson's offense to Buffalo's offense? While answering that, ask yourself how Watkins earned his reputation at Clemson and then correspondingly ask yourself if you think he'll be able to do the same thing in the NFL. Once you understand all of that you'll see clearly that something's going to have to change drastically if Watkins is going to have the same degree of success in the NFL, particularly with us, the Bills. Then ask yourself with the pieces in place, whether A) Watkins have ever even shown or proven that he can do that, for which the short answer is 'no," and B) can he excel by doing what was not his bread and butter at Clemson. The answer to that last part, B), will determine everything. I don't know whether that will work out as such, but I see two things holding him up from achieving that, first, Manuel, second, time, as it will take time for him to adjust and adapt to a role that he never was in while at Clemson. Anyone thinking that this leopard is going to come to the NFL and change his spots to stripes seemlessly is best advised to be cautious in their expectations. On top of that, Watkins had lots of strengths attached to him, primarily his athleticism, but among his negatives are poor route running, which is often if not usually a showstopper in preventing receivers from exceling in the NFL, It's not as if I simply make this stuff up because it's what I wanted to believe. In fact, I told numerous people prior to the draft that if the Bills take Watkins it will be the dumbest pick they'll have made in years, so I drew this conclusion before they even drafted him much less traded away next year's 1st to get him. IMO they should have taken Evans if they really wanted a receiver, I'll stand by my prognosis that Evans will have both a better rookie season as well as better NFL career, and that's starting off in Tampa, a very similar situation. Anyway, here's a really good article praising Watkins as among the best athletes in the Draft, and I agree, as athletes go he's proably among the top there. But it's the system at Clemson, the fact that he made a living off of bubble screens, and what's contained in his negatives here that concern me, this is an excerpt from that piece; http://nfl.si.com/2014/04/22/2014-nfl-draft-top-64-sammy-watkins/ Weaknesses: Watkins’ height creates concerns with regards to jump balls and contested catches; he’s simply not big enough to grab some of the balls that more physically imposing receivers might. And while he’s strong, he needs space to operate — he’ll get taken down on first contact a lot if the first contact is a form tackle attempt, though he’ll drive his helmet in and try to gain extra yardage. Watkins said at the combine that he’s comfortable with all manner of route concepts, but he was a quick up-and-out and vertical target at Clemson, and there are times when he appears a step slow on some more angular routes — especially curls and comebacks or anything with really quick cuts. Has the physical talent to master the techniques required and shows it at times, but that could be a process. nfl.com, and other sources, list his weakness as an over-the-middle receiver too talking about how he rarely had many challenges. We heard the same about Spiller needing space, which is merely another phrase for getting the ball to a player with no one around him. Well la-dee-dah, wouldn't every offensive skill-position player do better "in space" and wouldn't they all love that on every play. The problem is that they typically don't get "space" in the NFL and NFL players are much much bigger and faster than collegiate players. On that note, Watkins' opposition in college was easily on the lighter end of the scale. His senior season his Tigers didn't even play the best teams in the ACC other than FSU against which his performance was pedestrian, much less great defenses in their other games. He essentially lit it up against the worst passing Ds in college ball. So will he now all of a sudden play well against top DBs at the NFL level? To me that's a huge if, and only time will tell. But looking at this from Whaley's angle, he's promised playoffs now. To think that this young and inexperienced cadre of WRs is going to lead us to a winning season with Manuel throwing, much less to the playoffs, is somewhat ridiculous. In Cleveland they're talking about how Manziel, now that it appears that he may be starting, won't have anyone to throw to with Josh Gordon out. But over there they have Miles Austin, Nate Burleson, Travis Benjamin, and Andrew Hawkins are at least what we have and the experience among them exceed that of the experience on our roster by miles. Is anyone talking about Cleveland having a winning season, or making the playoffs, even if Manziel plays well for a rookie, and I can easily see him outplaying Manuel this season. So whether or not you like my answer, I think that I've answered your question pretty comprehensively. Any reason to think he wont ? Those are the reasons why I think that the chances of him doing so are notably less than the chances of him not doing so. I think that he's going to be more of a project than anyone thinks. For what the team gave up to get him he should easily be the team's leading WR this year, especially if Whaley is to be believed that this move is going to propel us into the playoffs. But I don't think he will be, I think Woods will have that honor and that he won't even cross the 1,000 yard mark. Let met ask you a question, if Watkins only post 700 or 800 yards and 5 TDs and we end up being 5-11, and his draft negatives begin to play out and reveal that he's got a lot more work than everyone seems to think that he does in turning himself into a top-shelf NFL WR, do you think that he'll have been worth what we gave up to get him? Because if in three seasons he's not elite as a WR, two 1st-rounders will have been a complete waste and one more in a long string of reaches for this franchise. Presumably we can agree on that. Either way, I answered your question honestly and legitimately. If you want to argue those facts, then take it up with what just about every Draft analyst said about him not with my opinions beyond that. Agreed. Here's the thing, he doesn't have a lot of experience "in traffic" over the middle. They also said that when he's in such a role, which wasn't often, he often struggled. Having said that, every player enjoys "getting the ball in space," but it's a luxury that NFL skill position players typically don't have. Every opposing DC is going to prevent him from having that space, and I don't think it's going to be difficult for them to do that, especially not the Jets or Pats which we play four times. "Stretching the field" will help, but as you imply, is Manuel up to the task? He wasn't last year and he was massively inconsistent at best on deep balls at FSU too for four years. That's going to change all of a sudden now, after five seasons of futility in that way? I suppose it could, but what are the odds? We were all lectured, both by the team and the long list of know-it-alls here too, about how great Spiller would be and his "key to success" was getting the ball in space too. But both he as well as his apologists have learned what should have been obvious, that "space" comes at a premium in the NFL, especially when defensive coordinators know that when a key to a player's success is "space," And who cares what the worst DCs in the league do, it's not them that we have to beat, it's the better defensively minded head coaches and better DCs, plenty of which we face this season with Ryan and Belicheat being in our division, and we can't seem to be able to beat the Pats under any circumstances as it is.

Good question. I enjoy the emotional challenges? Only partially being facetious. Why do you post here?

I'll tell you what, I'm tempted just to hit the tailgating and then go back home to watch the game, but they're taking the fun out of tailgating now too from what I understand, or at least making it more difficult for people to meet up and park together, etc. Problem with that approach is that you can't make it back home in time to watch the game. Do they even allow anyone to leave the parking lot that early? LOL That's just so American.

Couldn't agree with you more. For some reason many fans seem to think that the only way to watch a game is by being inebriated. I also don't care for the way that opposing fans get treated at games sometimes, and fans that have done nothing to antagonize the home crowd, that didn't used to be that way either. I'll add that fans today spew obscene language that's pretty impossible to avoid, and I'm not talking about traditional chants of bullsiht that aren't a big deal, but really lewd, vulgar, and crass stuff that disallows any concerned parent from taking their small kids. I took my 5-year old son years ago and decided that I simply couldn't take him to games anymore because of that and haven't been back since now that I'm a family man. I realize that they have a so-called "family section," but it's a siht section that's among the worst seats in the stadium. The game day experience has changed significantly from the '80s and '90s in that way. Maybe it's because we would win, but the era of all the playoff games, and not limited to playoff games, was golden and fun without all the lewdness and over the top drunkeness. Also, the TV timeouts impact going to the games too. You sit there and wait and wait and wait for that guy with the red glove on to step off the field and sometimes it's several minutes with players just standing around on the field, etc. with absolutely no reason for it besides commercials. If you're not watching the guy with the glove you'd think that the game's going to start any second, but it is often 60-120 seconds more before the game gets going while you're sitting there with your thumb up your a##. I prefer to watch streams on my laptop. The size of the picture is bigger than a huge TV 15 feet away because it's 20" from my face, and when commercials pop up I can do something else, read some articles, or surf the web, or even get some work done.

Until further notice the Buffalo Johnsons would be more suitable. Make sure you put the emphasis on the first syllable of BUFF-alo.

If he doesn't he'll have been a complete waste of two 1st-rounders. When a team puts that kind of faith in you you need to perform as rookie. What, do you have a crystal ball?

Sammy had better put up a lot better numbers than Moulds for what we gave up to get him. He also had better be far more consistent.