Bleeding Bills Blue

The tag alone is more than the year with the buyout penalty. Was pretty obvious it was going down this road. You likely get a better pick trading him (3rd round comp pick is after the round and in the 2020 draft, and you may swing a late 2nd or early 3rd for him on the tag). The only thing that sucks is he's just eating into the cap, and no one is sure when a trade will occur. They're over the cap as it stands now and that's after losing Graham, Tate, & Darby. Franchising Foles means you're basically cutting people (Peters, Bennett, Long, Kelce - that would net 27... the tag is 25). So even after those cuts you can't sign anyone until you trade Foles. You could also try to offload Agholors contract (5th year option so I think somewhat guaranteed, or you net literally nothing) - but expect the compensation to be really low-balled. This is a team in a transition any way you look at it, and they need to get younger. They're likely losing their top 3 pass rushers, and some starters on the offensive line. Get what you can for Foles as soon as possible before the players you want are already gone in FA.

I'd keep him if possible - seems like a solid addition to the rotation. We'll still need a major snaps guy at 3-tech, but he at least provides some solid depth. He batted a few passes down IIRC, which is a huge benefit. If Lawson continues to roll inside on pass rushing downs, it'd be nice to also add another pass rusher. Murphy had some injury issues, but theoretically he could bounce back. Also looking at depth backers in free agency. Thompsons play was very uninspiring, and Stanford was barely a JAG.

He got caught up a lot in the motion plays that teams like NO, LAR, and LAC run quite often. Teams were gashing us on reverses and also fake reverses as he was too often letting linemen get to the second level. So that is definitely something he'll need to work on. The other thing was when he was a deep lying backer in Tampa 2 he was late picking up in breaking routes quite often. Fixable things - just needs to play faster in those situations. He doesn't seem to have issues with tackling, play speed, pad level etc. He has a 2nd gear that is probably near the top of the league for a guy his size, so closing speed isn't an issue. Seems to have some pass rush ability, but that takes time for a linebacker to learn. Overall though he made some plays (2 INTs 2 sacks and 2 FF), and he made some mistakes. I thought a good first year for a rookie MLB.

He never took over a game, but he came close a couple of times. He needs to really focus on improving his hands - his catch rate is 55%. I know like, rookie QB and just generally poor QB play etc. But he improved his blocking, played about 88% of the snaps (3rd on the team), and had moments where he really made some nice plays. Just needs to bring some consistency, and not disappear in games. I don't know what his like ceiling is, but considering we ran 11 personnel about 60ish percent of the time - I'd like to see some improvement at the WR position. You need more than 3 quality ones to have a rotation. He should be able to carve out a role in the offense though.

I think buffalo could get better at a lot of positions. More bullets is probably good at this point - so I'd be OK with it if the value is right.

I remember those first 2 years they had a ridiculous defense and they just grinded with Bettis (and then Parker). He wasn't throwing a lot but it worked out - they went far and did well and it was good for his development.

After the Bell situation - I think it will either be a major point of contention in the next CBA. They'll either argue that it needs to be done away with entirely, or they need to drastically change the way that it works. Players with non-guaranteed deals like this want guaranteed money, and more years. 1 year deal's that lock them with a team is really damaging to the players It's hard to think of a way to do this without having all players be almost RFAs after their rookie contract - thus allowing offer sheets, but also giving a team ability to match and some control when trading. The tag doesn't allow anyone to offer sheet a player and get them the extension at the value that they feel they deserve, the franchise has all of the leverage because they have a tag in their back pocket. Multiple first round picks seems a tad excessive since there aren't as many rounds in a draft, there's a limited pool of players in the NCAA, and with a cap like this there is a lot of parity in the league. At the same time, you have to get something if you're losing a player who you drafted high, and don't have cap space or something to extend. So I think figuring out an appropriate compensation strategy would be pretty important. Maybe open it up to sign and trade deals (allowing agents some freedom to negotiate with other teams like a RFA), therefore the franchise gets contact from interested teams who have worked out a a contract with the agent. They can then work with that team on a trade - bring in a an established piece (or package of players) and a pick (or multiple picks) - while the other team gets the tagged player at the deal that they negotiated with his agent. Another option is maybe a sliding scale of tag amounts with sliding compensation for offer sheets, different from the RFA ones. The tag should be off the table unless the player is coming off of a rookie contract. Rookie contracts are capped, so they will want to maximize their income outside of that contract the first chance they get - they shouldn't be limited in doing so. As for other established players, they should be able to have more power to choose their destination. This probably causes more problems, but also limits the franchises ability to force players into unfavorable deals, and penalize them for not signing them.

I think they should have run more shotgun and spread type sets to help goff with identifying coverage.

NE has a strong secondary - and weren't afraid to man up woods/cooks 1x1 with gilmore. Coupling that with double teams on the other one in man coverage, and loading the box with linemen - it was a situation where they couldn't run and PA would have no effect on their coverages. They needed to adjust the gameplan to something more spread out to take advantage of the matchups, force 1x1s instead of allowing them to double guys like Woods.

Not to tyrod

What was the question that he answered?

I mean he saw Peterman play. He was right to not be benched

Nope. He was an entertaining press conference at least? For those who hate McD's coach speak.

It's the same in every profession though. If your boss lets you get away with being late, being on your phone... etc. Others notice - they start coming in late, they start playing on their phone. Dareus doesn't practice hard, so i won't either. Mario just plays pool instead of watching film, so i'll play pool instead of watching film. etc. It's on the HC to preach that the leaders of the team hold the others accountable. Rex was a walk in at 9, leave at 5 guy. So a lot of the players assumed that similar attitude.

To be fair - the -8 yard carry (that got him to -3 on the year) in the miami game was a really really stupid playcall. Tyrod was playing lights out and we run a bad gimmick play on 2nd and 12... ended up missing the field goal and losing the game. Overall Lynn has done some good things with LAC, but that was a moment where i just couldn't believe the call. If you want to run it again, run it... but i really think we should pass to ya know... try and win?

Rams Titans has to be up there... Rooting hard for the Rams too

I honestly loved the Patriots over Falcons one. Brady playing pretty much lights out in the 2nd half, carving up the falcons defense. The comedy of coaching errors from the falcons Shanahan calling a pass play up 8... on 2nd and 11 while the patriots had 2 timeouts... and losing 12 yards on a sack... followed by a holding penalty and another incompletion... Instead of say... 3ish minutes left, kicking off up 11, they had 3ish minutes left up 8 and punted. I love when a coach just absolutely collapses in the moment. My wife's a patriots fan so like everyone at the party is giving her crap, and couldn't believe it when they won. Oddly enough my friend bought 2 balloons for the game, and the moment the patriots helmet balloon turned from facing the right to the left, they dominated the entire game.

6th leading receiver on the team, Lower catch rate than Croom and Thomas, 0 Touchdowns. His injury history with Buffalo: 2018 - On the Injury report for 5 of 16 games. 2017 - On the injury report for 7 of 16 games 2016 - On the injury report for 14 of 16 games 2015 - On the injury report 4 of 13 games, and missed the last 3 weeks on IR. Never played 16 games in a season with buffalo, and has either missed time, or been too banged up to be effective. I'm fine with moving on.

He was simply used as a checkdown, as our offense was really vertical last season. One thing i notice when watching a team who uses their backs a lot in the passing game, is how much they design plays for backs that aren't check downs. They're identified pre-snap by a matchup they want to see, and whenever they see that matchup they run a play at that player. Same goes for McCaffrey, Gurley, kamara, etc. If they see a mismatch they are going that way with the ball.

I could see it - but we have no need of salary cap at the moment, and we aren't going to burn through the cap that we have. So bring him to camp, and confirm if someone can actually take his job. He has better hands than most incoming rookies and running backs in general, he doesn't fumble, he blocks well, and he's still tough to tackle 1x1. Find me a guy that can do all those things AND be an effective 3 down back... and it'll cost you a premium pick.

They all share revenue anyway, he's cash rich and can loan other owners money for projects etc. We're not buying these absurd rams PSLs so don't even bother trying to sell them to us.

It still could - league seems to be up int he pegula's business about it. I still think they focus on a like 5 year renovation strategy but thats me.

Same - that could easily be Buffalo. Maybe St. Louis has other problems and doesn't want to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for a football team. There's like no proven ROI other than that the owners probably make more money off of the fans.

Rooting for the patriots for a few reasons. 1 - My wife is from Central Mass. 2 - I hate that the team moved to LA because they were unwilling to essentially pay to keep their team. 3 - LA fans aren't real football fans so its annoying that they get a super bowl

Max contracts maybe? But then ur limiting the income of the player