SouthNYfan

Agree your post. Pretty much spot on, other than the bold, I'd also like to add that those best "gamblers" also play multiple hands, and also do go "all in" if they feel they are sure about something. Sometimes they hit big on the river with an "all in" hope and prayer, but usually they have calculated the odds before they do so. In regards to playing multiple hands, the Bills haven't done that in a while. We love to pass on QBs. Can't win if you aren't in the game, right? I don't advocate betting the farm in panic, but if they love a guy enough, I'm okay with them betting the farm, the car, and the rent check

I had never seen him regarded as anything other than a late round project from any source prior to his draft. If I'm wrong so be it, but I don't remember it

Really? They "pass the ball well" is all you have to say why those guys are the same? "Inaccurate and tend to run, a lot" is your only similarity between them?? Not the fact that Jackson won a Heisman, almost won another, has a stronger arm, has no problem throwing into traffic/isn't afraid to throw it, or the fact that he's a highly regarded prospect, and Tyrod was nowhere on anybody's radar? That's like saying Riley Ferguson is the same as darnold because they "both throw from the pocket" You assume tyrod = Lamar because they are black and mobile. Stop trying to act like that's not a factor to you. Yep.

On what basis??

Top10 in the draft I also wonder where Jackson and Watson would have ranked in their drafts had rgiii not been a Trainwreck after his knee, and instead continued to play his rookie year promise (also, where would that leave cousins??)

I still cannot fathom the people like you who just see "black, mobile QB" and lump them all together. Maybe we should say that Brady, Peyton, Eli, Rivers, Marino, Kelly, bledsoe, and favre are all the same too, you know, because they are "white, pocket QB"?? Not to sound arrogant and condescending... Actually you know what? I do mean to sound that way... If you think Tyrod and Lamar are the same then you either don't know anything about QB play/football, or you just haven't watched Jackson play, and are just assuming he's black and fast, so he must be like Tyrod... I'm willing to bet it's option 2. You don't have to like Jackson, you can say you prefer a pocket guy, whatever the reasoning... But he is NOT just another Tyrod.

I'm going to bet that BB gives him at least a call. If cousins goes to Denver I could see him there. There's a ton of teams that fit your criteria though.

From snap number one in preseason?? He went 14 of 19 for 195 yards, 1 TD 0 int, 9 rushes for 41 yards, and 0 sacks But you knew that game? Come on dude.

Stahp. No you didn't. I hate Tyrod. That's obvious. Every person who's read my posts knows it. Even I will admit that he had promise that first year.

I saw potential after 2015 After 2016 I was done though Hindsight is 20/20 obv I think that if we exit this off-season without a rookie QB who they expect to be the future, after passing on mahomes and Watson last year, then we should get the pitchforks and torches!! I would say that, even if people have their own preferences on what rookie to draft, if we go into next season without anybody who isn't from the list below should consider it a colossal failure: -Darnold -Rosen -Jackson -Mayfield -Allen Everybody has their preferences on that list, everybody has a guy or two they want to avoid like the plague on that list. That's fine, but I think we need to finish the draft with one of those guys on the roster. That's unless we pull a "cousins miracle" or some other crazy sh*t.

I definitely don't think the sky is falling, per say. I think, in regards to the qb situation, I think there are a few camps (generalizing) 1) people who like Tyrod and are okay with him 2) people who don't really like Tyrod, but want to stick with him unless we have a definite upgrade ---------------tyrod divide--------------- 3) people who want Tyrod gone, and would rather risk bottoming out with a rookie/high risk fa bridge who might be great, rather than use Tyrod as a bridge 4) people who want ANYBODY but Tyrod 5) people who want Peterman to start next year (aka delusional) I'm in #3, but I think to be in camp of #3 you have to be willing to accept that we might be awful next year I know that having a worse season might be a bad idea, but I also don't like being in "QB hell" which is "just good enough to be a fringe playoff team, but not bad enough to get a top5 pick" I'm not okay with that, I get it that some people are okay with that, but I'm not.

We mostly agree finally, I think if we trade up it's going big to top 3-5, otherwise we stay put I think

Tyrod didn't take us to the playoffs We fell into them

And the previous year he had 1136 yards and a 12.1 average. Over 1100 in 2015 as well. He's got over 4000 yards and 400 rec in his first 4 seasons That's 100 rec and 1000 yards per season average. I think he's a dbag, and I don't think he's a legit #1, but he's a damn good slot receiver, though he's going to get more $$ than he's worth (doesn't every high end Fa though?)

I thought you meant 10.6 YPCATCH Then I realized it was CARRY ??

You aren't a Tyrod homer? Jesus. I can't even.

Zeke is a God damned animal.

Word of the street is Giants are good with Eli and Webb, and are willing to take offers for the #2 I'm down for Rosen at #2

I'm with you. I couldn't give two craps about a guy's political views, kneeling, etc.

Damn right. Keep fighting Jim!!

Looking at the 2018 schedule, most of those teams I listed as difficult don't look to be having and regression on paper Over half of the 2016 trans I listed either were expected to regress, or wound up with a major injury (which can happen again this year obviously) If it's so "dumb" to pretend to "see the future" then why do you sit here and wank off to how great tyrod is, was, and is going to be, and how he's definitely going to be our QB next year, etc? It's just "dumb" to make predictions and have any discussions about the future then, right? As usual, somebody gives you a logical, well said out response, and you just say things like "that's dumb" and flash emojis.

I can Google "strength of schedule" also, which only takes into account the winning% of the teams from last year. For example: Last year the bills faced multiple teams who regressed significantly from the previous year, who wound up not being as good as their previous year's record: -Denver went 9-7 (wound up being terrible) -colts went 8-8 (terrible last year because they lost luck) -raiders went 12-4 (huge regression last year) -dolphins went 10-6 (lost Tanny and sucked) -chiefs went 12-4 (regressed and we got them at a cold patch) -bucs went 9-7 -falcons went 11-5 (we got them with Jones out) All those teams regressed, making 2016 easier than it looked. This year we have a few teams who played below expectations in 2017 and look to be on the rise for 201 Minnesota might have a regression because of their own QB situation, but their defense is downright elite, and will still be a tough draw for us. I'm not bending over backwards, I'm looking at things regarding our schedule that goes beyond "last year's opponents' records" It actually applies to just about every team, go look into "Pythagorean wins" for NFL teams and how it is pretty accurate. Glad to see your emoji responses are back.

They exceeded win expectations. That's a fact. Generally a team who exceeds expectations by more than 2+ wins, winds up regressing the following year

I agree, that's a lot of ifs . I would love improvement, but I don't see us getting better than 9 wins from last year.

Because he's not confident in his QB, and benched him last year in the midst of a playoff push, and still has yet to fully commit to him. That sounds to me like "well... He's our QB, I don't like him much, but I'm stuck with him..." It's okay though trans, I'm sure you take it as "he's the best QB ever I love him"