Kelly the Dog

Yeah. Totally agree. They must really not like what they saw from Schmidt lately, especially because one of his two punts against the Bears was a beaut.

I do think teams sign players cut all the time more based on their Scouts and player personnel guys detailed college evaluations versus the limited action in, say, preseason games. Be really hard I think to evaluate a punter in practice unless he was really bad.

That's not a real hat.

That's a good question. I imagine teams do it all the time. Obviously the ones open to public. Would be hard to enforce if league was against it.

And 30 year old former Bill and trick shot artist Alex Tanney. Amazing that dude still is playing. At least for now.

Seahags waiving OL Rees Odhiambo who started seven games last year. Worth a look? Anyone? Bueller?

Really hard to say. Guys like Redmond and Boetger other teams scouted and saw something or same thing Bills saw that made them sign these guys in first place. So they think maybe it didn't work out there but our coaches can work with these guys. Every team is looking for depth and guys to develop. Kaelin Clay was another guy we cut who was claimed. He keeps getting cut and signed. Teams know what he brings. Tanner Viejo was the fourth. Has some talent and some upside but I'm not sure why anyone would automatically put him on 53. Browns did. But theyre the Browns

De Beer signed to Bills PS

They should have put him with Nate more. Then the snap and the pass could look like it was in slow motion.

There were dozens of players claimed off waivers. Teams have until later today to make corresponding cuts. So a different wave of players will be available. Hopefully some vets that barely hung on with some teams now thought to be unnecessary. Bills don't really have to release anyone but Schmidt

Those are waiver moves. More like working the fax machine. Welcome to the 80s!!

Bills had four of their cuts claimed. Redmond and Boetger are two. Clay makes three.

Giants claimed C Adam Redmond who Bills wanted for PS.

Because these guys and most teams only want two QBs on their 53 saving a spot for another position. You don't have three active on game day anyway. So most are a waste.

I'd take Martavis. Grab your baggage and get on a flight to B-Lo.

I'm quite sure they traded AJ to only have two QBs on 53. I very much doubt barring injury they add a vet to the 53. Especially because the lack of even bad ones available.

Do you think it's possible that Nate can get the ball to the sidelines quick enough and downfield enough to stop every team from stacking 8-9 in box, playing tight on WR and taking Shady out of the game? I don't until I see it on a regular basis. Possible but unlikely IMO.

Ugh. That's a great example of it being stupid. It probably backfires more than it helps. But Beane and McD familiar with KB got us our only bona fide WR.

There are all kinds of examples of it working and all kinds it not working. Every coach does it to some degree.

I know we may have a couple or even several different players on the 53 by this time next week. But let's go with what we have. What seven do you make inactive? And what do you predict we may see from the 46 you envision? One thing that doesn't make a lot of sense is the four TEs we kept. I like them all to some degree. But can't see all four being active on game day. I think Clay and Lee are locks for the 46 but only one of Croom and Thomas. I see three TEs on field at same time several times a game but you don't need four at the expense of other positions. I know we will likely do it but I don't see the reason to dress four RBs. I would love to see just Shady, Ivory and Murphy. But McD loves Jones for ST when he doesn't make much impact. Neal probably is inactive early. As is 5th CB. Two OL will likely be inactive. I see five WR active with Foster not, but then why really have him (I expect we sign a guy this week and Foster goes to PS). Ray Ray Ray is active. Holmes is active or why keep him. And the three starters at WR obviously are. That will be interesting if Foster remains whether they want to develop him or whether they put him in there because he does what no one else does. That decision likely goes with whether Josh plays or not. What says you about any position?

That's exactly what I thought. I was pretty excited after watching the first game. Then the next three were pretty bland. I could easily see McD tampering it down as you described.

I'm not criticizing this I'm just curious. But why are you just assuming "Daboll's boy" is a bad thing? He obviously knows him better than anyone. Unless you already assume Daboll stinks why is lobbying for a guy he knows and obviously loves is wrong?

Neither Croom nor Thomas can block better than O'Leary. Lee can.

Agree. It's not easy to learn. Usually you either have it or don't for both of them. Zay Jones sucked at both of them last year, too. Let's just hope he can learn. It's not the same but it's like arm strength. Most players with rag arms cannot improve arm strength over the years to become adequate. It happens but most can't. Brady did dramatically. But there are not a lot of examples.

Totally agree on the bombs. He can't track for crap. Both Josh's fourth quarter bombs were right on the money and Foster blew them both. The OB catches only one of four could any WR catch in bounds. The ball was too far OB.