BigBillsFan

That was my exact thought

It was rumored he was on the trading block. The very fact our PR department didn't show they put up a 1st for him shows Beane clearly meant what he said that he didn't believe in #1 WRs. This and Hooper.

They've 100% earned my trust on defense. All of their FAs and draft picks have been average to stellar. On offense? I would rate it as below average. I liked both the Beasley and Brown pickups. This was the 1 pick we should have gotten and it was the perfect price and talent we needed for Allen. It's like getting a Kelce on a team. We all say we need Chief like weapons and he was a Chief-like weapon. He's 25 and very productive. At 25 Kelce had his 1st decent year. He was the perfect piece of for the offense with only 1 drop last year.

While it is funny if we paid the same or slightly more for Hooper we would be semi-set on offense and just wait for the draft for another WR and RB later. The Browns signings were all really good today.

He doesn't remember.

The Bills should have signed him. This was a no-brainer. $11 mil in the new age of contracts will be nothing for a guy who can scoop up 70 catches a year and a big outlet for a young QB. Who else could we have gotten for this price?

Excellent contract for both parties only if you factor in the overpricing of QBs. It's really a 2 year deal that becomes 4 if he does well and if he does the Titans have him at what will be a median salary for the following 2 years. Not bad for a guy has "just above average" stats for starters. He's the perfect fit for that team with his maturity. He's basically David Carr's older twin for QBing. They play almost identical football.

Congrats you made the best argument I never made. You win if you were debating yourself. The 4 best QBs of the last 40 years are: Manning (1st), Brady (6th), Montana (3rd) and Brees (2nd). You might disagree, but based on longevity and stats I think the argument can be made. I would consider Rodgers the most talented though. All of the other QBs you list are irrelevant to my point, but again you win the strawman debate. As to WRs the best to have played in the last 40 years is Rice, TO, Harrison and Moss. Only Moss & Harrison were 1st rounders. The best WR in the league right now is a 2nd rounder. As to picking better than a GM you tell me if the DEs picked in the draft over the last 20 years we would have had Maybin, which was my point. I limited it to Maybin, Denney and Kelsay. All of our top picks at DE over the last 20 years have been horrible. Yes the board would have picked better in this scenario unless you think Maybin was better "cause". You'll notice I limited the discussion to DEs and threw in Whitner as further proof that the GM label isn't proof of infallibility. Never once did you address what I said and you want to question my mental health? Strange all things considered.

I don't find your thoughts outlandish at all, and certainly not worthy of ridicule. I think you might be right, especially if we tried him as the 5th WR. No one wants to admit that GMs are frequently wrong. They aren't paid to be frequently right, but right enough to make a good team. The best WR of all time was not a 1st rounder, nor was the 2nd. The 4 best QBs of the last 40 years only 1 was a 1st rounder, 1 a 2nd rounder, the other a 3rd and the other a 6th rounder. This board has picked DE talent better than the Bills GMs over the last 20 years. Bills fans picked Ngata over Whitner and many other head scratchers too numerous to begin. Warner obviously sucked too... the GMs hated him. And then after his injury to this thumb he obviously wasn't good enough for Matt Lienart so he was a backup. Ahhh... right. The whole argument of GM collectivism is so incredibly shallow of an argument. The talent in the XFL isn't bad and if a guy shines there he would be a stud in college today so why not see if he could a contributor on a roster?

You couldn't make up the last name of a guy who Schatz on other teams for a living.

I tried once, but it wasn't as fun.

Not to be a wet blanket but we've never seen this team tested against better teams and consistently score points. Until then don't get all amped up. Notice I didn't say "win" as that can be luck, turn-overs, bad call, or things not in the cards on a given day. Our defense should be good enough to win more than we lose if we can score. The league is not a defensive league anymore. Watch DeAndre Hopkins against Tre in the playoffs and you'll see the advantages WR have over CBs in the league. Tre played a great game but a great WR/QB combo will always win nowadays if they get pass protection.

Wouldn't it be... Great No one Good Cole Beasley John Brown Potentially good Knox Neutral McKensie Duke Williams Bad The Rest (not sold on Foster at all) The problem is there isn't anyone great, just some guys that are good. That's my view anyways.

Yes they are all getting sundays without cherries on the top and they have to use smaller spoons. Biggest joke in sports.

They're at 70% until they can prove they can field a competent offense. Defense they get 95% approval and offense 45%. Loved the Singletary pick and the WRs from last FA. We just need a true #1 but Beane says he doesn't believe in #1s (sigh)

We tried he wouldn't fit in the locker room.

It's getting to the point where everyone who is not in some form of empathetic job will struggle with employment in the next 20-25 years. The reactive changes to the future of the economy from automation will mean a lot of professions and degrees will be futures in depression just like laborers are now. The uneducated middle-class is being forced out as labor value diminishes, but what happens when it happens to doctors and lawyers? It's coming. I use these technologies for my profession, they are frightening. They can do the work of journalists and financial advisors. A large number of articles you read online are written by algos, not people. The Luddite arguments have come full circle where man can't adapt to the changes too fast and complex for ordinary living. One thing is certain and that is the future is so uncertain no one can prepare for it.

Today they are. I meant in their best years from 26-32 yrs old. Dalton was the picture perfect definition of mid-tier until recently. He'll never blow you away, but he's not a back-up. I consider bottom tier rookies, 2nd year guys, older QBs or early injuries backups with extended time. Guys that show up between 12-20 year in and year out. They move around as coaches look for their chosen one. Let's for example revisit Fitz being cut. Do you think the Bills would have done better if he stayed in Buffalo and if we did draft a QB let them ride the pine until they were ready? I do.

I'm not sure I agree with that conclusions although the QBs and the history is obvious and factual. Edwards could have been more than serviceable until he went into a cocoon after the concussion. I still think what I said has not been tried which is a mid-tier pick + a vet. We've tried Vets or 1st rounders. 1st rounders IMO carry the most risk because teams feel like they are married to them or the GM gets fired. We should have had an Orton and drafted the best QB from rounds 2-5 every other year until we found one we liked. Only Peterman and Edwards fit that mold. Edwards could have been successful, but that could have happened to a 1st rounder as well. So 2 players in 24 years does not fit my argument.

I think that's true if they are coming off their rookie contract, but a mid-tier QB is 15-18/mil a year: Dalton, Keenum, FItz, et al.. I'm not sold a mid-tier talent QB on their rookie contract should be done. Dak was not mid-tier. In one of the biggest categories he's been in the top 8 for several years. I'm almost of the belief you're better off draft in the mid-tier rounds, keep a mid-tier vet and focus your attention on running and defense until you find a 2-5rd stud that you plan on extending on a huge contract.

You changed my perspective on signing him for the Cowboys. Your last few posts have been excellent. My question is can you afford to pay him and expect he keeps up that production if he swallows that much cap? I mean he's worth starter money, but the most in the league? Something has to give (o-line or good WRs) and I don't know if I believe a player like him is worth it but I guess if you have to roll the dice he's the best the Cowboys have.

You did not ask a legitimate question. You were trying to embarrass me. That's why you used the word "yet" at the end. Stop pretending you're 6. Let me give you an example so it makes it easier for you to understand you weren't asking anything legitimate. Did you learn to behave yet? Do you know the difference between a legitimate question and being arrogant yet? Now of course I would never say those things to you. That's just a demonstration your question wasn't legit. Of course I know the difference between a QB and a passer. You built a strawman like a politician would and in the end you'll make a conclusion I never intended or said, but somehow you're right no matter what. Congrats you win!!!

Of course I don't believe there is an orthodoxy that one must hold, I meant it solely towards the people who come flame-throwing with Allen. It was my way of saying "Calm down" with some sarcasm. Lalochezia was just hyperbole and a little fun with you. Glad you enjoyed the word and I hope you had a nice day.

Reef asked a question. I answered it. As to the rodomontade (not "roto") I'm not looking for sympathy. I expressed my view, got flamed, and I was responding back in the same sarcasm shown to me. No biggie. Since we're in the mood to use esoteric Italian words why is it some people can use lalochezia towards people they disagree with and that is not an agenda but if I use a little sarcasm its rodomontade?

In the same way you haven't figured out what a competent QB even looks like.