MRW

Not ALL Belichick. Parcells showed a talent for turning floundering franchises around even in the absence of Belichick.

I'd love to have Andy Reid as OC.

So are you satisfied if Patricia denies that he committed the crime? It doesn't seem to me that there's much to debate about a 20 year old alleged crime that was never prosecuted and that the original complainant won't discuss.

Common man, don't get so hung up on that.

Petty and Hackenburg won't be sticking around there. McCown and Bridgewater are on one-year deals. They aren't out of the draft competition by a long shot.

When did Nix move up to draft a QB?

Yes, it seems like "top QB prospect" is defined as "QB who is expected to be picked high in the draft". In which case, the argument is mostly correct, but pointless.

You've smelled some pretty bad football over the years, I bet.

I used to share this point of view. But in catching the obvious mistakes, every play has been opened up to too much scrutiny. I don't want to sit waiting for a replay review of a 15-yard catch on second down.

When instant replay was brought in to the NFL, the hope was that it could be used to eliminate egregious errors. Instead we've got refs scrutinizing every aspect of a catch down to the finest detail, coaches challenging the spot of the football, and still seemingly no end to the bad calls that determine the outcome of games. I'm coming to view it like the idea of measuring for first downs, that is, a fine level of precision based on garbage data (I always laugh when refs eyeball where the ball should be after a play, then trot out the chains, introducing more variables, then measure to the inch). I wouldn't have said this a few years ago, but maybe it's time to eliminate instant replay. Is it actually adding anything to the game, or just slowing it down?

JFC the fans of this team.

Take away the turnovers from yesterday's game and you're left with (obviously) a much closer game, but I don't think it's fair to say they won because of the turnovers. For the style of play of this team this year, if the D continues to keep points down, if they keep teams out of the endzone, they can be in virtually every game. Based on what I've seen to this point, even if the turnovers slow down they will continue to be competitive.

People need to stop overrating Watkins based on potential. Look at actual performance.

Kareem Hunt too. Even if you think a guy is a rare talent at RB I think it's tough to justify using a first round pick these days.

I hope Pegula develops superpowers.

Salary + additional guarantees + amortized cap would've exceeded the dead cap number, so on net the Bills get some cap savings.

Feeling good? I'd say it's more indifferent.

We could get the next Matt Darby!

I believe it's very possible. Dareus has been a huge disappointment to me after his great years under Pettine and Schwartz.

We could get a shot at Kyle Williams, though!

Our biggest point of disagreement probably comes down to what we think potential is worth. To me, not a whole lot, especially for a guy on his second contract, but it's an interesting thing to think about.

I dunno, I just can't get behind this. Culture is a real thing. It sends a message when a guy like Dareus is your highest-paid player and not doing squat. And I think if you kept him around you'd always be waiting for the next problem to pop up.

OK, but that changes the question, doesn't it? Isn't the decision to be made simply are we better off with Dareus, or with ~$5 million cap space this year, $2 million next, a 6th round pick, and no further obligation? I don't see how the dead cap number is relevant.

Albert Haynesworth was a Pro Bowl DT back in the day. Did Washington make a mistake when they cut him?

I thought that, even taking dead cap into account, we are getting small to modest net cap savings this year and next. Are those numbers wrong or am I misunderstanding?