JohnC

I would grade his play as a C- to D. And I'm being generous. He struggled but you learn by playing. I'll be interested to see how he does by the second half of the season.

I'm still mystified with the cutting of Jonathan Williams. Given what we got at the position it makes no sense. The referee who called an unsportsmanlike penalty on Von Miller should be fired. That was one of the most ridiculous and weird calls that I have ever witnessed. The Bills benefited by that bizarre call but it was a disgrace. There was a holding call made against Incognito when pulling in which McCoy made a big play. The replay showed that it was such a negligible transgression when the back was well past the line that it bordered on being a phantom call. The erratic officiating is killing the game. It makes the game tough to watch because there is little continuity due to so many stoppages of play. Virgil, Great analysis and summarization.

Airline mileage credits.

You are not stating the truth--you are stating your opinion. That's fine. Just do it on a forum that is a more appropriate platform. Very often the people who are the most righteous and outraged are the most intolerant.

He's a qb who looks the part. It just seems that something is missing. Maybe a change of scenery will give him a fresh start. Marrone is not the type of coach known for his nurturing of players, especially qbs. The Rams coach made it a priority to put Goff in the best situation to succeed. Marrone is the type of coach who when frustrated tightens the screws and adds pressure.

Without good qb play there is a numbing sameness for all teams in that excremental situation.

Goff was a rookie who was overwhelmed on a not so good team. When he was drafted the stated intention at his drafting was that he was going to sit out the year and use it as his training redshirt year. Although he wasn't ready he was thrown into the fire. It shouldn't be a surprise that he mightily struggled. His improvement this year was dramatic because as you noted the coaching was better, the team in general was improved and he worked hard to get better. That's how it is supposed to work. No one is suggesting that having a better roster with an upgrade at a number isn't important because obviously it is. My point is simply that a legitimate franchise qb is essential for success. If you offered me Goff for a first, second and third round pick in next year's draft I would make the deal and run out of fear of being arrested for robbery.

Atlanta gave up a lot to get Julio Jones. They already had a franchise qb in place capable of taking advantage of his tremendous talents. The most important player and indispensable player on the Falcons is Matt Ryan. What changed the dynamic from being one of the most mocked and losing franchise of the fading Al Davis era to a team now in the discussion for being a SB contending team is Derek Carr, their qb. There is no doubt that Khalil Mack and Amari Cooper are elite players at their respective positions but what altered the course of that franchise was the acquisition and development of their franchise qb. The same qb that we passed on in the draft. Getting a quality qb doesn't automatically mean that a team is going to be immediately successful. The roster still needs to be upgraded and the qb still needs to develop. You are in the LA area. You are well aware that what has changed the perception of the Rams is not just the acquisition of Goff, which required trading a number of high picks, but also his development and an upgrade of the roster. The indispensable player on that team is the qb and not the scintillating talent of the traded for player from western NY. The Bills are rebuilding. There is no quick fix. What is known for sure is that until this dithering franchise does what is necessary to acquire a legitimate franchise qb this besotted franchise will continue to be irrelevant.

I am paying attention. There is always going to be a small faction of fools who viciously personalize their comments. That's simply part of the landscape. But those fools make up a small but loud chorus. They don't reflect the overwhelming majority or even minority of contrarian posters. Magnifying this group does degrade the general discussion.

You and others are creating your own boogey man to justify your position. Who hates him? Are you kidding me? When have others made that declaration. There are people who supported the trade and others who didn't. There are good/reasonable arguments for both sides of the argument. But to characterize it as unjustly hating or disliking the person is preposterous. The rebuilding Bills are going to struggle this season. That's a reality that many people are going to find difficult to handle. Placing the factions into haters and not haters is descending into the realm of foolishness. For the record I don't consider Taylor a franchise qb. I don't hate him. I understand why Watkins was traded. In fact I have stated before I am glad that he is in a better situation as a player where his impressive talents can be realized. I don't hate him. So let's stop this foolishness before it spreads like a plague and irreparably damages the board.

He was hideously wrong. He was not close to being a first round talent. Regardless of the position being evaluated it was a bad evaluation. Overall, his drafting record was average to below average. He and his staff being fired should not be a surprise. It was very warranted. It seems like the franchise never fully recovered after the firing of Polian. That was the pivot point for this lackluster franchise.

When a player dramatically gets better in his second year I'll gladly bet on that player. There are rarely guarantees but I'm confident that he is going to be a good qb. If you think otherwise that is fine.

Whatever was given up to trade for Goff was well worth it. They now have a franchise qb while after a quarter of a century we still don't. Goff is going to get better while TT is going to remain what he is. I'm not knocking him because he is the best that we currently got. But if you want to thrive you either address the qb issue or continue on the path of wrenching mediocrity. Isn't a generation long enough for you?

Clearly, what was the turning point for the Rams was not the acquisition of Watkins but the bold trade-up to get Goff the prior year. Once this team secured its franchise qb it then had many options to upgrade the rest of the roster. There is no doubt that Watkins can be an important ingredient in the turn around but what was as important (my opinion) was the upgrading of the OL. Whaley was bold in the drafting of Watkins. The problem was that he got the basic sequence backwards. He should have used his boldness to first draft a serious franchise qb before expending resources for secondary issues. The sad irony is after being fired he was asked what he would have done differently. His response: I would have put more effort in getting a qb. I'm happy for Watkins. He deserves to be in a situation where his scintillating talents can be manifested. It wasn't going to materialize in Buffalo because it has operated in a half-assssed backwards. Hopefully, in due time a smarter approach will reap rewards.

I'm not looking at the top two qbs as being necessarily attainable. However, if you consider the top five prospects as being legitimate franchise qb prospects then we should be in the running. If we don't find ourselves in position to draft a franchise qb then use the picks to bolster the roster. Let's not again be so foolish as to take the EJ first round route. Refer to post #904.

That second round pick certainly can tip the balance if the extra first round pick and third round pick are added to the deal.

Terrific post and point. The Whaley roster was built to be at best an 8-8 roster. McDermott and Beane are not attempting to build off of it but to dramatically rebuild it and restructure it cap wise. In short order they not only reshaped the defensive backfield but also restructured the cap balance in that unit. As you smartly understand there is a bigger picture that goes beyond a particular controversial transaction. It is about looking at the roster as a whole and reconfiguring it so that it is better balanced from both a talent and cap standpoint.

Someone else brought up the point regarding Watkins and his status with the Rams. Will the Rams be able to sign him to his next contract? The Rams are going to be cap squeezed if they do go out and sign him at what his market rate is. They already have contract problems with some of their best players, now and next year. I have never been a doubter over Watkins's dynamic skills but it is a legitimate issue to have doubts about his durability. It appears to me that McDermott wasn't willing to offer Watkins a yield contract and saddle his cap with a contract that would limit other player options. Gilmore and his high cost requirements was let go and replaced with a rookie player who is cheaper and more effective in his zone system. That was a good cost/benefit deal. Don't be dismissive of getting another starting CB in the Watkins deal. And if that acquired second pick is used in a deal to draft a high end qb prospect then the Watkins deal looks much better, at least in my eyes. My point here is that the Watkins deal is not such an irrational and imbalanced deal as some people are trying to portray it (not necessarily you?) Sometimes a deal is good for each party involved in the transaction because each team has different circumstances. Ask yourself if the Rams have Watkins for one year is it a good deal for them? All I'm suggesting is let's consider this deal not from a one year perspective but consider it from at least a three year perspective. You still might not agree with the deal but it should become more understandable and reasonable.

Only time will tell. If we don't come away with a franchise qb in this next draft then it doesn't matter what plan anyone has. This descent into interminable exasperation (for some) is what happens when an organization is run in a second-rate manner for more than a generation. The defensive HC that you are sneering at did a masterful job in short order of stabilizing a defense that Rex destroyed. As far as the offense goes it is an open question. You can't fix everything at once. Although I disagree with your stance and others I understand it. It certainly has merit. My feeling is taking a patchwork and incremental approach is not going to work. In order to get beyond the middle of the road level a major reworking has to take place. This is not a quick fix. I understand what is being done and I for the most part I agree with it.

I agree it is conjecture. But you have to acknowledge that being an elite receiver in Buffalo, especially with their qb situation, isn't very appealing for the receiver. More likely McDermott realized the going rate was for top tier receivers was very high and for a variety of reasons he didn't see the value.

Sammy might be a member in the "flat earth society" but from a football standpoint he isn't stupid. I'm not convinced that he wanted to be part of a roster redo. This franchise is going to go through another few years of struggles. It's not a quick fix job. When he wasn't given a contract offer it was apparent right from the beginning that he was not in the plans, and quite possibly didn't want to be in the plans for this franchise.

The Pegulas aren't being surprised at what is going on with the rebuild because that was the plan that McDermott presented when hired. There was a complete re-make of the front office and scouting department. And there have been sweeping roster changes. Without a doubt the Pegulas' are all in on this rebuild. The Pegulas have made mistakes as novice owners. But they are not stupid.

You are not using relevant comparisons when you use the Bengals and Giants as examples. Both teams had very competitive teams for a long time. Now they are on a downward slope. The Bills haven't been at a serious competitive level for a generation. The Bills are rebuilding and their time-frame of being a contending team isn't this year or next year, or maybe the year following that. As I said in a response to Scot if you look at this Watkins deal from a short-term perspective then it makes little sense. But if you look at this deal from a longer-term perspective it makes more sense, especially if the added pick is used to get a franchise qb. I'm not asking you to agree with the Watkins deal but what I'm saying is that if you consider it from a longer perspective it makes some sense. I don't agree with your comment. Getting a rookie qb on the roster doesn't necessarily mean immediate playing time or instant success. Goff is an example of that. The roster still needs to be bolstered and the new qb needs to be developed. Whether you want to admit it or not this is a McDermott rebuild. For some that is an unpalatable pill to swallow. Not for me.

You are missing the point. If you want to maximize the talents of your receivers you need a qb who can execute a well rounded offense where those receivers can thrive. I have never denied the sterling talents of Watkins. But he was never going to play to his potential here until the level of quarterbacking took a dramatic leap forward. Whaley invested a lot in maneuvering to get Watkins, a special talent. His rationale as he explained it was not only the appeal of the receiver's dynamic talents but also helping to make a limited qb more presentable. In my view that's backward thinking and limited thinking. Instead of getting a receiver to prop up a qb why not get a qb who is capable of maximizing the copious talents of a receiver. People don't want to here it but when McDermott took the job it was with the intention of significantly rebuilding not only the roster but the organization. That's why the franchise was accumulating picks. The mind-sent of McDermott isn't about getting better in one or two seasons. It was on reconstructing all aspects of the team and organization so that a few years down the road it will have a stronger foundation. When you look at the Watkins deal from a one year and more immediate time-frame it is clearly a losing proposition. But when one takes a wider perspective it makes more sense, at least to me. I'll take this more strategic approach over the patchwork approach of Whaley that got us nowhere.

Upgrading the OL has also contributed to Goff's quantum leap forward. You can't learn anything if you are besieged on every play. As for those people who are lamenting the departures of our former receiver they are missing the self-evident point: If you don't have a qb to utilize their talents are being squandered. Without a competent qb there will never be a pro level normalcy to the offense.