Cash
-
Posts
2,910 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Cash
-
-
1 hour ago, TBBills Fan said:
Everyone seems to write off shavers, Virgil and hamper as nothing. But those guys have been putting in the work on the team. Who's to say all of them will not contribute this year?
Me.
-
Good post, @Logic! I was planning to do my own draft recap post, but it turned out to be more of a holistic "state of the roster" musing. This thread is as good a place as any for it:
Offense: I've read maybe a third of the WR discussion posts flying around right now (so like 10,000 of the 30,000 such posts), and I recently listened to Beane's 3 post-draft pressers and his testy interview with WGR. Here's where I'm at. I think Beane has a point when he points to the success numbers of last year's offense. I also think that, while he's telling the truth in the sense that he believes what he's saying, he's not telling the full truth. I think the Bills went into the draft figuring that sticking to their board would result in picking a WR by the end of round 5 or so. In Beane's Day 3 presser, he said a couple of times that they stuck to their board except at the very end. He didn't specify where that changeover happened, but at a minimum it suggests that Kaden Prather was not at the top of their board, and they specifically were drafting BWRA at that spot. And likewise, in comes Elijah Moore for a visit. Whether him or not, I expect that Beane will sign 1-2 cheap vets between now and training camp, similar to Claypool and MVS last year. There's no way they feel they're set at WR with just Shakir, Coleman, Palmer, Samuel, Shavers, and Prather. [Friends: No one else is worth listing. I'm sorry if you feel otherwise, but it's true.]
I've posted before about the need to at least try to improve on offense. The short version: 1.) Our TO rates on both sides of the ball were unsustainably high and likely to regress even if we play as well or better next year, 2.) Our offense had a serious flaw pre-Cooper and Cooper only mitigated the flaw a medium amount, and 3.) Last year our season ended when we turned the ball over on downs with a chance to take the lead late in the game. [Friends: I know the defense was worse than the offense. Two things can be true. Under the growth mindset that McBeane always preach about, you should be trying to improve both your strengths and your weaknesses.] Have we improved on offense? I think there's a chance, but only if we get tangible development from one or more of our returning young guys, OR if Joe Brady takes a leap as OC. At this point of the offseason, it looks like we will once again have a GREAT regular-season attack, which is once again vulnerable to elite defenses clogging the middle and daring us to beat them 1-on-1 on the outside. That's Good Enough (to win the Super Bowl), and that's a good thing! But I'm a little wistful because I don't think it'll be Elite. It'll take a while to know for sure, because IMO you can't tell the difference except against teams like the Eagles, Chiefs, and Ravens.
Defense: Last year's defense was bizarre. Great at forcing TOs, abysmal on 3rd down, better against the run and worse against the pass than casuals thought. Next year's should be better, but no one cares. We care about, "Will the defense be good enough to get a stop when we need one in the playoffs?" I have no idea, but I'm hoping for yes. I'm going to ignore the LBs, b/c they're basically unchanged from last year, and talk a bit about the line and secondary. First, the secondary: I love our draft additions. I feel great about our CB situation, both outside and nickel. I'm very curious to see who wins the starting safety job next to Rapp. Most people are expecting Bishop, but he showed very little promise last year. He was definitely hurt by missing camp, and McD says safety is 2nd-hardest after MLB to learn in his defense, so there are some valid excuses there. But there's also a not-crazy scenario where Bishop is just a bust, and never gets on the field by choice. I think if anyone is going to be Micah Hyde 2.0, it's probably Hancock, but I'd be shocked if he was in the mix to start in 2025. I'm intrigued by Darrick Forrest, but honestly just because of McD's past success signing Hyde and Poyer.
On to the d-line. I'm a little puzzled by and a little skeptical about the Bills' approach at DT:
Daquon Jones - 1T only
Ed Oliver - 3T only
Larry Ogunjobie - 3T primarily
TJ Sanders - per Beane's presser, 3T primarily but can/will play some 1T
Deone Walker - someone posted on his thread that he spent like 45% of snaps at 3T, 20-25% at 1T, and another 20-25% at DE or something like that
DeWayne Carter - sounds like he's switching from primarily 3T to primarily 1T - maybe full time?
We have 1 dude on the roster who has spent more time at 1T than 3T in either college or pro. That's weird. Is that a sign that the Bills are ahead of the curve, or high on their own supply? We'll find out. I'm not too worried about the run defense. They always look vulnerable against the run, and almost always wind up not being killed by the run. I think my hope/best case scenario is that we get creative in both how we line up and deploy guys. Similar to how Lorenzo Alexander was used when McD first took over, but with several guys being used like that. It sounded like that was the plan with Hoecht when he was signed, and the rookies feed into that as well from what I've read.
First impression prediction for each pick:
Hairston: Multi-year starter, potential star
Sanders: Contributes as a rookie, becomes above-average starter
Jackson: Similar career to AJ Epenesa, maybe a little better
Walker: Either turns out he just can't play in the NFL, or he becomes an impact player for us
Hancock: Makes the team; starting safety down the road
Hawes: Makes the team; 10 year career as a good blocking TE
Strong: Makes the team, core special teamer at first; maybe grows into a starter-level player
Lundt: Cut in training camp, picked up by another team
Prather: Cut in training camp, makes our practice squad, never amounts to anything in the regular season
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
@GunnerBill Thanks as always for these write-ups! I always appreciate that you stick to your guns, while still acknowledging that sometimes you're just wrong. (As is everyone.) These posts always a highlight for me.
-
1 hour ago, Warriorspikes51 said:
I've seen enough. Sign him! Of note, the last 2 highlights in the clip are deep routes (featuring bad QB play), one of which came at X against press coverage. He definitely wasn't asked to go deep much, especially last year, but it's nice to see that it went well for him at least twice in his career.
39 minutes ago, MarlinTheMagician said:I don't know. Seems like JAG to me - speedy little guy with a potentially bad attitude. He was picked slightly higher than Hamler, but they are pretty similar -- they are both very fast slots, and, admittedly, Moore is somewhat more accomplished in college (and meaningfully more in the pros). But the league valued them closely not long ago, and Hamler has put his ego on the shelf and put in two years of work to earn his way on to our team. Personally, if we feel compelled to dumpster dive for a WR, I would rather have Keenan Allen, forget the fantasy of 4.35 speed (for now), and move the chains with a proven pro like Allen. See below:
Moore’s second-round draft capital (34th overall to the Jets) reflected stronger consensus compared to Hamler’s late-second-round selection (46th overall to Denver), with scouts citing Moore’s polish and YAC ability as translatable NFL traits. Both profiled as slot-dependent receivers, but Moore’s college production against SEC competition and technical proficiency made him the safer projection.
Elijah Moore's Reputation
Recent reports suggest attitude concerns have emerged. During the 2024 season, the Browns benched Moore early in a game against the Bengals for disciplinary reasons, though specifics were undisclosed. Additionally, Reddit discussions speculate about a potential locker-room issue, with one commenter alleging a combination of "lack of skill" and "negative influence" as factors in his unsigned free-agent status.Counterpoint: KJ Hamler has 42 career NFL receptions. Only 12 of which came after his rookie year, and he's had zero NFL statistics since 2022. I don't know offhand how many PS elevations he got between us last year and the Colts in 2023, but it's pretty damning either way. (Either both teams didn't think he'd help them on the field, or he got multiple chances and did nothing with them.) Never say never, but at this point the overwhelming likelihood is that Hamler just isn't an NFL player.
Moore's lowest catch total in 4 years was 37. In 3 of his 4 pro years, Moore has caught more passes than KJ Hamler's whole career to date. Obviously there's a lot more to it than just catch totals, but it serves as a useful shorthand. There's a reason Moore is still unsigned after the draft, but he's been a viable if unspectacular player the past 4 years. There's really no comparison with where Hamler is currently at.
-
4
-
1
-
-
Are we sure he didn't mean Bill Belichick and Bill O'Brien? The 2023 Patriots were aggressively trying to trade into this draft.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, TFBillsfan said:
Agree, I’d prefer TE and RB aren’t on our draft board this year. If Jay Higgins, LB, Iowa, All American, is available in the later rounds I would love to add him to our LB group.
Oh, don't get me wrong - I'm fine with ANY position starting with our second 4th rounder. Late-round guys usually don't see the field on scrimmage downs as rookies anyway. If Terrell Davis 2.0 happens to be available in the 6th round, we'll all be thrilled if the Bills take him. We might not realize how thrilled we are until like 2027, but still.
-
55 minutes ago, Pete said:
You are sleeping on Derrick Forest. Rapp, Bishop, Damar, Lewis, Forest- Safety is deeper than DT, Edge, and WR. We need TE 3 too
RE: TE: I'm fine with Davidson as TE3 this year. I'm also fine if they draft a TE, but it's not a position I'd especially consider in rounds 2 or 3 (if we wind up with a 3). If we're in round 4 or later, and the top guy available far and away is a TE, by all means go for it. But if not, I'm very comfortable with some combo of Davidson/Gilliam/UDFA/vet bargain bin FA.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, Figster said:
When you look at some of Hairston's weaknesses like massive liability in run support this pick has allot of red flags IMO.
After watching film I just don't get it. Fast, but has trouble tracking down the football? Did we draft this guy for his personality?
Hate to be such a downer, but when I see some of our most football knowledgeable posters shying away from making any kind of determination on the pick its troubling.
Coming from one of the biggest homers on the board...
What film did you watch?
6 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:Bad shoulder or not. He's not a good tackler guys. Love him in every other area though.
I prefer things presented WITH comment, Here's a TL;DW:
- Good tackle. Hairston takes perfect position, ballcarrier squares up and tries to truck-stick, Hairston brings him down for a solo tackle. 2-yard gain.
- Bad tackle. Hairston takes okay position but gets juked as the ballcarrier is coming through the hole.
- Good tackle. Hairston comes up in run support, maintains his gap/assignment instead of chasing after the ball, and the cutback brings the ballcarrier right to him. Along with a teammate, brings the ballcarrier down for a short gain, and one of them forced a fumble.
- Bad tackle. I thought this was gonna be a highlight until the runner juked Hairston out of his shoes. Hairston came up beautifully to shut down the run; just didn't finish.
- Good tackle. Hairston comes up, keeps the runner from getting to the edge, and works in tandem with a teammate to bring the runner down for a short gain.
- Good tackle. Receiver is hit almost as soon as he catches the ball and gets 0 RAC. I don't know if they gave him the first down on forward progress at the moment of the catch, or if they thought the WR was taking himself backwards and marked him short.
- Bad tackle. Hairston got himself a bit out of position at the catch and the receiver took advantage. Hairston had a slim chance at a shoestring tackle but didn't convert.
- Bad tackle. Hairston was in the right place at the right time, but got royally stiff-armed.
- Bad tackle, but not that bad. Hairston came up for what would've been a really nice stop, and got his hands on the runner, but they slipped off via a spin move. I rate this not that bad because Hairston still slowed down the runner enough to let a teammate come in and save the TD.
- Bad tackle. Hairston was way off the receiver at the catch and overpursued to try to limit RAC. Receiver made a nice move and burned Hairston.
- Good tackle. Great solo tackle in space; ballcarrier never had a chance. Short gain on the play.
- Good tackle, but not that good. Not that good because it was the opposite of #10 above - Hairston waited for the receiver to come to him. Once he did, Hairston made a nice tackle, but it was like 12 yards down the field.
- Bad tackle, but not that bad. Very similar to #4 above, to the point where I had to rewind to make sure it wasn't a repeat. This one was a little better than #4 because Hairston did get hands on the ballcarrier and impede his progress, which helped his teammates finish the tackle.
- Good tackle. Came off his initial man in coverage, picked up the checkdown, and made another nice solo tackle in space.
- Good tackle. Receiver was trying hard to get some RAC and Hairston wasn't having it. Rode the receiver laterally, eventually brought him down with some help from teammates.
So that's 8/15 as good tackles and 7/15 as bad tackles. Definitely some room for improvement, but not cause for concern IMO.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
54 minutes ago, Prospector said:
to get who?
Shedeur Sanders, obviously. I think he can bulk up and play 1-technique.
Heading into the 2nd round, I'm looking for about what I wanted in the first: Players who will make a positive impact. If that's just 1 guy in a tradeup, I'm okay with it as long as he actually pans out. If it's 2 guys, and both of them pan out, even better. I'm hoping there'll be value at 1tech DT, but if there isn't, I won't kill the Bills for not reaching. I'd only be upset if they drafted an RB and an ILB or something like that. Anyone they draft tonight needs to be someone we can reasonably expect to see the field this year, and hopefully start at some point of their rookie deal. I don't think that's too much to ask.
My ideal Night 2 would give us a 2nd-tier 1tech, and whoever is the biggest faller at Edge or WR. I also think it's pretty likely that the Bills move up at least once, maybe twice, tonight. Gunner had 57 "2nd round worthy" prospects on his board, including borderline 2nd/3rd grades. If the Bills board is similar, that puts both of our picks right on the edge of where the 2nd round grades will run out. (And of course, if the last couple 2nd round graded guys are at positions where we're set this year, that's not super appealing.) Especially if we get in the range where a trade up is only going to cost us one of our 5th rounders or something like that.
-
21 hours ago, H2o said:
Leon?
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, mannc said:
Would your opinion change if I told you the Dolphins were able to snag him at 13?
In that case, I think he's the steal of the draft!
-
1
-
-
28 minutes ago, Logic said:
For me it's the Browns-Jags trade.
On the one hand, I understand it for the Browns. They get to add a blue chip type DL talent this year and then position themselves for a QB next year in what should be a pretty good QB draft.
On the other hand, I sort of DON'T understand it for the Browns. Your fans need hope. You need to sell tickets. You have a generational guy sitting there for the taking (that word is thrown around too much, but Hunter really IS generational)...and you decide to pass on him. If I was a Browns fan this morning, I'd feel very mixed. I'd understand what they're up to and be maybe more hopeful for the future, but I'd also be wondering "did I just trade away the rights to a first ballot Hall of Famer?"
As for the Jags...it's rare to see a team give up a future 1st to move up for a non-QB. That said, their GM called Hunter "a player that could change the sport", and I can't really disagree with him. Hunter is the type of talent worth gambling on. Furthermore, the single biggest factor in whether the Jags will turn the corner is the success of Trevor Lawrence. Giving him a BTJ/Hunter duo is the best thing they POSSIBLY could've done to set him up for success.
Wild trade. Fun trade. Can't wait to see Hunter on an NFL field.Yeah, even though I'm usually on the side of "trade down, especially if you can get next year's #1", I find myself liking this trade for the Jaguars. Let's face it: they've been pretty irrelevant for a while now. Hunter gives them a legitimate star who is incredibly cool, and he's happy to be there! At a minimum, he's going to sell a lot of jerseys, get the Jaguars mentioned in national media, and inspire a medium number of kids to become Jags fans. (Only a medium number because kids tend to like winners first, then cool players on 8-9 teams second.)
I totally get the arguments that you should never pay up that kind of price for a non-QB, but no rule is going to be right 100% of the time in something as complex as the draft. Hunter looks like a special player, and by definition there aren't a lot of those floating around.
-
28 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:
I don't believe that Hairston performed any of the agility drills so I think this would make his true RAS incomplete.
That said if you watch his combine workout, it's obvious that you're watching an elite athlete with agility in at least the 90th percentile.
Thank you. In general, I'm really sick of these partial-testing "RAS" numbers being thrown around. The agility drills are there to measure a major part of a prospect's athletic profile. If a guy skips them, we don't really know his RAS, because the agility numbers are a significant component of RAS. Good grief!
Now, speaking of Hairston specifically, I don't care what his real RAS would be, because he's very clearly a premier athlete when you see his combine workout or game highlights. Dude is both quick and fast, changes direction well, and looks super fluid. Some guys run track much better than they run football, and their 40 times are usually misleading. Hairston's highlights look like a guy with 4.28 speed.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Just now, HappyDays said:
I also want to mention how pleased I am with the rest of the AFCE draft picks. A guard, a RT, and a run stuffing 2 down DT. None of these picks scare me in the slightest.
I like Grant a lot - I think there's value in a guy that size who moves that well - but at #12 he's pretty underwhelming. The o-line picks are fine, but yeah not scary at all. I'll give Campbell the benefit of the doubt that he'll be a solid LT, but even then, meh.
-
1
-
-
Some quotes I enjoyed from Mike Tanier's pre-draft writeup on Hairston (emphasis mine):
QuoteAgainst Georgia early last season, Hairston was targeted four times in 27 coverage snaps, allowing just one 13-yard reception.
When he returned from injury late in the season against Texas, Hairston allowed two catches on four targets while on the field for 32 coverage snaps. He recorded two passes defensed in the end zone, one by outjumping Isaiah Bond (perhaps with a wee smidge of contact) and swatting a potential touchdown away.
Hairston handles man coverage well but is at his best in underneath zones, where he can jump routes, blow up screens and hold his own in run support. But his tape mostly shows a cornerback dropping back over and over again while quarterbacks look for open receivers on the opposite side of the field. That’s often a sign the cornerback you are watching is really good.
I'm very encouraged!
-
1
-
2
-
-
27 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
This is why I loved him as a prospect. The main complaint fans have had about McDermott's defense is we play too far off and give up easy underneath completions which lets elite QBs dink and dunk us to death. In Hairston you add a player that as you said can eat up all of that space in a flash and break on the ball. We haven't had a CB with close to his speed and hip fluidity... I'm really excited to see that skill set in McDermott's defense and I expect it to immediately improve our 3rd down conversion percentage.
Big agree. Hairston's speed helps 2 ways: If he's playing off coverage, he can still close lightning-fast to either pick it off, break it up, or at least limit RAC to nothing. Conversely, he can press at the line, and know that even if he gets beat, he has the wheel to recover and still make a play on the ball.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:
I never am a student of the draft, but my view of the Bills needs was the same as you. I wasn't desperate to get a high end corner, in part because McBeane have done so well putting solid corners on the field without spending a lot on them.
But I also agree with you that if Hairston can start, the Bills have a very nice corner room. Of course, a few years ago I was typing "If Elam can start," and we know how that went. It isn't easy to play the corner the way McDermott wants it played.
I wound up talking myself into wanting a CB with our first pick - unless someone like Golden or one of the pass rushers fell, or maybe if Malaki Starks fell. #1 thing I wanted was a player who will make a positive impact. I think Hairston has a great chance to do that. I also don't mind that only Hunter and Barron went before him. The Bills can say whatever they want, but they clearly had McDuffie ranked over Elam back then, and if they'd beat the Chiefs to the punch that would've been a great pick.
For me, I keep coming back to the most killer stat from the end of last season - Mahomes averaging something like 2.5 seconds to get the ball out. Put simply, there is no pass rush that's going to consistently get to the QB that fast. That's not to say I'm against fortifying the d-line, because I am. There's all kinds of benefits to having a great d-line. But we could've brought in 2007 Giants d-line via a time machine, and it wouldn't have made a difference in that game.
-
1
-
-
On 3/3/2025 at 5:48 PM, HappyDays said:
I agree which is why I'm hoping he gets drafted sooner. A 1T in the 1st round would be extremely underwhelming.
I find myself going back and forth between agreeing with this, but then also wanting a 1T in the first round, because I think a really good one would significantly help our defense. Intellectually/on paper, it does make the most sense to target the premium position in the first (CB, Edge, or WR), and wait on a 1T. But I also worry we're going to wind up missing out on the prospects who can contribute as rookies, and wind up with a developmental guy in the 5th or something. The idea of rolling out Jones and Carter as our gameday 1T rotation makes me nervous.
-
10 hours ago, Virgil said:
Just listened to the first half and I have some thoughts
-whoever’s phone kept buzzing, block them
-after 5 min of hearing that British accent, I became pregnant
Honestly, great job and super well done.
Yes, the phone buzzing was my only complaint. It was a really good listen, and here's hoping @gonzo1105 and @GunnerBill make this a tradition!
-
2
-
-
10 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:
Just to recap, as I fought this fight. Warren Moon was better. Dan Marino would have won multiple Super Bowls with this team. Jim wasn't a leader, if he was he wouldn't have partied before the Super Bowls.
Yeah, you make a fair point there. Definitely a ding against Kelly. But in terms of leadership during the games themselves, I completely stand by my take that Kelly>Marino, at least during the 90s Super Bowl run. I wasn't around for Marino's burst into the record books, but I was fully around for those Super Bowl years, and IMO Marino was fairly overrated during those years. (And still really good, just not as good as the hype.) Marino from that era wasn't insane like Latter Day Aaron Rodgers, but there were some similarities: phenomenally skilled passers, big egos, insisted on doing things their way, and averse to taking blame when things went wrong.
For me, probably the biggest anti-Kelly argument boils down to his playoff numbers. I don't think I ever looked at them directly before they were posted in this thread, and yeah. Even for the time, those are not great.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
If you read the thread, I said that numbers don’t compare across eras. That was the point.
At the same time, Kelly was never one of the 3, or maybe even 4, best QBs at any given time. He was the Jalen Hurts of his era (minus the Super Bowl). He led the best team in football and was a top 5ish player on that team. He won a lot. I’m REALLY struggling with people that think Kelly was so much better in his era than Hurts is in this era. If Hurts ever wins another, I’m not sure that you could reasonably rank Kelly ahead of him. Josh Allen is one of the best few players in football. Jim Kelly was never that.
As someone who was also around during those years, what's your early 90s QB list look like? I'm assuming you've got Montana & Marino (and Elway?) above Kelly most/all years, and maybe swapping in Steve Young once he became the starter in SF. Who else did you/do you have above Kelly? I'd take some but not all of Randall Cunningham's years, and maybe a couple Warren Moon years as well.
I get your point, and I think it's fine for a "hottest take" thread, but I personally think you're overcorrecting. IMO, Kelly was probably never above something like 3rd-best QB in any given season, but he was also probably in the top 5 most years. (Just going from top of my head memory here; feel free to prove me wrong.) Regarding Marino specifically - there's no real doubt that Marino was the more talented passer, but at the time and in hindsight, I'd rather have Kelly than Marino for 1988-1995 or so. Kelly was IMO the better leader, and it showed on the field. And his ability to call plays at the line as part of the no-huddle was a huge asset that doesn't show up on the stat sheet.
-
1
-
-
My draft doomsday scenario: Roger Goodell comes out, but instead of opening up the draft like usual, he says "Initiate Plan Omega". A few seconds later, my (and everyone else's) smartphone explodes, filling the room with poisonous gas. I and everyone I love are killed with no chance to say good-bye.
Option 2: We draft a running back in the first round.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Logic said:
This, respectfully, I don't agree with.
In no particular order:
Saquon Barkley
Derrick Henry
Bijan RobinsonJahmyr Gibbs
Kyren WilliamsBucky Irving
Breece Hall
Jonathan TaylorAlvin Kamara
I would take any one of those guys (age notwithstanding) over James Cook. Not to mention incoming guys like Ashton Jeanty, Omarion Hampton, Treveyon Henderson, and Kaleb Johnson.
Cook BARELY cracked 1,000 yards last year. And the reason people usually given in response to that is "well...he's in a timeshare. He's not a full time back". Right. Exactly. This is one of the reasons I don't want to pay him big money. You have to manage his load because of his size and frame.
And again, I'm maybe willing to give a big contract to a timeshare guy IF he's a great pass catcher and third down back, but Cook is neither.
I understand the perspective of people that want to pay him, I suppose. But me? I just happen to think that so long as the o-line remains strong, we can replace his production with a Ray Davis, Ty Johnson, and a draft pick. Running back is an extremely replaceable position, and I don't see anything elite or standout enough about Cook's game to indicate to me that he's worth top five money or is a top five back.
I mostly agree with you on Cook, but I think it’s worth pushing back on a couple things. First,the comps. Kyren Williams is close but I’d take Cook. Bucky Irving is a notch below IMO. Breece Hall is way overrated and I strongly prefer Cook there. And in their primes Taylor & Kamara? Sure. Actual age/injury situation? Nope.The second thing: elite or standout aspects to Cook’s game. His combo of quickness, burst, speed, etc is unmatched on our roster now, and going back a while. He moves the needle on a lot of those stretch runs and sweeps, where he’s able to beat the defender to the corner and either get a nice gain or break off a huge run. Those same runs are often stuffed when the RB has just regular NFL speed. Cook is also (the only) home run hitter on our offense. He’s shown he’s capable of taking it to the house from anywhere if given the opportunity. A lot of his long TD runs the last couple years would’ve been 10-20 yard gains with just a “good” back.
Add in that last year he showed both willingness and ability to be a goal line back and make tough runs between the tackles, and you’ve got a really interesting player. His pass blocking and dropsies keep him from being a truly elite player, but IMO he’s still a guy that moves the needle*. How much is that worth? Probably not elite or market-setting money, which is why I’m open to letting him walk (preferably via tag & trade or at least a comp pick). But I don’t think he’s as replaceable as you’re making it out.
*I guess my player tiers are something like:
-Sucks/replacement level
-Good player but JAG
-Needle mover
-Difference maker/elite
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
That’s fair and a much more eloquent way of saying what I was trying to get at. 🤣🤣 CB, they need a starter. They have a few other spots, DL & WR where they rotate and have different packages. They need, at least a guy at each of those positions that plays regular snaps. It doesn’t need to be 80% or anything like that but should contribute immediately.
Yeah, think contributor more than starter, and I think most of us are on the same page. A WR or d-lineman who plays significant snaps off the bench would fit the mold.-
1
-
Bills First Rnd pick in 2025 draft: Maxwell Hairston - CB - Kentucky
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I think maybe sometimes fans get stuck in the mode of everyone is either short or tall. Hairston is definitely not tall for a CB at 5’11; he’s average. IMO 5’9” is where you start getting into Short, and Tall starts at about 6’1”.