Billshank Redemption Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 Before the season he told us to get ready for luck, he was just on ESPN saying how Flacco is an "elite" qb with Brees, Brady, and Rodgers, I can't stand this guy he's so inept its ridiculous
zevo Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 If he did say this.....he should never be taken seriously ever again
dollars 2 donuts Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 (edited) Before the season he told us to get ready for luck, he was just on ESPN saying how Flacco is an "elite" qb with Brees, Brady, and Rodgers, I can't stand this guy he's so inept its ridiculous I like Flacco a lot, and previously I would have said that he is headed in the "elite" QB direction, but seriously if you look at this guys body of work over the last couple of years he seems to have gotten worse from earlier in his career. EDIT: I'll take that back; after review and up until this year his numbers have gotten better over the years...but it just seems like he was a better QB earlier. Edited November 2, 2011 by dollars 2 donuts
Dorkington Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 I consider Flacco to at least be in the running, he's a pretty good QB, imo. Most analysts and a lot of us predicted another poor or average year for the Bills.
Realist Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 None of that sounds too off the mark. What was your Bills prediction at the beginning of the year? Most of us were saying between the 5-8 win mark, maybe not Luck potential but definitely nowhere near the playoffs (unless of course your Senator, and predicted 19-0). We were coming into the season with what was a questionable QB, a thought to be terrible OLine, a defense that couldn't stop anybody (That's still up for debate). I can definitely see why he and others thought that we were capable of winning Suck for Luck. As for Flacco, up until the last couple of games he has been pretty good and heading toward great status and may turn it back around. If you don't like Clayton, don't read/watch/listen.
Captain Hindsight Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 None of that sounds too off the mark. What was your Bills prediction at the beginning of the year? Most of us were saying between the 5-8 win mark, maybe not Luck potential but definitely nowhere near the playoffs (unless of course your Senator, and predicted 19-0). We were coming into the season with what was a questionable QB, a thought to be terrible OLine, a defense that couldn't stop anybody (That's still up for debate). I can definitely see why he and others thought that we were capable of winning Suck for Luck. As for Flacco, up until the last couple of games he has been pretty good and heading toward great status and may turn it back around. If you don't like Clayton, don't read/watch/listen. I said 10-6 on draft day. Anyone that watched this team knew we werent even close to the worst team in the league at the end of last year. We added a ton of talent via the draft on the D. Clayton saw our last game when we started Brohm and made that prediction
eme123 Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 The best analysts are always the former players and coaches. They always have better insight and add more to conversations other than he's good/bad. I don't get how guys like Clayton or Jerry Sullivan make it. It must be because they can write. I have no idea. In Sullivans case he has no ability to evaluate football talent.
nucci Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 Before the season he told us to get ready for luck, he was just on ESPN saying how Flacco is an "elite" qb with Brees, Brady, and Rodgers, I can't stand this guy he's so inept its ridiculous I recommend stop listening to him.
BuffaloWest Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 Clayton still has a job because he is outrageoulsy handsome and pulls more PuzzA than you ever will! (Flacco is average, I had him on my fantasy team, and he did little to nothing-BUT he did go to Delaware- Go Fightin' Blue Hens!!!)
bruceisloose78 Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 the infamous ponytail http://deadspin.com/5481362/deadspin-i+team-is-this-john-claytons-ponytail/gallery/1
Zulu Cthulhu Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 So clayton should be singled out and fired? What about peter king? Merrill hoge? Mel kiper? Mcshay? They've all made awful predictions in the recent past. Not really fair to single out clayton.
Malazan Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 The difference between most 'analysts' and message board posters is the podium.
MattF2000 Posted November 2, 2011 Posted November 2, 2011 I agree with the OP. Clayton has no idea what's going on half the time. I felt the Bills had a good chance of getting 7 - 9 wins before the season started. Probably leaned closer to the lower number. Clayton on the other hand felt we were going to have 0 - 2 wins, had us ranked as the 31st or 32nd team in the NFL. That type of prediction was way off. Not even in the ballpark. If you look at the Bills body of work last year it was rather obvious that we couldn't be much worse than 4 - 12. We lost 4 games by a field goal to playoff teams, 3 of which were in OT. We had the benefit of drafting high and having a full year with a new coaching staff. For any expert to predict we'd be significantly worse (which 0 to 2 wins would have been) means the expert is completely out of touch with reality. Again, most of of probably didn't think we'd be doing this well but I think a lot of us that pay attention to the finer points of the team and personnel knew that we would have to improve. If nto for being in the same system and upgraded personnel than simply by the ball bouncing our way a time or two in close games when it didn't last year. Go Bills.
Koufax Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 As I say often, if you think there is any reason that Clayton knows as much about our team as most of us who follow them closely you are mistaken. NFL guys don't usually spend 32 times as much time on football as we do. And the bottom teams get very little attention and analysis. 40 hour split evenly is 1:15 per team. Think the team that hasn't made the playoffs in a decade gets the full hour and a quarter? Anybody here spend an hour and a quarter a week paying attention to this team? Anybody here realize before the season that Bell and Wood were coming off a fully healthy off season after performing pretty well coming off injuries? Leveitre was really good? Wood was moving to a position that he was better suited for, and we were obviously going to be better at RT with Green gone? And that the whole crew was on the upside of their young careers, playing together behind a returning QB, and very likely to be much stronger than people would otherwise expect? I know I did and I'm sure a bunch of you guys understood that, and I know nobody in the national media got that. Just one example of many. After some playoff appearances that might change, but for now Clayton and pals are always going to be the weathermen reporting whether it rained yesterday, but not having a clue as whether it will rain tomorrow. Go Bills.
Dr. K Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 None of that sounds too off the mark. What was your Bills prediction at the beginning of the year? Most of us were saying between the 5-8 win mark, maybe not Luck potential but definitely nowhere near the playoffs (unless of course your Senator, and predicted 19-0). We were coming into the season with what was a questionable QB, a thought to be terrible OLine, a defense that couldn't stop anybody (That's still up for debate). I can definitely see why he and others thought that we were capable of winning Suck for Luck. As for Flacco, up until the last couple of games he has been pretty good and heading toward great status and may turn it back around. If you don't like Clayton, don't read/watch/listen. I had them at 9-7 before the season started.
Mark Vader Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 I had them at 9-7 before the season started. Me too.
plenzmd1 Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 I hate Clayton as much as the next guy, and will turn the tv/radio when he comes on.I also think he is going the way of Len Pasquerelli (sp) and will not be at ESPN this time next year. Having said that, I never hold any of these guys predictions agaisnt them, just like I could give a hoot about power rankings. I will say I thought the Bills were going to be good this year, but I thought that last year and the year before that and the year before that. So I gotta discount what I think as just being a fanboy. I named my dog Fitzy last fall for christs sake..of course I thought they were onto something , Now, for all you you geniuses out there..who did you have as the dregs of the leaque? I know I was thinking San Fran, Cinci and Seatle were going to be in the lead for Suck for Luck,.333, not so a good if you were a betting man. It's the NFL, there are always surprises..I thought the Skins and Denver would compete for their divisions, I thought Miami would have a D that had them in most games and be around .500, I really and truly thought Cleveland had a chance to start 7-0 and run away with a Wildcard at least.. All I am saying is the guy is creepy and I cannot listen to him..but if any of these guys could really predict the NFL they would be in Vegas..not hammering phones for the latest injury info.
BaaadThingsMan Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 John Clayton is just mad because Berman is a Bills backer and he hates Berman
Zulu Cthulhu Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 So what's the point here? Is this just a thread where some of you can stroke your egos and point out that your season prediction is so obviously going to end up closer to reality than clayton's prediction? Are you 5? Wow you picked the bills to finish 9-7 modern day nostradamus. I called espn last night and told them to sign you up immediately.
eball Posted November 3, 2011 Posted November 3, 2011 What folks don't seem to realize is that Clayton is not a game film analyst or a particular "expert" on anything football related. He is simply a writer who has made many contacts over the years with owners, coaches, and GMs around the league (and particularly in the big markets). I suppose he has watched games (although I'm not sure). Years ago he was accurately depicted as ESPN's "resident insider" and the information he would provide was legitimate and newsworthy. Unfortunately, over the past several years either ESPN asked, or Clayton insisted, that he expand his repertoire into the realm of actual analysis and predictions. It's a horrible fit, and every time Clayton steps beyond what he's good at (i.e., reporting what others tell him) he sounds incompetent. I completely ignore him, along with most other "experts" who neither played nor coached, or who have not demonstrated a certain knowledge of the game.
Recommended Posts