wnysteel Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) If you go through the thread it is not so much about the player. It is more about risk/reward and a general philosophy on how to build the entire roster. That's how we got to 8 pages. gotcha. 8 pages is a little much to read through, but understood. Edited November 15, 2013 by wnysteel
K-9 Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) I agree with everything that you said except that talent doesn't separate people. I bet that Chris Hogan works harder and has a better attitude than Dez Bryant. My point again is that with that talent (just like Jason Peters, Mike Jasper, etc...) it is worth a shot. It is not worth a shot if it is risky or costly to keep him around. When talking about the other athletes we are suggesting the same thing. It isn't about Rogers specifically to me. It is about not settling for 3s that are never going to more than 3s. Go get the guy that may be a 3 today but could turn into an 8-9. Jason Peters was an undrafted guy that was a freakish athlete for his size that went undrafted because teams didn't know what to do with him. Keeping a guy like that (especially in a rebuild) is the right decision if it means that you have to cut Sam Young or Mark Asper or David Snow for his roster spot. If he doesn't work out you can find another David Snow pretty easily. To find someone with Rogers or Peters physical skills it usually costs you an early draft pick or a big free agent contract. Getting them as undrafted guys is incredibly low risk/high reward. I don't mean to imply that physical talent doesn't separates players. Of course it does. All I'm saying is physical talent isn't enough if you are lacking in other, more important, areas. Jason Peters, for all his awesome physical skills, readily adapted to the intricacies of OL play, where it's been said you need to absorb more information than any other position next to QB. I happen to agree with that. Unfortunately, Rogers didn't show the same aptitude for his position as others have in the past. I just can't see how anyone can fault the Bills for making a decision based on that criteria. Especially when we have no idea how long it will take for the light to go on, if it ever does at all. The Bills needed to move on in their estimation. And I fully understand that. GO BILLS!!! Edited November 15, 2013 by K-9
GG Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 If you go through the thread it is not so much about the player. It is more about risk/reward and a general philosophy on how to build the entire roster. That's how we got to 8 pages. And here's another team, with a more talented offense and bad WR injuries still had that player inactive. The Bills are not in a position where they have a luxury of waiting for his light to turn on. While Hogan is a jag, he's at least contributing to the team in a positive fashion this year. You could not expect that from Rogers this year. And if the cries are about developing him on the practice squad, I can make an argument that Streeter can give you the same potential without the possible headache.
KD in CA Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 I agree with everything that you said except that talent doesn't separate people. I bet that Chris Hogan works harder and has a better attitude than Dez Bryant. My point again is that with that talent (just like Jason Peters, Mike Jasper, etc...) it is worth a shot. It is not worth a shot if it is risky or costly to keep him around. If you go through the thread it is not so much about the player. It is more about risk/reward and a general philosophy on how to build the entire roster. That's how we got to 8 pages. But they gave him a shot; he failed to take advantage of it. Had he produced on the field and been a jerk off the field (like Dez) it would be a different conversation. But that's wasn't the case. The risk/reward analysis has to include the impact on a young team of giving a roster spot to a guy who simply didn't earn it. It's easy to sweep that under the rug but it's pretty hard for a new coach to sell the players that he's creating a new attitude on the team......except for this guy over here.
K-9 Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 But they gave him a shot; he failed to take advantage of it. Had he produced on the field and been a jerk off the field (like Dez) it would be a different conversation. But that's wasn't the case. The risk/reward analysis has to include the impact on a young team of giving a roster spot to a guy who simply didn't earn it. It's easy to sweep that under the rug but it's pretty hard for a new coach to sell the players that he's creating a new attitude on the team......except for this guy over here. This is critical and why I'm surprised Marrone gave him as much time and leeway as he did. GO BILLS!!!
NoSaint Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 This is critical and why I'm surprised Marrone gave him as much time and leeway as he did. GO BILLS!!! as much time and leeway as he did? im not sure i saw the volume of offenses and total lack of production that you seem to be asserting existed. can you run through the outline of his wrong doings with the team to see if i broadly missed several of them? i recall the taunting thing at OTAs, and early camp report of him missing his spot in a drill or two (not an every day, all the drills, all the time type situation, though the reports on reports about reports seemed to make it sound much more common than i could piece together it really being), a lack of hustle on the fumble he thought to be an incomplete pass, and then comments from marrone that he seemed to be down on himself and then him being an early cut. even before the fumble or being down on himself he was already getting nearly 100% shut out of any reps. am i missing something that happened early in the process that wouldve warranted him being cut before camp? or are you saying it shouldve happened a couple days earlier when he didnt leg out the fumble?
KD in CA Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 I wish we had a prediction market on this board so we could bet on things like Rogers' future, draft busts, etc.
T master Posted November 15, 2013 Posted November 15, 2013 Well Pagano said it "A gifted rookie" It made really no sense after the fact but keeping hogan or as Hackett so loved to call him in the preseason 7-11 b/c he was supposedly always open HA the guy has done little to nothing for us this far . I would have thought that developing a "Gifted Rookie" to help turn around a failing franchise such as ours would have been a better route to go rather than keeping a guy that has been cut multiple times from other clubs.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted November 16, 2013 Posted November 16, 2013 Does anyone remember how many snaps Rogers got in special teams and how he performed? He was fighting for a roster spot correct?
CSBill Posted November 16, 2013 Posted November 16, 2013 The GREAT Rogers is inactive... Too Funny You win, #1 post of this going no where thread.
KD in CA Posted November 16, 2013 Posted November 16, 2013 Does anyone remember how many snaps Rogers got in special teams and how he performed? He was fighting for a roster spot correct? I guess that's the real question. Was he really fighting for a spot like most UDFAs do? Or did he just kinda half-ass it through camp? When it comes to which #5 WR to keep, I assume that weighs very heavily in the decision.
YoloinOhio Posted November 17, 2013 Posted November 17, 2013 I guess that's the real question. Was he really fighting for a spot like most UDFAs do? Or did he just kinda half-ass it through camp? When it comes to which #5 WR to keep, I assume that weighs very heavily in the decision. Based on the info we heard about (let alone what we didn't hear about it), I highly doubt it. A fringe player like that has to be able to contribute on ST to warrant a roster spot if they aren't showing they are good enough to pick up their main position right away. He wouldn't/couldn't do that, and I think that was a big part of the decision.
Alphadawg7 Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 (edited) So far today..3 rec, 90 yards, TD including a 69 yard TD...still 3rd quarter Edited December 8, 2013 by Alphadawg7
NoSaint Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 So far today..3 rec, 90 yards, TD including a 69 yard TD...still 3rd quarter Well, he's officially earned some looks down the stretch. We will see what he does with them.
mrags Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 We never should have cut him. Should have kept him to develop into our big WR. He's got all the tools to be the best WR we had.
26CornerBlitz Posted December 8, 2013 Author Posted December 8, 2013 We never should have cut him. Should have kept him to develop into our big WR. He's got all the tools to be the best WR we had. Yeah, but 7-11 is the answer right?
BillsClinton Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 6 rec, 107 yds and 2 TDs Not bad for his first NFL start.
26CornerBlitz Posted December 8, 2013 Author Posted December 8, 2013 6 rec, 107 yds and 2 TDs Not bad for his first NFL start. Who cares? He didn't cover any today kicks the way Hogan can.
Jerry Jabber Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 The Bills kept Graham & Hogan over this guy? Another bonehead move...
KOKBILLS Posted December 8, 2013 Posted December 8, 2013 We never should have cut him. Should have kept him to develop into our big WR. He's got all the tools to be the best WR we had. Exactly...Like many here commented in Training Camp you kept a player with a limited upside over a guy with a high ceiling on a team that is young and looking to build together anyway...I swear you could see this coming a mile away...Not so much that Rogers was going to turn into a superstar or anything like that...But instead the Bills were faced with a key roster decision, and made the wrong one...That you just had to expect would happen...
Recommended Posts