jumbalaya Posted September 30, 2014 Posted September 30, 2014 Da'rick is now qualified to be the owner of the Colts.
Kirby Jackson Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 And that's the rub. Didn't Da'Rick get booted after his sophomore season? In that case, there should have been a slew of either top tier or bottom tier Division I programs vying to grab him for the senior year if there were no concerns. Yet he was nowhere on the radar. So, this discussion is only about Da'Rick being an idiot and not about Bills unwilling to give a shot to a kid with a checkered past. Maybe Stevie, Kiko and Duke can send a shout out to this thread. He went to the draft the next year instead of another D1 school. He was considered a 3rd round or better prospect. I too am going to let the topic die. I hope that everyone knows though that this conversation really has nothing to do with Da'Rick. If you read the comments it is about a type of player instead of a specific player.
NoSaint Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 And that's the rub. Didn't Da'Rick get booted after his sophomore season? In that case, there should have been a slew of either top tier or bottom tier Division I programs vying to grab him for the senior year if there were no concerns. Yet he was nowhere on the radar. So, this discussion is only about Da'Rick being an idiot and not about Bills unwilling to give a shot to a kid with a checkered past. Maybe Stevie, Kiko and Duke can send a shout out to this thread. He was declaring for the draft so no need to fight to recruit him? Just as Janoris Jenkins didn't have teams lining up. Because he declared for the draft, for example. Or Robert Quinn, as another noteworthy one (though he decided to simply sit out the year instead of going to a low tier program. The thread/discussion can be whatever you want- go nuts man. I stated my opinion pretty coherently. Some agree, some disagree- your side stated it pretty clearly too.... I'm about ready to bow out again though. As fun as it was the first 47 times, I'm cool with my contributions today and moving on for a bit. For his own sake I hope he grows up, even if he's burned his last nfl bridge. He went to the draft the next year instead of another D1 school. He was considered a 3rd round or better prospect. I too am going to let the topic die. I hope that everyone knows though that this conversation really has nothing to do with Da'Rick. If you read the comments it is about a type of player instead of a specific player. Yup - darick just happened to be the one we had. Heck, doesn't even have to be a wr- though their shared position made the comparison easier.
Andrew Son Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 How does everyone seem to know that Hogan has limited upside? Because he's white? To me he seems very athletic and he took up football late, he was a lacrosse player. Is it not possible that his athletic upside is even higher than Rogers? This whole conversation is very strange to me...
NoSaint Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 How does everyone seem to know that Hogan has limited upside? Because he's white? To me he seems very athletic and he took up football late, he was a lacrosse player. Is it not possible that his athletic upside is even higher than Rogers? This whole conversation is very strange to me... Because he turns 27 in 3 weeks and has 22 catches since high school.
GG Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 He went to the draft the next year instead of another D1 school. He was considered a 3rd round or better prospect. I too am going to let the topic die. I hope that everyone knows though that this conversation really has nothing to do with Da'Rick. If you read the comments it is about a type of player instead of a specific player. But that's where your argument falls apart. You're arguments have been all about Da'Rick and not about the type of player, because after cutting Da'Rick, Bills brought in Tommy Streeter and then experimented with Ramses Barden. All these guys were to fill that specific type of receiver. Your argument also runs in the face of reality that NFL teams, including the Bills, always give an opportunity to talented but troubled players. It's how Jason Peters and Vontaze Burficts make it to the Pro-Bowl. It's how Stefan Charles and Corbin Bryant make the squad, or the undersized Robey can contribute. The difference between those guys and Da'Rick is that the non-idiots recognize the opportunity and take advantage. So it's a red herring for you to now claim that the argument is about a player position rather than a particular player, when Bills have consistently been experimenting with that type of player in their try outs. It's not their fault Da'Rick is choosing to waste his talents away. And Da'Rick's competition wasn't Hogan, in reality it was TJ Graham. And each team has a need for a Hogan or Ruvel Martin, who are willing to do the dirty work that prima dona WRs woudn't be caught dead doing.
MRW Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 He went to the draft the next year instead of another D1 school. He was considered a 3rd round or better prospect. I too am going to let the topic die. I hope that everyone knows though that this conversation really has nothing to do with Da'Rick. If you read the comments it is about a type of player instead of a specific player. But I have to chime in here and agree with those who say that the Bills have brought in this type of player repeatedly. You can say it's not about the particular player but when your criticism hinges on the team cutting that particular player, it rings a little hollow. I mean, haven't subsequent events shown that the Bills in fact exercised good judgment in this case? Giving guys a shot doesn't mean keeping them no matter what.
NoSaint Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 But I have to chime in here and agree with those who say that the Bills have brought in this type of player repeatedly. You can say it's not about the particular player but when your criticism hinges on the team cutting that particular player, it rings a little hollow. I mean, haven't subsequent events shown that the Bills in fact exercised good judgment in this case? Giving guys a shot doesn't mean keeping them no matter what. He's addressed that, more than once. It's a discussion of opinion, and you simply fall on the other side. its to the point that no convincing is going to happen and both sides have been argued pretty extensively, and done their justice.
Kirby Jackson Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) He's addressed that, more than once. It's a discussion of opinion, and you simply fall on the other side. its to the point that no convincing is going to happen and both sides have been argued pretty extensively, and done their justice. Thank you. The Bills have had a great deal of success with guys like that. There are 80+ pages addressing the topic and not the player. If there is a better alternative than you don't need to protect the spot. If you can easily find a guy comparable to the guy that you are keeping you take the chance. If you need the spot you don't have that luxury. Specific to Da'Rick they didn't have a guy worth protecting in Hogan. He has produced as I suspected that he would when the decision initially bothered me. If Da'Rick did what he did this week you could have (and should have) released him. At that point you could have added Hogan, Graham, Kaufman, Roosevelt or Elliot (whichever you liked the most). None of their contributions would be all that different. Edited October 1, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
FireChan Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Who was worth more putting on a roster? Seantrel Henderson or Naaman Roosevelt?
Kirby Jackson Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Who was worth more putting on a roster? Seantrel Henderson or Naaman Roosevelt? I don't know if this is directed at me but Seantrel would have been someone in the same boat as Da'Rick IMO. Ironically, Cyrus ended up in that spot. I would much rather either of those guys than Legursky or Sam Young types though. If Cyrus is as bad as he looked you can always fill spots with those other types.
FireChan Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 I don't know if this is directed at me but Seantrel would have been someone in the same boat as Da'Rick IMO. Ironically, Cyrus ended up in that spot. I would much rather either of those guys than Legursky or Sam Young types though. If Cyrus is as bad as he looked you can always fill spots with those other types. I know, that was my point. Big upside guys.
GG Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 How does Seantrel support your argument? Bills took a chance on a kid with issues and he rewarded them with stellar play and a starting job. Meanwhile the sucky second rounder is riding the pine. There aren't enough guys who have the right combination of ability and mental stability to play in the league, so lunch pail types give you a much lower downside until you land the good player. BTW, any reason you bring Sam Young and Tim Anderson into the discussion? Tim Legursky? Chris Hogan? I think there's a developing pattern of the "a type of player" that you don't seem to like on the Bills.
NoSaint Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) How does Seantrel support your argument? Bills took a chance on a kid with issues and he rewarded them with stellar play and a starting job. Meanwhile the sucky second rounder is riding the pine. There aren't enough guys who have the right combination of ability and mental stability to play in the league, so lunch pail types give you a much lower downside until you land the good player. BTW, any reason you bring Sam Young and Tim Anderson into the discussion? Tim Legursky? Chris Hogan? I think there's a developing pattern of the "a type of player" that you don't seem to like on the Bills. Are you implying the white type? Cause I think he is pointing at the "if cut would still be free agents in October" type And seantrel isn't his argument, ck is at this point... Because his point is about untapped upside or excelling in a role vs a dime a dozen talent.... Character issues aren't the core at all really, though they could be in an individual situation I suspect all you want to hear is "you win"" though Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint
GG Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Are you implying the white type? Cause I think he is pointing at the "if cut would still be free agents in October" type And seantrel isn't his argument, ck is at this point... Because his point is about untapped upside or excelling in a role vs a dime a dozen talent.... Character issues aren't the core at all really, though they could be in an individual situation I suspect all you want to hear is "you win"" though Why bring up a guy who hasn't suited up for a decade? And no, I'm not here for the win. I'm here to illustrate the fallacy in the argument and the twist it took since Da'Rick did the inevitable. It was never about the type of player, it was always about Da'Rick. Because no matter how many times it was pointed out that Da'Rick couldn't beat out Kevin Elliott, Brandon Kaufman and Chris Hogan, the argument always came back to Hogan.
HalftimeAdjustment Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Since people are bringing up unrelated players, I propose a roster spot comparison: Tim Tebow vs Chris Hogan. Who is more likely to help the team? Who has more 'upside'?
IDBillzFan Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 All this talk about Da'Rick and no one commenting on the Jets signing TJ Graham?
Nitro Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Darick, as he was called by local media here in Indy, displayed the talent that Bills fans saw in training camp. He also showed the immaturity and bad judgement. Pagano had him on a short leash. Darick knew that the was under a microscope and he screwed up. The kid needs to grow up or he will be a "should have, could have but didn't" player.
Kirby Jackson Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Why bring up a guy who hasn't suited up for a decade? And no, I'm not here for the win. I'm here to illustrate the fallacy in the argument and the twist it took since Da'Rick did the inevitable. It was never about the type of player, it was always about Da'Rick. Because no matter how many times it was pointed out that Da'Rick couldn't beat out Kevin Elliott, Brandon Kaufman and Chris Hogan, the argument always came back to Hogan. It came back to him because he got the spot and predictably hasn't done anything. It could have just as easily been about Barden (who has actually done something in the league) or Ruvell Martin or Derek Hagan. CH has as many catches as me this year. If you want to go back through the 80+ pages and count how many times last year before anyone had played a game the point was made that it isn't the specific player go for it. There is plenty of that in there.
zazie Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Da'Rick is their secret weapon. They will keep him non active until at least mid-season then give him a game as a change of pace guy and he will get 100+yds and a touchdown. Then nothing again for the rest of the season. If that happens (happened last year) he is better than Mr. Hogan.
Recommended Posts