Da'Rick watch 2014

[GG]

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.

 

Except that it was about a specific player, because offering up the example of Mount Jasper doesn't really help your point.

 

Who are all these superior players that Bills abandoned and gave the roster spots to the lunch pails?

[NoSaint]

 

 

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.

delicate sidestep of not directly answering the "are you implying he doesnt like white players" issue.

 

Hogan made the team. So hogan is the only one we can say beat him out for the roster spot (or factually say beat him). Additionally, neither one if us has changed our stance based on the new info, because the new info really doesn't matter in the way we looked at the decision.... Again the worst case scenario was we cut him this week and sign any of those free agent receivers which was part of the plan in our original argument of the worst case scenario really not mattering.

 

It's again a simple argument that you simply don't agree with. I assure you, I grasp all the arguments you are making and simply disagree.

 

So..... You're not here for the win, simply to prove our argument as wrong.....?

Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[GG]

delicate sidestep of not directly answering the "are you implying he doesnt like white players" issue.

 

Hogan made the team. So hogan is the only one we can say beat him out for the roster spot (or factually say beat him). Additionally, neither one if us has changed our stance based on the new info, because the new info really doesn't matter in the way we looked at the decision.... Again the worst case scenario was we cut him this week and sign any of those free agent receivers which was part of the plan in our original argument of the worst case scenario really not mattering.

 

It's again a simple argument that you simply don't agree with. I assure you, I grasp all the arguments you are making and simply disagree.

 

So..... You're not here for the win, simply to prove our argument as wrong.....?

 

I disagree with the argument because it's taken many turns and you & Kirby can't backslide into the position that the argument was never about a specific player but about a type of player, because the history of developing players says otherwise. The basic fact that Jasper even enters the discussion makes the point irrelevant. Where are all the instances of Bills giving up on a talented player too soon. Which budding All-Pro did the Bills cut to give Tim Anderson a spot?

 

Bills & all NFL teams always give much more leeway to supertalented athletic freaks than they do to jags. That has always been the case and always will. The only thing they ask in return is that those players abide by the team rules. If Da'Rick didn't have his talent, Marrone would have cut him the day after he preened over Brooks after making a catch. That's why this is about Da'Rick and not the player type.

[NoSaint]

 

 

I disagree with the argument because it's taken many turns and you & Kirby can't backslide into the position that the argument was never about a specific player but about a type of player, because the history of developing players says otherwise. The basic fact that Jasper even enters the discussion makes the point irrelevant. Where are all the instances of Bills giving up on a talented player too soon. Which budding All-Pro did the Bills cut to give Tim Anderson a spot?

 

Bills & all NFL teams always give much more leeway to supertalented athletic freaks than they do to jags. That has always been the case and always will. The only thing they ask in return is that those players abide by the team rules. If Da'Rick didn't have his talent, Marrone would have cut him the day after he preened over Brooks after making a catch. That's why this is about Da'Rick and not the player type.

 

 

you win.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

I disagree with the argument because it's taken many turns and you & Kirby can't backslide into the position that the argument was never about a specific player but about a type of player, because the history of developing players says otherwise. The basic fact that Jasper even enters the discussion makes the point irrelevant. Where are all the instances of Bills giving up on a talented player too soon. Which budding All-Pro did the Bills cut to give Tim Anderson a spot?

 

Bills & all NFL teams always give much more leeway to supertalented athletic freaks than they do to jags. That has always been the case and always will. The only thing they ask in return is that those players abide by the team rules. If Da'Rick didn't have his talent, Marrone would have cut him the day after he preened over Brooks after making a catch. That's why this is about Da'Rick and not the player type.

Jasper was an example to deliberatly not look like we were cherry picking guys like Peters and saying that every player works out. The point was (and always has been) if you don't have another viable option you roll the dice on a guy that can develop into a starting caliber player. If he doesn't develop and you need that spot you can release him at anytime and pick up some street free agent that is no different from the guys that you are keeping.

 

Jasper is a perfect example. He is a 400lb guy that is a great athlete with no football experience. If you can develop him you may have an all-pro on your hands. If you can't you cut him and sign Corbin Bryant. Is Corbin Bryant ever going to be that much different from Landon Cohen? If he isn't than you don't need to save a spot for him.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

delicate sidestep of not directly answering the "are you implying he doesnt like white players" issue.

 

Am I being accused of reverse racism? That's odd as I am white. Oh well.

 

It's not that I don't like white players I don't like bad players. It just so happens that over the last few years the majority of the Bills bad players have been white: Moorman, Hogan, Legursky, Brown, Lee Smith and to a lesser extent Pears. Don't get it twisted though EJ, Chris Williams, Dickerson, Graham, Kouandjio and Gragg have all been bad as well.

[GG]

Jasper was an example to deliberatly not look like we were cherry picking guys like Peters and saying that every player works out. The point was (and always has been) if you don't have another viable option you roll the dice on a guy that can develop into a starting caliber player. If he doesn't develop and you need that spot you can release him at anytime and pick up some street free agent that is no different from the guys that you are keeping.

 

Jasper is a perfect example. He is a 400lb guy that is a great athlete with no football experience. If you can develop him you may have an all-pro on your hands. If you can't you cut him and sign Corbin Bryant. Is Corbin Bryant ever going to be that much different from Landon Cohen? If he isn't than you don't need to save a spot for him.

 

If the roster size was unlimited, that strategy could work. But as in any organization, there are limitations and teams have to make trade offs. But even without that limitation, there are very limited cases where a long shot became a contributor, and in each one of those cases, the long shot proved himself when the opportunity arose and earned the right to live another day on the roster. That's what separates Da'Rick from the "type of player" you're arguing about.

 

Jasper is the perfect example. Who cares that he was 400lbs? You were tantalized by his dominance at Div III, but he couldn't get by scrub OLs in NFL camps. At a certain point, the long shot player has to show a special skill that catches a coach's eye. What did Jasper ever do to merit a second look? How much precious development time do you want to give a guy who couldn't get by a Mark Asper in camp?

 

The NFL has a fairly good vetting process. It is very rare for a guy to slide under the radar on his way to the active roster. Teams always experiment with unknown guys with super athletic ability, but rarely does that pay off (outside big body power forwards turning into TEs)

 

Funny that you pick on Hogan, as he's the poster child for a team project. Because with only a handful of football games in college, he has made enough plays against NFL scrubs in preseason to warrant more time & investment. Something that Da'Rick & Jasper couldn't do.

[NoSaint]

At a certain point, the long shot player has to show a special skill that catches a coach's eye.

 

and kirby and i dont see hogans special skill. we did see a special skill in rogers. thats all this ultimately comes down to. you can window dress it with as much as you want. you saw it the other way around. not a big deal.

[GG]

and kirby and i dont see hogans special skill. we did see a special skill in rogers. thats all this ultimately comes down to. you can window dress it with as much as you want. you saw it the other way around. not a big deal.

 

And that's why the discussion was about Da'Rick, and not a player type. Everyone saw the special skill in him, including NFL scouts & coaches. Everyone else also saw the red flags, crappy effort and attitude. That was the reason he got bounced. Nothing more, nothing else.

[NoSaint]

 

 

And that's why the discussion was about Da'Rick, and not a player type. Everyone saw the special skill in him, including NFL scouts & coaches. Everyone else also saw the red flags, crappy effort and attitude. That was the reason he got bounced. Nothing more, nothing else.

 

right, but we are saying its not solely him because it couldve been a number of other skills or upsides. it didnt even just have to be a WR to take that spot. darick just happened to be the guy that was here. instead we kept hogan. so in that sense, that darick is our favorite option to have potentially become a good starter of the 30 guys cut, it happens to be about him.

 

i cant figure out a different way to explain to you that we see the red flags, and understood that this weeks incident was possible (if not likely). you have made the point repeatedly, and its totally understood. im not contesting his issues, as much as you seem to be arguing that i didnt see them. those issues just dont effect our assessment of this particular move.

 

i dont get why this seems to bother you so much.

Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[jumbalaya]

Who was worth more putting on a roster? Seantrel Henderson or Naaman Roosevelt?

Weren't Seantrel's "behavoir" issues all related to pot? That means he had the same behavoir issues coming out of college as Marino and Sapp. They each slid in Rd 1 because of it. We were lucky and Seantrel slid to round 7.

[NoSaint]

 

Weren't Seantrel's "behavoir" issues all related to pot? That means he had the same behavoir issues coming out of college as Marino and Sapp. They each slid in Rd 1 because of it. We were lucky and Seantrel slid to round 7.

 

well, i think his were a little more extensive with the number of violations.... and the fact that he was so out of shape at his pro day that he couldnt even finish the workout. additionally, those guys had consistent first round film, while seantrel flashed the talent but was inconsistent with it. marino and sapp wouldve probably fallen a lot more if they had pot issues AND were overweight and unable to complete drills before the draft AND inconsistent on the field.

Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[LB3]

 

 

and kirby and i dont see hogans special skill. we did see a special skill in rogers. thats all this ultimately comes down to. you can window dress it with as much as you want. you saw it the other way around. not a big deal.

 

Honest question. I was on the Da'Rick hype train back when we first signed him based on his nice stats in his one year in Division 1 and the scouting reports that I had heard. I quickly gave up on him after seeing him in camp and preseason. What special skill do you see that every other receiver trying to make a team doesn't have? He's slower and weaker than Hogan and doesn't run good routes and couldn't learn the playbook. He also can't play special teams because his effort was poor. How is he special? It can't be his college stats, because a lot of guys have good college stats but aren't special.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

well, i think his were a little more extensive with the number of violations.... and the fact that he was so out of shape at his pro day that he couldnt even finish the workout. additionally, those guys had consistent first round film, while seantrel flashed the talent but was inconsistent with it. marino and sapp wouldve probably fallen a lot more if they had pot issues AND were overweight and unable to complete drills before the draft AND inconsistent on the field.

The irony is that Seantrel has worked even if he had the same (if not more red flags than Da'Rick). Sometimes it works out and sometimes it doesn't.

 

CK, may be the best example. If we are all about the best 53 there is no way that he earned a spot out of camp. He might not have made the beast 83. He was kept because he has some raw physical skills that may or may not ever develop. If that spot was needed for Hairston for example who can contribute then he may have been cut. If it is all about "earning it in camp," how he is on the roster?

 

 

 

Honest question. I was on the Da'Rick hype train back when we first signed him based on his nice stats in his one year in Division 1 and the scouting reports that I had heard. I quickly gave up on him after seeing him in camp and preseason. What special skill do you see that every other receiver trying to make a team doesn't have? He's slower and weaker than Hogan and doesn't run good routes and couldn't learn the playbook. He also can't play special teams because his effort was poor. How is he special? It can't be his college stats, because a lot of guys have good college stats but aren't special.

He is 6'4" and led the SEC in receiving. That's a guy that I would extend some slack to. He has produced against top level competition. He would have been on a zero tolerance leash and released after this incident. The honest question that none of you guys have answered is "how much worse off this year would the Bills have been with Graham, Elliot, Roosevelt or Kaufman than with Hogan?" If they released Rogers they could have added any of those guys this week (or potentially Hogan too of no one picked him up). It is about risk reward (not a player). If you believe that Hogan is a significant upgrade over those guys then you protect him. If you do believe that he is, based on what? NoSaint and I see that group as pretty interchangeable.

 

Seantrel came in with the same leash but his play has warranted a little more slack IMO. If he pulled a Dareus I don't think that he would be released immediately.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Kirby Jackson

[NoSaint]

 

 

Honest question. I was on the Da'Rick hype train back when we first signed him based on his nice stats in his one year in Division 1 and the scouting reports that I had heard. I quickly gave up on him after seeing him in camp and preseason. What special skill do you see that every other receiver trying to make a team doesn't have? He's slower and weaker than Hogan and doesn't run good routes and couldn't learn the playbook. He also can't play special teams because his effort was poor. How is he special? It can't be his college stats, because a lot of guys have good college stats but aren't special.

 

hes a tough physical receiver that can go up for a contested ball and win, or turn a slant into a long touchdown. He did it against top flight competition in the SEC, he allegedly was doing it in our OTAs, and he did it a few times as a colt. the next time hogan does it will be the first.

 

hogan may have more reps at the bench, and his 40 may have been quicker (less than a tenth of a second) but rogers, if you actually watch him and not just look at the stat line, can be pretty incredible. kirby and i seem to be 2 of few that actually saw that SEC season, and that may be part of why we are slower to toss him. the kid was a beast at 19, without much effort. if we (or someone else) couldve reached him, theres no reason he couldnt be a TO type of receiver.

 

i just dont see that as ever possible with hogan. he had 4 catches over 10 yards in a full season at monmouth.

Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

For kikos sake, as i think you are actually curious to see him beyond the couple colts highlights we all know

 

heres a tennessee highlight reel... big catch radius, physical, and the position seems to come natural in a way it doesnt for hogan... probably a gift and a curse:

 

the td he scores in this one about 2 weeks after joining tennessee tech, and facing a top 5 oregon team is the type of play i just dont see hogan having in his repertoire:

[GG]

right, but we are saying its not solely him because it couldve been a number of other skills or upsides. it didnt even just have to be a WR to take that spot. darick just happened to be the guy that was here. instead we kept hogan. so in that sense, that darick is our favorite option to have potentially become a good starter of the 30 guys cut, it happens to be about him.

 

i cant figure out a different way to explain to you that we see the red flags, and understood that this weeks incident was possible (if not likely). you have made the point repeatedly, and its totally understood. im not contesting his issues, as much as you seem to be arguing that i didnt see them. those issues just dont effect our assessment of this particular move.

 

i dont get why this seems to bother you so much.

 

It doesn't bother me as much as you think it does, but I do go to great lengths to point out inconsistent arguments. (Could be why I like Carolla's podcast)

 

The main reason I think your and Kirby's argument is inconsistent is that there is little evidence that shows the Bills or any other team's unwillingness to provide an opportunity to special guys who may have slipped under the radar. For starters, between the dollars invested into college recruiting, college play and NFL scouting, it's very hard for players to slip under the radar anymore. And when it happens, NFL teams do give a lot of chances to those guys.

 

The reason the Da'Rick's discussion gets under my craw is that the Bills gave him a very good opportunity and, unlike many others in his position, he completely squandered it. That's why this was not about keeping a talented, but troubled kid on the roster and developing him. This was about getting rid of a talented, but immature, disruptive and undisciplined player off the roster who would bring much more risk than reward for a first time coach.

[NoSaint]

 

 

It doesn't bother me as much as you think it does, but I do go to great lengths to point out inconsistent arguments. (Could be why I like Carolla's podcast)

 

The main reason I think your and Kirby's argument is inconsistent is that there is little evidence that shows the Bills or any other team's unwillingness to provide an opportunity to special guys who may have slipped under the radar. For starters, between the dollars invested into college recruiting, college play and NFL scouting, it's very hard for players to slip under the radar anymore. And when it happens, NFL teams do give a lot of chances to those guys.

 

The reason the Da'Rick's discussion gets under my craw is that the Bills gave him a very good opportunity and, unlike many others in his position, he completely squandered it. That's why this was not about keeping a talented, but troubled kid on the roster and developing him. This was about getting rid of a talented, but immature, disruptive and undisciplined player off the roster who would bring much more risk than reward for a first time coach.

 

As I've said at least a dozen times, I simply disagree with the risk vs reward in this particular example. You think the downside potential was worse and the upside less likely. I get it. Unless you have a new point to bring that hasn't been beaten to death in 200 pages, I'm not sure the aspirations you have for the conversation to progress to. We just have differing opinions on a situation we are each well versed in. Player evaluations are an art not a science and we have different feelings on these specific guys.

Edited October 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

It doesn't bother me as much as you think it does, but I do go to great lengths to point out inconsistent arguments. (Could be why I like Carolla's podcast)

 

The main reason I think your and Kirby's argument is inconsistent is that there is little evidence that shows the Bills or any other team's unwillingness to provide an opportunity to special guys who may have slipped under the radar. For starters, between the dollars invested into college recruiting, college play and NFL scouting, it's very hard for players to slip under the radar anymore. And when it happens, NFL teams do give a lot of chances to those guys.

 

The reason the Da'Rick's discussion gets under my craw is that the Bills gave him a very good opportunity and, unlike many others in his position, he completely squandered it. That's why this was not about keeping a talented, but troubled kid on the roster and developing him. This was about getting rid of a talented, but immature, disruptive and undisciplined player off the roster who would bring much more risk than reward for a first time coach.

To me, opportunity cost is the part that's missing. A undrafted rookie is not influencing any locker room. That's why the immature thing I dismiss. He, like Seantrel, had 1 chance to keep his nose clean.

 

It's about what the cost is to keep him vs. someone else. Use Jordan Gay so we can take this off of Rogers. The team valued a KOS over a 5th DE. Now if we lose 2 DEs they may not have that luxury and Gay could be gone. They are gambling that the value of Gay now is greater than the dropoff from Jacquies Smith to whomever they sign to fill that spot. Each decision is intertwined and a part of a larger picture. Marcus Easley isn't on the team because he is a better WR than TJ Graham. He is on the team because his value as a ST player (and WR) is deemed greater than Graham's contributions as a WR (and ST player).

 

The Rogers argument was such a hot button on here because it was this to an extreme. Here is a troubled yet incredibly talented player that filled a need. He didn't separate himself in the offseason but didn't end up arrested either. What do you do? NoSaint and I believe that you continue to try to develop him until you have a better option (Easley the ST player) or until he screws up. If you deem that Hogan is too good to pass up on then you sacrifice Da'Rick right there. We don't believe that the dropoff from Hogan to Kaufman, Elliott, Roosevelt or this year, Graham was great enough to warrant that. Hogan himself could have been available to fill that spot.

 

It would have been interesting this year to see if the last roster spot came down to Pears or Kouandjio. Do you keep the guy with all of the upside that clearly isn't ready or the solid vet that is average at best? Now Pears has ended up playing so it maybe isn't the best example but you get the point.

 

The answer to me of how long a guys chance lasts depends on what my other options are. Da'Rick is a little different in that his past factored in more than most. The 1st time that he got in trouble with the law he would have been gone. With that being said, I would have cut him this week and looked to sign someone to fill that spot. I don't think that keeping him on the roster until this week, releasing him and signing TJ Graham would have negatively effected the team for the last 15 months in any way.

Edited October 1, 2014 by Kirby Jackson

[NoSaint]

I don't think that keeping him on the roster until this week, releasing him and signing TJ Graham would have negatively effected my team for the last 15 months in anyway.

 

right - i think many are viewing his arrest as a big "gotcha" moment for those of us that wanted to keep him, but as you outlined i still dont see what the downside actually would have been. if anything, i feel more comfortable looking around at the prospects out there this week and having seen what hogan has contributed. essentially, so what if he ended up like this with us?