BobChalmers Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) His "points" aren't even logical points. They will do worse than last year - because they cut Fred Jackson? - because 2 1st round picks was too much for Watkins? - because EJ is a bust? - because 2 seasons ago they were going to start Kolb? How does any of that drop them from 2nd to 4th in a year? His argument wasn't based in anything real - ultimately it was really more an argument of "I don't like the Bills' decisions lately"... Not really the same thing at all, particularly since all but the cutting of Fred were true already last year. To say this guy made no sense is generous. Best-Case Scenario: New offensive coordinator Greg Roman pieces together a competent offense out of a few luxury parts and Taylor, who exceeds expectations and resembles a poor man’s Colin Kaepernick. The defense is the best in football, and the Bills make it to the playoffs at 10-6. How in Hades does the "best defense in football" and a "competent offense" equal only 10-6??? This is what is bugging me about the intellectual inconsistency (dishonesty, flat-out laziness?) of nearly every national media buffoon. All pre-season we heard from multiple national sources "the Bills have the best or nearly the best team 21/22 positions - if only they had decent QB play they'd be a playoff team looking to go deep. Now they have a QB solution that's almost certainly better than what they were expected to have when those comments were made, and somehow they're back to be 9-7 or worse? Edited September 7, 2015 by BobChalmers
Dibs Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 "The problem, of course, is that those moves came at a prohibitive cost...." I wonder how many extra games we lose this season due to that prohibative cost? With logic like that he would fit right in around here.
The Frankish Reich Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 His "points" aren't even logical points. They will do worse than last year - because they cut Fred Jackson? - because 2 1st round picks was too much for Watkins? - because EJ is a bust? - because 2 seasons ago they were going to start Kolb? How does any of that drop them from 2nd to 4th in a year? His argument wasn't based in anything real - ultimately it was really more an argument of "I don't like the Bills' decisions lately"... Not really the same thing at all, particularly since all but the cutting of Fred were true already last year. To say this guy made no sense is generous. The individual points are taken out of context. Barnwell says that each of these made some sense in isolation -- for example, using a first round pick on the guy they thought was the best QB in the draft made sense when the alternative was Kevin Kolb. But Barnwell also notes that the doubling down on decisions that haven't panned out is the problem. EJ struggled as a rookie? Trade consecutive first round picks to get him a real weapon in Sammy! Offensive line terrible? Bring back 3 of the 5 starters, supplementing with an aging guard who was out of football for a year and a second round rookie, then try to make the running game better by putting all your eggs in the LeSean basket. Again, I hope this works. But objectively, without Bills-shaded glasses, the overall assessment of all the moves on the offense has to leave analysts scratching their heads.
YoloinOhio Posted September 7, 2015 Author Posted September 7, 2015 "The problem, of course, is that those moves came at a prohibitive cost...." I wonder how many extra games we lose this season due to that prohibative cost? With logic like that he would fit right in around here. prohibitive of what? Lol
PromoTheRobot Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Horrible analysis. Another guy who sat in his basement and wrote something without watching any camp or exhibition games....It's Buffalo, so.....
Dibs Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 prohibitive of what? Lol Hehe....you know. Prohibitive of the cap. That money we spent on star players could have been spent on, um, well, other star players.
Wayne Cubed Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 prohibitive of what? Lol Wins. Obviously. Didn't get that memo that when you acquire players like Harvin and McCoy said team must forfeit 2 wins.
The Frankish Reich Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 His "points" aren't even logical points. They will do worse than last year - because they cut Fred Jackson? - because 2 1st round picks was too much for Watkins? - because EJ is a bust? - because 2 seasons ago they were going to start Kolb? How does any of that drop them from 2nd to 4th in a year? His argument wasn't based in anything real - ultimately it was really more an argument of "I don't like the Bills' decisions lately"... Not really the same thing at all, particularly since all but the cutting of Fred were true already last year. To say this guy made no sense is generous. How in Hades does the "best defense in football" and a "competent offense" equal only 10-6??? This is what is bugging me about the intellectual inconsistency (dishonesty, flat-out laziness?) of nearly every national media buffoon. All pre-season we heard from multiple national sources "the Bills have the best or nearly the best team 21/22 positions - if only they had decent QB play they'd be a playoff team looking to go deep. Now they have a QB solution that's almost certainly better than what they were expected to have when those comments were made, and somehow they're back to be 9-7 or worse? Doesn't this amount to "what if Tyrod really is Russell Wilson 2.0." If he overacheives -- but realistically overachieves -- and becomes a mid-tier starting QB, how many teams with mid-tier starting QBs go better than 10-6? That's kind of the Alex Smith (or Matt Cassel?) Chiefs, which is pretty good for a team that hasn't made the playoffs in a decade and a half. I'll take it ... for now.
PromoTheRobot Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Agree he missed on the better oline due to upgrade at guard, however rest is pretty much spot on. The defense was already one of the best and lead the league in sacks. Can't expect much upside, if any, there. So its mostly rests how the offense does under him. And while the better oline play is a given IMO, the talent positions have many questions marksHa ha, we have the best defense which means it can't get better so that's a strike against the Bills? Since Tom Brady can't get better I guess the Pats** are doomed as well.
vegas55 Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Wow let me just point on two very obvious misstatements in this "analysis", blunders so bad that it destroys this guys credibility. He states moves such as obtaining Mccoy and Watkins came at a "prohibitive cost". Well superstar McCoy costs us a linebacker with a bum knee, a good player but not anything close to prohibitive cost. Much worse is his idiotic assertion that Bills gave up two first round picks to obtain Watkins, in effect he says, costing the Bills three first round picks to obtain Watkins. That's nonsense, but often repeated nonsense ( see WGR and Buffalo News). So one last time folks lets do the math. At the time of the 2014 NFL draft, the Bills had ONE first round pick in 2014, and ONE first round pick in 2015. After the Watkins deal, the Bills still had ONE first round pick in 2014 ( which they used to take Watkins) and no first round pick in 2015. No matter how desperate you are to criticize Bills, 2 minus 1 still and will always equal one. The Watkins trade cost the Bills ONE first round pick, not two or three.
Dibs Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Ha ha, we have the best defense which means it can't get better so that's a strike against the Bills? Since Tom Brady can't get better I guess the Pats** are doomed as well. Well no.....they cheat.
dave mcbride Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 If people read this piece to the end, they'll see that the Jets are on the list too. So he's really only predicting that Miami and NE will finish ahead of the Bills. One may disagree with that, but it's a plausible argument given Tannehill's upward trajectory and Miami's addition of the best defensive lineman in football this offseason.
YoloinOhio Posted September 7, 2015 Author Posted September 7, 2015 Wins. Obviously. Didn't get that memo that when you acquire players like Harvin and McCoy said team must forfeit 2 wins. oh that's right! Winning the salary cap bowl!
Packerland Bills Fan Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 Horrible analysis. Another guy who sat in his basement and wrote something without watching any camp or exhibition games.... Exactly! The preseason was going to be all about finding a quarterback. They all played much better than expected. 4-12? No way.
Wayne Cubed Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 If people read this piece to the end, they'll see that the Jets are on the list too. So he's really only predicting that Miami and NE will finish ahead of the Bills. One may disagree with that, but it's a plausible argument given Tannehill's upward trajectory and Miami's addition of the best defensive lineman in football this offseason. He picked the Bills because it's an easy pick, "they've been bad for 15 years". Why not pick the Bucs, Falcons, Giants, Bears or Rams? They were all pretty bad in 2015.
Dibs Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 ..... Much worse is his idiotic assertion that Bills gave up two first round picks to obtain Watkins, in effect he says, costing the Bills three first round picks to obtain Watkins.... It is a dunmb-arse article, no doubts....but he never said that. He said "Watkins cost the Bills 2 1st round picks"...which is true.
PromoTheRobot Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 If people read this piece to the end, they'll see that the Jets are on the list too. So he's really only predicting that Miami and NE will finish ahead of the Bills. One may disagree with that, but it's a plausible argument given Tannehill's upward trajectory and Miami's addition of the best defensive lineman in football this offseason.I guarantee if Tyrod Taylor were the starting QB for any other team in the NFL the media would be giving him a daily tongue bath. There is bias against Buffalo that is entrenched. If we start 8-0 there will still be people who say the Bills are pretenders.
YoloinOhio Posted September 7, 2015 Author Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) He picked the Bills because it's an easy pick, "they've been bad for 15 years". Why not pick the Bucs, Falcons, Giants, Bears or Rams? They were all pretty bad in 2015. right, though they weren't bad at all last year, and have improved in many key areas. IMO of course. Edited September 7, 2015 by YoloinOhio
The Frankish Reich Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 How in Hades does the "best defense in football" and a "competent offense" equal only 10-6??? Wow, let me go back into the depths of my memory, all the way back to ... 2009! Rex Ryan's NY Jets. # 1 defense in the NFL. # 17 offense (a "competent offense?"). And they finished ... 9-7! And guess what, they sneaked into the playoffs and made it all the way to the conference championship game. Sounds like a perfectly fine best-case scenario to me ...
1B4IDie Posted September 7, 2015 Posted September 7, 2015 @Grantland33: NFL 2015 Season Predictions, Part 1: The Cellar Dwellers, by @billbarnwell http://t.co/lzINEWRCNn Their pod cast is just as clueless. They got bolstered by the Grantland name. They have zero qualifications for the opinion other than being Grantland employees.
Recommended Posts