Deranged Rhino Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 (edited) lol at "bills could have stayed put at 9 and taken OBJ" or they could have taken eric ebron who has not played up to a top 10 pick. shoulda, woulda,coulda... could have had russel wilson. could have had tom brady. could have had antonio brown. sammy was the best wr prospect in a long time. i don't think he has even scratched the surface of how good he can be. injuries have derailed him. sammy is a flat out stud. "RE-LAX"-aaron rodgers...... Yup. But there's good news. The people who are down on Sammy (and I think that's a minority of fans overall) pretty much fall into one of the following categories: 1. Fans who are still angry about the trade to go up and get him (which is usually more about being anti-Whaley than anti-Sammy). or 2. Fans who don't really watch the games (where Sammy's impact and potential are evident) and only compare stat lines. There are plenty of rational fans in group 1 who possess strong football minds and are willing/capable of having good football discussions despite their position on Sammy. However, most everyone in group 2 is incapable of having a rational discussion about football because, by and large, they don't understand the game they're watching and/or they just want to troll folks on this board. imo Edited November 18, 2015 by Deranged Rhino
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 Wouldn't it be nice if Sammy became this generations Paul Warfield.http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WarfPa00.htm That is the best receiver on 3 championship teams. And, who's stats clearly suffered by the context he played in. A winning context, not a fantasy football context. BTW, he's a HOFer too.
What a Tuel Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 DeAndre Hopkins is probably hoping the Texans try to acquire EJM. It's not all about the stats, but to say things have gone the way most anticipated is being disingenuous. I surely believe that Watkins can tear it up, if given the chance, though. Hopkins again? Even by going with stats which admittedly don't tell the whole picture. 9 games for 124 targets, 927 yard and 7 tds. Or 13.7 targets, 103 yards, and .77 tds a game. Watkins 5 games for 32 targets, 329 yards and 3 tds. Or 6.4 targets, 65 yards, and .6 tds a game. One wonders if Sammy would get twice as many targets, he would easily match Hopkins in production. But no, we will ignore that in favor of total stats. I mean Sammy hasn't put up the stats, we want him to so far this year, but it is pretty clear to reasonable people that it isn't for a lack of ability. It is a combination of system, targets, and injury.
Nihilarian Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 Yup. But there's good news. The people who are down on Sammy (and I think that's a minority of fans overall) pretty much fall into one of the following categories: 1. Fans who are still angry about the trade to go up and get him (which is usually more about being anti-Whaley than anti-Sammy). or 2. Fans who don't really watch the games (where Sammy's impact and potential are evident) and only compare stat lines. There are plenty of rational fans in group 1 who possess strong football minds and are willing/capable of having good football discussions despite their position on Sammy. However, most everyone in group 2 is incapable of having a rational discussion about football because, by and large, they don't understand the game they're watching and/or they just want to troll folks on this board. imo Could it be possible that some fans simply didn't like the idea for giving up three draft picks, and two of them first round picks for a WR when the team didn't already have an established franchise QB? When they voice their opinions on that subject it automatically makes them "angry", and anti Whaley / Sammy? Last week Sammy Watkins was the 5th best receiver on the team with 7 targets for 3 receptions for 14 yards. That is a lot of targets for only three catches. There is nothing wrong about the fact that Bills fans want, and expect more from a player that cost the team three draft picks. I highly doubt anyone here is saying that they aren't rooting for Sammy Watkins to start putting up the numbers equal to some of the top wide receivers in today's game. The reality is that he isn't even consistently putting up numbers that a single first round draft pick puts up much less a player that cost the team three draft picks, and two firsts. He did manage to do that in his first year even with all the injuries and the Bills using him as a decoy a lot of the time. Most fans can see the potential in the player and are frustrated because they see other players doing so much better this year. Bills fans want, and expect to see greatness from this player and shouldn't be chastised by other fans when they voice their views. Bills fans have every right to B word and complain, and it doesn't make them any less of a Bills fan when they do B&C because it shows they really only want to win games. Fifteen years man! Fifteen years of being a no playoff losing team, of being a laughing stock bottom feeder in the division can create a lot of frustration. BTW, putting fans who are down on a Bills player for any reason into two category's is just lame, and says more about you then it does them.
Prickly Pete Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 Hopkins again? Even by going with stats which admittedly don't tell the whole picture. 9 games for 124 targets, 927 yard and 7 tds. Or 13.7 targets, 103 yards, and .77 tds a game. Watkins 5 games for 32 targets, 329 yards and 3 tds. Or 6.4 targets, 65 yards, and .6 tds a game. One wonders if Sammy would get twice as many targets, he would easily match Hopkins in production. But no, we will ignore that in favor of total stats. I mean Sammy hasn't put up the stats, we want him to so far this year, but it is pretty clear to reasonable people that it isn't for a lack of ability. It is a combination of system, targets, and injury. I think Watkins is better than Hopkins. I think that there are many factors (I'm pretty sure I already posted them in this thread), why he isn't getting good stats. I mention Hopkins because his QB's have been as bad or worse than Watkins', but somehow they are finding a way to get him the ball, and he is finding a way to make plays.
Deranged Rhino Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 Could it be possible that some fans simply didn't like the idea for giving up three draft picks, and two of them first round picks for a WR when the team didn't already have an established franchise QB? When they voice their opinions on that subject it automatically makes them "angry", and anti Whaley / Sammy? Of course it's possible. Nothing I wrote says otherwise. BTW, putting fans who are down on a Bills player for any reason into two category's is just lame, and says more about you then it does them. Not when it's an accurate description of the sorts of arguments you read on here. Also, note the use of the words "pretty much" in my OP.
K-9 Posted November 18, 2015 Posted November 18, 2015 If 7 targets is a lot to garner 3 catches, then what is 12 targets to get 4? GO BILLS!!!
Nihilarian Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 Of course it's possible. Nothing I wrote says otherwise. Not when it's an accurate description of the sorts of arguments you read on here. Also, note the use of the words "pretty much" in my OP. You basically said otherwise by putting anyone who is down on Sammy into one of two categories by saying they are either angry or don't watch games while comparing stat lines. Then "pretty much" means that they pretty much fall into one of the two categories you impose.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 It's lonely on Revis Island. LOL
eball Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 It's lonely on Revis Island. On that 3rd down grab, the only thing Sammy should have done differently was to get the first down and then go to the ground in bounds to keep the clock running. Surprised nobody brought that up (or maybe I just haven't seen it). I hope somebody on the team (coach or player) had that discussion with him afterwards; it could be helpful in a future game.
GG Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 On that 3rd down grab, the only thing Sammy should have done differently was to get the first down and then go to the ground in bounds to keep the clock running. Surprised nobody brought that up (or maybe I just haven't seen it). I hope somebody on the team (coach or player) had that discussion with him afterwards; it could be helpful in a future game. It hasn't been discussed because it would have been tough for him to stay in bounds. That was a filthy move he put on Revis, but because of that, he had way too much momentum going towards the sidelines.
Nanker Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 On that 3rd down grab, the only thing Sammy should have done differently was to get the first down and then go to the ground in bounds to keep the clock running. Surprised nobody brought that up (or maybe I just haven't seen it). I hope somebody on the team (coach or player) had that discussion with him afterwards; it could be helpful in a future game. He's still learning. He's had some drops and more than his share of gaffs, but I for one am very glad he's a Bill.
thebandit27 Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 On that 3rd down grab, the only thing Sammy should have done differently was to get the first down and then go to the ground in bounds to keep the clock running. Surprised nobody brought that up (or maybe I just haven't seen it). I hope somebody on the team (coach or player) had that discussion with him afterwards; it could be helpful in a future game. I don't think getting down in bounds is that important in that situation; what matters when winding down the clock is getting first downs. In fact, there's probably a school of thought out there that says to get OOB without contact when possible to avoid any chance of fumbling.
Nanker Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 That was a filthy move he put on Revis, but because of that, he had way too much momentum going towards the sidelines. Revis had to take and extra long post game shower and then take a Swedish Sauna, and he still felt dirty. He's probably undergoing therapy for PTSD now.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 Sammy will likely be undervalued for the foreseeable future on this site by the Fantasy Football crowd. FF has brought a great many people into the game who never played the game, and this has helped the NFL grow. It has also created a number of "new" experts who understand the game from the "he had 1200 yards receiving and 10 TDs".
eball Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 It hasn't been discussed because it would have been tough for him to stay in bounds. That was a filthy move he put on Revis, but because of that, he had way too much momentum going towards the sidelines. I don't think getting down in bounds is that important in that situation; what matters when winding down the clock is getting first downs. In fact, there's probably a school of thought out there that says to get OOB without contact when possible to avoid any chance of fumbling. I appreciate the comments but I respectfully disagree. There was nobody around him and he wasn't running at full speed. Again, it was a fantastic play and I'm not being overly critical, but I do believe it would have been easy for him to stop and drop down in bounds. Once you give yourself up the defense can't hit you. Running the clock was important at that point.
ricojes Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 (edited) On that 3rd down grab, the only thing Sammy should have done differently was to get the first down and then go to the ground in bounds to keep the clock running. Surprised nobody brought that up (or maybe I just haven't seen it). I hope somebody on the team (coach or player) had that discussion with him afterwards; it could be helpful in a future game. If he could have gone down, which i don't think he could have, it's somewhat excusable. the first down was the main goal of that play. https://pbs.twimg.co...CzmUEAAgega.mp4 I really don't know how you stay in bounds, he had to make sure to get both feet down. i mean there really was no way, not sure what you're seeing. Edited November 19, 2015 by ricojes
GG Posted November 19, 2015 Posted November 19, 2015 If he could have gone down, which i don't think he could have, it's somewhat excusable. the first down was the main goal of that play. https://pbs.twimg.co...CzmUEAAgega.mp4 I really don't know how you stay in bounds, he had to make sure to get both feet down. i mean there really was no way, not sure what you're seeing. Yup. Too much momentum to stop in the field of play, and if he tried to turn upfield, that's an ankle busting move for a guy already playing on a bum left side.
Recommended Posts