Ronin Posted July 11, 2016 Posted July 11, 2016 You know what other team was predicted to fail? The 1988 Bills. We had Polian then. Now we have Whaley. Whaley's last four 1st-round draft picks (and a 4th) were Manuel a bust, Watkins, grossly underachieving for several reasons and as injury-prone as they come and flirting with not even having the team exercise his 5th year option, and now an injured rookie Lawson whose biggest scout was one of his teammates at Clemson, not even someone on our staff. There is a difference there. Whaley might be suited to get coffee for Polian and his staff, ... might be. Polian knew how to put together a team, Whaley's still lucky to have a job in a high-level capacity in a front office much less as a GM. Brad Johnson says hello. So does Trent Dilfer, but both of those teams had exceptional, historically that is, defenses. Better than the '85 Bears who had 198 PA. Baltimore had 195 PA and Tampa had 165. So yeah, post a D that allows fewer than 200 points and you'll likely win the SB with a mediocre offense. How many times has that happened in the NFL? I think that those are the only three teams to have done it. Unfortunately we're not close. No surprise, 19 and counting. WAKE UP, PEGS! We'll be well into the 20's before he figures it out given his propensity to hire people he likes instead of people that can get the job done.
Dorkington Posted July 11, 2016 Posted July 11, 2016 Historically bad team projects to be bad in the future. Now that's some investigative journalism.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 11, 2016 Posted July 11, 2016 (edited) We had Polian then. Now we have Whaley. Whaley's last four 1st-round draft picks (and a 4th) were Manuel a bust, Watkins, grossly underachieving for several reasons and as injury-prone as they come and flirting with not even having the team exercise his 5th year option, and now an injured rookie Lawson whose biggest scout was one of his teammates at Clemson, not even someone on our staff. There is a difference there. Whaley might be suited to get coffee for Polian and his staff, ... might be. Polian knew how to put together a team, Whaley's still lucky to have a job in a high-level capacity in a front office much less as a GM. What are you taking about?!? Not picking up Watkins' 5th year option?!? You lose all credibility that you are trying to build with such an outlandish thought!! Fwiw, the Bills front office is well respected around the league. The talent hasn't been the issue. They've drafted well (nice job leaving Darby out of your rant) and added talent in free agency. Edited July 11, 2016 by Kirby Jackson
Blokestradamus Posted July 11, 2016 Posted July 11, 2016 my thought as well. Should just join the CFL because we are, you know, basically in Canada anyway. We'd dominate. With the CFL pre-snap motion, Cyrus could play every down without a false start penalty!
3rdand12 Posted July 11, 2016 Posted July 11, 2016 Imagine how high we would be if they knew the Bills were finding the cure for Zika. LOL'd I always laugh at these things. The Bills are always predicted in the bottom 5 but if memory serves me correctly they have only finished in the bottom 5 once in like 12 years (the Dareus pick). I think that is on of the misconceptions about the Bills during this streak. They have been bad but averaged 6.6 wins a season in that time frame. It isn't like they are the Browns and missing on guys at the top of the draft all of the time. They aren't getting a shot at the top guys. Well then. I feel much better about the last couple decades
Kirby Jackson Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 LOL'd Well then. I feel much better about the last couple decades It's tough to get an Andrew Luck type with the 8th pick. The Browns (since returning) have taken Couch, Brown, Warren and Richardson (off the top of my head) in the top 3. They traded out on Watkins and Julio. If you want to see why a team has been bad go look at the Browns 1st round picks since re-entering the league. It's an appalling exercise.
3rdand12 Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 It's tough to get an Andrew Luck type with the 8th pick. The Browns (since returning) have taken Couch, Brown, Warren and Richardson (off the top of my head) in the top 3. They traded out on Watkins and Julio. If you want to see why a team has been bad go look at the Browns 1st round picks since re-entering the league. It's an appalling exercise. Oh I realize their struggles Kirby when drafting and developing players. My sigh was more comparing Bills to Browns. I just don't feel it has an uplifting effect. I look at Bills in isolation usually. Not what we could have done. Just what we did. like the Gronkowski thing. what ifs are a wasted path to follow I was glad we got Dareus in the 3rd. Good solid pick. I cheered wildly. Crap, crap, and more crap. well i suppose you could look at things that way
Kirby Jackson Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 Oh I realize their struggles Kirby when drafting and developing players. My sigh was more comparing Bills to Browns. I just don't feel it has an uplifting effect. I look at Bills in isolation usually. Not what we could have done. Just what we did. like the Gronkowski thing. what ifs are a wasted path to follow I was glad we got Dareus in the 3rd. Good solid pick. I cheered wildly. well i suppose you could look at things that way Yeah, sorry to drag you down. I wasn't trying to compare the Bills to the Browns. The Bills have actually drafted pretty well. They just haven't had a shot at star type players besides Dareus and the trade up for Sammy. They loved Cam and if Luck would have come out when he should have the Bills would have gotten Cam. They tried desperately to get Ben and the Jags were worried about losing Reggie Williams. The Bills haven't been terribly lucky. They've made some bad picks (Maybin, Fat Mike, McCargo, Losman, EJ and Troupe) but have made some really good picks as well. They haven't been a disaster like the Browns. Not trying to find a silver lining but the Bills are ranked here as team 28 when in reality (even during the streak) they've been closer to 20.
3rdand12 Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 (edited) Yeah, sorry to drag you down. I wasn't trying to compare the Bills to the Browns. The Bills have actually drafted pretty well. They just haven't had a shot at star type players besides Dareus and the trade up for Sammy. They loved Cam and if Luck would have come out when he should have the Bills would have gotten Cam. They tried desperately to get Ben and the Jags were worried about losing Reggie Williams. The Bills haven't been terribly lucky. They've made some bad picks (Maybin, Fat Mike, McCargo, Losman, EJ and Troupe) but have made some really good picks as well. They haven't been a disaster like the Browns. Not trying to find a silver lining but the Bills are ranked here as team 28 when in reality (even during the streak) they've been closer to 20. Oh Shoot Kirby, you never bring me down. I remain pretty steady anyways. I also don't pay too much attention to the rankings. most of us here know the real deal anyways. We pay much more detailed attention the comings and goings. Especially good folks like you !! Edited July 12, 2016 by 3rdand12
Mr. WEO Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 We had Polian then. Now we have Whaley. Whaley's last four 1st-round draft picks (and a 4th) were Manuel a bust, Watkins, grossly underachieving for several reasons and as injury-prone as they come and flirting with not even having the team exercise his 5th year option, and now an injured rookie Lawson whose biggest scout was one of his teammates at Clemson, not even someone on our staff. There is a difference there. Whaley might be suited to get coffee for Polian and his staff, ... might be. Polian knew how to put together a team, Whaley's still lucky to have a job in a high-level capacity in a front office much less as a GM. So does Trent Dilfer, but both of those teams had exceptional, historically that is, defenses. Better than the '85 Bears who had 198 PA. Baltimore had 195 PA and Tampa had 165. So yeah, post a D that allows fewer than 200 points and you'll likely win the SB with a mediocre offense. How many times has that happened in the NFL? I think that those are the only three teams to have done it. Unfortunately we're not close. We'll be well into the 20's before he figures it out given his propensity to hire people he likes instead of people that can get the job done. Already forgot Denver last year??
Kirby Jackson Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 Which almost makes it worse. They'd be better off going 3-13 then the typical 6-10 seasons like the Sabres the past couple years. Absolutely, the worst thing that you can be is ok. You never get better picking 10. You need stars and that's why teams tank. It is easier to get good if you bottom out.
BuffaloBill Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 I suppose this might be interesting if some math guys with experience in sports-related regression analysis put it together. From the very get-go this thing is purely a click-bate opinion piece with little connection to reality. They have 3 guys subjectively rate each team in five categories. Each category is subjectively weighted by the author, thus giving you a final score. There is zero data to suggest the methodology produces anything but garbage. Amen, but to play a tiny bit of contrarian ... The Bills do not have a proven QB and there is no reason to believe they have taken a big step forward from the past 16 years.
BADOLBILZ Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 Absolutely, the worst thing that you can be is ok. You never get better picking 10. You need stars and that's why teams tank. It is easier to get good if you bottom out. This sounds good but it's not really true. Escaping mediocrity is less about drafting early than it is about properly addressing QB and hiring good coaches. If not properly weighted and addressed you can otherwise draft well and never get over the hump. And for every Colts/Luck and Carolina/Newton there are more teams that didn't let mediocrity keep them down. The SB Seahawks were re-built almost completely during two 7-9 seasons...the worse seasons prior didn't do the trick.(interestingly the Seahawks haven't finished last in their division since 1996) The current Patriots arose from their late-90's mediocrity. The Steelers re-built with a brief period of mediocrity. The Broncos hovered around .500 every year from 2006-2011.(Broncos are particularly interesting because they basically restocked their roster in mediocrity and AGAIN while they were winning......) The difference was QB decisions and coaching. Less about luck than the will to win. The Bills have traditionally half-stepped when it comes to addressing QB and head coaching hires. If you lose because you didn't do all you can to address those key aspects then shame on you........no excuses. Hopefully the Pegula's change that.......but to suggest that mediocrity itself has kept the Bills down is revisionist.........it's been poor stewardship.
maddenboy Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 (edited) This sounds good but it's not really true. Escaping mediocrity is less about drafting early than it is about properly addressing QB and hiring good coaches. If not properly weighted and addressed you can otherwise draft well and never get over the hump. And for every Colts/Luck and Carolina/Newton there are more teams that didn't let mediocrity keep them down. The SB Seahawks were re-built almost completely during two 7-9 seasons...the worse seasons prior didn't do the trick.(interestingly the Seahawks haven't finished last in their division since 1996) The current Patriots arose from their late-90's mediocrity. The Steelers re-built with a brief period of mediocrity. The Broncos hovered around .500 every year from 2006-2011.(Broncos are particularly interesting because they basically restocked their roster in mediocrity and AGAIN while they were winning......) The difference was QB decisions and coaching. Less about luck than the will to win. The Bills have traditionally half-stepped when it comes to addressing QB and head coaching hires. If you lose because you didn't do all you can to address those key aspects then shame on you........no excuses. Hopefully the Pegula's change that.......but to suggest that mediocrity itself has kept the Bills down is revisionist.........it's been poor stewardship. This. Every single word of this. I couldnt even figure out what to highlight, because its all spot-on. Draft position be damned. Get ur shtt together. Starting at QB and coaching, not necessarily in that order. Edited July 12, 2016 by maddenboy
Kirby Jackson Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 This sounds good but it's not really true. Escaping mediocrity is less about drafting early than it is about properly addressing QB and hiring good coaches. If not properly weighted and addressed you can otherwise draft well and never get over the hump. And for every Colts/Luck and Carolina/Newton there are more teams that didn't let mediocrity keep them down. The SB Seahawks were re-built almost completely during two 7-9 seasons...the worse seasons prior didn't do the trick.(interestingly the Seahawks haven't finished last in their division since 1996) The current Patriots arose from their late-90's mediocrity. The Steelers re-built with a brief period of mediocrity. The Broncos hovered around .500 every year from 2006-2011.(Broncos are particularly interesting because they basically restocked their roster in mediocrity and AGAIN while they were winning......) The difference was QB decisions and coaching. Less about luck than the will to win. The Bills have traditionally half-stepped when it comes to addressing QB and head coaching hires. If you lose because you didn't do all you can to address those key aspects then shame on you........no excuses. Hopefully the Pegula's change that.......but to suggest that mediocrity itself has kept the Bills down is revisionist.........it's been poor stewardship. That's kind of the point. Cam and Luck went 1 overall. The following QBs weren't available when the Bills selected (Eli, Wentz, Goff, Alex Smith, Palmer, Gabbert, Ryan, Rivers, Sanchez, Bortles, Tannehill, Ben, Cutler, Cam, Luck, Jameis, Mariota, RG3, Stafford, and Rodgers). Now some of these guys came available and others you wouldn't want. 20 of the starting 32 QBs you didn't have a chance at. If you were to look at a team that's been perennially bad, like the Browns, that number is much smaller. If you are picking early, as I said, you increase your chances of finding the franchise QB.
YoloinOhio Posted July 12, 2016 Author Posted July 12, 2016 I always laugh at these things. The Bills are always predicted in the bottom 5 but if memory serves me correctly they have only finished in the bottom 5 once in like 12 years (the Dareus pick). I think that is on of the misconceptions about the Bills during this streak. They have been bad but averaged 6.6 wins a season in that time frame. It isn't like they are the Browns and missing on guys at the top of the draft all of the time. They aren't getting a shot at the top guys.This. They aren't projecting them to be the same as they've been for the past decade, which is average to just below average. They are projecting them to take a huge step back.
Kirby Jackson Posted July 12, 2016 Posted July 12, 2016 (edited) This. They aren't projecting them to be the same as they've been for the past decade, which is average to just below average. They are projecting them to take a huge step back.They are basically projecting that the Bills will be 2 1/2 games worse than they have been (on average) over the last dozen or so years. I don't see the Bills on the decline. They have most of their best talent locked up and may have found their QB. Why are we expecting them to be 4 games worse in 3 years than they were last year? To that end, they have averaged 4 division wins a year over the last 2 years. I don't see them winning 4 TOTAL games moving forward. Edited July 12, 2016 by Kirby Jackson
YoloinOhio Posted July 12, 2016 Author Posted July 12, 2016 (edited) They are basically projecting that the Bills will be 2 1/2 games worse than they have been (on average) over the last dozen or so years. I don't see the Bills on the decline. They have most of their best talent locked up and may have found their QB. Why are we expecting them to be 4 games worse in 3 years than they were last year?that was what I took from it. They need to prove they can win more than 8 or 9 games once in awhile before they get any credit in any of these media things and be ranked in the top half, yada yada. I get that and I agree. They've proven nothing. But in reality, they've been in the top half. Just outside the playoff teams. Not good enough. It still sucks of course. But it's a young, talented roster. They've been getting better, not worse. They finally have a QB who at worst is good so far but unproven, and at best a franchise guy. Bottom 5? Weird ranking. Edited July 12, 2016 by YoloinOhio
Recommended Posts