Bill_with_it Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 all well and good. however to express that you don't think it could be an expression of doubt of Taylor is.... (to be kind) nearsighted. the problem with shutting oneself off from possibilities is that chances are, you are going to be wrong. thank you for the all worldly opinion, signed the middle schooler. Your wit doesnt change how ridiculous that post was. Let me explain it to you a different way. 1. Bills didnt have to keep Taylor. 2. Bills could have saved the money and rolled with Cardale. 3. Bills didnt do any of that. 4. If your theory was true a) Tyrod wouldnt be on the team, b) we would have more cap space, c) there would be about 300-400 less pages of inconsequential Taylor talk in this board. 5. Do you see why your theory hilds no water? Its borderline delusional.
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 (edited) Did thinking EJ sucked mean not supporting the team? What about Cassel? again, crying about a player sucking doesn't change anything, you're just crying the blues, he is/was still part of the team. so, if you want to cry about a player, yet still support the team then you are supporting the player your crying about as well. unless of course you just support your argument that said player sucks then keep crying about it, if that's what floats your boat. Edited May 29, 2017 by DaBillsFanSince1973
BringBackOrton Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 again, crying about a player sucking doesn't change anything, you're just crying the blues, he is/was still part of the team. so, if you want to cry about a player, yet still support the team then you are supporting the player your crying about as well. unless of course you just support your argument that said player sucks then keep crying about it, if that's what floats your boat. Crying? Or thinking he sucks?
Foxx Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 (edited) Your wit doesnt change how ridiculous that post was. Let me explain it to you a different way. 1. Bills didnt have to keep Taylor. 2. Bills could have saved the money and rolled with Cardale. 3. Bills didnt do any of that. 4. If your theory was true a) Tyrod wouldnt be on the team, b) we would have more cap space, c) there would be about 300-400 less pages of inconsequential Taylor talk in this board. 5. Do you see why your theory hilds no water? Its borderline delusional. so, if we are not being delusional,and if Watkins gets traded, it has absolutely no bearing whatsoever on Tyrod, says absolutely nothing about what they think of him. gotcha. carry on wit your bad worldly self, nothing to see here in middle school land... Edited May 29, 2017 by Foxx
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 Crying? Or thinking he sucks? to me, when it becomes repetitive and you post or talk about until the horse is dead and no longer kicking, yes, you're crying...
Foxx Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 to me, when it becomes repetitive and you post or talk about until the horse is dead and no longer kicking, yes, you're crying... yet the other side of the coin is... what? continually spouting the virtues of a borderline, average QB is what exactly?
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 it can go for both sides mac, no discrimination when it comes to the argument. both sides have cried more than enough. but hey, it makes for real good discussion now doesn't it Foxx.
HappyDays Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 Sammy isn't getting traded this year so I don't understand the point of the discussion
Shaw66 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 I already have in the appropriate Watkins thread. But since you ask ill provide some reasons that if true might be why Watkins might be traded: -Medical prognosis of the health of the foot is not good. -Medical prognosis of the ability of the foot is not good. -Watkins agent told the Bills he doesnt want to be with the Bills anymore after this season. -Watkins agent wants more for a new contract than the Bills are willing to play for. -Watkins isnstill hurt and will miss more time this season than the Bills are a) willing to wait on, b) dont want to design an offense around a player that will miss games and whos abilities on the team arent replicated by anyone else, c) want to get a player on the team that can play 16!games. Those are just a few, if you believe they are trading away Watkins as a slight of Taylor or as tell tale sign they dont believe in Taylor I should probably stop communicating with you now though because thats a truly asinine opinion. One to which you are welcome to express and enjoy. Where'd you get all of this stuff? Prognosis on the foot is not good? My understanding is that most guys do just fine recovering from this, just not in a year. If I recall correctly, Julio Jones did the same thing. Was it reported that Watkins' agent said Watkins wants to leave. Was it reported that Watkins wants more in a contract than the Bills will offer? Was it reported that Watkins is still hurt? Was it reported that the Bills are done with him, that they've decided he doesn't fit? And, by the way, this notion that the Bills don't want him because there isn't another player on the roster who replicates his skills would mean that the Bills also wouldn't want Julio Jones, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Rodgers, JJ Watt or any other guy who's a top 20 player in the league, That's a really stupid idea.
Foxx Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 it can go for both sides mac, no discrimination when it comes to the argument. both sides have cried more than enough. but hey, it makes for real good discussion now doesn't it Foxx. nothing meant by it, DBFS'73. just an honest question. the same equation does indeed apply to all sides, which really was my point. the discussion is only good if it is enlightening. Where'd you get all of this stuff? Prognosis on the foot is not good? My understanding is that most guys do just fine recovering from this, just not in a year. If I recall correctly, Julio Jones did the same thing. Was it reported that Watkins' agent said Watkins wants to leave. Was it reported that Watkins wants more in a contract than the Bills will offer? Was it reported that Watkins is still hurt? Was it reported that the Bills are done with him, that they've decided he doesn't fit? And, by the way, this notion that the Bills don't want him because there isn't another player on the roster who replicates his skills would mean that the Bills also wouldn't want Julio Jones, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Rodgers, JJ Watt or any other guy who's a top 20 player in the league, That's a really stupid idea. Shaw, they were suppositions to what the reason would be if Sammy is traded. suppositions.....
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 Where'd you get all of this stuff? Prognosis on the foot is not good? My understanding is that most guys do just fine recovering from this, just not in a year. If I recall correctly, Julio Jones did the same thing. Was it reported that Watkins' agent said Watkins wants to leave. Was it reported that Watkins wants more in a contract than the Bills will offer? Was it reported that Watkins is still hurt? Was it reported that the Bills are done with him, that they've decided he doesn't fit? And, by the way, this notion that the Bills don't want him because there isn't another player on the roster who replicates his skills would mean that the Bills also wouldn't want Julio Jones, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Rodgers, JJ Watt or any other guy who's a top 20 player in the league, That's a really stupid idea. ....great rebuttal Shaw.....more fertilizer in that list than Agway has in stock.......Jesus............
Shaw66 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 ....great rebuttal Shaw.....more fertilizer in that list than Agway has in stock.......Jesus............ Actually, my questions were serious. Maybe there's more out than I know about. I know it's the wrong thread, but the only important rule here is that you never give up on potentially great talent too early. It's always better to keep a guy with big potential a year too long than to dump him a year too early. Great talent is special.
Bill_with_it Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 ....great rebuttal Shaw.....more fertilizer in that list than Agway has in stock.......Jesus............You have a hard time reading the thread in its entirety dont you??
Bill_with_it Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 Where'd you get all of this stuff? Prognosis on the foot is not good? My understanding is that most guys do just fine recovering from this, just not in a year. If I recall correctly, Julio Jones did the same thing. Was it reported that Watkins' agent said Watkins wants to leave. Was it reported that Watkins wants more in a contract than the Bills will offer? Was it reported that Watkins is still hurt? Was it reported that the Bills are done with him, that they've decided he doesn't fit? And, by the way, this notion that the Bills don't want him because there isn't another player on the roster who replicates his skills would mean that the Bills also wouldn't want Julio Jones, Adrian Peterson, Aaron Rodgers, JJ Watt or any other guy who's a top 20 player in the league, That's a really stupid idea. Shaw go back and read the post that you quoted was in reference to. FWIW if you only have Watkins truly healthy for 8 games a year, Its a detriment to the team offense. If you design an offense to where your number one receiver is to get the load of targets based on his elite abilities, then said player misses 8 games or is unhealthy long term then its time to move on. IM NOT SAYING SAMMY WONT BE ABLE TO PLAY 16 OR THAT SAMMY WONT BE ABLE TO PROVE HIMSELF THIS YEAR. What I am saying is echoing Mcermotts tenants availability and durability. If Sammy's long term outlook projects to not being available and durable consistently evey season regardless of his epic talents, I highly doubt the Bills pay the money that hes going to be looking for.
transplantbillsfan Posted May 29, 2017 Author Posted May 29, 2017 you think a reasonable question on what the Bills must think of Tyrod if they trade away his best receiver is out in right field (is right field better than left field?) you may say that my thought is not well formed or expounded upon very well but not reasonable?? i think only if you consider Tyrod the heir apparent to Kelly that the thought must be threatening and therefore unreasonable. perhaps i am wrong?? whatever, i don't know if the rumor is true or not but i think it a reasonable question to ponder. i think if they trade away Tyrod's best receiver it says that they really don't think much of his abilities. it prolly says something like, 'we know you need to be surrounded with the best players available in order to somewhat succeed. however, here's the thing ..., we don't want to just somewhat succeed, so we are going to make moves for the future when we will be drafting who we think will help us really succeed. at that point we will surround him with the best receivers we can obtain'. or something like that. conversely, if they keep him, knowing that they may lose him with no compensation, whatsoever. that may say that they believe in Tyrod or at the very least are willing to roll the dice to see what Rico can get out of him in a new scheme. as you know, i don't think it much matters but, stranger things have happened. this new staff we have seems like they have a plan so i don't think they are rolling the die here. it could be that they have plan A and plan B. if Tyrod fails to give them what they're looking for, they have plan B which involves two first round draft picks and a qb next year. There's the man I know and love
Shaw66 Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 Shaw go back and read the post that you quoted was in reference to. FWIW if you only have Watkins truly healthy for 8 games a year, Its a detriment to the team offense. If you design an offense to where your number one receiver is to get the load of targets based on his elite abilities, then said player misses 8 games or is unhealthy long term then its time to move on. IM NOT SAYING SAMMY WONT BE ABLE TO PLAY 16 OR THAT SAMMY WONT BE ABLE TO PROVE HIMSELF THIS YEAR. What I am saying is echoing Mcermotts tenants availability and durability. If Sammy's long term outlook projects to not being available and durable consistently evey season regardless of his epic talents, I highly doubt the Bills pay the money that hes going to be looking for. I don't disagree with that. But where is the long-term outlook saying he isn't going to be available? As I said, my understanding is that it's typically a two-year recovery from this injury, and Sammy's well into his second year. Julio Jones recovered. I think Marquise Goodwin is chronically injured. Sammy played all through college uninjured. This is more than likely just a bad string of injuries, not something chronic. (Of course, the Bills may have another opinion, and they have better info.)
Bill_with_it Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 I don't disagree with that. But where is the long-term outlook saying he isn't going to be available? As I said, my understanding is that it's typically a two-year recovery from this injury, and Sammy's well into his second year. Julio Jones recovered. I think Marquise Goodwin is chronically injured. Sammy played all through college uninjured. This is more than likely just a bad string of injuries, not something chronic. (Of course, the Bills may have another opinion, and they have better info.)All I said was if he was traded there were reasons that were likely other than they didnt believe in Tyrod, in my opinion.
transplantbillsfan Posted May 29, 2017 Author Posted May 29, 2017 If Taylor + Watkins = success Or if Taylor - Watkins = no success If this trade were true.... What message does it send? I dunno... maybe they're saying we really want a certain level of QB who doesn't need a great WR to be successful so Tyrod, you think you're that guy and we think you might be but aren't spending more than this year to decide that, so here's your chance to prove it. That's not me saying I think that's the level of QB Taylor is.
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 You have a hard time reading the thread in its entirety dont you?? ...sorry....still working my way through "See Spot Run"......see if your dog will take you for a walk.............
Foxx Posted May 29, 2017 Posted May 29, 2017 There's the man I know and love thanks. i really don't mean anything derogatory with my curt responses. at times, i just don't have the time for a better thought out response and yet still on other occasions, i am just tired of the back and forth. besides, i think you know me well enough to know that generally, once i have stated something i may state it once or twice thereafter but that is pretty much it. i don't see a whole lot of sense in repeating the same tired refrains over and over again. even though all refrains are essentially the same when you boil them down i suppose. :shrug:
Recommended Posts