Luxy312 Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 If they were setting up a tank season, they sure as heck would not have re-signed Lorenzo Alexander either. Add him to the mix. If the Bills cut him next year, they save $2.6m against the cap and only eat $800k in dead cap money. Keeping him, assuming he has a good year like last year, and he's only counting $3.4m to play. That is beyond cheap and fits right into the logic I posted previously. They're not really locked into much of anything except for Dareus after this year. Yes, I think your perspective is a completely reasonable one, and I agree with you 100%. Based on transactions from this past offseason, the situation seems to be setting itself up in a way that you propose. You didn't mention getting a new QB, but my opinion is that's part of the math too. The "new QB" thing becomes completely optional. I liken it to the Joe Flacco situation really. Flacco is nothing special. If he didn't have that stellar defense and running game, he would never have stayed on that roster. He earned his spot with mistake free football when it counted in the playoffs, and with the team relying mostly on the defense to help them win games. I do tend to agree with you though that absent something crazy happening, there will be a new QB at the helm in 2018. Whether that's Peterman or someone drafted next year is a TBD.
Guest NeckBeard Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 Mistake free football? Flacco was en fuego in the playoffs that year. Best QB out of the bunch that included Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. He never looked that good before or since. Well, to the post which you were responding, they did say that Flacco is nothing special. Which he isn't.
Luxy312 Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 Mistake free football? Flacco was en fuego in the playoffs that year. Best QB out of the bunch that included Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. He never looked that good before or since. I wouldn't say he was that great. In 4 games winning a Superbowl, he threw for 1,140 yards and 11 TD's. Drew Brees has averaged that over the course of almost his entire career. That's what I would call en fuego. No turnovers at all and winning a Superbowl is pretty mistake free, which is mostly what I'm alluding to. Still, the point remains. What has he done when he's not in the playoffs? 236 YPG is not a lot of passing yards. 182 to 117 TD to INT ratio is good, but not Earth shattering. He's not Baltimore's franchise guy for everything else he's done and neither will Tyrod.
#34fan Posted June 28, 2017 Author Posted June 28, 2017 Well, to the post which you were responding, they did say that Flacco is nothing special. Which he isn't. I wouldn't say he was that great. In 4 games winning a Superbowl, he threw for 1,140 yards and 11 TD's. Drew Brees has averaged that over the course of almost his entire career. That's what I would call en fuego. No turnovers at all and winning a Superbowl is pretty mistake free, which is mostly what I'm alluding to. Still, the point remains. What has he done when he's not in the playoffs? 236 YPG is not a lot of passing yards. 182 to 117 TD to INT ratio is good, but not Earth shattering. He's not Baltimore's franchise guy for everything else he's done and neither will Tyrod. Right now. -Flacco or Taylor. Who do you take?
Guest NeckBeard Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 Right now. -Flacco or Taylor. Who do you take? Taylor. Because he can move in the pocket, and create plays with his legs. Flacco does his cro-mag thing, and he's getting old. But you're setting the bar pretty low here, and what does your suggestion have to do with your OP: tanking?
#34fan Posted June 28, 2017 Author Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) Taylor. Because he can move in the pocket, and create plays with his legs. Flacco does his cro-mag thing, and he's getting old. But you're setting the bar pretty low here, and what does your suggestion have to do with your OP: tanking? Oh, I'm still prepared to back a strategic tank.... You guys were talking about Flacco, so I chimed in... Btw, there's NO WAY I take TT over Flacco... I DETEST stat-Jacking, but... First rookie quarterback to win two playoff games Most wins by a quarterback in first six seasons: 62 (regular season only) Most wins by a quarterback in first seven seasons: 72 (regular season only) Second-most combined regular and postseason wins in first three years as a quarterback: 36 (tied with Marino) Most road playoff wins for a quarterback (Tied with Manning) From an experience and production standpoint alone, I go with Flacco... They both wear #5, but that's where the similarities END. Edited June 28, 2017 by #34fan
Luxy312 Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 Right now. -Flacco or Taylor. Who do you take? On THIS Bills football team, there's no question that would take Taylor. The pass blocking of the Bills offensive line isn't all that great and Taylor took a bunch of sacks last year. Flacco does not have the escapability that Taylor does, evidenced by his grand total of 58 yards rushing. Factor in fumbles that the QB doesn't recover and what do you get for $24.6m from Flacco? 4,375 total yards 22 TD's and 19 turnovers. Instead I can pay $9.7m for 3,603 total yards, 23 TD's and 17 turnovers. Both teams were pretty average last season, and neither QB absolutely flies off the page. Ask me about Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers and my answer would be different, but asking me about Joe Flacco is like asking me about Brock Osweiler, Ryan Tannehill, or similar. None of them look like a franchise guy, and certainly not worth franchise guy money.
#34fan Posted June 28, 2017 Author Posted June 28, 2017 (edited) By the way, I think the 5-11 season they had before drafting him, facilitated alot of the draft-day moves they made to land him... Going back in time, I would NOT have taken McKelvin at 11... LOVE the guy... But no. On THIS Bills football team, there's no question that would take Taylor. The pass blocking of the Bills offensive line isn't all that great and Taylor took a bunch of sacks last year. Flacco does not have the escapability that Taylor does, evidenced by his grand total of 58 yards rushing. Factor in fumbles that the QB doesn't recover and what do you get for $24.6m from Flacco? 4,375 total yards 22 TD's and 19 turnovers. Instead I can pay $9.7m for 3,603 total yards, 23 TD's and 17 turnovers. Both teams were pretty average last season, and neither QB absolutely flies off the page. Ask me about Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers and my answer would be different, but asking me about Joe Flacco is like asking me about Brock Osweiler, Ryan Tannehill, or similar. None of them look like a franchise guy, and certainly not worth franchise guy money. Too late... He already landed the richest contract in NFL history (for a few months anyway), and he earned a ring... I have mixed emotions on BAL paying him as much as they did, but I KNOW I'd roll with Flacco today, and try to bolster the O-line. Here's a decent writeup: https://www.baltimorebeatdown.com/2017/6/28/15880500/trey-wingo-says-joe-flaccos-contract-gutted-the-baltimore-ravens-tyrod-taylor-anquan-boldin-carr?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo&yptr=yahoo Edited June 28, 2017 by #34fan
Rocky Landing Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 Would you say we're winners at this point in time? I know exactly who, and what tanking is for, and believe me we fit the bill... You want your Andrew Luck, or Marcus Mariota? You want a stud DT like Bama's Da'ron Payne to replace KW? -Well here's what you gotta do... I'll quote the Pegulas new campaign "It starts with ONE" (tanked season) -No victory without sacrifice, my friend. At this point in time, we would be literally competing to tank. Get over it. We're not tanking. We have two first round picks in the next draft. We have plenty to trade for if we need to. Anyone who thinks we're tanking is not paying close attention, or is blinded by their own agenda.
BillsFan4 Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 I somewhat chuckle at the idea of an NFL team purposely losing games. Other than perhaps the Patriots bagging a game in Week 17 to secure the playoff matchup they want, It doesn't seem all that realistic on the flip side playing for a draft pick. My two cents for what it's worth on this subject. I don't think they're "tanking" per se for this season, but really setting themselves up in the event that this season goes poorly. Being realistic, if they were tanking, Taylor would have been gone. They wouldn't have given him his revised deal, which is essentially a 1-year "prove it" deal. If he doesn't work out like some think/hope, he can be cut next year for a $1m cap hit. That's it. They're not accelerating the cap hit on clay by another $4.5m to release him. Next year, he would save $4.5m by letting him go. They signed Groy to a nice deal and he played some 6-7 games at center last season. If Wood continues to make the all injury club, he's only $1.2m to let go next season in dead cap. Kyle Williams is in the last year of his likely last contract. They could have saved a bunch by cutting him, but didn't. When you look at all of the big names on the roster at this point with big contracts, only Dareus really can't be touched in the next year. You can call it tanking if you want to not re-sign Gilmore or Gillislee, but I just think it's giving the team the room to rebuild if they need it. The key there is IF they need it. I personally think that another 0.500 season or less will be a rebuild next year. Being in the playoff hunt would be another discussion. I do think that some front offices "tank" on occasion (like the Browns recently, and possibly the Jets this season). I'm not sure if their ultimate goal is losing (although i find it very hard to argue that the Browns had any aspirations of winning games when they basically purged their roster of the little talent that it had 2 seasons ago and I suspect that's part of the Jets plan this year - lose games to get a top QB next year, but that's just speculation on my part at this point), but they're definitely not trying to win either. I guess that's just part of a full scale rebuild, though. But I agree in that I don't think any NFL coach or players try to purposely lose games. I also agree with what you said about the Bills not tanking. Like you said, Tyrod and Kyle (etc) would not have been brought back if that was the goal. I don't think Tyrod is only a $1M dead cap hit if cut next year, though, is he? It shows an $8.6M dead cap hit on overthecap.com (pre-June 1st) and a $9M cap savings, which still isn't terrible especially since it's only for a season. I think a post-June 1st cut is cheaper, but spread out longer? I'm not sure though. But yeah, I just don't see what the Bills are doing as tanking in any way, shape or form. I'm not really even sure what someone could point to as to (legitimate) reasons why the Bills are tanking... I don't think they would have signed Hyde, or went afte Maclin and Barnidge, or traded up in the draft twice to plug holes on their roster if the goal was to tank.
Watkins101 Posted June 30, 2017 Posted June 30, 2017 Here's to hoping the Chiefs lose every game this year, us getting the #1 pick, getting a great qb, and then a wr/te depending on how Sammy/clay performs with our pick.
#34fan Posted June 30, 2017 Author Posted June 30, 2017 Says right here... We're not picking in the top ten in '18 http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/way-too-early-2018-nfl-mock-draft-its-all-about-the-franchise-quarterbacks/
#34fan Posted June 30, 2017 Author Posted June 30, 2017 Some think this may be worth tanking for.... Sammy D looks tough... Better than Rosen IMO.... Very tough call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM82bzlZkdE
26CornerBlitz Posted June 30, 2017 Posted June 30, 2017 Some think this may be worth tanking for.... Sammy D looks tough... Better than Rosen IMO.... Very tough call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM82bzlZkdE
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted July 1, 2017 Posted July 1, 2017 (edited) Some think this may be worth tanking for.... Sammy D looks tough... Better than Rosen IMO.... Very tough call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM82bzlZkdE for those who love the tank idea... join the army of tankers https://worldoftanks.com/ have fun! Edited July 1, 2017 by DaBillsFanSince1973
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted July 1, 2017 Posted July 1, 2017 for those who love the tank idea... join the army of tankers https://worldoftanks.com/ have fun! ...sadly bud OH FER 17 YEARS tells me there is no need for a FORCED tank effort......seems to have come naturally..........BUT....the cadre of Beane, McD, and their respective staffs of vets and young gun 40 somethings have me as optimistic as the Polian era.....sure it's on paper, but THAT paper looks pretty damn good....stay tuned...............
DaBillsFanSince1973 Posted July 1, 2017 Posted July 1, 2017 (edited) ...sadly bud OH FER 17 YEARS tells me there is no need for a FORCED tank effort......seems to have come naturally..........BUT....the cadre of Beane, McD, and their respective staffs of vets and young gun 40 somethings have me as optimistic as the Polian era.....sure it's on paper, but THAT paper looks pretty damn good....stay tuned............... I can say the same about the optimism. I don't fall in to the 17 years crowd. hell, I wont even be here for another 17 so I'm not going to dwell on the 17 behind me. no, it's a football game and I will look forward to yet another season and be grateful if I can. they're heading in to 2017 with a different regime which seems to be taking a different approach. one I like so far and anxious to see how this staff and team transition it to the field. I already have a good sense the defense will be stepping up. been a while since I had this much anticipation. Edited July 1, 2017 by DaBillsFanSince1973
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted July 1, 2017 Posted July 1, 2017 I can say the same about the optimism. I don't fall in to the 17 years crowd. hell, I wont even be here for another 17 so I'm not going to dwell on the 17 behind me. no, it's a football game and I will look forward to yet another season and be grateful if I can. they're heading in to 2017 with a different regime which seems to be taking a different approach. one I like so far and anxious to see how this staff and team transition it to the field. I already have a good sense the defense will be stepping up. been a while since I had this much anticipation. .....agree on the anticipation part....it's like OBD's "little purple pill".....woot for an old guy... ...another 17?....seriously?......already have my "reservation" in "Hell's Kitchen" LONG before another 17 and they tell me reception sucks there.....boyz better hurry up...........
SoTier Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 Some think this may be worth tanking for.... Sammy D looks tough... Better than Rosen IMO.... Very tough call. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KM82bzlZkdE Who, exactly, besides draft nuts, media mavens, and message board GM wannabes, would "some" include? Certainly not employed NFL GMs and HCs who want to remain employed because they're busy looking for players that can help them win in the upcoming season, not drooling over the high light videos of college kids who have 1+ years of college eligibility remaining. Scouts might be keeping tabs on some of the best looking ones, but no GM would decide to throw away a season just for chance to draft a specific college player. Too many kids who looked so great as juniors either get injured or don't perform up to snuff as seniors for an NFL team to commit to "tanking". Moreover, especially among QBs, too many supposedly "great" prospects who had excellent senior years have crashed and burned because they couldn't adapt to the pro game. Keep in mind that in order for a mid-pack team to deliberately tank, the FO would have to make the decision to do so even before the FA period and the NFL draft so that it could shed key talent via FA and trades. Then it would have to pass on talented players in the current year's draft who could play well as rookies in order to preserve its chance to pick in the first slot in next year's draft. Now, this might seem sensible to you, but it's simply an absurd scenario to most sensible people. Somehow, I think NFL GMs are more concerned with the collegiate players currently in the draft than with who might be in the draft the following year.
NoSaint Posted July 3, 2017 Posted July 3, 2017 So far what has Suck for Luck gotten Indy? Like a 15 year window to figure out a roster around a qb that could win it all
Recommended Posts