eball Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 i think you could argue FA priorities. Aggressively targeting bad players like Ducasse so early was odd, to say the least. Is Ducasse not exactly the sort of veteran "depth" one wants? You guys need to make up your minds -- either the Bills do or don't want to build a roster that can withstand some bumps and bruises.
Kirby Jackson Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 Is Ducasse not exactly the sort of veteran "depth" one wants? You guys need to make up your minds -- either the Bills do or don't want to build a roster that can withstand some bumps and bruises. For me, it's about the right guys. Ducasse has been a bad football player, as has Yates, amongst others. You don't need to add guys just because they've played if they aren't any good. Guys like Tolbert are an example of solid veteran depth. I'm not the biggest Tolbert fan but he's a guy that's been effective for stretches of his career. At this point Byrd would be good veteran depth.
BringBackOrton Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 (edited) Dont you think complaining about players like ducasse is nitpicking a bit? We have a incombant starter....then you have other players that are gonna make the team that can play that position like groy As far as free agent priorities.....probably the biggest one was Micah Hyde....who to say the least looks like he is gonna be a important player......are you complaining about Holmes? They did in fact draft in that area and already have a number 1 WR They resigned a pro bowl LB....and got a promsing LB for cheap by being patient Where exactly did they make a mistake (I mean we dont really know yet but still) "Nitpicking" implies you agree it was a mistake, just not one you really care about. That doesn't make it any less of a mistake. Ducasse being an FA priority was a mistake. Point blank. I know you like to always hope for the best, and I respect that, but you can't ask "What mistakes have been made?" and then play the "We don't know anything for sure until the season plays out" card. It makes all our discussions pointless. Is Ducasse not exactly the sort of veteran "depth" one wants? You guys need to make up your minds -- either the Bills do or don't want to build a roster that can withstand some bumps and bruises. No because he's absolute garbage. That's like calling EJ good vet QB depth. If the Raiders acquired EJ in the first few days of FA and paraded it as good QB depth, I'd call it a mistake as well. For me, it's about the right guys. Ducasse has been a bad football player, as has Yates, amongst others. You don't need to add guys just because they've played if they aren't any good. Guys like Tolbert are an example of solid veteran depth. I'm not the biggest Tolbert fan but he's a guy that's been effective for stretches of his career. At this point Byrd would be good veteran depth. Agreed! We should have already gotten him with his dad being the coach. Edited August 4, 2017 by jmc12290
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 For me, it's about the right guys. Ducasse has been a bad football player, as has Yates, amongst others. You don't need to add guys just because they've played if they aren't any good. Guys like Tolbert are an example of solid veteran depth. I'm not the biggest Tolbert fan but he's a guy that's been effective for stretches of his career. At this point Byrd would be good veteran depth. Nailed it.
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 For me, it's about the right guys. Ducasse has been a bad football player, as has Yates, amongst others. You don't need to add guys just because they've played if they aren't any good. Guys like Tolbert are an example of solid veteran depth. I'm not the biggest Tolbert fan but he's a guy that's been effective for stretches of his career. At this point Byrd would be good veteran depth. Agreed. But coaches love experience even if that experience sucks!
That's No Moon Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 I don't think Ducasse is making the football team. I think they keep Mudge instead.
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 "Nitpicking" implies you agree it was a mistake, just not one you really care about. That doesn't make it any less of a mistake. Ducasse being an FA priority was a mistake. Point blank. I know you like to always hope for the best, and I respect that, but you can't ask "What mistakes have been made?" and then play the "We don't know anything for sure until the season plays out" card. It makes all our discussions pointless. No because he's absolute garbage. That's like calling EJ good vet QB depth. If the Raiders acquired EJ in the first few days of FA and paraded it as good QB depth, I'd call it a mistake as well. Agreed! We should have already gotten him with his dad being the coach. Just because they didnt get the players you wanted that means they are making mistakes? Sorry.....I just dont see it
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 I don't think Ducasse is making the football team. I think they keep Mudge instead. I'd like to see someone else win his spot, but the reality is that (a) they gave him a 3-year contract that would cost more to cut prior to this season than it would to keep him, and (b) he's gotten first-team reps in OTAs, mini-camp, and TC.
BringBackOrton Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 Just because they didnt get the players you wanted that means they are making mistakes? Sorry.....I just dont see it No, because they targeted a bum as a priority means they made a mistake.
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 I'd like to see someone else win his spot, but the reality is that (a) they gave him a 3-year contract that would cost more to cut prior to this season than it would to keep him, and (b) he's gotten first-team reps in OTAs, mini-camp, and TC. Im not going to call it a mistake till I actually see him in our scheme. but...who knows we may never see him....my guess is Groy would be next up if either of our starting Guard or center went down. No, because they targeted a bum as a priority means they made a mistake. I realize that you are this astute talent evaluator who has NFL teams knocking down your door....but I think I will wait till the new coaches make that determination sir.
eball Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 For me, it's about the right guys. Ducasse has been a bad football player, as has Yates, amongst others. You don't need to add guys just because they've played if they aren't any good. Guys like Tolbert are an example of solid veteran depth. I'm not the biggest Tolbert fan but he's a guy that's been effective for stretches of his career. At this point Byrd would be good veteran depth. If you read writeups about Ducasse you see that there was some noted improvement last season, and he is precisely the kind of guy a team with an already decent OL brings in for depth and a spot start.
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 Im not going to call it a mistake till I actually see him in our scheme. but...who knows we may never see him....my guess is Groy would be next up if either of our starting Guard or center went down. That's my beef with the move John--he's unlikely to even be active on the Week 1 roster barring injury. Groy will be the interior backup and the odd-man-out of Henderson/Mills/Dawkins will be the swing OT. That means that he is, at best, your 8th OLman.
artmalibu Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 And your getting on my takes? Ducasse is awful. There's a difference between solid veteran depth and guys like Ducasse. So you watched all his game film and all the other guys that were available to know who is better? You also know who they reached out to that were not interested? At some point you have to have a little faith they brought in the best guys available for the positions of need.
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 That's my beef with the move John--he's unlikely to even be active on the Week 1 roster barring injury. Groy will be the interior backup and the odd-man-out of Henderson/Mills/Dawkins will be the swing OT. That means that he is, at best, your 8th OLman. So for you it isnt the talent but the money spent? I can see that arguement. What happens if he actually plays well for us?
eball Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 So you aren't saying the Bills might have adequate depth to not suffer a big setback with normal injuries? What are you saying then? Not sure you understand what a straw man argument is..........people like Scott, Kirby and myself have expressed concern about the lack of decent depth and it's potential impact..........we are creating/initiating the argument.......not responding to it with something out of left field. The response argument seems to be along the lines of......"well Bills management knows better".........because, you know, their plans never blow up in their face due to foreseeable flaws in them. I'm saying I'm sick of hearing about the Bills having "no depth" when the truth is nobody knows, because there are new faces being asked to provide that depth. How do you know whether or not the rookies will be decent? How do you know whether or not other players show signs of development and improvement? I'm not saying "Bills management knows better" but I'm also not saying they don't. I'll trust McD, Beane, and their experienced staff more than a bunch of yokels on a message board until I see the results on the field for myself.
thebandit27 Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 So for you it isnt the talent but the money spent? I can see that arguement. What happens if he actually plays well for us? It's both...I felt that he was a poor allocation of all resources (money, roster spot, time in pursuit). If he plays, and plays well, then I'll do as I always do and change my disposition.
Andrew Son Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 It's both...I felt that he was a poor allocation of all resources (money, roster spot, time in pursuit). If he plays, and plays well, then I'll do as I always do and change my disposition. Or you could do what Badol does and say that you were right, and knew that he could play well if he just stopped playing poorly.
Jamie Nails Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 So nothing on Boldin? Ok, carry on with the offensive line depth thread.
Kirby Jackson Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 If you read writeups about Ducasse you see that there was some noted improvement last season, and he is precisely the kind of guy a team with an already decent OL brings in for depth and a spot start. I guess this is the disagreement. I would rather have a young guy as the 5th interior OL instead of a journeyman that has struggled. I hope that he improves as he is likely going to make the team. He's just not a good decision IMO. If they didn't have Groy maybe it would have made some sense (and maybe that was the thinking).
John from Riverside Posted August 4, 2017 Posted August 4, 2017 I guess this is the disagreement. I would rather have a young guy as the 5th interior OL instead of a journeyman that has struggled. I hope that he improves as he is likely going to make the team. He's just not a good decision IMO. If they didn't have Groy maybe it would have made some sense (and maybe that was the thinking). This is kinda where I get to the nitpicking thing Does it really matter where the player you dont like falls on the depth chart as long as the bills have adequately addressed the situation? We have several interior offensive linemen that can play center/guard to include a promising young player in Groy who isnt even a starter at this point. There are plenty of NFL teams that WISHED they had that kind of depth at that postition. For a team that does have depth concerns this is the last place I would be looking to nitpick.
Recommended Posts