Kelly the Dog Posted August 14, 2017 Author Posted August 14, 2017 They could very well have been showcasing him Kelly - but I also think it's very possible that Dennison was actually trying to install an offense around his best player... either way it's depressing, honestly. I'm still very, very upset about this trade. Yeah, I think the four passes is possible but highly unlikely. Even if he was trying to do that I doubt it would be done that way. And it's possible that it just was part Tyrod looking over the defense and deciding that the go-to guy on that call vs that defense was Sammy. It just seemed to me impossible that McD didn't know about the LA offer before the game and there was no showcasing. It's possible. That's why I started the thread to discuss the disparate sides and to see what people thought. Like you, I think the whole thing was depressing. I liked Beane until the trade. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because I understood the other side and why he did it I just violently disagreed with it. But then I thought he was not being forthright about how it happened for no reason and it made me distrust him a little more when I don't want to. That was the idea of the thread. I actually want smart posters to convince me that he wasn't being dishonest. Who cares? Humans on Earth? Im not going pretend to think to know what someone i never met is thinking or doing. But i will say, if sammy took 1 of those 4 passes to the house he would still be a Bill. That's an interesting thought. I have no idea if that would have mattered either way. But it's a great point to ponder. I guess I believe they still would have made the trade, or else one of the other teams interested, after seeing that, could have upped the ante and we got more for him. One of the many bad ideas IMO about the trade is that we didn't get nearly enough for him. I believe the offense is structured now in the West Coast mold and that is the reason I didn't like the trade. Because Sammy would thrive in that. No I do not think it was scripted to show his trade value; I think he was open and TT threw him the ball. And no I do not think Beane kept it from McD. In fact Beane said he, the coach, and the owner all discussed it before the trade was made. The conspiracy stuff is silly in my opinion. But Beane came right out and said he didn't discuss it with McD. That is the point of the thread. Beane said he told McD about it after the game.
mrags Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 GMs and front office people in the NFL and all sports for that matter lie about these things. It's like playing poker. You don't show your hand or tell anyone what your holding. And the more people see your hand the more they know how you bet in the future. Give them nothing. Take everything.
Maddog69 Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 What does Beane have to gain by telling a complete lie? I understand the Bills have been bad for a long time and we've had some incompetent people making decisions at times, but I don't understand the conspiracy theory. I believe he was telling the truth. What I personally think happened was that Philly called and upped their offer for Darby because they got desperate for a CB. I think Beane was holding out for a little more from LA for Sammy. But once they got the sweetheart deal with Philly, the Sammy trade was more palatable. Sounds like it all really came together during and just after our game.
Coach Tuesday Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 What does Beane have to gain by telling a complete lie? Well, one thing it would do is take pressure off of his coach...
oldmanfan Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Yeah, I think the four passes is possible but highly unlikely. Even if he was trying to do that I doubt it would be done that way. And it's possible that it just was part Tyrod looking over the defense and deciding that the go-to guy on that call vs that defense was Sammy. It just seemed to me impossible that McD didn't know about the LA offer before the game and there was no showcasing. It's possible. That's why I started the thread to discuss the disparate sides and to see what people thought. Like you, I think the whole thing was depressing. I liked Beane until the trade. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because I understood the other side and why he did it I just violently disagreed with it. But then I thought he was not being forthright about how it happened for no reason and it made me distrust him a little more when I don't want to. That was the idea of the thread. I actually want smart posters to convince me that he wasn't being dishonest. Humans on Earth? That's an interesting thought. I have no idea if that would have mattered either way. But it's a great point to ponder. I guess I believe they still would have made the trade, or else one of the other teams interested, after seeing that, could have upped the ante and we got more for him. One of the many bad ideas IMO about the trade is that we didn't get nearly enough for him. But Beane came right out and said he didn't discuss it with McD. That is the point of the thread. Beane said he told McD about it after the game. My understanding is he told him about the offer but the trade was not done until the GM, HC and owner discussed it together.
ALF Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 I think Beane and McD are planning for long term success not short I hope. jmo
Alphadawg7 Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 I thought this concept deserves its own thread. Perhaps MODS don't. You decide. Brandon Beane, who for the most part I very much like, even though I hated the trades, said on WGR I believe that he never discussed the trade possibilities with Opie until AFTER the game against the Vikings. He never brought it up. That means they weren't auditioning Sammy for the Rams or the other three teams that expressed interest by the first four plays all going to Watkins. Frankly, I find that very hard to believe on both counts. That he hadn't discussed the trade with McDermott, and that it was just coincidence that four plays in a row out of a possible four went to SW. Now granted, everyone knows that what GMs say to the press and public have to be taken with grain of salt. But he didn't at all have to say it this way, and went out of his way, AFTER the trade, to say that Opie knew nothing about it, and it wasn't an audition. And Sammy even says he thinks it was. That really makes me, personally, not believe Beane for the first time, early in his tenure. And it will take some time to make me believe he is being forthright with the press and the fans. Not a good way to start, and it seems like it was an unforced error. So, do you believe Beane that he never discussed the trade before the Vikes game AND the four straight passes to Sammy were just coincidence? Or that Beane lied about it? And can you think of a good reason why he would lie about this particular thing. While I get its totally plausible that a GM isnt being fully upfront, nor should they be, about everything behind closed doors...at the same time, if you watch the game again like I did just to see Sammy one more time in a Bilsl uni, Tyrod made the right read on every throw. Sammy badly beaten his man and was wide open on every play. So unless you believe Tyrod was in on it, which there was no way he way, then its pretty hard to make this case. Its not like they forced it. Its the offenses job to execute, and TT made the right play on every one of those throws. So for me personally, i am going to take Beanes word on it. Plus, if they were really doing it shop Watkins to seal a trade, I would think they maybe throw his way a couple times to show hes healthy, not risk an injury on 4 straight plays if a trade was just about to complete.
oldmanfan Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 If they were showcasing the guy theyy would have played him more and sent him long a few times to show he still had his speed.
Last Guy on the Bench Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 (edited) I can't see how catching a few passes in a preseason game would be an audition or a demonstration of anything - especially when a guy has been around for 3 years. If a trading partner was going to base their decision on that they would be crazy. Even just to show he's healthy - who's going to put stock in a few plays (which he could gut out) as opposed to the full medical he would definitely be getting? Other teams know all about Sammy Watkins. They are not sitting around watching three or four plays in a preseason games and going, "Hey wait a minute, this guy is good! Let's trade our injured third string CB and a mediocre draft pick for him!" Maybe if he was some UDFA, that would make sense, but not in this case. In fact, if a trade was already potentially in the cards, I don't think they play him at all. Why risk injury? Edited August 14, 2017 by Last Guy on the Bench
4merper4mer Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 I think Beane and McD are planning for long term success not short I hope. jmo Short term self sabotage does not guarantee long term success.
Buftex Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Who cares? It is relevant to a degree. The last GM was crucified by the media and fans for not being truthful about the way Rex Ryans' departure was handled. Sammy Watkins is better at what he does, than Rex was at what he did....
EmotionallyUnstable Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 (edited) I got roasted in another thread for suggesting too many people are giving too much credit to McD and Beane. In fact, I stated some people are "crowning" them. I wonder if my perspective would be as outrageous now as it was a week ago. I don't trust either of them. Culture, discipline, process all sound excellent. But they guys are inexperienced at their current position, seem to deceive (maybe indirectly)players and media. I'm glad i don't have to answer to someone who shows no alligence to anyone but their own people. Edited August 14, 2017 by AlwaysBilleve
mrags Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Sammy Watkins is better at what he does, than Rex was at what he did....Rex doesn't get hurt as much?
Coach Tuesday Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Rex doesn't get hurt as much? Can you push yourself to try a bit harder?
Joe Miner Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 So in 1 thread we're supposed to believe Sammy wanted to be here because he said so, but in this thread Beane is a liar because of 4 plays between a QB and wr who needed to get on the same page and only had 1 quarter to do so. Whaley was a liar at the press conference fiasco, but maybe only in his intent, maybe not technically in his words. Name a player, coach, of GM that made a controversial statement and a good portion of people will believe they're a liar. We like to believe people when they say what we want to hear or agree with and call them liars when they don't. Chances are, most of what they're telling the media is a giant shade of gray.
wiskibreth Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Short term self sabotage does not guarantee long term success. Sabotage, really?... anyway... it doesn't extinguish the possibility of success either. Time will tell.
mrags Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Can you push yourself to try a bit harder? no. I think I'm at maximum effort. Kind of Like Sammy when he plays 6 games a season
nucci Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 Im not going pretend to think to know what someone i never met is thinking or doing. But i will say, if sammy took 1 of those 4 passes to the house he would still be a Bill. That would have been interesting
Kelly the Dog Posted August 14, 2017 Author Posted August 14, 2017 I can't see how catching a few passes in a preseason game would be an audition or a demonstration of anything - especially when a guy has been around for 3 years. If a trading partner was going to base their decision on that they would be crazy. Even just to show he's healthy - who's going to put stock in a few plays (which he could gut out) as opposed to the full medical he would definitely be getting? Other teams know all about Sammy Watkins. They are not sitting around watching three or four plays in a preseason games and going, "Hey wait a minute, this guy is good! Let's trade our injured third string CB and a mediocre draft pick for him!" Maybe if he was some UDFA, that would make sense, but not in this case. In fact, if a trade was already potentially in the cards, I don't think they play him at all. Why risk injury? One of the reasons that the foot injury hurts Watkins a little more than other WRs is how quick and hard he makes his stops, cuts and his breaks. They are noticeably different than everyone else on the team. It's the reason he can get wide open on a seven yard out pass, and one of the many reasons why he is unstoppable when healthy. If I were the Rams and about to make that trade I think those four plays would seal the deal for me that he is 100% healthy.
K D Posted August 14, 2017 Posted August 14, 2017 After I saw they traded him one of my first thought was "oh so the first free passes were an audition." But if Beane says nobody knew then I believe him until he gives us a reason not to. Maybe he said throw the first few to Watkins to get him going and didn't say why. That's certainly possible
.thumb.jpg.529869a0a9afd197241cad0932282c97.jpg)
Recommended Posts