LeGOATski Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 As it always seems to be for Bills' fans, there is always something negative to draw - KC looked very good, good enough that their 1st round pick is unlikely to be very helpful in trading up for a QB in 2018. Looks like unless the Bills are bad enough to earn a top 3 pick on their own, the QB problem will persist beyond next year. Surprised? They looked good in preseason and have been a playoff-caliber team the last few years. Who here thought they would get us a top 10 pick?
Kelly the Dog Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 As it always seems to be for Bills' fans, there is always something negative to draw - KC looked very good, good enough that their 1st round pick is unlikely to be very helpful in trading up for a QB in 2018. Looks like unless the Bills are bad enough to earn a top 3 pick on their own, the QB problem will persist beyond next year.The top pick or top.two doesn't mean or guarantee anything. You have to get lucky AND be smart. Â Is Goff, Wentz or Dak the guy you want? Â Is Marriota or Winston the guy? Â There are precious few sure things. The only one in the last ten years is Luck and a lot of fans don't even think he is worth it. Â Even high first round picks are less than 50-50 to become solid franchise quarterbacks. There are only 10-12 people in the world who can excel consistently.
OldTimer1960 Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 The top pick or top.two doesn't mean or guarantee anything. You have to get lucky AND be smart. Is Goff, Wentz or Dak the guy you want? Is Marriota or Winston the guy? There are precious few sure things. The only one in the last ten years is Luck and a lot of fans don't even think he is worth it. Even high first round picks are less than 50-50 to become solid franchise quarterbacks. There are only 10-12 people in the world who can excel consistently. No question about that, but the large majority of very good QB prospects are selected very early in the draft. If a QB prospect lasts beyond the first few picks in an NFL draft, it is because that prospect has either some less than ideal traits or has unanswered questions such as inexperience, coming from a non-pro style systems, injury history, size, arm strength, etc - For sure, it doesn't mean that prospects like that can't succeed, but the very best prospects go very early.
Philly McButterpants Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Surprised? They looked good in preseason and have been a playoff-caliber team the last few years. Who here thought they would get us a top 10 pick? Â KC suffered a couple of key injuries as well, so . . . .
4merper4mer Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 I agree that they looked like dog crap, especially on defense but I have seen them look bad in week one before. Keep in mind......no cheatin tapes yet. They started ok and were not able to make critical adjustments on offense. Hmmmmmm I wonder if they will know a way to fix that. Â They did look like crap though.
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 I missed most of the second half, so I would love to see a replay. I am shocked that 1) the Patriots lost that game 2) that they lost that badly and 3) that they had such a huge 4th quarter discrepancy. Â I've remarked before that I think the Brady dynasty is winding down. The man is already older than Manning when he retired, and Belicheck went against usual procedure by bidding crazy high for Gilmore, and giving up draft picks for Cooks and Gilly. Â I will not be shocked if the Pats bounce back, but they definitely put out tape on how to attack them.
aristocrat Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Gronk 2 for 33 yards? He looked like he was having trouble running. Â Â Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Philly McButterpants Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 I missed most of the second half, so I would love to see a replay. I am shocked that 1) the Patriots lost that game 2) that they lost that badly and 3) that they had such a huge 4th quarter discrepancy. Â I've remarked before that I think the Brady dynasty is winding down. The man is already older than Manning when he retired, and Belicheck went against usual procedure by bidding crazy high for Gilmore, and giving up draft picks for Cooks and Gilly. Â I will not be shocked if the Pats bounce back, but they definitely put out tape on how to attack them. Â BB wanted to win now, so he gives up draft picks to stock his current roster to get a shot at another ring. I would LOVE it if they limp to 8-8 or worse AND they mortgaged the future. Karma MF'er.
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Â BB wanted to win now, so he gives up draft picks to stock his current roster to get a shot at another ring. I would LOVE it if they limp to 8-8 or worse AND they mortgaged the future. Karma MF'er. Believe it, I would love that too. Â I think one of the most telling remarks I saw on the Pats forums was "Brady *looks* 40". I'm also remembering how fast Manning went downhill at the end of 2014 and then how he looked in 2015. Â Brady has already beaten the odds on time, and even a diminished Brady is still likely the best QB in the AFCE, but yeah, it would be quite a nice surprise of they spin their wheels this year and be stuck with bad contracts and an aging QB next year
H2o Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 Brady looked average last night. The Chiefs also showed everyone some soft spots in the Pats armor. I will never talk of their demise until it is fully upon us, but the Pats do look beatable this year and there will certainly be more losses to come.
TPS Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 It looks like their #1 weakness is lack of an effective pass rush. The Run D was average too. As for KC, I think the Bills will look like that in another year or two.
CSBill Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 The bastards are tanking for Darnold!!! Ugh! -Eighteen more years of dominance, for a single season's sacrifice. Â Always one set ahead of the Bills, beating us at losing now. Ugh!
KellyToughII Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 I agree its not just losing huge, at home with all the hype, but they honestly look bad. They look like a normal, good team with holes...not the normal Pats*
Kirby Jackson Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 (edited) I agree its not just losing huge, at home with all the hype, but they honestly look bad. They look like a normal, good team with holes...not the normal Pats*I agree with this 1000%. They did not look at all like the Pats on either side of the ball. I'm going to eat a little crow as well. I'm on record as saying that I thought the Pats had a legit shot at 16-0 this year. In my defense I think that was before the Edelman injury. They are a different team without him. My dad has been telling me that for years and I usually just shrug it off. He's Brady's safe option. He acts as their running game. Brady looks for him when he knows they need some momentum. All that being said though they didn't look at all like the team that I expected to see. Brady looked average last night. The Chiefs also showed everyone some soft spots in the Pats armor. I will never talk of their demise until it is fully upon us, but the Pats do look beatable this year and there will certainly be more losses to come.Oh, you mean they attacked them down the field? I've been screaming this offseason about the Bills lack of big play ability on offense now. That was my issue with a lot of these moves. You need chunk plays. You can't always count on 15 play drives. KC torched them last night with them. Well it's a good thing that we....ah nevermind Edited September 8, 2017 by Kirby Jackson
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 I agree with this 1000%. They did not look at all like the Pats on either side of the ball. Â I'm going to eat a little crow as well. I'm on record as saying that I thought the Pats had a legit shot at 16-0 this year. In my defense I think that was before the Edelman injury. They are a different team without him. My dad has been telling me that for years and I usually just shrug it off. He's Brady's safe option. He acts as their running game. Brady looks for him when he knows they need some momentum. All that being said though they didn't look at all like the team that I expected to see. Oh, you mean they attacked them down the field? I've been screaming this offseason about the Bills lack of big play ability on offense now. That was my issue with a lot of these moves. You need chunk plays. You can't always count on 15 play drives. KC torched them last night with them. Well it's a good thing that we....ah nevermind Great point! I don't think the Bills have the ability to exploit one of the Pats biggest weaknesses. We don't need no Warkins.
clearwater cadet Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 it's to early to celebrate, but I've come to the point were I enjoy a pats loss as much as a bills victory.
Bleeding Bills Blue Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 They need that edelman safety valve. He was forced to hold the ball longer, and they put more people in coverage to make it harder to find people. Brady needed to be very accurate, and he was not.
Big Turk Posted September 8, 2017 Posted September 8, 2017 (edited) Meh.. who cares, it's week one, lots of crazy things happen...would you bet $1000 if these teams meet in the playoffs the end result would be the same? Hell no...Chiefs would get curb stomped. Edited September 8, 2017 by matter2003
Recommended Posts