Rico Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Yo, if you're the one with the rest of the inside gouge can you share? Last sentence. https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/196455-sammy-watch/page-49?do=findComment&comment=4577929
Bills Pimpin' Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Yo, if you're the one with the rest of the inside gouge can you share? It may be worth remembering that the Bills great talent won them a lot of football games, but never the championship, in 4 tries. Twice, they lost to teams with significantly lesser talent at "skill" positions. May bes don't fly in December (or January) but it is just possible that a bit more "team first" attitude would have gotten them over the top, no? Could be true. Every team is different and every coaching style is different. All of the folks that hate the Sammy trade based on talent let go and talent/picks received are right on. I would guess that McD and Beane in a talent vacuum would agree with those people. But all you have to do is listen to any McD press conference where he talks about team and loving each other and building a culture basically every sentence to realize why Sammy was traded, especially after hearing these comments from the player.
JohnBonhamRocks Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 I think the distinction to be made with Sam-me Wantkins is between (1) wanting the ball, which of course I want my WR1 to do, and (2) voicing that want of the ball in a way that adversely impacts the locker room. I do think the little "little jobs" tweet is pretty emblematic of his attitude problem. Had to look it up, and forgot that a reason people were upset, among others, was that he was too injured to play but then healthy enough to vacation to Disney the same week.
26CornerBlitz Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 I think the distinction to be made with Sam-me Wantkins is between (1) wanting the ball, which of course I want my WR1 to do, and (2) voicing that want of the ball in a way that adversely impacts the locker room. I do think the little "little jobs" tweet is pretty emblematic of his attitude problem. Had to look it up, and forgot that a reason people were upset, among others, was that he was too injured to play but then healthy enough to vacation to Disney the same week. That is a very stupid correlation to make.
Bill_with_it Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 A Vegas insider RJ Bell explained in detail how lines move due to injuiries and inactive players when Gronk was listed as out on Thursday. He said only about 32 players around the league other than QB's impact the line. Gronk moved it a "smidge" I think was his words, a half a point. I agree that the WR position has been mismanaged but i don't have much faith in Watkins. I wrote this to let yah know, ain't no way in hell Sammy Watkins moves a line, nevermind 3 points. RJ bell is on twitter if you or anyone would like to get a solid confirmation on that. There are a lot of posters that will have a diificult time grasping this. Wrong again cupcake. It's not an insult. It means your points are soft and sweet, but contain little substance. Actually its not funny its immature and backs my point 100% that you never watched Kelly and Reed work the field together let alone know how Reed felt. So once again carry on. Although its 100% that you wouldnt act like this in person.
26CornerBlitz Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 There are a lot of posters that will have a diificult time grasping this. Actually its not funny its immature and backs my point 100% that you never watched Kelly and Reed work the field together let alone know how Reed felt. So once again carry on. Although its 100% that you wouldnt act like this in person. Wrong again cupcake no matter how many times you post it.
Bill_with_it Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Wrong again cupcake no matter how many times you post it. myhere is ni way you are older than 24-25. The way you carry yourself with regard to this board and reply/converse is a key indicator that you clearly are immature. Every single post you dont agree with you insult the poster if it bothers you, regardlesss if its founded on concrete substance, if a player confirmed it, or if it was reported by multiple outlets or the coach or gm himself stated it for all to hear.Nevertheless, your personal takes (not the 100 million copies and pastes) are usually so awful that imai think its going to just keep me away from any of the threads you start. So just keep on insulting it speaks volumes of you as a man, your age, and your ability to converse.
26CornerBlitz Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 myhere is ni way you are older than 24-25. The way you carry yourself with regard to this board and reply/converse is a key indicator that you clearly are immature. Every single post you dont agree with you insult the poster if it bothers you, regardlesss if its founded on concrete substance, if a player confirmed it, or if it was reported by multiple outlets or the coach or gm himself stated it for all to hear. Nevertheless, your personal takes (not the 100 million copies and pastes) are usually so awful that imai think its going to just keep me away from any of the threads you start. So just keep on insulting it speaks volumes of you as a man, your age, and your ability to converse. I couldn't care any less about what you think.
JohnC Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) Marshawn Lynch was a real POS too........then the Bills traded him at age 24. As I've said MANY times over MANY years here.........when you draft a 20 year old kid onto a losing culture/rudderless ship and expect him to be a star player.......you are asking to fail. I've rarely seen such consensus on TSW that a player was a complete POS and was guaranteed to fail elsewhere as when Marshawn Lynch was traded........obviously a lot of idiots on TSW. They had weathered the worst of the problems with Lynch.......just as they had with Watkins.........at that age, things change fast. But AT LEAST they had Jackson when they dealt Lynch......and had addressed the position with a potential star talent in CJ Spiller........there was NOTHING behind Watkins and "Drop Zone" Jones was low ceiling/high floor prospect who has shown a much lower floor than imagined. The Matthews trade just yielded them a better posession WR than Holmes..........the Watkins trade only made ANY sense if the team was tanking and the Rams were going to be bad. So far the trade has cost the Bills one game and it's going to take a HERCULEAN effort from Tyrod Taylor to prevent a second loss Sunday..........in a game that they would probably be favored in if they had any kind of reliable WR talent. With respect to the highlighted segment the Bills were not tanking as exhibited by their record and their willingness to give a veteran such as Wood a new beefy contract. Whether the Rams were going to be good or not was irrelevant to the Bills because they were without any hesitation going to get rid of him, no matter what. So they took the best deal they could. It's as simple as that. There's no need for a deep analysis when the issue was so obvious. What's the point of McDermott taking over the football team and with religious zeal talking about unity and team and then giving a talented diva receiver who was detached from his mates a rich long term contract. The message the wrestling coach gave to the locker room is that his message was backed up by action. One of the first things that McDermott did after getting a sense of the locker room was not signing his option. From day one he and his staff were looking to deal him. What's the surprise? In the short-term are the Bills a better team with Sammy? Obviously so. But McDermott/Beane are not making a player calculation from a one year perspective. They are looking at it from the perspective of rebuilding the roster with the type of players they want for the long haul. Clearly, he's not one of them. In fact, even the departed player acknowledges his attitude was wayward! Would Sammy have made a difference record-wise for this team if he was here? Absolutely not. The team has done fine without him. The bottom line is that your indispensable player has proved to be dispensable. From a talent standpoint Watkins is a given. Few argue otherwise. But when putting together a team from scratch the HC made it obvious that from a big picture perspective he didn't want him here. Edited October 7, 2017 by JohnC
BananaB Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 WRs being selfish is no big deal. Everyone wants to perform to the best of their ability. Kid has all the talent but seems the guys taken after him have gotten more results and more publicity. Gotta think that has something to do with it also.
JohnBonhamRocks Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 That is a very stupid correlation to make. Take it up with WYRK. http://wyrk.com/sammy-watkins-calls-fans-losers-little-jobs-picture/ How are you related to Watkins again?
26CornerBlitz Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Take it up with WYRK. http://wyrk.com/sammy-watkins-calls-fans-losers-little-jobs-picture/ How are you related to Watkins again? We do cocaine together.
JohnBonhamRocks Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 We do cocaine together. Haha the zealous defense of him makes more sense now...
YoloinOhio Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Last sentence. https://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/196455-sammy-watch/page-49?do=findComment&comment=4577929 hasnt stopped Zeke!
NoSaint Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Good points. Still, we don't know what was tried in the way of developing Watkins. It may be that expectations were set out and not met. Over the course of like 8 days of mini camp and a week of training camp? It's a pretty tight window to make any meaningful investment in a guy.
KGUNBILLS Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 In the back of my mind, I thought it was kind of dumb that we traded up for him when we could of had a better product with Mike Evans without trading a thing.
Scott7975 Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 i guess sammy is the bad guy for pointing out the obvious that the OC & HC should target their best player more than 5 times a game. it would be like this years team where if shady averaged 10 touches a game and then said he should be getting 20.....(duh) I guess your either vanilla or a distraction = media digging for stories Yeah he pointed it out to them while sitting on the sidelines with an injury. He played healthy game one and didn't get targets because Harvin and Clay lit it up. Also because he wasn't around for training camp to get reps with Tyrod. Its pretty stupid to complain about targets after your team just won two football games and he is on the sidelines with injury.
YoloinOhio Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 In the back of my mind, I thought it was kind of dumb that we traded up for him when we could of had a better product with Mike Evans without trading a thing.Mike Evans went #7 and the Bills drafted at 9.
Big C Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 Mike Evans went #7 and the Bills drafted at 9. And I think Whaley said Ebron would have been the pick otherwise.
Magox Posted October 7, 2017 Posted October 7, 2017 (edited) And I think Whaley said Ebron would have been the pick otherwise.I remember there being rumors that the Bills were very high on OBJ, and I remember thinking to myself, who? Looking back I wish we had picked OBJ. Trading that extra first and selecting a clearly inferior Sammy (production wise) set this organization back. It was one of Whaleys worst moves as GM Edited October 7, 2017 by Magox
Recommended Posts