Saints news

[Buffalo716]

Just now, Kelly the Dog said:

Sure. But it wasnt because of great scouting and brilliant drafting, which is what we were talking about.

 

Of course not 

 

it was sheer luck 

[boyst]

On 11/5/2017 at 7:54 PM, YoloinOhio said:

Yeah I’m a big fan of Brees. Class guy.

Did you know he has a child with another woman that's not his wife? Yeah nobody really talks about that but it's true

[PABillsfan23]

34 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

Did you know he has a child with another woman that's not his wife? Yeah nobody really talks about that but it's true

Who cares

[boyst]

15 minutes ago, PABillsfan23 said:

Who cares

You do, because you commented on it so... You care enough to do that. snowflakes, snowflakes everywhere

[Captain Murica]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

Did you know he has a child with another woman that's not his wife? Yeah nobody really talks about that but it's true

Brady does as well. 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

Did you know he has a child with another woman that's not his wife? Yeah nobody really talks about that but it's true

 

And.....? 

[boyst]

4 hours ago, Captain Murica said:

Brady does as well. 

no one passes brady off as mr nice guy or perfect.  

[Kirby Jackson]

11 hours ago, JohnC said:

You are not characterizing my position accurately. I'm not suggesting dumping Taylor after the selection of a upper-tier qb prospect. The Chiefs didn't cut Alex Smith after they drafted Mahomes. So why are you assuming that my position is by selecting a qb with a high round pick I'm requiring that Taylor be dispatched? This is the NFL. You are not guaranteed a job, you compete for a job. The best time to draft a qb is when you have a reasonable qb in place so you don't have to force the issue of playing a prospect before he is ready. 

 

Please don't bring up the selection of EJ in response to anything I have said regarding the position. It means absolutely nothing other that it is a demonstration of a alarming inability to evaluate players, regardless of position. Manuel was a fourth round caliber of prospect drafted in the first round by a clueless organization. Again, please don't bring up Maniziel with respect to anything that I have said regarding  to my position. Selecting him in the first round was a foolish decision by a laughable organization demonstrating the definition of stupidity. The problem with the selection was not that he was taken but that he was taken with a first round pick. 

 

Our fundamental difference is while you  believe TT is a viable franchise qb, I don't. I consider him to be at best an adequate bridge qb. I strongly believe that there are more than a few very good prospects in this draft that should be available, especially with our ability to parlay some of our acquired extra picks. The Bills have had a history of letting opportunities pass by. What has it gotten us? Talking about the next draft and the next draft and the next draft etc. It's an entrenched futility that I have little tolerance for. 

I am all for finding a franchise guy, everyone is. The problem is that you only look at the good. The Bills traded a 1st in 1998, traded a 1st in 2003, drafted a guy in the 1st in 2004, the 3rd in ‘07, the 7th in 2010, the 1st in 2013, the 4th in 2016, and the 5th in 2017. You act as if they’ve abandoned the position. Over the last 20 drafts they’ve used a 1st on QB in 20% of the drafts. They’ve also signed some guys and drafted a few others. Tyrod is the best QB of that group (I used to preface that with IMO but at this point a rational argument can’t be made for anyone else).

 

It doesn’t mean you don’t try to get a guy but they’ve tried. You can’t ignore Losman, EJ and Edwards because they didn’t work out just like you can’t ignore Manziel, Bortles and Hackenberg. Obviously Carr and Prescott worked out and it appears that Watson will as well. 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I am all for finding a franchise guy, everyone is. The problem is that you only look at the good. The Bills traded a 1st in 1998, traded a 1st in 2003, drafted a guy in the 1st in 2004, the 3rd in ‘07, the 7th in 2010, the 1st in 2013, the 4th in 2016, and the 5th in 2017. You act as if they’ve abandoned the position. Over the last 20 drafts they’ve used a 1st on QB in 20% of the drafts. They’ve also signed some guys and drafted a few others. Tyrod is the best QB of that group (I used to preface that with IMO but at this point a rational argument can’t be made for anyone else).

 

It doesn’t mean you don’t try to get a guy but they’ve tried. You can’t ignore Losman, EJ and Edwards because they didn’t work out just like you can’t ignore Manziel, Bortles and Hackenberg. Obviously Carr and Prescott worked out and it appears that Watson will as well. 

 

What I would say... and John I think agrees, is that trading 1sts for guys other teams have decided are not their starter is not a way to find a franchise QB.  The only guy who "became" a true franchise QB for a team that didn't draft him in the past 15 years is Drew Brees and he was not "traded" he was a FA after his team had drafted another QB 1st overall.  There is of course technically Philip Rivers and Eli as well.... but being traded the day of the draft in which they are picked it splitting hairs for the sake of this argument.   

 

The closest example I can think of where a guy was traded to a team and became their guy is Alex Smith, and the Chiefs just traded up in the 1st round of the Draft to find his replacement.  

 

One of Badol's favourite lines is this franchise has never spent its original first pick in a first round on a Quarterback.  That is pretty damning evidence about the way they have traditionally approached finding their guy.  Even Jim Kelly was their 2nd of two first rounders.   

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

Did you know he has a child with another woman that's not his wife? Yeah nobody really talks about that but it's true

Who appointed you the moral police? He had a child with the woman he was involved with at the time. The relationship didn't work out. That isn't so unusual. He is involved in the life of the child and is a good father. So what is your point? 

[JohnC]

21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

What I would say... and John I think agrees, is that trading 1sts for guys other teams have decided are not their starter is not a way to find a franchise QB.  The only guy who "became" a true franchise QB for a team that didn't draft him in the past 15 years is Drew Brees and he was not "traded" he was a FA after his team had drafted another QB 1st overall.  There is of course technically Philip Rivers and Eli as well.... but being traded the day of the draft in which they are picked it splitting hairs for the sake of this argument.   

 

The closest example I can think of where a guy was traded to a team and became their guy is Alex Smith, and the Chiefs just traded up in the 1st round of the Draft to find his replacement.  

 

One of Badol's favourite lines is this franchise has never spent its original first pick in a first round on a Quarterback.  That is pretty damning evidence about the way they have traditionally approached finding their guy.  Even Jim Kelly was their 2nd of two first rounders.   

You and I agree so it is like preaching to those in the choir. What Kirby, Kelly and the other good fellows constantly point out that investing a high pick on a qb is a risky endeavor. I consider it well worth it because if you hit on that pick it will positively reverberate throughout the roster, and even to an extent the defense. The Bills have had a sordid history of hitting on first round picks and then releasing or dealing off those high pick players for a variety of reasons, such as Gilmore, Watkins, Dareus etc.  My point is what were considered precious draft picks were eventually dealt away anyway. So why not take a risk on a qb prospect that can have a dramatic effect on your team. 

 

Whenever the draft approaches and qb prospects are discussed the emphasis too often is on their flaws rather than on what they can do. As an example you touted Watson last year. The consensus on this board was that he was a great college qb whose game didn't translate to the pro game. JeffisMagic and I touted Mahomes. The consensus on this board is that he played in a gimmicky offense and his mechanics were not sound. I believe he will eventually a good qb.

 

There was a recent report that the Giants' owner ordered his football operation to put an emphasis on the current college qb class. He gets it! 

[GunnerBill]

9 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Whenever the draft approaches and qb prospects are discussed the emphasis too often is on their flaws rather than on what they can do. 

 

The other thing that gets said around here often at draft time is "Quarterback is not our biggest weakness we have a bigger need at X".  I don't think you can treat Quarterback that way in the draft.  If you are balancing the level of your need at Quarterback against your need at corner or defensive tackle or offensive line then you are doing it wrong.  

[Kirby Jackson]

42 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

What I would say... and John I think agrees, is that trading 1sts for guys other teams have decided are not their starter is not a way to find a franchise QB.  The only guy who "became" a true franchise QB for a team that didn't draft him in the past 15 years is Drew Brees and he was not "traded" he was a FA after his team had drafted another QB 1st overall.  There is of course technically Philip Rivers and Eli as well.... but being traded the day of the draft in which they are picked it splitting hairs for the sake of this argument.   

 

The closest example I can think of where a guy was traded to a team and became their guy is Alex Smith, and the Chiefs just traded up in the 1st round of the Draft to find his replacement.  

 

One of Badol's favourite lines is this franchise has never spent its original first pick in a first round on a Quarterback.  That is pretty damning evidence about the way they have traditionally approached finding their guy.  Even Jim Kelly was their 2nd of two first rounders.   

I don’t disagree but they haven’t abandoned the position as some believe. They have just been wrong. I’m just tired of the cherry picking some successful mid round guy and saying “see.” It doesn’t work like that. For every one of those guys there are like 10 that flame out. As long as we keep a real perspective on the situation I’m all for it. I just don’t want to hear “we missed on Dak” without “thank God we didn’t take Lynch, Hackenberg, Brisett, Kessler, and Cook.” Using outliers and hindsight to make an argument doesn’t work.

 

I am all for taking a shot on a guy that you believe in. I don’t want to hear about that guy 8 months after the draft. For me, I still believe in Rosen as the guy in this draft. I may be bullish on that but he seems like that guy to me. If they want to aggressively try to get him cool. I like Mayfield and Jackson some too. What I don’t want to see is the Bills pass on Stidham in the 4th, him play well and a bunch of people complaining that we couldn’t identify Stidham when every other team will have passed on him 3 times. That is luck not scouting prowess.

[JohnC]

5 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I don’t disagree but they haven’t abandoned the position as some believe. They have just been wrong. I’m just tired of the cherry picking some successful mid round guy and saying “see.” It doesn’t work like that. For every one of those guys there are like 10 that flame out. As long as we keep a real perspective on the situation I’m all for it. I just don’t want to hear “we missed on Dak” without “thank God we didn’t take Lynch, Hackenberg, Brisett, Kessler, and Cook.” Using outliers and hindsight to make an argument doesn’t work.

 

I am all for taking a shot on a guy that you believe in. I don’t want to hear about that guy 8 months after the draft. For me, I still believe in Rosen as the guy in this draft. I may be bullish on that but he seems like that guy to me. If they want to aggressively try to get him cool. I like Mayfield and Jackson some too. What I don’t want to see is the Bills pass on Stidham in the 4th, him play well and a bunch of people complaining that we couldn’t identify Stidham when every other team will have passed on him 3 times.]/b] That is luck not scouting prowess.

Hitting on a player such as Stidham who may turn out to be a great player will not nearly have the impact of hitting on a qb who turns out to be a good franchise qb. Let's not forget Dareus was from a talent standpoint a worthy high pick. He showed glimpses of being one of the top DTs in the league. Overall, what was his impact in comparison to getting a franchise qb? Gilmore was a high pick and a worthy pick. He's gone. Watkins was a multiple first round pick and a superlative talent. He is gone. Kujo was a high second round pick. He is gone. Ragland was a second round pick. He is gone. My point is simple. If you want to stabilize the franchise and put it in an upward trajectory you need to solidify the qb position. You don't accomplish that by being passive and fearful when your turn comes up to go to the podium. 

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Hitting on a player such as Stidham who may turn out to be a great player will not nearly have the impact of hitting on a qb who turns out to be a good franchise qb. Let's not forget Dareus was from a talent standpoint a worthy high pick. He showed glimpses of being one of the top DTs in the league. Overall, what was his impact in comparison to getting a franchise qb? Gilmore was a high pick and a worthy pick. He's gone. Watkins was a multiple first round pick and a superlative talent. He is gone. Kujo was a high second round pick. He is gone. Ragland was a second round pick. He is gone. My point is simple. If you want to stabilize the franchise and put it in an upward trajectory you need to solidify the qb position. You don't accomplish that by being passive and fearful when your turn comes up to go to the podium. 

Stidham is a QB John

[JohnC]

15 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Stidham is a QB John

I'm wrong about the player and position. Was thinking about another defensive stud in this draft. I'm sure you know what my point was. You do at times have the ability to flummox me. 

[Kirby Jackson]

17 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I'm wrong about the player and position. Was thinking about another defensive stud in this draft. I'm sure you know what my point was. You do at times have the ability to flummox me. 

You are kind of proving my point. At the moment a lot of people wouldn’t care at all if we took Stidham in the 4th. If he goes out and lights it up like Dak I don’t want to listen to a bunch of people complaining that we didn’t take Stidham in the 4th. You don’t get hindsight to argue your points.

 

Gunner deserves some credit because he was bullish on Watson BEFORE the draft. That was his guy. He was right. If he wants to bang the table saying they screwed up he has that right. He isn’t just looking at what worked and MMQBing it. 

[JohnC]

8 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You are kind of proving my point. At the moment a lot of people wouldn’t care at all if we took Stidham in the 4th. If he goes out and lights it up like Dak I don’t want to listen to a bunch of people complaining that we didn’t take Stidham in the 4th. You don’t get hindsight to argue your points.

 

Gunner deserves some credit because he was bullish on Watson BEFORE the draft. That was his guy. He was right. If he wants to bang the table saying they screwed up he has that right. He isn’t just looking at what worked and MMQBing it. 

You are way off the mark with me. My position is clear and unequivocal. My position is simply stop with this bullshiittt low ball approach toward drafting a qb. Assess the qb class and go after the best one you can get. That doesn't mean selling the whole store for a particular qb when there are other good options to address the position. 

 

The point I have made regarding qbs such as Dak and Russell Wilson is that when you are considering a qb it is better to take the prospect a round sooner than later because of the importance of the position. From what I have read Whaley liked Dak but waited too long to pull the plug. You are wrongly twisting my view on this issue and making it seems as if I am a hindsight backbencher when my point is that this franchise has to be more aggressive on the position. And ,as you know very well I have been consistent on that issue. That's the point!

[BUFFALOTONE]

On 11/6/2017 at 8:58 PM, BuffaloMatt said:

EVERYONE PUMP THE BREAKS ABOUT NO. Last six games Panthers Dolphins Lions Packers Bears Bucs. See what I'm saying?

This is all you need to know. None of those teams can run the ball and keep the Saints offense off the field. Buffalo can, pound it all day and don't let up. The Saints front 7 is middle of the road and we can be effective up front. Have to win this game in the trenches...

[Kirby Jackson]

8 minutes ago, JohnC said:

You are way off the mark with me. My position is clear and unequivocal. My position is simply stop with this bullshiittt low ball approach toward drafting a qb. Assess the qb class and go after the best one you can get. That doesn't mean selling the whole store for a particular qb when there are other good options to address the position. 

 

The point I have made regarding qbs such as Dak and Russell Wilson is that when you are considering a qb it is better to take the prospect a round sooner than later because of the importance of the position. From what I have read Whaley liked Dak but waited too long to pull the plug. You are wrongly twisting my view on this issue and making it seems as if I am a hindsight backbencher when my point is that this franchise has to be more aggressive on the position. And ,as you know very well I have been consistent on that issue. That's the point!

I’m not trying to twist your view. You want to address the position early. However when you look back you pick the best guys and then say we could have had them. If what you are saying is true you would have been just as happy if the Bills drafted Hackenberg in the 1st as if they would have taken Dak. They would have identified a guy that they thought could be a franchise guy and pulled the trigger. As long as you hold that position I’d agree. You can’t just say though, I want them to address the position once and for all (but only with guys that become good).