Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
6 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Yes, let's ignore Jacksonville and the Raiders. Let's also ignore Tennessee and the Eagles as well, since they're not supporting your point. Do you really have a point here? Oh and the Rams too. Probably shouldn't mention them.

 

 

 

Besides the Eagles, which of these teams are Superbowl favorites? They are on the way up.. compared to the ugly place they were. Is it in an improvement? Hell yeah! But a guarantee for being a constantly dominant team? Nope. And they tanked for a few seasons, not just one. And oh let's forget the Browns and other 0-16 teams of the last 10 years. All powerhouses for years to come now, right?

 

My point is, as you still don't get it: tanking does NOT guarantee a return to greatness! And so far, it's your ONLY magical solution. Recall that Bill Bellichick hire and drafting Tom Brady with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round? They needed to tank completely for that to happen?

Posted
2 minutes ago, NoPlayoffs said:

 

I'm comparing downfield passing attempts...I thought it was pretty clear.  If you can't understand that, I don't know how to help you.  I mean, it makes sense that you don't understand, but it is what it is.

 

If only checking down was the only thing an NFL QB had to do. If only.

 

 

Just now, Jerome007 said:

Besides the Eagles, which of these teams are Superbowl favorites? They are on the way up.. compared to the ugly place they were. Is it in an improvement? Hell yeah! But a guarantee for being a constantly dominant team? Nope. And they tanked for a few seasons, not just one. And oh let's forget the Browns and other 0-16 teams of the last 10 years. All powerhouses for years to come now, right?

 

My point is, as you still don't get it: tanking does NOT guarantee a return to greatness! And so far, it's your ONLY magical solution. Recall that Bill Bellichick hire and drafting Tom Brady with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round? They needed to tank completely for that to happen?

 

Well then I guess we should just wait until the end of the sixth to take our QB, am i right? What could POSSIBLY go wrong doing that?

 

:lol:

 

So by all means, let's do it your way. Let's strive for .500. I'm sure we'll have a great future doing that. It's worked the past 20 years!!

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

Besides the Eagles, which of these teams are Superbowl favorites? They are on the way up.. compared to the ugly place they were. Is it in an improvement? Hell yeah! But a guarantee for being a constantly dominant team? Nope. And they tanked for a few seasons, not just one. And oh let's forget the Browns and other 0-16 teams of the last 10 years. All powerhouses for years to come now, right?

 

My point is, as you still don't get it: tanking does NOT guarantee a return to greatness! And so far, it's your ONLY magical solution. Recall that Bill Bellichick hire and drafting Tom Brady with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round? They needed to tank completely for that to happen?

Um, Rams?

Posted
3 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

Besides the Eagles, which of these teams are Superbowl favorites? They are on the way up.. compared to the ugly place they were. Is it in an improvement? Hell yeah! But a guarantee for being a constantly dominant team? Nope. And they tanked for a few seasons, not just one. And oh let's forget the Browns and other 0-16 teams of the last 10 years. All powerhouses for years to come now, right?

 

My point is, as you still don't get it: tanking does NOT guarantee a return to greatness! And so far, it's your ONLY magical solution. Recall that Bill Bellichick hire and drafting Tom Brady with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round? They needed to tank completely for that to happen?

The Eagles didn't really tank either. They went 7-9, 7-9, 10-6, 10-6, 4-12 in the last 5 years and the year they went 4-12 they selected Fletcher Cox with the 12th pick in the draft...

Posted
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

The Eagles didn't really tank either. They went 7-9, 7-9, 10-6, 10-6, 4-12 in the last 5 years and the year they went 4-12 they selected Fletcher Cox with the 12th pick in the draft...

 

AND Carson Wentz. They gutted that team the year they brought in Wentz.

 

Got rid of the chip kelly cancers, like we SHOULD be doing with the Whaley leftovers.

 

Posted
Just now, joesixpack said:

 

AND Carson Wentz. They gutted that team the year they brought in Wentz.

 

Got rid of the chip kelly cancers, like we SHOULD be doing with the Whaley leftovers.

 

They didn't tank though. They won 7 games and then traded a bunch of picks for him. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, joesixpack said:

 

AND Carson Wentz. They gutted that team the year they brought in Wentz.

 

Got rid of the chip kelly cancers, like we SHOULD be doing with the Whaley leftovers.

 

Follow the plan of the best team in the NFL who drafted what looks to be the best QB of his generation? No way! Let's keep doing it this way!

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

They didn't tank though. They won 7 games and then traded a bunch of picks for him. 

 

OK, so, let's talk about the upcoming draft. Are you hanging your hat on SF trading with us?


Secondary question: how much are you willing to give up to get a QB?

 

Edited by joesixpack
Posted
3 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

OK, so, let's talk about the upcoming draft. Are you hanging your hat on SF trading with us?

 

9ers, Colts, Broncos, Giants are all in play depending on the offer and how things shake out in the last few weeks.

Posted
1 minute ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

9ers, Colts, Broncos, Giants are all in play depending on the offer and how things shake out in the last few weeks.

 

Sorry, i was late with the follow-on question.

 

Posted
Just now, BuffaloHokie13 said:

9ers, Colts, Broncos, Giants are all in play depending on the offer and how things shake out in the last few weeks.

I said yesterday and I stick by it that the Giants aren't going QB in the first round...Colts situation is really up in the air from what I hear. It will clarify over the next couple months.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Jerome007 said:

Recall that Bill Bellichick hire and drafting Tom Brady with pick #199, a compensatory pick, in the sixth round? They needed to tank completely for that to happen?

 

They went 5-11 in Belichick's first season so maybe they were tanking.

Posted
14 minutes ago, Bill_with_it said:

Well we know they arent supposed to throw 5 picks in a half....

5 pics, constant checkdowns to 3 and out punts, is there really a difference?

Posted
19 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Manning has gone for 6TDs to 1INT since Beckham Jr. went down. That's along with the injuries to his other receivers...his main target right now is a rookie TE/WR hybrid. Tough slate of games with Seahawks Rams Broncos Chiefs all since Chargers...dumpster fire is the easy narrative.

 

Bills fans like to complain about our offensive line...watch the Giants and you'll suddenly have a much greater appreciation for them.

I'm saying that Eli has been hamstrung, the team has won 2 games and 2 games with under 130 yards passing (yes 1 win).  The point was they beat KC and didn't have a TD.  

 

Just an observation.

Posted
5 hours ago, Billzgobowlin said:

I think he had too.  He almost certainly would have lost the team.  I think what took him so long was KC had to wait to prepare fully

Losing the team would be cool.  We have nothing to gain by a few more wins this year.

 

 

Posted
Just now, Billsfan1972 said:

I'm saying that Eli has been hamstrung, the team has won 2 games and 2 games with under 130 yards passing (yes 1 win).  The point was they beat KC and didn't have a TD.  

 

Just an observation.

I was objecting to your observation of Manning's play since Beckham Jr went down as a 'dumpster fire'. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, PeterGriffin said:

5 pics, constant checkdowns to 3 and out punts, is there really a difference?

5 punts x 40 yds each = 200 yds of field position difference.

 

Yes.

Posted
1 minute ago, moshermw said:

5 punts x 40 yds each = 200 yds of field position difference.

 

Yes.

It's been said over and over and over that yards don't mean a damn thing.

×
×
  • Create New...