Bills 2017 Draft - It Might Be Really Good

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

8 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Peterman was a bad call and Beane admitted they should have brought in a vet when McCarron didn’t work out.  Peterman has nothing to do with any point you’re trying to make.

 

Someone started a thread about the 2017 draft. If you don't want to talk about Peterman don't bring him up. He was part of the 2017 draft class

Just now, Augie said:

 

On this we can agree! 

 

Cool, hopefully this will end that "argument" that the Bills 2017 draft was good because I personally didn't know Mahomes would be good

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

Someone started a thread about the 2017 draft. If you don't want to talk about Peterman don't bring him up. He was part of the 2017 draft class

 

Cool, hopefully this will end that "argument" that the Bills 2017 draft was good because I personally didn't know Mahomes would be good

Peterman didn’t work out.  They got a an elite CB, really good OLB, starting LT, and starting WR.  Or do we now only grade drafts on 5th round QBs?

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

Someone started a thread about the 2017 draft. If you don't want to talk about Peterman don't bring him up. He was part of the 2017 draft class

 

He was a 5th round QB. What exactly did you expect? Who did we take in the 7th? Yeah, who cares about that crap shoot? You take shots and hope for the best. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

3 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Let's talk about what constitutes a disastrous draft:

 

Taking Eric Flowers or Aaron Maybin or trading two picks to take a WR, That's a disastrous draft.

 

What the Bills did in 2017 is not.

 

Exactly, it's ANYTHING BUT a "disaster," no matter how much Chemical wants to believe it is.

 

 

Wait remind me when the Bills may have traded up for another receiver, one that had a lot of drops and an embarrassing naked video, I think it was pretty recently

[Augie]

6 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

Someone started a thread about the 2017 draft. If you don't want to talk about Peterman don't bring him up. He was part of the 2017 draft class

 

Cool, hopefully this will end that "argument" that the Bills 2017 draft was good because I personally didn't know Mahomes would be good

 

Logic is not your specialty, I’m guessing? 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

Just now, Augie said:

 

Logic is not your specialty, I’m guessing? 

 

Here they come, the personal insults. Keep em coming guys it really helps your argument

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, Chemical said:

 

Wait remind me when the Bills may have traded up for another receiver, one that had a lot of drops and an embarrassing naked video, I think it was pretty recently

 

And now we're getting a sense of Chemical's ACTUAL objection here.

 

He doesn't like McDermott, Beane, or both.

 

Let's deal in honesty here, buddy. Your Mahomes hindsight is just cover for your ACTUAL feelings.

 

[GunnerBill]

12 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

Exactly, it's ANYTHING BUT a "disaster," no matter how much Chemical wants to believe it is.

 

 

Still an "if" on Dawkins though. I am encouraged but he has to prove it this year. I am not expecting him to be a top 10 left tackle (in the way that Cordy Glenn at his best was) but think he can be a solid long term starter. 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Still an "if" on Dawkins though. I am encouraged but he has to prove it this year. I am not expecting him to be a top 10 left tackle (in the way that Cordy Glenn at his best was) but think he can be a solid long term starter. 

I am bullish on Dawkins. I think he'll be back to his rookie form with a legitimate LG next to him.

 

[K-9]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

Eventually people will have to stop using the "yea but Mahomes and Watson would have sucked in Buffalo" argument. 

If you’re suggesting they’d be just as good here, I’d like to hear the argument why because nothing about their respective experiences in KC and Houston would be the same. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

And now we're getting a sense of Chemical's ACTUAL objection here.

 

He doesn't like McDermott, Beane, or both.

 

Let's deal in honesty here, buddy. Your Mahomes hindsight is just cover for your ACTUAL feelings.

 

 

What's wrong with being critical of decisions? I only talk about personnel or on the field decisions and whether or not they are going to lead to a superbowl.

 

You're the one making it personal. You and Augie, Try bringing the conversation back to the draft and if you honestly think getting 3 "starters!" every year will lead to a superbowl victory in the future when other teams are adding definitively better players.

Just now, K-9 said:

If you’re suggesting they’d be just as good here, I’d like to hear the argument why because nothing about their respective experiences in KC and Houston would be the same. 

 

No one said that and it doesn't matter

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Just now, Chemical said:

 when other teams are adding definitively better players.

Except they're not.

 

2017 nets us AT A MINIMUM 3 starters, one of whom is top 5 at his position and could easily net us FOUR starters. If you call that a disaster, I'd say it's more of a "you" problem than anything else.

 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

what did other teams get? That's the problem, you're not looking at other teams results. You follow the Bills so you're happy with their "starters!" when each team has their own favorite players you never give a second thought to.

[K-9]

5 minutes ago, Chemical said:

No one said that and it doesn't matter

If it doesn’t matter, then why did GunnerBill suggest we should not to argue that neither Mahomes or Watson wouldn’t have been as good in Buffalo as they are in their respective situations in KC and Houston? Besides, I asked GunnerBill for his input as l like his logical responses to things, but thanks for chiming in with your keen insight as well. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

1 minute ago, K-9 said:

If it doesn’t matter, then why did GunnerBill suggest we should not to argue that neither Mahomes or Watson wouldn’t have been as good in Buffalo as they are in their respective situations in KC and Houston? Besides, I asked GunnerBill for his input as l like his logical responses to things, but thanks for chiming in with your keen insight as well. 

 

He was replying to someone who made that argument thats why he said that.

[Buffalo03]

7 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

He was replying to someone who made that argument thats why he said that.

If it's referring to me, I never said he wouldn't be good here. I said he probably wouldn't be KC level good. Big difference there

Edited July 27, 2019 by Buffalo03

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

12 minutes ago, Chemical said:

what did other teams get? That's the problem, you're not looking at other teams results. You follow the Bills so you're happy with their "starters!" when each team has their own favorite players you never give a second thought to.

 

 

You're making assumptions that you shouldn't, and being a richard about it. We get it, you don't like to be called out on your nonsense. Get over it.

 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

Just now, Buffalo03 said:

If it's referring to me, I never said he wouldn't be good here. I said he wouldn't be KC level good. Big difference there

 

ok, true, but that's what I mean when I say it doesn't matter. Why even bring it up?

[K-9]

6 minutes ago, Chemical said:

 

He was replying to someone who made that argument thats why he said that.

Does that mean I can’t be interested in his reasons why Mahomes and Watson would have been just as good in Buffalo? I maintain there is no way that would have been the case, so I’d like to get his reasoning. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

 

You're making assumptions that you shouldn't, and being a richard about it. We get it, you don't like to be called out on your nonsense. Get over it.

 

 

hmm a personal insult instead of examples to support your argument. Not surprised