Buffalo Bills are reportedly interested in DE Chandler Jones

[muppy]

5 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

he really is a fan board fav Yep.  Maybe on a short term deal to put our defense over the top..? 

[Patrick Duffy]

With Jones considered to be one of the popular names, I'm kinda wondering the reason he hasn't been mentioned yet today so far of any news about him (unless I missed something)

 

 

[H2o]

5 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

Multiple pass rushers have been effective into their mid-30's. Jones seems like one of those guys to me. In every season he's played in at least 15 games, he's had at least 10.5 sacks. Last year be had 41 QB pressures and 26 QB hits to go with his 10.5 sacks. 

[BADOLBILZ]

 

Chandler Jones and Daquon Jones aren't related.........but both from Binghamton high schools and same age range........their careers are followed closely by locals.    

 

Not sure if they are friends.

[Virgil]

7 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Chandler Jones and Daquon Jones aren't related.........but both from Binghamton high schools and same age range........their careers are followed closely by locals.    

 

Not sure if they are friends.

 

If we get Chandler Jones, I'll just be happy I won't have to track which Jones is which when not writing the reviews anymore.  Tracking lineman is frustrating at times

[Negan]

Could be down to Bills and maybe 1 other team I hope 🙏 

[Big Turk]

1 hour ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

 

30+ sacks over the last 3 years doesn't seem like a risk to me.

[ExWNYer]

1 hour ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Chandler Jones and Daquon Jones aren't related.........but both from Binghamton high schools and same age range........their careers are followed closely by locals.    

 

Not sure if they are friends.

 

So these people are literally keeping up with the Joneses. 🤔

[BuffaloBillsGospel]

2 hours ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

I don’t get the chandler jones love. Seems like a risk— 11-year vet? 

I won't bash people's opinions because they differ from mine but can I ask other than he's an 11 year vet why you think he's a risk?

[Patrick Duffy]

1 hour ago, Negan said:

Could be down to Bills and maybe 1 other team I hope 🙏 

It makes you wonder if that's the case that something is lined up for most part because he has not been mentioned at all with any team today to my knowledge. With him considered a pretty popular name available it's a little surprising I haven't heard him mentioned yet

[Aross3415]

Still no updates on him?? Hopefully since he is taking a little longer that he will come a little cheaper with his age.. could be huge for Buffalo and would love to get him for 2 years.

[Thurman#1]

23 hours ago, JayBaller10 said:

This is so silly it’s hardly worth a response. You used Deion Sanders in your example as a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren’t visible and related that to Edmunds making impact plays that aren’t visible because teams are reluctant to throw in his area. Is that not what you’re doing in comparing Sanders impact to Edmunds? The length you will go to, to justify your rationale and then claim the comparison wasn’t your intention is ridiculous beyond measure. 
 

Ask yourself this… why do you more put on your wrinkly slacks and plastic rent-a-cop badge to patrol these threads? You claim everyone is entitled to an opinion, yet the first post in this thread you commented on had nothing to do with my “that’s just reality” claim. It was an opinion that was liked and supported by others but you swooped in with your “little fella” name calling. You need a bat signal, or better yet, a Tremaine Edmunds signal that entices you to crawl out of hiding whenever you do miss a critique. The effort must be exhausting on your behalf and you derailed this thread to make it about you and I, good job. 
 

Another poster above told me to “give it a rest,” but it’s you who constantly chirps at me, so who truly is the one who should give it a rest? I enjoy arguments, debates, and banter, it’s the reason I haven’t put you on ignore, even if you do go to great lengths to justify things no matter how faulty the logic. It’s annoying, but also humorous. This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post. Get a life… put that in your fecund mind.

 

 

 

No. That is simply bull#### you're talking there. Flat-out, pure 100% crap.

 

Yes, I did use Deion as an example of a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren't visible. No, I did not "comparing Sanders' impact to Edmunds," and you know it. Pure crap there.

 

To repeat, you said, " “Ignoring all the impact plays that don’t happen” is quite possibly the most baseless argument I’ve ever heard one use to defend a player. It’s an argument built on supposition and assumption."

 

I used the example of Deion to show that your argument wasn't just wrong, but stupid. Deion is probably the single most obvious example of a guy who proves that plays that don't happen can be huge. There were a lot of times when nobody threw near Deion, and yet all those plays that never happened were huge. No mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same sentence. Not even any mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same paragraph. Only use of Deion to attack your argument.

 

Again, the first person to compare the two was you, when you created your sad little straw man argument there. You said it, then were so happy about the idea that you'd created that you didn't just use it talking to me that you boasted about your kindness in not using my name in an early post about it, and then said I must be old not to remember that I'd made an argument I'd never made, an argument created entirely by you.

 

And I do have to crack up with you. I'm the one who "cracks at you," apparently? You're just an innocent little sweet thing, not insulting me for possibly being old, not consistently  ? Yeah, again, dumb argument. Both of us are involved here. And it ain't a coincidence that that poster told you to drop it, but not me.

 

You're the one who leapt in with the first post of the thread, so desperate to insult Edmunds that you felt it was worth the rudeness of thread-napping.

 

 

 

Oh, and yet more classic stuff in your post here. "This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post." Yeah, um, that's not how thread-napping works, dude. Nor any form of rudeness in conversation. The first guy who changes the subject doesn't to say the guy who answered his rudeness is the one at fault. You brought the whole thing up. And it's something you and yours do with tremendous consistency.

 

Some guy posts a thread on something he wants to talk about, and you or someone like you immediately darts in to change the subject to moan and whinge about Edmunds. Just like you did here. With such desperate eagerness that you were in whining and moaning about your feelings about Edmunds 6 minutes after the OP thought he'd start a conversation about Chandler Jones.

 

You won't accept responsibility for thread-napping. And you say it's only me and apparently not you who's cracking back. Two posts and we can see an absolute inability to accept even partial responsibility, from the guy who first thread-napped.

 

Pitiful.

[Virgil]

Where’s the F5 gif?

[Draconator]

5 minutes ago, Virgil said:

Where’s the F5 gif?

 

[NewEra]

On 3/14/2022 at 6:59 AM, JayBaller10 said:

This is so silly it’s hardly worth a response. You used Deion Sanders in your example as a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren’t visible and related that to Edmunds making impact plays that aren’t visible because teams are reluctant to throw in his area. Is that not what you’re doing in comparing Sanders impact to Edmunds? The length you will go to, to justify your rationale and then claim the comparison wasn’t your intention is ridiculous beyond measure. 
 

Ask yourself this… why do you more put on your wrinkly slacks and plastic rent-a-cop badge to patrol these threads? You claim everyone is entitled to an opinion, yet the first post in this thread you commented on had nothing to do with my “that’s just reality” claim. It was an opinion that was liked and supported by others but you swooped in with your “little fella” name calling. You need a bat signal, or better yet, a Tremaine Edmunds signal that entices you to crawl out of hiding whenever you do miss a critique. The effort must be exhausting on your behalf and you derailed this thread to make it about you and I, good job. 
 

Another poster above told me to “give it a rest,” but it’s you who constantly chirps at me, so who truly is the one who should give it a rest? I enjoy arguments, debates, and banter, it’s the reason I haven’t put you on ignore, even if you do go to great lengths to justify things no matter how faulty the logic. It’s annoying, but also humorous. This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post. Get a life… put that in your fecund mind.

 

12 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

No. That is simply bull#### you're talking there. Flat-out, pure 100% crap.

 

Yes, I did use Deion as an example of a player who makes impact plays on the field that aren't visible. No, I did not "comparing Sanders' impact to Edmunds," and you know it. Pure crap there.

 

To repeat, you said, " “Ignoring all the impact plays that don’t happen” is quite possibly the most baseless argument I’ve ever heard one use to defend a player. It’s an argument built on supposition and assumption."

 

I used the example of Deion to show that your argument wasn't just wrong, but stupid. Deion is probably the single most obvious example of a guy who proves that plays that don't happen can be huge. There were a lot of times when nobody threw near Deion, and yet all those plays that never happened were huge. No mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same sentence. Not even any mention of Deion and Tremaine in the same paragraph. Only use of Deion to attack your argument.

 

Again, the first person to compare the two was you, when you created your sad little straw man argument there. You said it, then were so happy about the idea that you'd created that you didn't just use it talking to me that you boasted about your kindness in not using my name in an early post about it, and then said I must be old not to remember that I'd made an argument I'd never made, an argument created entirely by you.

 

And I do have to crack up with you. I'm the one who "cracks at you," apparently? You're just an innocent little sweet thing, not insulting me for possibly being old, not consistently  ? Yeah, again, dumb argument. Both of us are involved here. And it ain't a coincidence that that poster told you to drop it, but not me.

 

You're the one who leapt in with the first post of the thread, so desperate to insult Edmunds that you felt it was worth the rudeness of thread-napping.

 

 

 

Oh, and yet more classic stuff in your post here. "This wasn’t an Edmunds thread until you made it such, despite one thing I said in a single post." Yeah, um, that's not how thread-napping works, dude. Nor any form of rudeness in conversation. The first guy who changes the subject doesn't to say the guy who answered his rudeness is the one at fault. You brought the whole thing up. And it's something you and yours do with tremendous consistency.

 

Some guy posts a thread on something he wants to talk about, and you or someone like you immediately darts in to change the subject to moan and whinge about Edmunds. Just like you did here. With such desperate eagerness that you were in whining and moaning about your feelings about Edmunds 6 minutes after the OP thought he'd start a conversation about Chandler Jones.

 

You won't accept responsibility for thread-napping. And you say it's only me and apparently not you who's cracking back. Two posts and we can see an absolute inability to accept even partial responsibility, from the guy who first thread-napped.

 

Pitiful.

Maybe you two should continue this nonsense in private messages from here on out gents 

[Solomon Grundy]

11 hours ago, ExWNYer said:

 

So these people are literally keeping up with the Joneses. 🤔

Maybe the Bills are moving away from the Williams and switching to the Joneses😎

[Draconator]

Just now, NewEra said:

 

Maybe you two should continue this nonsense in private messages from here on out gents 

 

And deny us our lunch time entertainment?

 

[NewEra]

I think it’ll come down to Denver and Buffalo with him joining Denver 

1 minute ago, Draconator said:

 

And deny us our lunch time entertainment?

 

Entertainment huh? 🤮 

[Thurman#1]

28 minutes ago, NewEra said:

 

Maybe you two should continue this nonsense in private messages from here on out gents 

 

 

I would have zero interest in saying anything that was purely to him, honestly. The fun for me is in pointing out ridiculousness for everyone to see.

 

Perfectly willing, though, to honor the Chandler Jones focus of this thread. It ain't me who threadnaps so relentlessly on this subject [EDIT: nor just him, but it's constant overall with one group of folks]. As for continuation, though, there are two of us responsible, despite the belief of one of us that it's only me.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2022 by Thurman#1

[TPS]

1 minute ago, NewEra said:

I think it’ll come down to Denver and Buffalo with him joining Denver 

If so, then Shaq will most likely be our consolation prize