Isabella shows moves, will he make the roster?

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Rocky Landing said:

Every fanbase in the league believes their WR depth is such that there are multiple receivers who will be snatched up after cuts. (Even Patriots* fans!) But, I think the truth is that when you're looking that far down the depth chart, teams are more comfortable with the guys that have learned their playbook, and system, and are adequate in ST-- even if there are options on the waiver wire that are a little bit better.

We’ll see.  The guys we have are big WRs that can work in the red zone.  I expect several in practice squads.

[BillsfaninChicago]

I didn’t realize it but he was taken with the pick that the dolphins wasted trading with the Cardinals for the other Josh. That makes me like him more on our roster!

[AuntieEm]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I'll make a friendly wager with you that Gilliam doesn't make it at his current contact, if he does, he'll be brought back at something much closer to vet min.  

 

He defines expendable.  

 

 

 

Then how come he's hardly ever on the field?  

 

And what's so special about him as a FB that can't be found on waivers after cuts?  

 

 

 Or likely stashed on ps so if needed they call him up.  Why pay him to be a cheerleader on the bench.  Bad look not paying the Jill's in retrospect if that is the case.

[PBF81]

9 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Wasn't his QB just the #4 pick in the draft? I also remember talking about Shorter's upside as a 5 star recruit at Penn State, where he did next to nothing before transferring to Florida where he also didn't do a ton.

 

So you're claiming that Richardson was among the better QBs in the SEC last season and that UF's passing game was robust if not what, among the best in the SEC then?  
 

Is that what I'm understanding in your reply to what I said.  Which was ... 

 

Quote

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

 

In short, NPI, you seem to think that given his circumstances at UF, Shorter's got a lower ceiling than his stats, and to at least some extent his draft capital, suggest?  

 

Do you think that maybe "he didn't do a ton" at UF because he had a QB that was erratic, had poor mechanics and decision-making, and ranked near the bottom of the SEC for passers?   Or don't you think that had anything to do with it?  Shorter was a freshman and sophomore at PSU, and despite that he still was the third leading WR on their team as a soph, and a team that's almost always heavy on TE use, as it was then as well.  Just sayin'.  

 

Trying to understand your point here. 

 

 

[JakeFrommStateFarm]

39 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Shorter isn't making any waves at receiver either from what I can gather.  

 

Oh come on. He's a rookie. Did we expect him to light TC on fire ?

 

This is a tough fan base

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, AuntieEm said:

 Or likely stashed on ps so if needed they call him up.  Why pay him to be a cheerleader on the bench.  Bad look not paying the Jill's in retrospect if that is the case.

 

I can't speak to the PS, I only care about the 53.  And I would argue, that if he's truly as good as his proponents here say he is, then he won't last long on our PS squad either.  

 

I'm suggesting that with the drafting of Kincaid & Torrence, the team is changing its offensive approach slightly, and that it won't nearly include the FB/Gilliam as much, particularly since he doesn't catch, and that therefore he's expendable, perhaps with a FB that does catch more but may not be quite as good a blocker.   

 

Again, so far the only argument that I can see in favor of his use here is that he's in on the "big body" plays, but it was pointed out that he wasn't in on any of our short TD runs.  Next up was that he's in on the short-yardage plays otherwise.  Maybe, but until we look at those plays in action I'm far from convinced.  

 

We had a mere 34 plays on 3rd-and-short (1-3 yards) all season.  Of those, 27 converted.  We have no idea how many Gilliam was involved in and those were supposed to be his specialty.  At least nothing has been posted.   

 

I'm simply not seeing the need this season on what appears to be more of a spread offense in the making.  I could be way off on that, as I'm incredibly optimistic and bullish on the Offense this season, more so than anyone else that I can see.  Either way, I'm not seeing a significant role for a blocking FB on this team, particularly with the signing of Harris, who granted, isn't Gilliam in blocking, but who can block well nonethelss.  

 

 

[That's No Moon]

10 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

So you're claiming that Richardson was among the better QBs in the SEC last season and that UF's passing game was robust if not what, among the best in the SEC then?  
 

Is that what I'm understanding in your reply to what I said.  Which was ... 

 

 

In short, NPI, you seem to think that given his circumstances at UF, Shorter's got a lower ceiling than his stats, and to at least some extent his draft capital, suggest?  

 

Do you think that maybe "he didn't do a ton" at UF because he had a QB that was erratic, had poor mechanics and decision-making, and ranked near the bottom of the SEC for passers?   Or don't you think that had anything to do with it?  Shorter was a freshman and sophomore at PSU, and despite that he still was the third leading WR on their team as a soph, and a team that's almost always heavy on TE use, as it was then as well.  Just sayin'.  

 

Trying to understand your point here. 

 

 

My point is people have spent an awful lot of time already waiting on Justin Shorter's potential. At some point he actually needs to do something.

 

Also, if we are going to use his QBs as an excuse, he's not going to be on the field with a QB better than Anthony Richardson this preseason so congrats, that is already baked in.

[JoPoy88]

4 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I don't disagree as he's the only FB on the roster, so if they keep one, he's it, but I'd wager against it, heavily, at his current contact value of $2M.  

 

If they really want a FB he's the only option now.  

 

But it's a bit of a reach to think that there won't be another FB on the market after cuts that can do what Gilliam does.  To imagine otherwise it's too suggest that he's somehow special.  

 

Are you saying that he is special?  If not, then that seems to fit the definition of expendable.  

 

Agree with you on Isabella however.  

 

We'll find out soon.  

 

 

Problem is there aren’t many alternative FBs floating around nowadays, and even if there were readily available cheaper replacements, none of them would be able to come in off the street after cuts and learn the system and do all the things that Gilliam does for them right away. 

[GunnerBill]

56 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

BTW, I'm still waiting for the evidence that you used to garner all of that.  Not to be snarky at all, I'm truly interested in seeing it.  

 

Knowing you, there's gotta be something besides "the coaches said" that's behind this.   Please share.  I'd love to take the time to see it, truly.  

 

 

 

The evidence is I have seen it the years he has been here. I don't have an exact breakdown of the plays written down to share with you. But I'd advise you start wit the two regular season KC wins. Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both.

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

My point is people have spent an awful lot of time already waiting on Justin Shorter's potential. At some point he actually needs to do something.

 

He's a rookie.  What the ...  

 

LOL 

 

 

8 minutes ago, That's No Moon said:

Also, if we are going to use his QBs as an excuse, he's not going to be on the field with a QB better than Anthony Richardson this preseason so congrats, that is already baked in.

 

So in your world the quality of a QB's passing game has little to do with how well WRs perform.  Alright, noted.  

 

I would quickly add that the WRs that have worked with Brady and other much better QBs would likely differ from you on that.  

 

Either way, my point is simply that if Isabella's kept around, and I have no idea whether he will be or not, IMO the one to get cut would be Sherfield.  

 

What people seem to be overlooking in the matter is that teams often talk up certain players in camp, and I'm sure give them good reps to shine, in hopes of trading them.  Who knows whether Sherfield is one of them or not.  We do not at this point in time.  We may never know.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

Does it?  

 

On one hand we have no idea who the coaches are going to cut, and they obviously keep their cards close to their vests.  

 

On the other, we already know in advance, that a WR that's done all but nothing in five seasons, averaging much fewer than 200s yards and 1 TD per season, despite having a relatively negligible cap hit, has zero chance of being cut should Isabella be kept on?  

 

The premise floated is that Khalil and Shorter cannot backup Diggs/Davis.  IMO that's absurd.  And Khalil as a rookie posted what Sherfield's averaged in five seasons.  And Khalil has posted more catches and yards as a rookie in the playoffs than Sherfield has in five seasons, which is none, he has no postseason catches.  

 

I also do not see them cutting their 5th-round pick at WR this year either.  If they do then questions need to start being asked about picks like that.  

 

Shorter, as I pointed out, was on an SEC team which ranked near the bottom in passing, had one of the worst passing offenses, and one of the least efficient and worst QBs in the conference.  His ceiling is higher than his draft status.  

 

 

 

Shakir can't back up Diggs and Davis. They tried to tell us that last summer then when it came to games they chose Jake Kumerow and the corpse of John Brown rather than put him wide. He is a slot receiver if he has any chance at this level.

 

Maybe Shorter can.... but a raw 5th round rookie who has done next to nothing in camp and didn't have a target last week? Hell of a gamble.

 

I'll take the friendly wager on Sherfield making the 53. It's nailed on.

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, julian said:

In fairness, how many fullbacks even still exist in the NFL ? 

 

The teams that don't keep full backs keep blocking tight ends in their place. They have changed how they do it but not the overall balance.

[HappyDays]

4 hours ago, Chaos said:

Ever year is different, but in the playoffs last year would you rather the Bills have had Isiah Hodgkins,

 

Oh enough with Isaiah Hodgins. He would not have made a lick of difference against the Bengals. He is going to spend his career bouncing around different teams as the 5th or 6th WR on the depth chart. Nothing wrong with that career but waiving him was not a huge whiff on our part.

 

We signed Beasley because Crowder was injured and Josh had no faith in McKenzie or Shakir to be where he expected them to be. This year that spot will mostly be held by Kincaid and Harty who are both massive upgrades on the slot options we had last year (pending Harty staying healthy).

 

Gilliam is very important because he fills three roster spots in one. You aren't considering the opportunity cost of losing him. We would have to keep other less talented players to fill his roles. So that would leave less room on the roster for depth WRs, not more.

 

If it comes down to it keeping Isabella over Shorter is an easy decision. Why would we even need to consider cutting Gilliam?

[HappyDays]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I know you'll disagree, but if Isabella makes the roster, I see Sherfield getting cut.  

 

 

 

The guy that came off the field against the Colts at the same time as Gabe Davis has exactly a 0% chance of getting cut.

[Brand J]

20 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Oh enough with Isaiah Hodgins. He would not have made a lick of difference against the Bengals. He is going to spend his career bouncing around different teams as the 5th or 6th WR on the depth chart. Nothing wrong with that career but waiving him was not a huge whiff on our part.

I don’t know about that. He’s currently a starter on the G Men. At worst, he’ll be a WR4 for them and I’d say won’t become a journeyman 5th or 6th receiver.

[PBF81]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The evidence is I have seen it the years he has been here. I don't have an exact breakdown of the plays written down to share with you. But I'd advise you start wit the two regular season KC wins. Because without racking up numbers he has had a big impact on both.

 

Through the years?  Two years?   Well, OK.  

 

OK, so you went and found two games in which he had his 1st and 4th highest snap counts.  Taking your advice, I reviewed 20 minute highlight video.  

 

2021:  

 

On Allen's first designed run Sing blocked for him, Gilliam not on the field.  

Second play, in motion, dropped into the flat, didn't even directly draw a defender.  Inconsequential on that play.  

Third play, Allen run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fourth play, designed trick play, Allen run for a TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Fifth play, Gilliam entirely against the grain, whiffing on the block inconsequentially.  

Next relevant play, Moss with about a 10-yard run, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next three plays big pass plays, last one for a TD.  Gilliam not on the field. 

Huge pass play to Diggs deep, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed screen to Moss for 15, Gilliam not on the field. 

Next play, deep to Knox for a 53 TD, Gilliam not on the field. 

Allen on what appears to be a designed run for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Gilliam lined up as TE, blocks, sheds, wide open in the flat, Allen to Knox deep for 41.  

Allen 11-yard pass to Sanders, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Beasley for 5, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen scrambles for 4 and a 1st, Gilliam not on the field. 

Screen to Moss for 16, Gilliam not on the field.  

Allen to Davis for 16 and another 1st, Gilliam not on the field.  

Designed UTM run by Allen for 12, Gilliam not on the field.  

Tight formation, Allen to Sanders for an 8-yard TD, Gilliam not on the field.  

 

I suspect that a third of Gilliam's snaps were on our last drive clearly just trying to kill the clock and insurmountably up at that point.  

 

Either way, on the entire highlight video Gilliam was on the field for only three plays, inconsequential on every single one, as in could have been any JAG that did what he did.  He clearly wasn't getting any particular respect from Reid's D.  

 

I'm not sure it's worthe reviewing the 2022 game, but maybe I will.  Either way, if he was somehow instrumental it wasn't clear.  Either way, he certainly didn't have much of an impact much less a "big impact" as you stated.  You did say in both games, so I'm not sure there's any sense in my reviewing the other one at this point.  

 

You've called me out for posting more opinionated stuff than facts, and I've even acquiesced, such as when I was playing a little fast and loose with history going back to 2017-2020 re: our analysis of the LBs.  I'm going to suggest the same here, cordially of course.  On plays where the vast majority of our yards and all scores came from, Gilliam had exactly zero impact much less any "big impact."  

 

 

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Shakir can't back up Diggs and Davis. They tried to tell us that last summer then when it came to games they chose Jake Kumerow and the corpse of John Brown rather than put him wide. He is a slot receiver if he has any chance at this level.

 

Maybe Shorter can.... but a raw 5th round rookie who has done next to nothing in camp and didn't have a target last week? Hell of a gamble.

 

I'll take the friendly wager on Sherfield making the 53. It's nailed on.

 

My friendly wager offer was regarding Gilliam not making the 53 at his current $2M contract value.  We're on for that.  

 

My take on Sherfield is clearly linked to if Isabella makes the 53.  If he does, then yes, friendly wager that Sherfield is the one he beats out.  I'm not sure that we have another WR on the team that would take Sherfield's place after Isabella though.  If Isabella is cut, I fully expect Shefield to be on the 53.  

 

 

Edited August 19, 2023 by PBF81

[BananaB]

I have trouble seeing him make the final roster week 1. I could see him getting called up and possibly making an impact if guys in front of him don’t produce. That’s if we can sneak him on PS

Edited August 19, 2023 by BananaB

[PBF81]

17 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

The guy that came off the field against the Colts at the same time as Gabe Davis has exactly a 0% chance of getting cut.

 

Let's see how things line up tonight.  I could not disagree with you more on game 1 of preseason.  

 

It's funny, because every year there are surprise cuts around the league.  

 

I don't see Shorter or Khalil going anywhere.  As stated, if they do, then Beane needs further scrutiny.  Either way, if Shorter and Khalil do stay, and if, a big if, Isabella makes the 53, my money says that Sherfield is out.  

 

IMO they're trying to pump up his value in camp and practice for a trade.  Sure, I could be 100% wrong.  Time will tell.  It's purely opinion.  

 

 

[Brand J]

9 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

My take on Sherfield is clearly linked to if Isabella makes the 53.  If he does, then yes, friendly wager that Sherfield is the one he beats out.  I'm not sure that we have another WR on the team that would take Sherfield's place after Isabella though.  If Isabella is cut, I fully expect Shefield to be on the 53.  

I said earlier if Isabella makes the team, it guarantees there’ll be at least one surprise cut. The numbers make it so. However, that cut won’t come at the expense of Sherfield. It’s not my conversation, so sorry for jumping in here, but I’ll take you up on that wager if you’d like, $50 or $100. 

[BullBuchanan]

5 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I'll make a friendly wager with you that Gilliam doesn't make it at his current contact, if he does, he'll be brought back at something much closer to vet min.  

 

He defines expendable.  

 

 

 

Then how come he's hardly ever on the field?  

 

And what's so special about him as a FB that can't be found on waivers after cuts?  

 

 

It was already mentioned but he gives you high level ST play and blocking TE depth. You'd have to carry multiple players that would waste roster spots and cost more overall than one of him.