Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

The better your rush defense the worse it is for you because it discourages opponents from rushing and encourages them to pass, and passing is better, smarter, more efficient. Bad rush defense is better than good rush defense because it encourages rushing, and rushing a lot is a stupid move for the offense. The goal is to win not to be ranked #1 in useless statistical categories.

#SometimesHotTakesAreRightTho


wut? 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

The better your rush defense the worse it is for you because it discourages opponents from rushing and encourages them to pass, and passing is better, smarter, more efficient. Bad rush defense is better than good rush defense because it encourages rushing, and rushing a lot is a stupid move for the offense. The goal is to win not to be ranked #1 in useless statistical categories.

#SometimesHotTakesAreRightTho

 

Thinking Think GIF by Rodney Dangerfield

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
3 hours ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

The better your rush defense the worse it is for you because it discourages opponents from rushing and encourages them to pass, and passing is better, smarter, more efficient. Bad rush defense is better than good rush defense because it encourages rushing, and rushing a lot is a stupid move for the offense. The goal is to win not to be ranked #1 in useless statistical categories.

#SometimesHotTakesAreRightTho

 

I don't go as far as having a bad run defense is better.... but I do think there is a grain of truth. The days of "run and stop the run" are over. And if you build a really dominant run defense to the point teams barely even try against you then that is good against teams with average and bad Quarterbacks but it isn't great when you play the good Quarterbacks.... because you want those teams to get cute and waste downs rushing.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
5 hours ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

The better your rush defense the worse it is for you because it discourages opponents from rushing and encourages them to pass, and passing is better, smarter, more efficient. Bad rush defense is better than good rush defense because it encourages rushing, and rushing a lot is a stupid move for the offense. The goal is to win not to be ranked #1 in useless statistical categories.

#SometimesHotTakesAreRightTho

The fundamental problem with this argument is that having to be prepared to defend against the run forces suspect defensive lines to always anticipate moving laterally to get to the back, and if you can be run on, your d-line’s get-upfield-to-the-qb ability will be significantly handicapped. Being weak against the run means that you have to play two-dimensionally on d-line all the time, and that is NOT a good thing. Also, being weak against the run tends to create massive problems inside the red zone.

 

This is why there is literally not one defensive coordinator or head coach in the NFL who would agree with this take (flagging @GunnerBill, who somehow bizarrely agrees in part with this argument.)

Posted

love it.  fills a huge hole at DT.  still can draft 1-2 (2nd-3rd and late pick).  draft seems deep at 1T types.  We can now get 2 early WR—even 1in both 1st -2nd round). 

Posted
6 hours ago, Warriorspikes51 said:


wut? 


he’s just arguing 7 yards per attempt passing is better than 4.5 yards per carry for an offense. 
 

candidly, if you can be stingy in short yardage and goal line situations, I don’t much care about the yardage given up on 1st and 10 (or better yet, when behind schedule) unless you are an extreme outlier 

Posted
3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't go as far as having a bad run defense is better.... but I do think there is a grain of truth. The days of "run and stop the run" are over. And if you build a really dominant run defense to the point teams barely even try against you then that is good against teams with average and bad Quarterbacks but it isn't great when you play the good Quarterbacks.... because you want those teams to get cute and waste downs rushing.

 

every snap moss takes from burrow is a win, right? 
 

obviously it’s more nuanced than that but at its oversimplified core 

  • Agree 1
Posted
1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

The fundamental problem with this argument is that having to be prepared to defend against the run forces suspect defensive lines to always anticipate moving laterally to get to the back, and if you can be run on, your d-line’s get-upfield-to-the-qb ability will be significantly handicapped. Being weak against the run means that you have to play two-dimensionally on d-line all the time, and that is NOT a good thing. Also, being weak against the run tends to create massive problems inside the red zone.

 

This is why there is literally not one defensive coordinator or head coach in the NFL who would agree with this take (flagging @GunnerBill, who somehow bizarrely agrees in part with this argument.)

 

I don't agree with him, but I think there is a germ of a point there. I'm not advocating being weak against the run or building a weak defensive line. I am saying seeking to build a dominant run stopping defense to force teams to be "one dimensional" which 15 years ago was absolutely something teams sought to do is no longer a winning strategy against the best Quarterbacks. 

10 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

every snap moss takes from burrow is a win, right? 
 

obviously it’s more nuanced than that but at its oversimplified core 

 

Exactly. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
11 hours ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

Difference Jones has made in the playoff the last 2 seasons?  None.


Diggs hasn't been a big difference maker the past two playoff seasons, either. Should probably cut him.

Heck, Allen didn't play great against the Bengals in the 2022 playoffs. What do you think we could get back if we trade him away?

  • Vomit 1
Posted
43 minutes ago, Logic said:


Diggs hasn't been a big difference maker the past two playoff seasons, either. Should probably cut him.

Heck, Allen didn't play great against the Bengals in the 2022 playoffs. What do you think we could get back if we trade him away?

Seriously?  I don't feel like getting banned today, so I won't respond further 

Posted
7 minutes ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

Seriously?  I don't feel like getting banned today, so I won't respond further 


Probably for the best.

 

Posted
5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't agree with him, but I think there is a germ of a point there. I'm not advocating being weak against the run or building a weak defensive line. I am saying seeking to build a dominant run stopping defense to force teams to be "one dimensional" which 15 years ago was absolutely something teams sought to do is no longer a winning strategy against the best Quarterbacks. 

 

Exactly. 

Yeah having a dominant rush defense will help the Bills beat up on bad teams but they have Josh Allen, they're going to win most of those games anyway, automatically. When you play the Chiefs you want them to run the ball.

  • Agree 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Looks more like a one year deal to me.  Far from an overpay 


I’m thinking he is still there in 2025… only save $3m …if they cut him after this year ..

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
10 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/daquan-jones-14523/

 

$4.5M cap hit this year, $9M in 2025, then two void years. This is an overpay IMO.

 

It would be an overpay IF Jones can't play well for the bulk of the season.  If he does, then it all comes down to his effectiveness in 2025.

Seems to me this contract's risk is about 2025.  Beane has to hit on 2 DL guys in this draft.  If that happens, Jone's cap hit next year is

easily workable.  My fingers are crossed on DaQuan's health.

Posted
18 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

Looks more like a one year deal to me.  Far from an overpay 

 

Wouldn't call it a 1 year deal. It's a $6M dead cap hit to cut him next offseason, only saving $3M according to Spotrac.

 

OTC has it even worse:

 

https://overthecap.com/player/daquan-jones/3051

 

They are saying it would be a $7.25M dead cap hit to cut him in 2025. Not sure which report is correct.

Posted
2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Wouldn't call it a 1 year deal. It's a $6M dead cap hit to cut him next offseason, only saving $3M according to Spotrac.

 

OTC has it even worse:

 

https://overthecap.com/player/daquan-jones/3051

 

They are saying it would be a $7.25M dead cap hit to cut him in 2025. Not sure which report is correct.

 

It would be $6M ($2.25M of 2025 salary plus $3.75M in unamortized SB). 

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...