Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is how I read the rule too though it isn't totally clear. I am going to guess Sal has checked with others before posting so looks like my read is the right one. 

If that happens, he’ll be released with that settlement and eventually would be able to re-sign with the Bills for whatever amount of weeks that settlement is, +3 weeks. (amount of weeks of the settlement is not made public). In that scenario, once a settlement is reached, he could sign with another team at any time.

 

 

 

 

Edited by DaBillsFanSince1973
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

Can't possibly articulate how much I hate these stupid internet "doctors" making diagnosis from video clips

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

No source on Milano injury status, but common sense says he wouldn't be trying push ups OR picking up a Jugs machine if trainers thought he tore/seriously injured his arm.

 

I've had multiple stingers, and that pain/tingling can linger.  

 

Either way, hope he's OK and coaches keep him out of action until 9/8

Posted
7 hours ago, DaBillsFanSince1973 said:

 

Idiotic take by Tompsett.

 

Does he think we're going to go through the whole season without having to attempt an important field goal?

 

  • Eyeroll 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Idiotic take by Tompsett.

 

Does he think we're going to go through the whole season without having to attempt an important field goal?

 

 

I don't think he's saying that - he states it's a silver lining, which means there's a great cloud to the issue, rather than it being an outright good thing.

  • Agree 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Idiotic take by Tompsett.

 

Does he think we're going to go through the whole season without having to attempt an important field goal?

 

 

I think you missed the words "silver lining."

Posted
3 hours ago, UKBillFan said:

 

I don't think he's saying that - he states it's a silver lining, which means there's a great cloud to the issue, rather than it being an outright good thing.

 

23 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think you missed the words "silver lining."

 

Saying that it's good for a team (that goes for it more than 27 other teams in "coin flip situations") to go for it even more is an assertion with no proof.

 

Making strategic decisions based on not trusting your field goal kicker has no silver lining.

 

Posted
16 hours ago, stevewin said:

Can't possibly articulate how much I hate these stupid internet "doctors" making diagnosis from video clips

 

Don’t get me started…it’s irresponsible and borderline unethical for an actual MD to do this.

 

 

1 minute ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

 

Saying that it's good for a team (that goes for it more than 27 other teams in "coin flip situations") to go for it even more is an assertion with no proof.

 

Making strategic decisions based on not trusting your field goal kicker has no silver lining.

 

 

I think with an offense (and QB) like the Bills have, and an above average defense, they should *never* punt from beyond midfield or attempt a FG of longer than 40 yards (LOS at the 23) unless it is an end of half or end of game scenario.

 

I’m sure there are a few other limited exceptions, but if McD ran things that way I’d be pleased.

 

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, eball said:

I think with an offense (and QB) like the Bills have, and an above average defense, they should *never* punt from beyond midfield or attempt a FG of longer than 40 yards (LOS at the 23) unless it is an end of half or end of game scenario.

 

I’m sure there are a few other limited exceptions, but if McD ran things that way I’d be pleased.

 

 

I'd like to see the analytics on it.

 

If you always go for it in coin flip situations you run past the point of diminishing returns and if the Bills already go for it more than all but 4 teams they're probably close to that point.

 

 

Edited by Sierra Foothills
Posted
2 minutes ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

 

Saying that it's good for a team (that goes for it more than 27 other teams in "coin flip situations") to go for it even more is an assertion with no proof.

 

 

That is a slightly different point to your initial point. I understand challenging that assertion. But he didn't suggest that that it was sufficient of a sliver lining to override the risk that we do need to make a clutch kick at some point (which was your original point as you articulated it).

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

That is a slightly different point to your initial point. I understand challenging that assertion. But he didn't suggest that that it was sufficient of a sliver lining to override the risk that we do need to make a clutch kick at some point (which was your original point as you articulated it).

 

Maybe I take "silver lining" to have a different meaning than some others.

 

To me it means that ultimately there is an overall benefit.

 

Maybe to others it means that it's not as bad as it first appears... mitigation.

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Sierra Foothills said:

 

Maybe I take "silver lining" to have a different meaning than some others.

 

To me it means that ultimately there is an overall benefit.

 

Maybe to others it means that it's not as bad as it first appears... mitigation.

 

 

Yea a silver lining means a mitigation to me. It means something good can can be found in an overall negative situation. 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea a silver lining means a mitigation to me. It means something good can can be found in an overall negative situation. 

I see the OP's point, but it implies that McD isn't going for it enough, and his being forced to because he has an incompetent kicker might be a good thing in some circumstances. But as he or someone else pointed out, the Bills are already top-five in going for it on fourth down. So gambling even more is likely not a good thing. Plus, you always want flexibility so you can respond to the circumstances. (E.g., Trubinsky is in there and falling flat.)

 

Time to bring in another kicker. If Bass is so fragile that the competition causes him to spiral, better to know that now. But maybe he'll improve instead. Or maybe the new guy (or woman!) will be just be better. Even then, I can see McBean sticking with Bass, hoping he gets his swagger back. 

  • Agree 1
Posted
24 minutes ago, finn said:

I see the OP's point, but it implies that McD isn't going for it enough, and his being forced to because he has an incompetent kicker might be a good thing in some circumstances.

 

I'm not sure it is implying the former. It is implying the latter point (that going for it more might be a good thing in some circumstances) and it is fair to challenge that rationale. Again though, that wasn't what @Sierra Foothills initial point was. Had it been I would not have responded to him initially. 

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...