Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

The thing that bugs me the most is a lot of the new outlets reporting that the best takeaway from last night is that the Giants run game can or will be formidable. I'm left scratching my head. the first 2 series, they went nowhere. The only completions allowed were dump offs. They weren't able to gain more than a few yards/carry until the entire 2nd team came in (LBs and DL). Does NFL.com or fox sports media watch or pay attention?

 

On top of that, the Giants only averaged 3.2 yds/rush which isn't anything to write home about.

 

My thoughts on everything else:

1) Manuel looked like a young qb typically looks in his first preseason game of the season. He starred down a receiver or two, and overthrew a guy. Nothing to be too scared of yet. He'll get more time Friday. He went through his progression decently, and he trusted his receiver to make a play (i.e. letting M. Williams go up and make a play on the endzone ball - he didn't do that often last year, avoiding that kind of throw for a check down).

 

2) Our 1st team D looks nasty, except for picking up screens. This is where Kiko and his awareness come in handy. We will be missing that this year.

 

3) Our O-line looks better. I'm not too worried about Henderson filling in for Glenn if need be.

 

4) Tuel looked better last night than Lewis by a large margin.

 

5) There's no way that Hogan or Easley are left off of the roster.

Posted (edited)

5) There's no way that Hogan or Easley are left off of the roster.

 

Easley makes it as a special teams ace. I like Hogan better than TJ Graham.

 

Williams, Watkins, Woods, Goodwin, Hogan, Easley (ST) should be the six roster receivers this year.

Edited by Potato
Posted

I remember when expecting much out of a rookie QB in their rookie year, and first half of their second year was far fetched (until the luck, rg3, wilson draft). Now if a QB doesn't show he is a pro-bowler in his first season he is a bust. Its laughable. EJ Manuel shouldn't have started last year, and looked okay for the time he did play. Everyone knew he was a raw project with high upside, but wont let him develop. He needs to show improvement this year, if he doesn't, then its time to complain

 

 

 

 

So when do you give up on each one? Their rookie season?

 

 

EJ Manuel (306 attempts, 59% completion, 6.44 avg completion, 11:9 TD-int ratio, 78 rating)

Nick Foles? Would be Cut (265 attempts, 61% completion, 6.41 avg completion, 6:5 TD-int ratio, 79 rating)

Eli Manning? Lol CUT (197 attempts, 48% completion, 5.29 avg completion, 6:9 TD-int ratio, 55 rating, his next 3 seasons aren't much better)

Drew Brees? CUT, sorry (526 attempts, 61% completion, 6.24 avg completion, 17:16 TD-int ratio, 77 rating)

Joe Flacco? CUTTTTT (428 attempts, 60% completion, 6.94 avg completion, 14:12 TD-int ratio, 80 rating)

Carson Palmer? nope (432 attempts, 61% completion, 6.71 avg completion, 18:18 TD-int ratio, 77 rating)

 

Alex smith, Ryan Tannehill? Cut!

 

 

 

Lets all pretend the rookie season for QBs is the way to judge them. And let's all pretend EJ manuel didnt deal with injuries. And let's also pretend the line wasn't god awful last year, his RBs were healthy, and he had a WR core that didnt have an injured stevie johnson, robert woods, and goodwin

 

That's some good stuff. I'll settle down for at least one more preseason game. :P

 

And GCoE.. EJ is Leino... Ouch. :worthy:

Posted

I think his point is that the Bills should have grabbed one in the fourth round to compete with him.

 

I agree, even though I think Manuel will be a successful NFL QB.

 

Take one every year until you've got the man. It is the hardest position to fill, and they could easily have found a middling CB in free agency (rather than in the 4th round).

Exactly.

Posted
...and F Bon Jovi! I hated that guy's music back in the 80s. How that guy is still relevant three decades later is beyond me.

 

I grant him this: He's a savvy businessman.

Posted

And even a after this entire process, the league still has to approve the new owner, right?

Wouldn't it be somethin' if they turned down Pegula because he would keep them in Buffalo.

Posted

 

Oh, to be young and full of hope.

 

The league has absolutely no reason to force a money-making franchise out of a small market. Small market success is a treasure for professional leagues. They know that, if they REALLY want a team elsewhere, they can just charge a heinous expansion fee and get it done while making more money and drawing more interest.

Forcing the Bills out of Buffalo makes zero sense for the league, especially with a Jamestown boy running the show.

Posted

That strikes me as possible, albeit somewhat unlikely.

No chance that happens.

 

I'm glad you think so! :) I can see people at NFL corporate having the conversation that Toronto, with its much larger population, being better for the NFL as a league than Buffalo. You'd probably lose half of the Buffalo TV viewers, but gain that back plus a ton with more interest in TOR.

 

The league has absolutely no reason to force a money-making franchise out of a small market. Small market success is a treasure for professional leagues. They know that, if they REALLY want a team elsewhere, they can just charge a heinous expansion fee and get it done while making more money and drawing more interest.

Forcing the Bills out of Buffalo makes zero sense for the league, especially with a Jamestown boy running the show.

 

I doubt they expand past 32 teams. It's such a good number for divisions and whatnot.

Posted

 

I doubt they expand past 32 teams. It's such a good number for divisions and whatnot.

 

I agree, but it's more likely they expect than cut down a market like Buffalo. And there's a growing belief that divisions in sports are dying off soon. The NBA is considering it.

Posted

They 31 other owners all get richer if the bills move.

 

Maybe. But I think a football team in Buffalo being worth over $1 billion is going to be having them seeing green.

Posted

If a team in buffalo is worth $1B, that same team in a huge market (Toronto, LA, Mexico City, etc.) will be worth $2B+.

 

None of this will convince the owners to bite the PR bullet and force a move, but the owners long term financial interest is squarely in favor moving a small market team into one of the unserved large North American media markets.

Posted

 

 

I agree, but it's more likely they expect than cut down a market like Buffalo. And there's a growing belief that divisions in sports are dying off soon. The NBA is considering it.

Why would they even consider it?

 

The NHL effectively tried it for 2 years when they absorbed the WHA teams. Though they effectively had no conferences either. It resulted in loss of rivalries (instead of playing the B's or TO 7-8 times, they played them 4x), greatly increased travel costs, and started the scourge that was the Isles SC run. In the words of Dennis Hopper, "bad things man, bad things."

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't like the NBA's version of bouncey ball, so anything they do that's boneheaded, I'm good w/. Just don't see what they gain by doing it.

Posted

If a team in buffalo is worth $1B, that same team in a huge market (Toronto, LA, Mexico City, etc.) will be worth $2B+.

 

None of this will convince the owners to bite the PR bullet and force a move, but the owners long term financial interest is squarely in favor moving a small market team into one of the unserved large North American media markets.

W/ a league that doesn't look to be expanding, such as the NFL, absolutely.

 

If the league were looking to expand, it makes more sense to keep the team w/ history (AND making a relatively inordinate amount of $) to stay put and put the expansion team into the bigger market. That way you keep a known profit maker and get the benefits of the big market. If you move the small market team, you have the PR issues, the Schumer issues, and you end up expanding into a place like OKC.

 

Would a team in LA be worth more than 1 in Bufalo - almost definitely. Would 1 in OKC be worth more/ bring in more revenue than one in Buffalo - ST, yes; LT - it's debatable, and I'd make the case that it isn't. Jacksonville seemed to be a good choice when the league expanded, but tarping over huge swaths of seats isn't good. And they're always in the relocation discussion.

Posted
Jacksonville seemed to be a good choice when the league expanded, but tarping over huge swaths of seats isn't good. And they're always in the relocation discussion.

 

Drew Magary had a brutally honest assessment of Jx-ville in his annual "why your team sucks" write-up:

 

This city's only purpose is to stage the Georgia-Florida game. It is a temporary fairground that people decided to live in for some reason.

 

http://deadspin.com/why-your-team-sucks-2014-jacksonville-jaguars-1616275574

 

I realize that he's basically a comedy writer. But that line hits close to the truth.

Posted

If the NFL didn't force the Jags to move through the ownership process, they're not going to force the Bills to move. I'm sure some owners would prefer it, but they're not going to go out of their way to make it happen.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...