Buffalo Bills 2018-2019

[Sabel79]

Not watching today and really don’t care, but how have I never noticed until today how entertaining Jerry Sullivan’s twitter feed is during Bills Games?

There has never been another old man on this planet who yells at clouds quite as loudly as him.  Bravo, sir.  

[TrueBlueGED]

Robert Foster > Zay Jones.

[JujuFish]

4 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Robert Foster > Zay Jones.

Kenny Golladay > Tre White ?

[TrueBlueGED]

1 minute ago, JujuFish said:

Kenny Golladay > Tre White ?

Tre has had a rough second half of the year, I think.

[Taro T]

36 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Robert Foster > Zay Jones.

True.  Benjamin really did teach Zay Jones everything he knew about being a #1 wide receiver.  :(

And shockingly Bills Special Teams > Lions STs.

Where do they end up picking with a 6-10 record?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

28 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Tre has had a rough second half of the year, I think.

But, he did make that fantastic video, so all is forgiven.

[inkman]

McClappy is gonna process this team straight to the 14th pick in the draft

Edited December 16, 2018 by inkman

[Eleven]

They lost me with the punt from the Lions' 35 in the first quarter.  Good that they won, I guess.  Who cares?  I read the news and did crossword puzzles for the rest of the game.

McDermott is a clapping chicken.

[Samson's Flow]

48 minutes ago, inkman said:

McClappy is gonna process this team straight to the 14th pick in the draft

At least this year it might be partly from development of Allen, Foster, etc. and not meaningless veterans overachieving

[Eleven]

3 hours ago, Samson's Flow said:

At least this year it might be partly from development of Allen, Foster, etc. and not meaningless veterans overachieving

Wait until next week when he punts on third and goal.

[nfreeman]

Allen looked quite promising again yesterday IMHO.

[That Aud Smell]

17 hours ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Tre has had a rough second half of the year, I think.

That sense had been growing for me before yesterday's game. I didn't get to see a lot of it, but, man, it sounded like he got scorched.

18 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Allen looked quite promising again yesterday IMHO.

Agreed. I'm still not sure what he'll end up being, but he's shown enough for me to feel like he could end up being quite good. 

[Samson's Flow]

46 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

Allen looked quite promising again yesterday IMHO.

It was a good step forward since the Lions took away his scramble game and dared him to be a QB. He made a bunch of confident throws over the middle, and would have had more if not for some bad drops/contested catches that his WR's didn't win.

[LGR4GM]

I would like to see a new center, right guard, and right tackle brought in for next season. Allen looked better in this game then some in the past. He is in desperate need of 2 more WR options. They need someone for the opposite side of Foster. They need a true #1. 

[inkman]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

I would like to see a new center, right guard, and right tackle brought in for next season. Allen looked better in this game then some in the past. He is in desperate need of 2 more WR options. They need someone for the opposite side of Foster. They need a true #1. 

If we can get two of those OL, I'll take it. I hope they don't place all their hopes on a draft pick WR. Draft one 1st or 2nd round and sign the best FA possible. Then Foster, Jones, Mackenzie can be fill out the top 5.

[Hoss]

On 11/27/2018 at 7:04 PM, shrader said:

Has that ever been substantiated or is it just his word that he’s been tested “like 5 times”? All I found with a limited google search was that quote and that wording could point towards exaggeration for the sake of making a point. 

The number is now seven times in 11 weeks. And if nobody cared last time they absolutely care now because an impressive number of reporters have no started tweeting the NFL asking for an explanation and directly calling it ridiculous.

 

[That Aud Smell]

If his union doesn’t grieve that, they’re as much to blame as the NFL.

[Hoss]

2 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

If his union doesn’t grieve that, they’re as much to blame as the NFL.

My guess is the drug agreement might have their hands tied. I would also guess the drug agreement will be a huge issue in the next CBA.

[shrader]

6 hours ago, Hoss said:

The number is now seven times in 11 weeks. And if nobody cared last time they absolutely care now because an impressive number of reporters have no started tweeting the NFL asking for an explanation and directly calling it ridiculous.

 

I still need to see it backed up by something other than his words.  The source for every link I've read is his quote above.  One story did have a picture of the notice posted on his locker.  I don't know if he's shown those before, but that was a good one to get out there.

Look, I don't doubt that the league could target someone like this, I also wouldn't be surprised by a player stretching the truth to help his cause.  I need to see more than just a quote from one person before I lean one way or the other.

3 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

If his union doesn’t grieve that, they’re as much to blame as the NFL.

I wonder if either side is allowed to disclose publicly who is tested and when.  If there's a grievance process, it may be completely private.

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, Hoss said:

My guess is the drug agreement might have their hands tied. I would also guess the drug agreement will be a huge issue in the next CBA.

The policy calls for random tests. If there's proof that his tests aren't random and are instead being orchestrated as a form of retaliation for protected activity of some kind, they'd have a basis for grieving. Maybe the union's looking into it. It would be tricky to prove, I bet.

[LTS]

8 hours ago, Hoss said:

The number is now seven times in 11 weeks. And if nobody cared last time they absolutely care now because an impressive number of reporters have no started tweeting the NFL asking for an explanation and directly calling it ridiculous.

 

Calling it ridiculous is a stretch without facts.  The ONLY fact is that Eric Reid has stated he's been testing 7 times in 11 weeks.  There are important questions to be asked before I would call it ridiculous.  But hey, calling it ridiculous grabs eyeballs right?  Why not just ask the NFL and NFLPA to clarify:

How many other players have been tested at the same rate?

What is the expected test rate of the random algorithm?

Those answers provide context.  The next is determining if he just happens to be the victim of a statistical outlier.  

I like Eric Reid and his entire approach to this so far, but if it's just chance, it's just chance.

1 hour ago, That Aud Smell said:

The policy calls for random tests. If there's proof that his tests aren't random and are instead being orchestrated as a form of retaliation for protected activity of some kind, they'd have a basis for grieving. Maybe the union's looking into it. It would be tricky to prove, I bet.

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/25403736/nflpa-looking-eric-reid-allegation-excessive-drug-testing  - as of Nov. 29 they were.

[Lanny]

Quote

What are the odds of Eric Reid being drug-tested this much?

Let’s go through some numbers that we first dove into when Reid received his fifth drug test of the season. There were 72 players on the Panthers’ roster eligible for drug testing. NFL drug-testing policy dictates that 10 players from each team, supposedly chosen randomly by a computer, are tested each week of the season.

Reid has been with Carolina for 11 weeks and says he has been drug-tested seven times, though one of those would have been his mandatory annual test that is basically part of his physical. That means six positive results out of 11 chances on odds that work out to 72 divided by 10.

Using a cumulative binomial probability calculator, those numbers work out to a 0.17 percent chance of Reid getting randomly selected at least six times in 11 chances, according to the NFL’s rules. That’s a 1-in-588 chance. Reid would have a better chance at correctly guessing a coin flip nine times in a row.

Considering Reid and the NFL’s relationship, hitting on those odds that often is quite convenient for a league likely looking for any reason to make Reid go away.

https://sports.yahoo.com/odds-nfl-randomly-drug-testing-eric-reid-7-times-season-055406909.html

[LTS]

9 minutes ago, Lanny said:

https://sports.yahoo.com/odds-nfl-randomly-drug-testing-eric-reid-7-times-season-055406909.html

The last phrase is amazing.

9 minutes ago, Lanny said:

Considering Reid and the NFL’s relationship, hitting on those odds that often is quite convenient for a league likely looking for any reason to make Reid go away.

Let's follow this logic being used by the author.

Reid believes he is being targeted by the NFL.  The author believes the league is "likely looking for any reason to make Reid go away".  As such..

The NFL must believe that Reid is going to either screw up the process of taking the drug test or fail one.  My guess is that they'd have to hope on the former because Reid, if knowing he's in the headlights of the NFL, fails a drug test, he's an idiot.  I don't think he's an idiot.

Therefore, if the NFL is rigging the outcome they are actually countering their own agenda (if it is their agenda) and giving Reid a platform on which to speak.  Now it's entirely possible the NFL is that ignorant, we shall see.  But it's a helluva stretch by the author and just more inflammatory language.  I will give the author credit for attempting some math with it.  A better ending would be:

"Considering Reid and the NFL's relationship, hitting on those odds that often certainly raises questions on what is happening with the random drug test procedure and a reason to confirm that no intended bias is causing Reid to be tested more frequently."

Of course that's my opinion and I'm certainly not in the majority of the reader demographic for the media...

PS. Lanny did not say that.. but the quote from a highlighting text function is pretty cool.

Edited December 18, 2018 by LTS
Added the PS...

[shrader]

Does he have any history because they do more frequently test players in the system.  If I'm reading the policy correctly, having other players in the system on his team would also impact this.  They draw their random testings from the pool of all players who aren't already subject to "ongoing reasonable cause testing".  So the more players you have on the team in the system, the higher chance you have to be randomly selected.

[pi2000]

It's impossible to prove a negative.