That Aud Smell Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 You have that backwards. It was Yahoo that had to prove to the league and the sponsors that their technology was worth spending big dollars on teams that matter. I'm not so sure. It's a a big stew, with multiple moving parts. Yahoo is going to want to bid for rights, the NFL will want them to, the NFL may want to stream games on an in-house basis, and the advertisers will want to kick the tires on all of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 I'm not so sure. It's a a big stew, with multiple moving parts. Yahoo is going to want to bid for rights, the NFL will want them to, the NFL may want to stream games on an in-house basis, and the advertisers will want to kick the tires on all of that. So we're agreeing, then. The NFL absolutely wants to stream games. It is how everything is going and will eventually be, but like Hoss said, local dollars. They aren't going to risk losing big national money being lost if something went wrong with the new technology. There were buffering issues even Sunday. I can't even imagine how much bigger the viewership would have been if was a Giants/Cowboys game. They would have had server crashes galore and way more lost dollars. Test it out on Bills/Jags. work out the kinks till it's ready for teams that matter. I don't fault them for it, but I also don't want to think my team is special because of it either, because, um, they ain't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Leaving aside the awfulness of the Bills' play and the general train wreck that the season has been, I'll just note regarding the streaming technology that I have a reasonably fast cable modem at home and whenever I watched it on "full screen" on my computer, it was unwatchable. However, when I watched on my TV using the Roku, it worked pretty close to perfectly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 What is "the Roku"? I saw the game at a bar and they had a decent picture but it was a little stop-actiony and not quite synched with the sound. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 You have that backwards. It was Yahoo that had to prove to the league and the sponsors that their technology was worth spending big dollars on teams that matter. Yep, and Yahoo! showed the technology wasn't ready for primetime at least at my house. Relatively new laptop (1920x1080 screen), FIOS internet (25Mb, I think), and it would still bounce around between "pretty good", "a little fuzzy", and "2002 amateur porn" quality levels. I didn't plug in the TV, but "pretty good" looked relatively clean on the laptop screen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 What is "the Roku"? I saw the game at a bar and they had a decent picture but it was a little stop-actiony and not quite synched with the sound. A bar was open at 8 in the morning? Were the regulars confused as to why a football game was on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 The game was not on in the sports book at the Mirage and from what I understand at any of the other books in town either. Some exclusivity rights mumbo jumbo, so I had to watch on my iPad but the quality was fine using hotel WiFi. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Before anyone even suggests it: The answer is "no." No, the Bills should not sign Ryan Mallett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Before anyone even suggests it: The answer is "no." No, the Bills should not sign Ryan Mallett. Wow, you're really putting the hammer down on that idea. Hey-o. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Here's a nugget I just learned for those interested in the "Should Whaley be fired?" debate: his contract is over at the end of this year. I'm now officially predicting that he is gone after this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Here's a nugget I just learned for those interested in the "Should Whaley be fired?" debate: his contract is over at the end of this year. I'm now officially predicting that he is gone after this season. I am firmly on the fence as to whether he should be fired, but it seems to me that you're right; he's likely gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Ambivalent on potentially saying buh-bye to Whaley. He's had a good (arguably very good) track record with a lot of talent decisions, evaluations. And I'm not just talking about the draft. Take, for example, letting Byrd walk. Smart move. Gutsy move. He hasn't landed himself a franchise QB. And he overpaid for Watkins. Any other sins for which he might be fired? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woods-racer Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Ambivalent on potentially saying buh-bye to Whaley. He's had a good (arguably very good) track record with a lot of talent decisions, evaluations. And I'm not just talking about the draft. Take, for example, letting Byrd walk. Smart move. Gutsy move. He hasn't landed himself a franchise QB. And he overpaid for Watkins. Any other sins for which he might be fired? I spotted Bill Polian at a Sabres game :angel: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Ambivalent on potentially saying buh-bye to Whaley. He's had a good (arguably very good) track record with a lot of talent decisions, evaluations. And I'm not just talking about the draft. Take, for example, letting Byrd walk. Smart move. Gutsy move. He hasn't landed himself a franchise QB. And he overpaid for Watkins. Any other sins for which he might be fired? The biggest sin IMHO isn't just that he hasn't landed a franchise QB. He hasn't even tried, other than drafting EJ. The position is so important that it's critical to keep trying until you find the right guy. Whaley has just sat out the game. Other sins: - giving McCoy a big contract - failure to assemble a respectable offensive line - failure to draft good WRs other than Sammy - getting rid of Freddy (I appreciate that others disagree with this, but I firmly believe the Bills could've used him this year, both on the field and in the locker room) - trading Cassell, thus leaving the Bills with only EJ in a situation in which TT gets hurt or falls off the table And the ultimate sin: failure to assemble a winning team. Bottom line is that, like Darcy, it's his job to put together the complete product -- and he's responsible if it doesn't happen. (Now, in reality, I think Whaley has much less juice than most other GMs, and thus perhaps should have less accountability. But if we're going to credit him with good developments on his watch, he needs to be accountable for bad developments.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny DangerFace Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 He looked worse than EJ ever has for most of that Titans game. 1) you apparently didn't watch EJ's Houston or Jacksonville game. 2) he still put the team on his back, and won the game for us 3) who cares? It was his 5th career start Not saying this is you, but years of bad QB play has turned the fans into the most ignorant group of people wanting a new QB always and then giving up on them at any signs of struggling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Doug Whaley likely being gone also makes it a lot more likely this team targets a QB this offseason. A new GM, despite what he may like from Taylor so far, isn't going to hedge their bets on a guy with potential injury issues and still big question marks. Even if Taylor has a successful return can anybody really say without a doubt he won't end up just like Kaepernick or the other several run-first QBs who had success early but struggled once the defenses schemed for them? I am with freeman and the contract note is important. I don't see any way they extend him. The biggest sin IMHO isn't just that he hasn't landed a franchise QB. He hasn't even tried, other than drafting EJ. The position is so important that it's critical to keep trying until you find the right guy. Whaley has just sat out the game. Other sins: - giving McCoy a big contract - failure to assemble a respectable offensive line - failure to draft good WRs other than Sammy - getting rid of Freddy (I appreciate that others disagree with this, but I firmly believe the Bills could've used him this year, both on the field and in the locker room) - trading Cassell, thus leaving the Bills with only EJ in a situation in which TT gets hurt or falls off the table And the ultimate sin: failure to assemble a winning team. Bottom line is that, like Darcy, it's his job to put together the complete product -- and he's responsible if it doesn't happen. (Now, in reality, I think Whaley has much less juice than most other GMs, and thus perhaps should have less accountability. But if we're going to credit him with good developments on his watch, he needs to be accountable for bad developments.) Yeap. You could break down some of those sins into others. The McCoy situation was: -Valuing the running back position by trading a young asset for one -Compounding it by extending his contract The handling of the QB position has been inexcusable. Other GMs here (and in other cities) have made similar mistakes and not gotten passes for it. Whaley shouldn't. His time here is just about done unless something big changes between now and the ened of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Interesting takes on Whaley. My sense is that the team's biggest failure this season has been with the coaching staff. It's the NFL, man. If you don't have your QB, you're really just screwing around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 (edited) The biggest sin IMHO isn't just that he hasn't landed a franchise QB. He hasn't even tried, other than drafting EJ. The position is so important that it's critical to keep trying until you find the right guy. Whaley has just sat out the game. Other sins: - giving McCoy a big contract - failure to assemble a respectable offensive line - failure to draft good WRs other than Sammy - getting rid of Freddy (I appreciate that others disagree with this, but I firmly believe the Bills could've used him this year, both on the field and in the locker room) - trading Cassell, thus leaving the Bills with only EJ in a situation in which TT gets hurt or falls off the table And the ultimate sin: failure to assemble a winning team. Bottom line is that, like Darcy, it's his job to put together the complete product -- and he's responsible if it doesn't happen. (Now, in reality, I think Whaley has much less juice than most other GMs, and thus perhaps should have less accountability. But if we're going to credit him with good developments on his watch, he needs to be accountable for bad developments.) 1) people that keep referring to the McCoy contract just have no idea how contracts work in the NFL 2) offensive line play ranks right below QB's in NFL problem areas. It's an area of concern throughout the league. It's so bad that the Bill's line probably falls right in the middle of the pack. 3) WR's are fine when healthy 4) 6-10, 9-7, ? Not a bad start for most GM's A team that apparently hasn't tried to address the QB position, the OL or the WR and hasn't played one game with its starters is 8th in the league in scoring offense. Edited October 27, 2015 by tom webster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 (edited) 1) people that keep referring to the McCoy contract just have no idea how contracts work in the NFL 2) offensive line play ranks right below QB's in NFL problem areas. It's an area of concern throughout the league. It's so bad that the Bill's line probably falls right in the middle of the pack. 3) WR's are fine when healthy 4) 6-10, 9-7, ? Not a bad start for most GM's The problem is this year looks more like 7-9 than 10-6, so good start or not, the team isn't showing improvement this year (I suppose they could finish the year 9-2, but I'd put money on it not happening. Edited October 27, 2015 by MattPie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Flagg Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 He looked worse than EJ ever has for most of that Titans game. It's the same as the "defenseless receiver" calls. You just can't take free shots on either side of the ball. The league said they were going to emphasis these hits going back to last season. IMO, it was a selfish play by Woods, he was looking for an ESPN highlight hit. It hurt the Bills. The McCoy fumble hurt, the ball inside the 5 instead of the 20 puts the Bills defense in a better spot. Ah yes, I remember TT's stretch of 2 picks, one of them being a pick six, and a fumble that was recovered for a touchdown, in a span of a few minutes, in the Titans game. Dreadful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 1) people that keep referring to the McCoy contract just have no idea how contracts work in the NFL 2) offensive line play ranks right below QB's in NFL problem areas. It's an area of concern throughout the league. It's so bad that the Bill's line probably falls right in the middle of the pack. 3) WR's are fine when healthy 4) 6-10, 9-7, ? Not a bad start for most GM's 1. This is both insulting and a confusing statement. Contracts in the NFL work in many ways. You've got contracts like Mario Williams' that can essentially be torn up at any point. But McCoy's isn't quite like that. Cutting him next season has a negative impact on the cap. Then we only save $1M while paying him $8M. THEN we can save $3.7M while still paying him $6M which is high for a running back anyways. It isn't until 2019 that cutting him would have the positive impact you're hinting at. 2. Maybe. But this team hasn't even seemed to try to fix the offensive line. Signing a guy that was out of the league for a year and a half to "fix" one guard position was questionable. He's been solid so that worked out... Then a third-round rookie to fill the other guard spot. And a seventh-round rookie started a right tackle for us last year and is this year. That's patchwork if I've ever seen it. If the Bills line was struggling after making some legitimate acquisitions I would be willing to follow your line of thinking there. 3. True. Robert Woods is better than he gets credit for. Sammy's health, according to Sammy, is largely because the Bills turf is so bad. They're the only team in the league that uses this type of turf, too. 4. That's not how evaluations work. You can't just go "well, everybody else did this or this, so Whaley is fine." It's about the context of it. 9-7 last year was a big success, sure, but the attempts to supplement it going into this season were highly questionable. The likely step back is a big negative to me. Ah yes, I remember TT's stretch of 2 picks, one of them being a pick six, and a fumble that was recovered for a touchdown, in a span of a few minutes, in the Titans game. Dreadful. I think he meant the EJ BEFORE this most recent game. The Jaguars 2nd quarter might be the worst quarter of quarterbacking I've ever seen, though. I disagree that Tyrod looked THAT bad, but I do have to agree that he looked dreadful. He got a ton of credit coming out of that game and everybody was like "TYROD SAVED US" but that's like me pulling somebody out of a river after I pushed them in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 1) people that keep referring to the McCoy contract just have no idea how contracts work in the NFL 2) offensive line play ranks right below QB's in NFL problem areas. It's an area of concern throughout the league. It's so bad that the Bill's line probably falls right in the middle of the pack. 3) WR's are fine when healthy 4) 6-10, 9-7, ? Not a bad start for most GM's A team that apparently hasn't tried to address the QB position, the OL or the WR and hasn't played one game with its starters is 8th in the league in scoring offense. Regarding McCoy -- Isn't he getting $26MM guaranteed? Doesn't that royally screw the Bills if they cut him in the 1st 3 years of the deal? And are you confident that by the end of next year he won't be JAG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom webster Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 1. This is both insulting and a confusing statement. Contracts in the NFL work in many ways. You've got contracts like Mario Williams' that can essentially be torn up at any point. But McCoy's isn't quite like that. Cutting him next season has a negative impact on the cap. Then we only save $1M while paying him $8M. THEN we can save $3.7M while still paying him $6M which is high for a running back anyways. It isn't until 2019 that cutting him would have the positive impact you're hinting at. 2. Maybe. But this team hasn't even seemed to try to fix the offensive line. Signing a guy that was out of the league for a year and a half to "fix" one guard position was questionable. He's been solid so that worked out... Then a third-round rookie to fill the other guard spot. And a seventh-round rookie started a right tackle for us last year and is this year. That's patchwork if I've ever seen it. If the Bills line was struggling after making some legitimate acquisitions I would be willing to follow your line of thinking there. 3. True. Robert Woods is better than he gets credit for. Sammy's health, according to Sammy, is largely because the Bills turf is so bad. They're the only team in the league that uses this type of turf, too. 4. That's not how evaluations work. You can't just go "well, everybody else did this or this, so Whaley is fine." It's about the context of it. 9-7 last year was a big success, sure, but the attempts to supplement it going into this season were highly questionable. The likely step back is a big negative to me. I think he meant the EJ BEFORE this most recent game. The Jaguars 2nd quarter might be the worst quarter of quarterbacking I've ever seen, though. I disagree that Tyrod looked THAT bad, but I do have to agree that he looked dreadful. He got a ton of credit coming out of that game and everybody was like "TYROD SAVED US" but that's like me pulling somebody out of a river after I pushed them in. Solid? He's is already getting mentioned for pro bowl consideration. Look at New England's OL. They started a college free agent at center. To say that they haven't tried to fix the line given the number of picks and signings is ridiculous. You can argue if they chose the right guys and then I point back to how hard it is to find the right guy. As for McCoy's contract, I am going to leave my statement as it is. There was a lot more that played onto that and I fully expect him to play to the value of his contract through 2019 but if he doesn't it was a worthwhile investment in my book. I know how evaluations work and not sure what you mean in the contect of my statement anyway. The Pegula's will evaluate Whaley on his three years and may or may not choose to move on but his record of success will get him another job. I still don't understand all the talk about a step back this early in the season especially with all the injuries and the team starting to get healthy. His sticking by EJ may be his ultimate downfall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 The Ralph's turf is to blame for Sammy's soft tissue woes? Well. NFW the turf at OBD is worse than the rug in the Superdome. Even so: Get Sammy a new field, Uncle Terry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted October 27, 2015 Report Share Posted October 27, 2015 Solid? He's is already getting mentioned for pro bowl consideration. Look at New England's OL. They started a college free agent at center. To say that they haven't tried to fix the line given the number of picks and signings is ridiculous. You can argue if they chose the right guys and then I point back to how hard it is to find the right guy. As for McCoy's contract, I am going to leave my statement as it is. There was a lot more that played onto that and I fully expect him to play to the value of his contract through 2019 but if he doesn't it was a worthwhile investment in my book. I know how evaluations work and not sure what you mean in the contect of my statement anyway. The Pegula's will evaluate Whaley on his three years and may or may not choose to move on but his record of success will get him another job. I still don't understand all the talk about a step back this early in the season especially with all the injuries and the team starting to get healthy. His sticking by EJ may be his ultimate downfall. Comparing the Patriots center position to what the Bills have done is baseless. They had a starter who got hurt. The undrafted player is only starting because of that. The Ralph's turf is to blame for Sammy's soft tissue woes? Well. NFW the turf at OBD is worse than the rug in the Superdome. Even so: Get Sammy a new field, Uncle Terry! According to Sammy, yes. During the tours of the Ralph he was apparently telling people how bad it is and that much of the team feels the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.