TrueBlueGED Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Objectively, it's a great move. If anything, there is the opposite of kool-aid drinking going on here No, it is not. Correct. And why would trading players who never made you good in the first place mean you are tanking? Because trading your best players for downgrades and draft picks makes you worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 No, it is not. How so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubkev Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Because trading your best players for downgrades and draft picks makes you worse. How many losses is considered a tank in football. The season is so short, I feel like we can put a definitive number on it. Is it 13? 14? 12? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 How so? Because it implies that any opinion other than "it was a great move" is factually and proveably wrong. How many losses is considered a tank in football. The season is so short, I feel like we can put a definitive number on it. Is it 13? 14? 12? I'd say 12 or 13. Anyway, the trades made the team worse for the sake of a future draft. They were tank moves in the sense that the team deliberately decided to do it one freaking month before the season. And now I'm even more annoyed. It's like there was no central plan here at all, they're just doing things as they come. Bleh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) Because it implies that any opinion other than "it was a great move" is factually and proveably wrong. I know what the word objectively means Edited August 15, 2017 by WildCard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I get that the bills seem like they're "winging it" but were there moves available last month or beyond? I mean I don't know where these trades stemmed from and won't pretend to have a clue, no one here saw Matthews and gaines coming to Buffalo and trades are not very plentiful in the NFL. I honestly don't belive its a tank move, I think the upper brass believes we won these trades and that may be the scariest part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I'll never get it. There have been 3 Pope's since the bills last made the playoffs. I'm betting we can get to 4. We're at least gonna have flying cars by then. You're aiming pretty low on that pope count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) I get that the bills seem like they're "winging it" but were there moves available last month or beyond? I mean I don't know where these trades stemmed from and won't pretend to have a clue, no one here saw Matthews and gaines coming to Buffalo and trades are not very plentiful in the NFL. I honestly don't belive its a tank move, I think the upper brass believes we won these trades and that may be the scariest part. I tend to agree the "Brass" thinks they won these trades short term, dillusional imo. Longterm the argument could be made if the two players they received are serviceable fits to McBean's scheme especially with the Darby trade and the draft picks "may be" a win. McDemott's agonizing over Sammy trade tells me he is and was concerned but decided the risk is worth it. Losing Sammy is a big loss, no question even with the return. PS rebuild v tank is a semantics game over stink v middling... both tiresome after 17 years. Edited August 15, 2017 by North Buffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I know what the word objectively means So you honestly believe that "it's a great move" is the only valid view on the matter? One cannot reasonably argue to the contrary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 So you honestly believe that "it's a great move" is the only valid view on the matter? One cannot reasonably argue to the contrary? I think it is a mediocre series of moves with a murky outcome at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 So you honestly believe that "it's a great move" is the only valid view on the matter? One cannot reasonably argue to the contrary? I think when you take the bias out of it then yes, it was a great move. Every article I've read and seen has said the same. When I consistently view 3rd parties claiming the move was great for the Bills, then I call it objectively a great move. I think it is a mediocre series of moves with a murky outcome at best. I mean, what's the alternative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I think when you take the bias out of it then yes, it was a great move. Every article I've read and seen has said the same. When I consistently view 3rd parties claiming the move was great for the Bills, then I call it objectively a great move. I mean, what's the alternative? Kobayashi Maru. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Bills GM annoyed by tanking talk https://www.thescore.com/news/1351228 (via http://thesco.re/theScore_app ) We knowingly and willingly downgraded at both positions and the Bills brass thinks so as well. How do I know that? Because they required and received additional draft picks to make up for the difference. That means they knowingly downgraded their talent this season in exchange for hopefully improving in the future with draft picks in 2018. Any talk of trying to win this year is just window dressing to keep even more of the fans and team from mentally checking out. Is it still possible for them to win and make the playoffs this season? Yeah, it's possible. Not very likely though. It won't be a full on tank though as long as we have Taylor and McCoy though, we'll win just enough games to draft 8th or something horrible like that. Bad enough to have no real chance at the playoffs in December but not bad enough to get our choice of the QB's coming out next draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 We knowingly and willingly downgraded at both positions and the Bills brass thinks so as well. How do I know that? Because they required and received additional draft picks to make up for the difference. That means they knowingly downgraded their talent this season in exchange for hopefully improving in the future with draft picks in 2018. Any talk of trying to win this year is just window dressing to keep even more of the fans and team from mentally checking out. I don't know about the new corner we got, but I remember being often let down by Darby's performance last year (after initially being hopeful). I am completely meh about his departure and will have to be convinced that it is a downgrade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunkard Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I don't know about the new corner we got, but I remember being often let down by Darby's performance last year (after initially being hopeful). I am completely meh about his departure and will have to be convinced that it is a downgrade. The Bills and Eagles both saw Darby as an upgrade over Matthews or else they wouldn't have had to include a 3rd round pick. Same with Watkins over Gaines except they had to add a 2nd in exchange for a 6th from us. It can still work out for Buffalo, but it's clear that they expect us to lose the trade in 2017 with the expectation that they balance it out at the draft in 2018. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwampD Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 The Bills and Eagles both saw Darby as an upgrade over Matthews or else they wouldn't have had to include a 3rd round pick. Same with Watkins over Gaines except they had to add a 2nd in exchange for a 6th from us. It can still work out for Buffalo, but it's clear that they expect us to lose the trade in 2017 with the expectation that they balance it out at the draft in 2018. I agree regarding Watkins. I'm just not convinced about Darby, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dominator Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Because it implies that any opinion other than "it was a great move" is factually and proveably wrong. I'd say 12 or 13. Anyway, the trades made the team worse for the sake of a future draft. They were tank moves in the sense that the team deliberately decided to do it one freaking month before the season. And now I'm even more annoyed. It's like there was no central plan here at all, they're just doing things as they come. Bleh. I know if I was LA, I would want to see Sammy take some snaps before finalizing a trade for him. It's a bad look if they finalized a trade, only to have Sammy arrive in LA and fail the physical. The timing seemed intentional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 (edited) Because trading your best players for downgrades and draft picks makes you worse. Is true. I'd say 12 or 13. Anyway, the trades made the team worse for the sake of a future draft. They were tank moves in the sense that the team deliberately decided to do it one freaking month before the season. And now I'm even more annoyed. It's like there was no central plan here at all, they're just doing things as they come. Bleh. Say what you will about McDermott and Beane, but they do seem to have a vision and plan. They may not be able to deploy it in one fell swoop, but I get the sense they know where they want to go and how they want to get there. The question of whether it will work is obviously an open one. The lingering anxiety I have: What if Beane has recommended that the team do MORE to effectuate the rebuild? What if, for example, he recommended moving McCoy for a conditional second and a guaranteed third plus a late round pick in 2019, but was rebuffed by some version of this dynamic? (That's Pegula's corollary on the right, btw.) Edited August 15, 2017 by That Aud Smell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Because it implies that any opinion other than "it was a great move" is factually and proveably wrong. I'd say 12 or 13. Anyway, the trades made the team worse for the sake of a future draft. They were tank moves in the sense that the team deliberately decided to do it one freaking month before the season. And now I'm even more annoyed. It's like there was no central plan here at all, they're just doing things as they come. Bleh. There is a difference between a tank and a rebuild. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 There is a difference between a tank and a rebuild. I've seen it stated various places that there really is no "tank" option in the NFL, for various reasons. Fair? I know one thing for certain: The process of assembling a playoff team in the NFL is a gotdam marvel of personnel engineering. I think much moreso than in other pro sports. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 I've seen it stated various places that there really is no "tank" option in the NFL, for various reasons. Fair? I know one thing for certain: The process of assembling a playoff team in the NFL is a gotdam marvel of personnel engineering. I think much moreso than in other pro sports. "Suck for Luck" was definitely a thing. Not sure it worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 "Suck for Luck" was definitely a thing. Not sure it worked. It did. They got Luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eleven Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 It did. They got Luck Yeah, but it remains to be seen whether he was worth it. I guess they're always in the conversation, at least, unlike some other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
That Aud Smell Posted August 15, 2017 Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 "Suck for Luck" was definitely a thing. Not sure it worked. Also seems a bit like the exception that proves the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted August 15, 2017 Author Report Share Posted August 15, 2017 Yeah, but it remains to be seen whether he was worth it. I guess they're always in the conversation, at least, unlike some other teams. He is, they just failed the rest of the rebuild by giving him no running game and a garbage offensive line. The Colts are basically the Oilers of the NFL Also seems a bit like the exception that proves the rule. Well, nobody else has ever really tanked that I can think of. Most rebuilds go the Browns route, which is what we're doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts