Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

[OpIv37]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

Where did you read the “we don’t need to add talent” bit?

I must have missed it.
Everyone knows we do need to add talent. That’s kind of why they hold this draft thingy every year.

The only difference between eeyores like you and the rest of us is we don’t see the shelves as they are right now as barren.

EVERYONE gets to add talent through the draft, not just us. I don’t know why it almost 25 years into BZ and no one gets that yet.

[Mad Max]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

EVERYONE gets to add talent through the draft, not just us. I don’t know why it almost 25 years into BZ and no one gets that yet.

And your point?

The teams with less holes will draft more for depth and future starters whereas teams with more holes will plug their holes immediately with their draft picks.
Either way the field is leveled.

[OpIv37]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

And your point?

The teams with less holes will draft more for depth and future starters whereas teams with more holes will plug their holes immediately with their draft picks.
Either way the field is leveled.

No, the field isn’t leveled. There are teams that had more talent than us in 2023. We lost talent after 2023, they didn’t. We get to add talent through the draft, so do they. End result: the talent gap still exists.

It’s not complicated.

[Mad Max]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

No, the field isn’t leveled. There are teams that had more talent than us in 2023. We lost talent after 2023, they didn’t. We get to add talent through the draft, so do they. End result: the talent gap still exists.

It’s not complicated.

Ok quick get ready to run and hide.

I propose another avatar bet.

Im calling 11 wins minimum. You obviously don’t think we hit that number put your money where your mouth is.

The avatar gets changed as soon as the math aligns we don’t need to wait until seasons end.

[sukie]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

Milano back is assumed. He could get injured again.

Kincaid improvement is assumed. Some guys make jumps in year 2, some guys don’t. It’s also drought era thinking. “We don’t need to add talent- the guys we have will just get better with experience!”

11 wins is not gonna happen with this schedule.

lol Kincaid and Milano aren’t starters. I guess Josh might need to watch that shifty Turbisky fellow.

[notacon]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

And through all of this you still failed to show how we have anyone equal or better to the guys we lost.

I have many times.

When the reality is that the players that departed were not worthy of being retained (as I detailed and you refuse comprehend the plain reality), everyone that will replace them is de facto "equal or better".

[OpIv37]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

I have many times.

When the reality is that the players that departed were not worthy of being retained (as I detailed and you refuse comprehend the plain reality), everyone that will replace them is de facto "equal or better".

I fully understand why they weren’t worthy of being retained. But it’s still a net talent deficit. Everything you said is about what’s wrong with the guys we no longer have. None of that makes the guys we still have equal or better.

[notacon]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

I fully understand why they weren’t worthy of being retained. But it’s still a net talent deficit. Everything you said is about what’s wrong with the guys we no longer have. None of that makes the guys we still have equal or better.

You still don't get it do you???

McGovern is equal to Morse (but younger) - Morse will NOT be missed all that much.

Pretty much any of the top WR's in the draft class would be better than Diggs - he is an albatross and a cancer. We already saw how the Bills went 6-1 as soon as they started ignoring Diggs. Shakir is much more reliable target than Diggs....without the constant drama and diva bullcrap that diminishes Josh Allen's leadership.

Curtis Samuel is better than Davis - by a lot. Much more versatile weapon.

Mike Edwards is better than Poyer (at this point in their careers - Poyer is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) - younger too.

Rasul Douglas is better than White - without two devastating injuries and he's a better ball hawk than White.

Taylor Rapp is better than Hyde (at this point in their careers - Hyde is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) and a lot younger

[OpIv37]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

You still don't get it do you???

McGovern is equal to Morse (but younger) - Morse will NOT be missed all that much.

Pretty much any of the top WR's in the draft class would be better than Diggs - he is an albatross and a cancer. We already saw how the Bills went 6-1 as soon as they started ignoring Diggs. Shakir is much more reliable target than Diggs....without the constant drama and diva bullcrap that diminishes Josh Allen's leadership.

Curtis Samuel is better than Davis - by a lot. Much more versatile weapon.

Mike Edwards is better than Poyer (at this point in their careers - Poyer is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) - younger too.

Rasul Douglas is better than White - without two devastating injuries and he's a better ball hawk than White.

Taylor Rapp is better than Hyde (at this point in their careers - Hyde is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) and a lot younger

Of course. Whoever is on the Bills now is ALWAYS better than who we used to have in your homer mind.

[notacon]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

Of course. Whoever is on the Bills now is ALWAYS better than who we used to have in your homer mind.

Nope.

Of course. Whoever is on the Bills now is ALWAYS worse than who they used to have in your Pats/Fins/Jets homer mind.

[Chet]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

You still don't get it do you???

McGovern is equal to Morse (but younger) - Morse will NOT be missed all that much.

Pretty much any of the top WR's in the draft class would be better than Diggs - he is an albatross and a cancer. We already saw how the Bills went 6-1 as soon as they started ignoring Diggs. Shakir is much more reliable target than Diggs....without the constant drama and diva bullcrap that diminishes Josh Allen's leadership.

Curtis Samuel is better than Davis - by a lot. Much more versatile weapon.

Mike Edwards is better than Poyer (at this point in their careers - Poyer is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) - younger too.

Rasul Douglas is better than White - without two devastating injuries and he's a better ball hawk than White.

Taylor Rapp is better than Hyde (at this point in their careers - Hyde is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) and a lot younger

This post ranges from TBC to wishful thinking. You did not list one fact other than x players are older than y players.

Do better.

- - - Updated - - -

You still don't get it do you???

McGovern is equal to Morse (but younger) - Morse will NOT be missed all that much.

Pretty much any of the top WR's in the draft class would be better than Diggs - he is an albatross and a cancer. We already saw how the Bills went 6-1 as soon as they started ignoring Diggs. Shakir is much more reliable target than Diggs....without the constant drama and diva bullcrap that diminishes Josh Allen's leadership.

Curtis Samuel is better than Davis - by a lot. Much more versatile weapon.

Mike Edwards is better than Poyer (at this point in their careers - Poyer is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) - younger too.

Rasul Douglas is better than White - without two devastating injuries and he's a better ball hawk than White.

Taylor Rapp is better than Hyde (at this point in their careers - Hyde is damaged goods who's best days are well behind him as his career is almost over) and a lot younger

This post ranges from TBC to wishful thinking. You did not list one fact other than x players are older than y players.

Do better.

[notacon]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

This post ranges from TBC to wishful thinking. You did not list one fact other than x players are older than y players.

Do better.

No "from TBC to wishful thinking"....simple plain reality.

I've listed plenty of "facts" over several threads that support what I write.

What "facts" have you presented that refutes my astute observations????

[OpIv37]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

Nope.

Of course. Whoever is on the Bills now is ALWAYS worse than who they used to have in your Pats/Fins/Jets homer mind.

McGovern has never played C in the NFL before and you’re saying he’s better than Morse.

You’re saying an unnamed rookie who has never played in the NFL before is better than Davis.

It’s deranged homerism.

[notacon]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

McGovern has never played C in the NFL before and you’re saying he’s better than Morse.

You’re saying an unnamed rookie who has never played in the NFL before is better than Davis.

It’s deranged homerism.

Nope. Just reality.

[kscdogbillsfan1221]

Re: Can you win a Super Bowl without a great #1 WR?

McGovern has never played C in the NFL before and you’re saying he’s better than Morse.

You’re saying an unnamed rookie who has never played in the NFL before is better than Davis.

It’s deranged homerism.

curtis samuel is not an unnamed rookie.

now i will give you that diggs hasn't been replaced (yet) and McGovern is a big question mark.

other than that, i don't see a drop off with poyer/hyde/tre white with the replacements