Alphadawg7

No it’s not, but ok.

This is a good question and weird answer for me. My actual answer is No, we should not be as favored to get there as last year...but with an asterisk of saying I actually think our chances of reaching and winning the Super Bowl are better this year now that we know the real deficiencies of last year and the adjustments we made this offseason. Last year, we were seen as the cream of the crop by most coming off that amazing performance against KC and adding more to our team like Von Miller, while KC lost some guys including Hill. The NFC wasn't seen as strong at that time either. This year, our schedule has us playing the consensus 3 toughest divisions in football (Our own, AFC West, and NFC East) plus the Bengals and the Jaguars. More importantly there are several more teams seen as elite at the top this year compared to last year. Now you have Eagles, Niners, and in some cases Dallas in the NFC plus the Chiefs, Bengals and Bills in the AFC. Now this year, while I don't expect us to be as favored to get to the SB, I do think our actual odds of getting there and winning it are better with the offseason moves Beane made for us to get tougher, bigger, and more built to play in those tough bad weather playoff games.

I think its a highly unlikely he can break that record, doesn't feel realistic without injuries playing a role in it. Not because of ability, but I don't think he will get enough touches with how deep the offense is. From wanting to run the ball more than last year, getting our RB's also involved in the pass attack more and all the mouths we have to feed as receiving targets at WR and TE...I just don't see him getting enough targets. I think a more realistic good season from him will be more in that 600-700 yard range given all the weapons on this team right now.

Eagles lost several key players on Defense, and while they added some rookies to the D, they are just unproven rookies at this stage and it wasn't enough to for sure offset all the players they lost. I get the whole prove it thing with the Bills, nothing wrong with that. There are several teams that have a case to be top 3 or 4 teams today...Bills have a valid argument to be among them. No one can truly say who is or isn't, and nothing wrong thinking one way or the other.

Chiefs, KC, and Eagles all lost more than they gained. Niners lost players and gained players is pretty even, but they still have a major question at QB. Bills are the only team of the top 5 I can definitively say that we for sure gained more than we lost. We will see if it was "enough" or not, but we definitely improved this roster heading into the season.

I voted for a top 3 team still...here is why: We were already a top tier team before the offseason began. We gained a lot more than we lost. Defense - Our biggest loss is Edmunds, but we managed to keep Poyer and now get Hyde back as well. Plus Tre should be better going into this year as it often takes until the next season to get all the way back from a torn ACL. Von Miller will be back too. So looking at the Bengals game last year, we lose Edmunds but gain Hyde, Von, and a better Tre...that is a net positive by all measures. And we have brought other guys back and some new ones like Rapp and Poona. Bonus - We will have new life from the DC position too with McD calling plays rather than the serial playoff folder Frazier. This is a "change is good" situation in my book, at least on paper. Offense - We got rid of guys at or near the end of their career and made upgrades else where as well. We did not downgrade at any of the 11 spots on offense, and we have actually upgraded many. Out are the end of career guys or guys who really just shouldn't have been starting (Brown, Cole, McKenzie, Saffold, etc). Sherfield is better than people realize and Harty gives us that gadget like player who can also take the top off the D when needed. Kincaid is a potential stud, and Harris/Murray combo is better than the Devin/Moss combo we started last year with. OL is in much better shape (on paper at least) than last year too. Josh Allen - The guy is just special, anytime you have him you are automatically going to be a very tough team to beat. But more importantly, he is back to 100% and also the mental toll that was last year is gone off him. Yes, the whole team went through the same emotionally draining events, but it weighs even heavier on Josh given the kind of person he is, the pressure he has to lead this team, and all this team has had to ask of him to win games. Health more than ever could be a major factor on separating teams at the top this year. The teams are so clumped at the top now, especially in the AFC, that even a small injury can shift hierarchy. Now...all that being said does NOT mean we will still win 13 games again or have a top 3 record. AFC is nuts, our division is tough, and we play AFC West, NFC East, plus Cincy this year. As with any season, there could be some bumps/hiccups at times, injuries, etc that influence some of those games. But I do think we will make the AFCCG and be one of the final 4 teams with a good shot at the SB. Top 5 overall teams IMHO and in NO particular order: Buffalo, 49ers, Eagles, KC, and Cincy. An argument can be made for any one of those teams to be a "top 3" team IMHO, and so I am sticking with Buffalo doing enough to remain up here and be a strong contender for the Super Bowl.

Ha, ok you got me to laugh there haha. I can't speak for anyone else, but I would never personally say Beane "knew" what Dallas would do because that is impossible. My only personal point was that Beane didn't need to know to justify trading up, he only had to feel the risk was high enough to warrant paying the cost to make sure we got him. Plus besides Dallas, there was another team with a similar offer in play for Jax pick, and there is a good chance it might have also been for Kincaid given he was widely considered to be the BPA at that point. Either way, all good and GoBills!

Im stunned...seriously stunned...that @Airsevenvoted for the most negative poll answer. Never saw that coming, so unlike him.

No disrespect, but I have to say, this is a real odd hill you are trying to die on. I mean, no GM in NFL history ever traded up knowing 100% for sure that X team was 100% taking X player and the only way to get them was to trade up. Literally never happened because teams don't share their draft boards with other GM's. They make calculated decisions on where a player might go and weigh the risk of waiting against the cost of moving up to insure they get said player. So the point you are trying to insist on making is honestly just irrelevant to the decisions a GM has to make on draft night when facing the proposition of staying put or making a move to get a guy. And Beane was comfortable with the cost to get a guy he had way ahead of any other player on his board so he pulled the trigger to make sure he got him. I mean if you expect Beane to ONLY trade up if he 100% knows another teams official draft choice before they have made it, then I think you have a very unrealstic view of what information a GM is expected to concretely know before making decisions. Bottom line too, is just about every sports insider, analyst, commentator, and fan pretty much feel like Dallas was likely going to want Kincaid there if he was on the board. So its not even requiring a leap in logic here to justify Beane's decision to move up, it was what most people thought would be at or near the top of Dallas draft board. And given they took a TE right after this, that is pretty much validated they wanted a TE early and that it is entirely possibly, maybe even likely, Kincaid would have been the BPA when they were on the clock. I for one am glad we don't have a GM afraid to make a small move to get the player they covet, especially when that player is WIDELY considered the best player available still at that spot and also widely seen as a top 10 talent. Not sure why it rubs you the wrong way so much, but hey, everyone is welcome to their own opinions and reasons. GoBills

Totally agree

There would have likely been more picks involved, but on the trade value chart their 3rd slightly over pays for the move up. And there were a number of spots he could have gone before Chargers too like Lions, Packers, etc.

Love love love this signing

This needs more laugh emoticon reactions than you’ve gotten so far haha

But you miss me the point of what it means while live in a draft. You equally have no proof Cowboys would have passed on Kincaid if he didn’t trade up. You have Dallas saying they love the guy they took, which they will say regardless if it’s true or not. They are never ever going to publicly say Mazi wasn’t who they wanted and really wanted Kincaid but got stuck choosing Mazi because Bills out maneuvered them. They are 100% going to always, whether true or not, state the guy they got was their target. Everyone and their mom thought Dallas could take a TE there. So as a GM you have to decide is it worth the gamble to stay put or is the guy too good to risk getting taken before you and therefore the cost of moving up is worth it. This is true for every trade up in every draft. No GM knows if the guy they want will get to them and make decisions to guarantee they get their guy.

I don’t know, no specific details as to why have come out, but my guess would be his feet and route running are similar to Diggs. And with Allens ability to improvise and extend plays someone like Addison could really excel like Diggs has. Outside Diggs, our other receivers struggled with getting separation and winning on their initial routes too, so I just gotta think they were attracted to that kind of stuff. That is just my guess though.

Yeah, I think Shorter has a great shot at making the roster and I think its possible we could carry 7 WR's this year with him and that UDFA kid we supposedly signed to a 3 year deal that has all this ST hype that he could be the best ST player in the NFL soon.

Ok, here you go @KDIGGZ, here is the proof you have been wanting. Beane tells Rich Eisen in this interview that yes, he specifically traded ahead of Dallas because he knew they were in the market for a TE because they lost Schultz and could potentially take him. Go to 8:45 into the interview. Which is exactly what I said that it doesn't matter if Dallas really was, or claim they weren't, etc...all that mattered that in that moment live in the draft that they felt Dallas could take him to warrant trading up to make sure they got him.

Yeah, I think wether Beane said so or not, Shakir is the clear penciled in "starter" at slot entering camp. Sherfield is WR3 behind Diggs and Davis, and Harty is going to be a gadget player and occasional deep ball threat. And I expect him to hold on to that starter designation and open the season that way too.

I think you underestimate just how strong our schedule is. I’m optimistic we will win 11-13 games still, but it’s not the lock you think it is. AFCE is much tougher with Rodgers in it. But we also play the AFC West, NFC East which has both Super Bowl teams in them, and we play Cincy who we didn’t look competitive against in the shortened game or playoff game.

Actually, this is not accurate. Peyton had a winning record vs Brady in the playoffs going 3-2 vs Brady. He faced Brady 4 times as a Colt (2-2) and once as a Bronco (1-0). Peyton doesn't have more Championships because he wasn't the same guy in the post season. And in the only 2 SB's he "won" he beat Rex Grossman the first time, and then in Denver he was the worst passer in the NFL that season and had statistically the worst Super Bowl game of a winning QB in NFL history. Tyrod Taylor could have been the QB in that Super Bowl and they would have still won the game as it was all defense and run game for the Broncos that got them a win. So I think they missed out on multiple championships because Peyton was the A-Rod (baseball A-Rod) of the NFL...gaudy regular season guy, not as dominating in the post season. Manning still holds the NFL record for going 1 and done 9 times in Indy, including several of those being as the #1 seed. Yet only 2 of those 9 losses were to Brady.

Agree with most of this, but with McD I am pretty optimistic about him calling plays, more so than worried. Dorsey still has a lot of question marks for me, but hoping he learned a lot year 1 and makes significant strides in year 2.

Personally, my confidence in Davis was sky high last offseason and the polar opposite this offseason to where I now question if he is capable of even being a good WR2 or is just better suited to be a good WR3. So I am hoping you are correct right now, because even though Kincaid has not stepped on the field yet, I have more confidence in his reliability to make the plays than I do in Davis. Heading into camp, feels like Davis would be best suited as more of a 3rd option where we feed Diggs and Kincaid and then focus more on putting Davis in the spots he is most comfortable to make plays with confidence. At the same time, my bigger concern is Dorsey figuring out how to get Kincaid relevant targets still. Yes it is easy for us all to sit back and say Dorsey will use him like Beasley today...its another thing to see him really do it on the field. Last year he struggled to use our personnel for the way they were intended when we acquired them. Cook and Hines were brought in last year to be receiving weapons and despite the struggles at slot and the need to get Josh more help, Dorsey just didn't use them this way and didn't use Hines at all. Knox was brought here a developmental weapon at TE, and he leads the team in catch % the last 2 seasons and also has 15 TD's....yet he only got 65 targets this year, again in a season where the slot position was struggling and Josh needed a reliable weapon. And Shakir showed promise but couldn't get time at the slot despite the slot struggles. I will have a lot more confidence in whether or not Kincaid will truly be a major part of the pass attack when I see Dorsey actually use him that way. Kincaid isn't much of a blocker right now, so if Dorsey treats him more as a TE2 than he isn't going to take Knox off the field a lot and might end up with less than 50 targets and put up a season of 30-35 rec and like 400 yards and a few TDs. So I am hoping Dorsey truly does use him as more of a big slot than a TE, if he does, Kincaid could be 2nd in targets by seasons end.

I mean it does match and correlate though with how Beane handles the situation and moved up to get the player he said was the only one they felt still had a first round grade. And keep in mind, both times we picked at the back end of the round where there isn’t going to be many guys left with first round grades on anyone’s board. So IMHO I think Beane is being authentic here given where we picked, him moving up, and based on who was left on the board that we would potentially draft.

True...but you also are not looking for a "serviceable" RB when you take one in the top 10. Not defending Atlanta, they had a very good rookie RB last year, so puzzled why they take another and I definitely would have picked someone else. But, just saying when you take a RB in first round in general, it's because you want more than a "serviceable" guy.

Solid signing as insurance for Harris. I mean there was no backup no the roster for Harris as neither Cook or Hines could do what he will be used for, so this felt inevitable after they didn't draft one.