Alphadawg7

haha nah I’m settled in here with the wife, only place I want to be. Although she is being authentic I can go and thinks it would be pretty cool for me to go. But this is where I want to be

Nah, shes a die hard Niners fan...so if I was gonna do that I would have had to make that deal when we had our first to where he would have been Josh and this one would have been named after a Niner lmao. Plus we know too many Josh's and I wouldn't want any of them getting to say we named one of our sons after them hahaha...especially the Browns fan one. First son was named Luke though...and the day we found out in the reveal we were having a Boy was the same day as the Bills vs Packers Sunday night football game. And how we did the reveal was if it was a girl there would be a Niners onesy and a boy a Bills onesy, so opened the gift bag and there was the Bills one. So then I put a First TD of the game bet on Dawson Knox before the game started feeling lucky. Well first TD of the game was a short toss to Knox winning me like $500 so we were going nuts...and during the TD celebration Knox pointed to the sky for his brother who had just passed away before the season began and I told everyone in the room he was pointing up to his brother Luke that had passed. And then after that I said, you know, I have always really liked that name Luke and my wife looked at me and said she loved it and everyone else was like we really like it too. Later that night after the game we were laying in bed and were like it was the first boys name we loved and made it official. So he wasn't directly named after Dawson's brother, but his TD celebration led us to the name and forever connected his name to Bills lore. Our 2nd boy was inspired by a combo of Dukes of Hazard joke and from seeing the movie Point Break in my movie queue. I kept telling my wife (and was joking) we should name him Bo...and she kept saying our boys are not going to be named Bo and Luke after the Dukes of Hazard hahaha. I also kept joking Han or Kylo and she insisted they aren't being named after Star Wars either. While I did not really want to name them after Dukes of Hazard (or Star Wars), the funny part was we both actually did actually like the name Bo lmao. Then one day we were searching for something to watch (and still had not found a name we really liked) and the original "Point Break" movie popped up in my queue and I was like what about Bodhi? I was like we can always call him Bo for short and no one can accuse us of naming him after Dukes of Hazard...hahaha. She was like I love it cuz I can call him BoBo in my belly lol. So we wound up with that name but spelled it Bodie instead of the hippy way it was spelled in the movie. And we plan to call him Bodie, not Bo unless he grows up and just prefers it. At least by then the only people who will remember Dukes of Hazard will be dead or too old to notice lmao.

Well since this power ranking is just about each team vs the Bills as opposed to a league wide power ranking...I went ahead and listed the Bengals as one of the 3 teams better than the Bills because I am not sure we can matchup well with them right now. Bengals are scoring a lot and not sure our D can slow them down enough without Taron, Milano, and Von for the offense to keep up based on how the offense played the past 2 weeks. So the way I looked at this power ranking was which team would be the better team on the field in a head to head matchup right now...and we have not played well at all against the Bengals the past 2 years. And with our offense in a rut, our D missing 3 key starters, and their offense scoring a lot this matchup feels tougher than a rematch with the Texans who we almost just beat without the same starters on D, no Shakir, and Allen literally maybe playing his worst game of his career. Just my 2 cents on how I viewed this poll...

I am not so sure Texans are really better than us yet. Both teams were missing good players, and yet with Allen playing the absolute worst maybe of his entire career we still not only almost won that game, but should have won. And Texans were struggling in wins prior to that game against lesser teams and also had a bad blow out on their record (Vikings) like we had (Ravens). But, if you ignore their record I might suggest Bengals would be a tougher opponent for us right now and not so sure we can beat them with how our offense is playing. So I went Chiefs, Ravens, Bengals as the only teams I feel would be most likely teams to better than us on the field in a head to head matchup. Chiefs are very beatable, but they keep winning their close games thanks to the Defense being great again to where the O doesn't have to win shootouts. Ravens smashed us, so can't take anything away from them when they dominated both trenches that game. And I am not sure if our defense can slow the Bengals offense down enough right now missing Taron, Von and Milano for offense to keep pace unless our offense gets back on track here like it was the first 3 weeks.

Yup...total LAMP post...but I don't care HA I am going to be watching the game tonight at the hospital as we checked in this morning at 6am for my wife to begin getting induced for our 2nd son! My wife told me to go down the street to a famous Bills bar here in Santa Monica called "Busbys" to watch the game because she is awesome. Admittedly that would be pretty cool, but, I would still rather be by her side and watch it here in the room with her so gonna just do that. So who knows, newest member of Bills Mafia may be coming during the game tonight! I can't wait to baptize this one into Bills Mafia too by putting him through a little homemade styrofoam table like I did my first son last year haha. LFG!!!!!!!!!! GO BILLS!!!!!!

He also dropped 2 other TDs…so there’s that too

I’m not a fan of this. Too much money for a guy who’s a better WR2 than he is WR1 IMHO.

Because almost all these trades scenarios are grossly over estimated in terms of trade cost. No one is giving that much for DK

Looking good for SHAKIR too https://x.com/builtinbuffalo_/status/1845136926245851253?s=46

No disrespect, but this “story” or source seems to just adjust based on the rumors of the day.

Something? Nothing? Dunno...interesting though

Look at his weekly game log...his whole career is the same...couple monster games where he gets like 25% of years total production in those couple games then lots of game of meh or full out disappearing. It is similar the same patter Davis had here...and like Davis, maybe even more than Davis, he drops a lot more balls than people think. Adams is a superior player. BUT...doesn't mean Cooper doesn't upgrade the offense, because he would still be an upgrade. But you are asking why many prefer Adams, and that is why.

This was posted in here earlier when you were saying it was off lol

Make no mistake about it, Allen was down right bad against the Texans...and not because of the people around him, the kind of bad are things squarely on him. Doesn't mean he couldn't use more weapons, but the fact remains, on Sunday he was wildly inaccurate, he made a lot of bad decisions including bailing on the pocket prematurely, holding the ball too long, not taking the open guy, missing reads all together, and going off script in critical moments like the final drive when he was supposed to get a first down and not take shots down field. McD was furious on that drive and was yelling this on the sideline too and Allen had 3 guys open underneath and yet forced a ball to Mack Hollins because as Brady put it...."Allen thought he saw something with Mack"...but he was never supposed to throw to mack who was running a clear out. I really hope both Cook and Shakir play this week...Jets D is still pretty good, they are already going to be fired up with a new OC and new HC now, so not exactly the soft Defense you would hope to see to help the offense get back in a groove. So to do it short handed is not ideal to say the least.

I don't know what we need to run...but I do know they need more out of the this "dynamic TE duo" we were supposed to have. Knox on limited targets had 15 TD's the prior 2 years before Kincaid was drafted that earned him an extension despite the fact our OC often forgot he was on the team until back halves of the seasons and never go him enough targets. Drafting Kincaid was supposed to open up a two prong attack. But so far, Kincaid is being underused and Knox doesn't exist in the passing game. First 3 weeks I get it...9 people caught Josh's 18 completions week 1, no one was going to have relevant individual stats. Week 2 was the Cook show and we chewed clock the 2nd half in a blow out...again no one was going to have relevant individual stats in the pass game. Week 3 Josh hit 10 different guys and again chewed clock the whole 2nd half...so once again, no one player was going to have relevant stats. BUT...weeks 4 and 5 when we needed the passing game to do more, Kincaid was still underused and Knox was non existent. I will say, a LOT of that is on Allen as there were many times both weeks with Kincaid especially he had him for short gains and he chose to look for bigger shots that never happened. But, that more pertains to Kincaid...Knox doesn't seem to even be an option out there, he gets no looks what so ever. So I am still waiting for the game when we come out and Knox and Kincaid are pressuring the LB's and S's on the same plays and we are hitting them and attacking both short and mid levels with them. Like its never happened even once since Kincaid was drafted despite that being the "reason" he was drafted.

During the first 3 weeks I was not seeing the fit just based on Adams high expectations for target share given he has complained even in a win about his low volume activity that game. So with Allen hitting 9 guys week 1 and 10 guys week 3 it just felt like it may not be a style of offense he would be happy in which is what concerned me. But like I said even after 3 weeks, while it was working seemingly great, we still needed to see what would happen once teams got more film and our 3 game stretch of Ravens, Texans and Jets would tell us where we are really at and Brady can find a way to adjust as teams adjust to us. And now with how well the defense bounced back last week and guys getting healthier, I think it makes sense now to make the move and go get him and give a boost to the offense that also will help Colemans development and not kill our cap next year. Had the defense stunk against Houston, I would not be on board as I wouldn't think Adams would be enough. But I have seen enough from the D now to think we can make a run if the offense is at its best, so go get him, he may just move the needle at this point.

I don’t know…this level of compensation does not sound like a Beane move for a player 32 years old and expected to be a half year rental as his contract makes him a sure cut next year. And given how much he prioritizes playing with his buddies, I would expect him to land in NO or where ever Rodger’s is if he plays another year once he is a FA. So I’m just gonna say I’m quite skeptical this is accurate. Lots of people who say they have “sources” close to the situation all have wildly different insights. So they can’t all be correct.

Ha just came here to post this…interesting, this may be the first credible rumor link I think we have seen giving some actual life to this potential situation. At this point…do it Beane. Not just because he adds something we don’t have right now, but it will also put Coleman in better position to where we can do more with him and help create mismatch opportunities moving him around too. Not to mention, Adams and Coleman are similar in speed and skill sets Coleman aspires to reach his potential at. So would be a good fit for Coleman to learn from. His contract makes him basically untradeable this year for us That does not sound like a Beane move at all.

I doubt anyone is trading for Adams until he shows he is recovered from the Hammy. You don’t generally see players hurt get traded while hurt. Could happen, but I am guessing it’s going to be at least another week before we see where he is going.

I’m curious what the hit is to move on from Samuel next year if it’s not figured out how to get more out of him as the season goes on. We are absolutely adding another WR next year via draft as neither Hollins or MVS were anything other than inexpensive guys to fill roles while we had so much dead cap from Diggs. Not sure if it will be 2 though, as it depends on what FA’s are out there too. I can see them wanting to add a Vet as well (or we may even trade for one before the deadline). But if we don’t trade for or sign a relevant WR next year then I think 2 is very much a possibility next year in the draft as we will be replacing at least 2 WRs next year.

I agree about BTJ, I was just pointing out he wouldn’t have been in the field in Hollins spot getting that pass from Allen, he would have been where Coleman was on other side of field because we wouldn’t have Coleman if we had BTJ. But I agree about BTJ, he was my top target in draft of the guys who were realistic and he’s off to a good start too.

Keep in mind, if we had BTJ he would have been on the left boundary like Coleman. Mack Hollins runs the same route, the play stays the same. And that play failed because Allen threw a terrible pass and was substantially more on Allen anyway. I like Coleman, but BTJ was also the guy I preferred and I would take now too. So not saying BTJ wouldn't help this offense more, just saying he wouldn't have replaced Mack in the lineup, he would have replaced Coleman. So if we call that same play its Hollins in that spot. But to fair, maybe something else happens in the game with BTJ on the field that helps us win that is more than Colemans one catch for a 49 yard TD. So in that respect, yeah possible it makes a difference.

Yeah, it was clear ahead of the draft his preference seemed to be to move down unless someone they coveted was atop their board while on the clock. Beane then later stated he went in really looking to recoup the 3rd he used to get Rasul, which he did in the KC trade down. I too would have been willing to use a 2025 pick to get BTJ based on where he fell. I do like Coleman, so not a knock on the kid. Just saying on draft night, BTJ is who I was most hoping to land at WR.

Yeah BTJ was the only guy I was willing to go up for. MHJ, Nabers, and Odunze would have cost QB level compensation because none of those teams wanted to move that far down and never were going to. Beane even said, none of those teams called him to explore a trade down knowing the Bills were targeting a WR. So this was never even an option, nor should it have been for the heaven and earth level comp it would have took to get them interested at that point. But BTJ was my top target entering the draft as I had him WR4. I didn't want to over pay to get him, as he came with risks like you mentioned being unproven outside of the lone deep threat, but I was hoping once he got into the 20's (assuming he did, and which he eventually did) then maybe we would make a move to get him which in that range he was worth the risk. If we didn't get BTJ, I figured it would come down to Mitchell or Coleman.

I wanted Thomas too and thought when he got as close as he did we might move up for him. But I also like Bishop, its not about what you do in your first 5 games. Bishop to me has a lot of potential moving forward, and I am excited to see him get on the field more. And lets not forget, he missed a lot of camp, so that is why he has been brought along slow.