Thurman#1

He's not on the short list of areas we need to improve. Very lucky to have him. But a few mistakes at bad times hurt in the Chiefs game last year. In last year's playoff game against the Chiefs, the D was absolutely devastated by injuries, while the offense was healthy and Josh had a decent game but not a great one. Nearly everyone on the field was on that short list last year, but at least most of the defenders were 2nd or even 3rd stringers in as injury replacements. It may not have been a short list, but the offense simply wasn't very effective, and there were two plays by Josh that cost us dearly: that end zone shot when a bit of easy pocket movement leaves Josh an easy throw for seven points and If he'd just stepped to the side to buy some room on that play with around 1:55 left in the 4th where he was lightly bumped on the throw to the end zone, we very likely score an extra seven. Tons of room everywhere else and he didn't step away from Jones pushing Dawkins into him just enough to affect the throw. If he'd just thrown shorter on the play before the missed field goal instead of holding it. Nobody was wide open but Diggs had space and someone else was open short over the middle in position to get close to a 1st. Remember he fumbled it at around 5:30 in the 4th, and we got very lucky with Kincaid recovering it? Just before that he missed Diggs and almost gifted McDuffie a pick six. He sure didn't play badly. Pretty well, overall. But not at the level you expect of Josh in the playoffs. I'm still pissed at the Diggs drop on the long ball, though. Frustrating. Three offensive possessions in the 4th quarter and only a missed FG out of it.

It is indeed scoring that matters, we can definitely agree on that. But there's a reason they say it's a field position game. The whole team has a major effect on how much you score, not just the offense. And the whole team has an effect on how much your opponent scores, not just your defense. Yards is the best way to isolate the performance of one unit, and it's not close. Offensive scheme impacts yardage offense? Yeah. A ton. Being more effective at running will make your offense more effective. Less effective running will make your offense less effective. Same with passing. Your scheme is very likely to affect your productivity. It's just that measuring effectiveness by yardage helps you isolate the offense from the rest of the team by a large amount. Same for the defense. But being able to use his own scheme instead of Dorsey's is likely to be helpful, I think. On the other hand, losing Diggs is likely to hurt, but it seems there was some kind of problem that didn't permit him to be productive the last half of the season. Except as a decoy, at which he was still damn effective. Yup, would absolutely have had a big effect.

Yeah, well, using scoring D (or scoring O for that matter) is simply misleading. It's much more of a whole team stat. The reason people use yards rather than points is that it much better targets the defensive (or offensive) unit rather than the whole team. Scoring defense pretends that drive start isn't extremely relevant to how many points your offense will score and of course drive start is a huge factor in how many points you score. Not nearly so much in terms of how many yards you get. Nor does yards give the offense credit for your defensive pick six. Scoring does. If the other team recovers a fumble or benefits from a terrific runback and starts on your one yard-line and your D makes them take four plays to score the touchdown, or even pushes them back 5 yards and makes them kick a field goal, the defense has performed well. But scoring defense shows a failure, allowing points. The defense allowed negative five yards but allowed three points. Clearly a failure using scoring defense. Whereas allowing a 98 yard drive that ends on a missed field goal is a huge success by the defense according to scoring defense. Scoring, on offense and defense, is greatly affected by field position. It's probably 30 - 35% the other unit. Yards, on defense and offense, is about 98% on the unit you're measuring. The Jets D was damn good all year long. Even the last half of the year they were well above average in yards and points, despite having to face more drives and better drive starts than most Ds did because of the Jets awful offense. The Bills offense scored the second highest number of yards the Jet D allowed in the last nine games of the year and the second highest number of points (the Browns benefitted from scoring a pick six, and starting one drive on the Jets 32 and one on the Jets 12 (that one failed on downs at the Jets 6), a perfect example of why scoring defense is limited in terms of evaluating the defensive unit's performance). The Jets, Dallas, Miami, Chiefs and Pats all had very good defenses. That leaves only L.A. and Philly Yeah, can't be both? Um, yeah, it can. Complex systems work that way. Things are not black and white once you go beyond light switches and such simple things. It absolutely can be both, in fact that's exactly what it is. It's simply facts that he was using Dorsey's playbook and that he didn't have an offseason to prepare. And facts that the offense scored a lot better despite that. And it didn't appear much of that was due to the defense improving as injuries mounted. Yes, completion percentage and QB rating went down, also a fact. But given a choice between improving completion percentage and QB rating versus a serious improvement in offensive production in both yards and points, it's not difficult to say the production is a ton more important. Again, it was winter and that was a very difficult slate of defenses, yet we were much more productive.

It would indeed be depressing if the offense produced the same numbers under Brady. But I don't think "McD breathing down his neck," was the problem. Much more likely it's Brady not having had an offseason and a training camp, having to deal with a playbook written by Dorsey, having to deal with winter weather which generally lowers passing game numbers naturally, and having to play four of his seven games against the Jets, Eagles, Chiefs and Dallas defenses. The Pats and Fins were also top ten Ds actually. That was a damn tough slate, and yet they upped their scoring dramatically.

Fair enough, but there are a lot more who've gotten 90 in a year and that's my rough guess for Kincaid. I'd take the over every time on this. Particularly when Kincaid managed 73 last year in a season when during the first 6 weeks he only had 17 (2.83 per game) but in the last eleven, he managed 56 (5.09 per game). And 5.09 per game multiplied by 17 is 86.5 per game. So he was already going at a nearly 90 reception pace for the last 11 weeks.

Deeper, yes, I think that's completely legit. Better? Without Diggs? No, absolutely not, unless somebody like Coleman or Claypool takes a huge step up. But could they be a functional efficient group that can move the ball and give defenses a lot of trouble? Yeah, I think so, particularly with Josh throwing to them and a run game that threatens.

You're not usually this, um, off. Yes, the Chiefs 2024 season ended at 17 games. Luckily for them, they made the post-season. Same with the Bills. Again, there's a reason they call it the post-season. When people talk about a player's production for a season they are indeed talking about the regular season. Unless you add in something along the lines of, "including the playoffs."

Yawn indeed. This is you, isn't it, using the word seasons? There's a reason they call one the season and the other the postseason. He's never put up 50 in a season. It's a fact. Just sayin'.

Well, I've made mistakes before, maybe this is yet another. I'm very willing to believe that I've made another or that we're in some way talking past each other. The way I see it, on both ESPN and NFL Football Reference ... Last year Josh had 29 passing TDs and 15 running TDs, totalling 44. Which is superb, but not above 50. In 2022 he had 35 passing TDs and 7 rushing TDs, totalling 42. In 2021 he had 36 passing TDs and 6 rushing TDs, totalling 42. In 2020 he had 37 passing TDs and 8 rushing TDs, totalling 45. None of those are over 50. Oh, wait, are you throwing in playoffs? Ah, maybe that's what you're doing here. I was honestly bumfuzzled about how our figures could be different. If that's what you're doing, it's pretty questionable. Playoff stats are considered separately, at least unless you go out of your way to say that you're looking at both. Combining those two means you can't reasonably compare the guy's total stats with the stats of most of the league 'cause you're allowing your guy more games. Maybe you're talking about something else? In any case, he's not totalled 50 passing and rushing TDs any of the last four seasons. Seasons are 17 games long. Well, we can agree that Allen's terrific.

I know no other teams end up having their third and fourth stringers not do all that well when injuries see them getting time. It's only us.

We don't need Allen to put up 50+ TDs every year. The idea's ridiculous, as he's never done it. His high is 45. Allen's production hasn't translated to any particular level of exit. That would be the performance of the whole team that translated to that. Same as it works for every team. W-L is a team stat. The QB is a part of the team. A very important part, but a part. And an awful lot of where you go out of the playoffs is who you play in what round. It's not a mistake that it's KC we lost to three times. They've been the best team in the game. It wouldn't have taken KC to knock us out with Cousins behind center.

Cousins is good. I think we'd make the playoffs and bomb out probably first round unless we got a real dog as a wildcard opponent. Nearly always, the team that wins the SB is considered one of the top 5 to 6 teams. The current Bills are always in that group, the group with a real chance. IMO with Cousins we'd be around 8th to 12th best, with a chance that was more theoretical than actual. We consistently have a very good roster. QBs aside, better than Minny's But generally the top five to six teams have excellent QBs, or a QB who's cheap but playing very well, ala the Eagles and Niners, and an excellent roster.

Yup, pure fantasy. The only reason the Chargers would give up Bosa for that little would be cap relief. But we're in much worse cap shape than they are. We do need more sacks. Unfortunately we're not in a good position to bring them in in that way.

Yup. And Tee is likely to be too expensive next year, most likely. Next year we should expect them to bring in guys who look more like John Brown and Emmanuel Sanders, with likely another guy or two drafted as well.

You're straining here, Beck. He said, "The last 2 offseasons I haven’t done really anything before OTA’s." Your understanding of that is, "that's not saying 'work on his craft' less. That's saying he doesn't work out 4x a week from January 21 (Division round) to April 15 (start of OTAs). " You're spinning here. "haven't really done anything" is saying an awful lot more specifically about not doing anything than, "doesn't work out 4x per week." It just is. January 21st to April 15 is nearly three months. Of doing not really anything. Last offseason at least. He also mentioned getting more serious about understanding whiskies, if I remember correctly. He had time for that. He does need rest and relaxation and recovery, they all do. But can you imagine Peyton or Brady saying something like this? I can't even imagine early Josh saying it. Happily, he seems to have gotten more serious again this year. Or at least he's trying to put that out there. It can never be clear whether it's a more serious approach or just good P.R. unless we get hold of Josh's paper calendar, which will never happen. Your thoughts about whether "getting back to that" means working out 4x a week have as little basis as anything anyone else here said. Whatever precisely "getting back to that" means, it's more than "haven't really done anything."

His problems the last two years were not only with his release. When you have an injury change one thing, other things in the biomechanical chain change to attempt to compensate with the problem. Yes, his mechanics had some problems. And yes, injuries were likely some of the problem. But there's no particular reason to think it was all of the problem beyond our perhaps wishing it was all of the problem. "Allen told reporters that this isn’t a broad change of his mechanics akin to what he implemented between the 2019 and 2020 seasons, but rather an adjustment sparked by discomfort he felt down the stretch of the 2023 campaign. “I wouldn’t call it a complete overhaul of my throwing motion, but definitely some things to work on and clean up, especially getting long with my arm and a little bit with my stride,” Allen said. “Just trying to clean that up—anytime you go through something like that, sometimes it’s going to feel really good, sometimes it’s not going to feel really good. It’s just like changing a swing in golf, but as long as you’re trusting it and you keep working on it each and every day, results will come." https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/bills-qb-josh-allen-again-digitally-mapping-throwing-motion-to-tweak-mechanics/ar-BB1o6Gwj He worked with Hess in 2019 and 2020, and now before 2024. He had problems with injury changing his mechanics in the 2022 season as well, but after that season he didn't .... Hmmm.

No, his stance is not that he didn't work on his craft before this offseason. He specifically says so in the post you just replied to. We have a bunch of evidence of times when he worked on his form and such in the offseason he talked about it. Then he didn't talk about anything the last couple of years. Then he started again this year. Also the Bussing with the Boys podcast he essentially said last offseason that he didn't do anything but recover. That isn't absolute proof, but there's no absolute proof the other way either. Not proof, but it is indicative. He may well have been besotted with the new GF and let that affect him. That's a guess, not anything there's evidence for, but it's a reasonable guess, I think.

He worked with Palmer on different things in different years. Yes, particularly in year one they concentrated on synching lower and upper body, but it was more than that. They also both mentioned rotating the upper body more and using the rotation to provide power. They mentioned one or two other things as well. Not sure whether it was year two or three but they worked together on improving his longer throws in terms of dropping it into a bucket, increasing the angle so receivers had a bit more time to run under it rather than just line driving it out to guys running long routes. They worked on a lot of different things. Most likely he doesn't go to the QB summit anymore because he's rich enough and focused enough that he's no longer willing to share the time he spends with his coach with another bunch of guys. A very reasonable stance at this point in his career. I think the developing vs. refining thing isn't particularly useful here. He still works with Palmer and he wouldn't if Palmer was only good at developing young guys.

He was a bust. Nobody, but nobody, thought the Bills overdrafted him until they started to see his level of performance year after year. If the Bills hadn't traded up, they never would have gotten him. The level he performed at was not bad, really. But for a guy drafted in the top ten, he was a bust, compared to his perceived draft value. And that's what a bust is. Whitner is a guy who was overdrafted. Should never have been drafted that high, and if the Bills hadn't taken him there he seemed very likely to fall to the late 20s or so, at which point he'd have been a decent pick. Watkins wasn't going to fall if we didn't draft him.

It's not lazy. And you're spinning like crazy. Yes, if you go to other stats, Josh is crazy good. Overall, that's what he is, he's crazy good. Game-changing plays, whatever. He's fantastic. But that doesn't mean he didn't have too many INTs the last year or two. Most particularly last year. You don't want to have an INT % much over 2.0. Josh last year had a 3.1%. Way too high. Third-highest percentage in the league. Yes, a few others were too high also. But that doesn't make Josh being even higher than the guys you mentioned any more acceptable. Josh was 3.1%. Much too high. Tua was 2.5%. Purdy too. Still too high, but not nearly as bad. Mahomes was 2.3%, still a bit high, but awful. It was a problem. Josh admits it.

Yeah, I think he's likely to try. OL would be my guess. I'd say La'el but I don't think we'd get anything for him at this point. Whether he can manage it is questionable and will be so till we see how things look at training camp. If it happens, I'd guess OL.

Fair enough, but to say “we paid him to stay home and started winning games as soon as we did,” doesn't seem to line up with the facts. What does seem reasonable is that with him on the field for them they were losing, although it was the first three games, GNB, TAM and KAN. After that they sat him for two games and went 1-1 against Denver and the Commanders. Then they sent him to Miami and went: L Vikes W Raiders L Chargers L Saints W Panthers L Lions W Vikes W Lions L Browns W Cards W Falcons L Packers You can say reasonably that they turned things around the last six weeks, but he was long gone well before then. And those last six games were against some bad teams, outside of the Lions. I don't remember that game, but these days beating Detroit is a quality win. That seems like confirmation bias to me, not from you but from him. Or if not confirmation bias then maybe a very cheerful look at how things went after they got rid of Claypool. Which isn't to say that he wasn't a problem for them. I'd be willing to believe it. Something has kept him unproductive (after his first two years anyway) and on the move.

Badol, In fairness to that guy (you?), his guess as to when it would happen was closer than my guess. But I knew my guess was a guess. He was trying to claim that market value was already over $30M. It wasn't. There were no contracts in the range he was trying to say was market value. It was a dumb claim. It simply wasn't market value at that time.

I'm completely aware this is what you think. I come along, point out where you're wrong, you say the same dumb thing again or even several times, and I see, "ah, another worm herder," and do indeed vanish, because why bother, the point is made whether you know it or not. You're consistently wrong, and are unable to see it. I was right about the WR market at that time. As usual you are mis-stating my argument as well as the facts. It's your M.O., getting things wrong. At that time only an idiot would have argued that the WR market was above $30M/yr., since no WR contract of over $30M/yr. had ever been given. By definition. I only pointed out that it was a stone-cold fact that the WR market wasn't as high as he was trying to claim. I noted that market value would in the future go higher. And that nobody knew precisely when that would happen. That it could either be a while or very soon. But it hadn't happened yet. That anyone who said when that would happen was guessing. Simple facts. I was correct. Whoever the dolt was who thought his guess was a fact, was wrong. I don't remember whether or not it was you, but whoever said it was wrong. Confusing guesses with facts is simply poor thinking. And by the way, I didn't say a thing about nonsense in this thread, that's you bringing it up in a reply, bizarrely. What is your obsession with me? I didn't bother answering but you recently started discussing me in a thread I hadn't even entered, without even replying to me. Just started talking about me? Again, what's the obsession, dude? I'm decent-looking, but nothing special. I guess it's your right, but it seems sad. I'm living rent-free in your head. It's just weird.

True. But there are also some people here who absolutely curate threads, keeping them going for hundreds of pages when there just isn't much there. I tend to stay away, dropping in every few weeks to marvel at how much care the guy is spending on this limited topic. It's like someone trying to keep a fire alive by putting thousands of tiny twigs on it one at a time. The same guy will have 30% of the posts in a thread. Worth looking at and shaking your head. Whatever. It's what they want to do. It's like watching someone try to herd a worm on a trip from Kansas to LIncoln, Nebraska. Worth checking in on.