Buddo

Methinks that is somewhat of an exaggeration. There is difficulty there though, in that many of those guys have already passed. I'd also say that from the NFL side of things, the use of a variety of PEDs, has contributed to guys being bigger/stronger/faster, which has inevitably meant that collisions have become harder. Harder collisions will pretty much equal enhanced risk of trouble. Alongside how much PEDs have 'enhanced' players strength, speed and size, there is almost certainly no comparative increase,in the body's ability to absorb the extra punishment that will result in. Tbh, I'm almost more surprised that Cushing got caught, than anything else, as while the NFL may have state of the art facilities for analyzing tests, the way they go about getting the tests done, is so poor, you have probably got to try quite hard to fail them.

Regarding the D-Line, I would suggest that much is to do with system, and keeping their powder dry until more needed. Albeit with another pass rusher, in Mario, the front 4 under Schwartz, showed a lot of ability to utilize stunts to get to QBs. I doubt very much that that capability has disappeared entirely, and would hope that we start to see it as the season progresses. I'd guess that there are elements of the game plan, and also how comfortable the coaches are with the players keeping to their assignments, that will have to be addressed, before they will let them loose, as it were. Even under Schwartz, they didn't really start going after it until the second half of the season. Overall, the D looked pretty composed throughout, with only one obvious blown assignment that I saw. I thought they got a little 'soft' on coverages occasionally, but I'm pretty certain that was deliberate, and while it's not something I like personally, it was probably what was called. Whilst disappointed that Williams was cut, I like having Tolbert to spell Shady. Simply because if you are running the football as much as we will, having a physical lump doing some of it, helps with the softening up process. While talking about the offense, I also liked the odd designed QB run that got us a 1st down from tricky 3rd down situations. Some nice play design, as was the first TD. First impressions are that this isn't going to be a team that 'tanks'. There appears to be too much general competence for that to happen, both on and off the field, as the coaches appear to know what they are about, and have translated what they want to the players fairly well. Another 7-9 to 9-7 season beckons assuming Shady can be kept upright.

As to how much I 'trust' Beane and McDermott, currently not so much. I will say that they obviously have a great deal of belief in what they are doing, but I'm unconvinced they are the 'smartest guys in the room', which appears to be their current approach. While regime change will inevitably lead to some personnel changes, too often in the NFL, teams appear to throw the baby out with the bathwater (and not just the Bills), in messing up stuff that works while attempting to get better, supposedly, everywhere. As things stand, I see McDermott and Beane as little different in that respect, to how things, generally, seem to be done throughout the NFL.

A fair bit of truth in this, imho. Unfortunately for Whaley, a lot of circumstances conspired to prevent him being able to push a 'vision', assuming he had one. Tbh, when Marrone did a runner, Whaley should have said to the Pegulas, now is the time for change, and pushed hard to get the juice to appoint the next HC (prior to Ryan), and to make whatever changes he felt were necessary at that point in time. In effect, getting the sort of leeway, that McDermott and Beane currently are enjoying. As he didn't, he pretty much has only himself to blame for the way things panned out, even though I think he can probably work with just about any type of HC if necessary, as a talent evaluator, and someone who will bring in the best available talent to suit what that HC wants. It might be that he doesn't actually have a strong enough desire to be a true GM, but if he does, then if he ever gets another shot at it, I think it won't be without demanding the final say on what HC to hire etc.

Don't like this move much at all. Seymour has some talent, and can at least be a capable backup. Capable backups are not something you should be just giving away, especially at CB. A WR with no proper NFL receptions, and a 7th round pick two years from now, doesn't represent any sort of value to me. All the arguments about 'building' don't exactly scan that well either, as Seymour is still young, and could have been a guy you could rely on for a good few years. Fwiw, Seymour wasn't actually cut, otherwise he couldn't have been traded, and you have to also consider that without some sort of recommendation from McDermott, Rivera probably wouldn't be prepared to have him, or want him.

I'm fine with the Darby move - seems like decent value. I don't believe he's a 'bad scheme fit', for one moment, but I can see he has more value in a 'man' scheme, hence a trade that gets us value. I simply don't like the Watkins trade. If he gets injured again, then hindsight will say it's a good move. If he doesn't, then he will be the cause of much angst over the years, as he can be an absolute beast, if he stays healthy. Sometimes I really have to wonder about the mentality of all of the organizations 'football guys'. Did they not see what happens when you don't actually have a quality WR to throw to, when you aren't running the football? Or when you have to try and get down the field in a hurry? Things get ugly, quickly. And they probably will this season, again. Watkins could have been a game changer for the Bills, especially as he and Taylor seem like they have developed chemistry/timing. Talking of chemistry, I wonder what it's going to do to the rest of the team, or more particularly, the offensive side of things. While I'm sure there's a bunch of no name and no good WRs on the roster thinking it's a chance for them to stick, I doubt the O-Line and RBs will be being very impressed.

This is not something that has just happened over the last few years. It isn't something that can be put into that sort of context. Historically, the 'Middle East' has been contentious for hundreds of years, going back to the crusades. However, bearing in mind that the USA wasn't involved in them, the 'current' context for all of the crap that is happening, roughly begins with the end of the 2nd World War, and the establishment of modern Israel. Where in their collective guilt at what had happened, made the Allies displace the Palestinians, in order to give the Israelis their spiritual 'home' back. That action, and the subsequent support for Israel from, and by, the USA, has had all sorts of ramifications spread out from it, as various conflicts and issues, have sprung from it. Rather ironically, there was a really good opportunity, to have kept an awful lot of this from happening, with the first Gulf War. When right was most definitely on the allies side. Unfortunately, Daddy Bush didn't pull the plug on Saddam Hussein, even though Thatcher told him he should do, and at a time when the Arab world, would have been more than happy to see the back of him. Son of Bush, then has to dig up some sort of spurious 'weapons of mass destruction' (which were never found) to finish off what Daddy started, but this time around, with the backing of the big oil interests in the USA. About the only consistent thing with the USA's foreign policy in the middle east, has been its support of Israel. Pretty much everything else has been ill conceived, poorly executed, and often hypocritical. A large number of the Middle Eastern countries, are pretty much well known for having oppressive regimes, yet only some are 'enemies'. There's an awful lot more that can be said about the whole history of the area, and I've pretty much missed a lot of it, but if you want to start admitting to the 'problems', it's as good a place to start as any. I would also like to point people at the BBC website, to see news about what happened. Especially about how the diverse people of Manchester, stood together, and made every effort to help those affected by the tragic event. Look at who these people were who helped, as they included many from ethnic groups who are the supposed cause of this, who simply saw a tragedy unfolding, and rushed to do as much as they could, as you would expect any other human to.

Ryan's 'exotic' looks, continually put someone in a position to fail. The better QBs took enough time to see who that was, and let them do so. Schwartz used the front four to stunt quite a bit, while occasionally throwing in a corner/safety/lb blitz in the mix. The main point being that the front four were pretty much always putting pressure on, and not being sent into stupid coverages, just to try and do something different.

In recent times, Fred Jackson seemed to be the only guy who could make plays that actually lifted the whole team. (And the fans at the Ralph) I don't care about numbers, the guy just played as fierce as anyone, and dragged his teammates along with him. Moorman, for being consistently good. It's also worth noting that both Moorman and Jackson did a lot for the local community, and when you are talking about the Bills' Wall, imho, that should figure into the overall picture. Kyle Williams, for seemingly improving every time he comes back after injury. Always has the right attitude. Always makes plays. Tbh, there are a few guys who probably deserve to be on it ahead of all of those mentioned above, but from the last several years, those are the only ones I would consider. I suppose you could call my selections, 'post Moulds', who himself should get serious consideration.

Wonder if he put Marrone on his list?......

'Game situation' is very important, but also it's about, imho, which team has 'momentum', and how much that will change, depending on the success, or not, of 'going for it'. Having said that, iirc, McDermott said in one of his pressers, that he intends to be aggressive in those types of situations, although I believe he was referring more to the traditional '4th and 1' scenario, but even so, that should make him more likely to 'go for it' on a 4th and 2 from around the 40. Personally, I'm hoping he does pay as much attention to the first point I made, as possible, as getting those decisions right more often than not, is something that definitely helps you win games.

More like they don't believe you should practice, full stop. The reps/practice thing, needs to have a better balance, imho. There simply must be ways, in this day and age, to practice techniques, especially tackling, without going full blown at it, and it makes too much sense for there not to be more time allowed to do so. Part of the problem is the long standing tradition the NFL has, of turning a blind eye to stuff that contravenes the CBA, when it comes to practicing. If they actually made teams pay, and pay in ways it hurts them, e.g. picks etc. then you can have more 'walk through' type practices, or technique practices, as teams who don't toe the line would be punished. As that hasn't happened in the past, then the NFLPA, is pretty much not going to agree to it, unless there's some sort of nailed down regulation of it, with specific consequences. Back on the OP, these helmets sound like a great improvement. Seems like the softer shell reduces the initial impact, and the 'crumple' part, acts as an additional 'brake', reducing how quickly the goo inside your head, moves towards the skull. If I was a player, I'd be wanting these, badly, to the extent that I'd possibly even be prepared to pay for one myself.

I'm with Kirby on this one. Firstly, for all people have complained about all sorts of things over the years, the ability of the FO to find guys , especially in FA and the waiver wire, who haven't cost much, yet have made good contributions, has never really been an issue. The people responsible for that side of things, were fired, alongside the rest. Makes no sense to me. It seems obvious that the Pegulas decided to give the new GM, a 'clean slate', but was it necessary to do so? Seems as though it's the norm in the NFL, to get rid of everything, and start again, even when there are parts that are working well. Certainly in respect to coaching and FO hiring and firing.

It's all irrelevant, really. The only 'accountability' there is, is to Ownership, and if things go pear shaped, you will just have to see who's gone, to work out who Ownership thought was responsible.

While saying Watkins has just missed 11 games in 3 years, is true, it's also rather trite, don't you think? Mainly because that number (11), might actually be less than the amount of games he's actually been fully fit in. Not picking up his option, due to it being fully guaranteed against injury, was simply the only sensible business move, to make. Now, I rate Watkins ability, but all the ability in the world, doesn't mean diddley squat, if it doesn't make it to the field on a Sunday. If Watkins stays fully healthy for the vast majority of the season, it will almost certainly be a 'no brainer' to re-sign him, or tag him if necessary. If he doesn't, then it becomes a whole different ball game, and if other guys come through, then I could see him being let go, unless he wants to return at a discount.

So far, all the candidates appear to be pretty young, and I'm very dubious about their ability to both set up, and bring in, guys needed for scouting etc. On the one hand, I'm pretty unimpressed by some of the nepotism that goes around in the NFL, on the other hand, you actually need to have put in a fair amount of time, to build up contacts with the right people, or even to identify the right people. I'm not especially convinced any of the guys interviewed so far, have that. Why is it that I'm already getting the feeling that the next draft will have McDermott making the first few picks, and then a sim like Drafttek doing the rest....

People are way too enamored with his athleticism. He hardly did anything worthwhile for the Bills, and the out of bounds catch from EJ in London, was both a disgrace and an embarrassment. He's not a great blocker, so unless Clay is off the field, his usefulness is extremely limited. Imho, O'Leary has already contributed more than Gragg did, and I'd much rather have him on the team, as I consider him to be a much better footballer, irrespective of 'measurables'.

Thanks for that Yolo - it is a good read. It seems as though the Pegulas want to go down this route. Thing is, if given the opportunity, I think Whaley was more than capable of performing the 'Dimitroff' role, as I believe he's pretty much had to do that his entire tenure. McDermott may have had something in his dealings with the Pegulas that said he wanted Whaley out, but I still wonder if that may have been a mistake. (Carucci has something about that apparently). Could it be that he actually found working with Whaley to be ok? Yet due to wanting his 'own' people in, and a prior agreement with the Pegulas, felt obliged to have them pull the plug on Whaley? Now it may be that he didn't want to continue to work with Whaley, in which case, fair enough, but I can't get away from a gut feeling, that although McDermott looks like the right guy as HC, shipping out all the scouts/pro-personnel people at his behest, is another mistake being made by the Pegulas.

This is very true about Dawkins, although as a guy who might have to move inside to succeed, they did hedge their bets there, and O-Line depth is no bad thing. Like the Jones pick, and tbh, with McDermotts input about the chances of the Panthers taking him, I think the trade up was fair enough. My personal first requirement in a WR, is 'hands', as if you don't catch the pigskin, you can't make a play, and by the sounds of it, he might have the best 'hands' in the draft. Safety does look 'thin', but I wouldn't be too surprised to see a conversion project or two happen.

The real irony in all of this, is that if McDermott does succeed, will anyone give Whaley credit for pointing the Pegulas in his direction? Whaley's tenure as GM, has been consistently undermined, by circumstances largely out of his control. Unfortunately, it all starts with the selection of EJ. Marrone never really seemed interested in developing him, and Hackett was incapable of doing so. Instead of sitting behind a vet for a year or two, he has to start immediately, due to the stupid decision to keep Kolb over Jackson. One guy (Jackson) has toughed out injuries and carried on playing in the past, the other has an injury list as long as your arm, including multiple concussions. Who then trips and suffers another one, that totally ices his career. Marrone's desire to 'win now', hangs EJ out to dry against JJ Watt and the Texans, so he can use the vet (Orton) he's most comfortable with. Whaley simply can't do anything about this, as Marrone is Brandon's guy. Ralph passes, and there's a state of flux until the Pegulas buy the team. Marrone bails out, probably due to Orton retiring, as much as anything else, and Whaley then has to deal with the Ryan Circus. Once again, the choice not being his. In the unlikely event Whaley becomes a GM again (I doubt he wants it anymore), I'd bet my bottom dollar, it wouldn't be without contractual say over HCs and Scouting teams. I'm sure he will get another job in the not too distant future, as he's not done anywhere near as bad a job here, as people seem to think, given the variety of crap circumstances he's had to put up with. He was by no means faultless, and I rather suspect that the issues with RFA tenders in the last two years, are one of the things that the Pegulas didn't like especially, although that is speculation. Overall, I'd still say the stuff he got right, outweighed the mistakes, and there's still a pretty decent core to the team, providing they are kept healthy.

From what others have said, I don't want the Panthers Asst GM, as he simply doesn't sound like he's any good tbh. Unless told otherwise, by the Pegulas, I can only assume that the new GM is nothing more than a glorified Scouting Coordinator, for both College and Pro sides. So you realistically want the best talent evaluator you can find.

The fundamental problem, is that the supposed deficiencies, become all-encompassing, when there were clearly parts that worked, and worked well, over the years. Namely the Pro-Personnel side of things, yet that goes out with the bathwater. I cannot for the life of me, think that getting rid of functioning parts, alongside removing bits that don't, is the right approach. Trouble is, you see this sort of crap all the time in the NFL, especially with new coaching staffs, and it perpetually sets franchises back, imho. If it isn't broken, don't fix it. Want to get rid of Whaley, fine, but why get rid of the one thing he set up, that has worked, and worked well? Imho, it's totally unnecessary.

McDonut, for wanting control over so much, when he doesn't know the half of it.....

It was luck that the class was deep where we needed it to be, and that other teams hadn't taken guys we were interested in, although moving ahead of the Panthers had to be done. If McDermott wasn't our HC, would we have known how interested they were in Jones? Or Dawkins for that matter. I agree that need is a factor when drafting, and I've had plenty of arguments (elsewhere) over the years about this, my concern is how much weight is being put upon 'need' as a factor when drafting. This draft, to an extent, you can probably get away with it, as once you got out of the top 10, there wasn't, supposedly, a lot to separate the next 30-40 guys, all of whom were expected to be viable NFL starters, but are we now locked in, under McDermott, to pursuing needs only? Going to miss on some good players if we do that, and be 'reaching' a lot. Past history should tell you how that has worked out over the years, with a variety of busts and mediocrity, when there were other better guys available, who would have helped the team more over the years.

I find it both rather odd, and rather stupid, to be even thinking about canning Whaley. The pro-personnel side of things, has been exceptional, and without a doubt, he set it all up. Now, it may be time for some scouts to move on, but I'm not convinced that that should be the case either. For better or worse, I think Whaley has pretty much gone out on a limb, to draft the types of players successive HCs wanted, and he has seemed to be able to find guys who 'fit' what they were after. Some of the issues with that, have been more injury related, rather than the ability of the players, some of which are yet to be determined. It seems to me, that as usual in any forum I've been to that is about the Bills, Whaley is deemed a failure, largely on the back of his inability to find a franchise QB. He's not alone in that, as a plethora of other NFL teams can attest. I'm extremely uncomfortable with giving a new HC, the degree of power that it appears, atm, he is going to have, especially when he has proven nothing as a HC. The notion that the Assistant GM of the Panthers is going to become our new GM, is also disturbing, in that I neither know anything about him, and his association with the Panthers, means that the only real pick at QB that they would have made in his time there, (assuming he was there then) was Jimmy Clausen. Cam was such an obvious pick, it's just not true, and I'm totally discounting that. So we aren't getting someone who is demonstrably better than Whaley, at the critical 'position', yet we are going to potentially blow up all the scouting side of things, just because our new HC wants to have his own guys there. My view of this draft is that we pretty much drafted for need, and got lucky in that need and value coincided with our first two picks, and with the Peterman pick. Is this the way we will be going from now? Need over ability? Now, while I'm not a subscriber to the 'BPA' nonsense spouted regularly by teams, I do believe that you shouldn't be passing up on exceptional talent just to fill a need, which I feel is the way we are heading. Fwiw, I don't have a problem with removing guys from the board due to character issues. These days, it just comes back to bite you on the ass, regularly, with suspensions etc. Anything that prevents a guy from suiting up Sundays, is a red flag, be it injury or suspension.