Ronin

They need a lot. They don't have a blue-chip player anywhere on the offensive roster. Relying on Shady at 31 is a fool's gamble, it was debatable at best going into this season. They have needs at 9 of 11 spots, and that's with Allen cemented in there, not because he's arrived as a franchise QB yet, but simply because it's his job to lose, and with Foster as a strting WR, which remains to be seen whether he can continue to perform at that level as such. Either way, there isn't an above-average player at any of the other 9 spots, and again, right now Allen's not above average either. They do need, absolutely, to improve the offense around him however or he won't even stand a chance whether that's a slim or good chance notwithstanding. But that's a tall order. All of a sudden it's easy to see how that "extra cap space" isn't going to go nearly as far as so many think it will. As well, McBeane haven't demonstrated, or anything even close, that they even know how to rebuild an offense. D is McD's forte and who knows re: Beane. But given their attempts on offense to date it's not encouraging. One pick each in rounds 1-3 even with a couple of blue-chip OL ain't gonna cut it, even if two of the draftees work out as such as rookies. At this point they're going to have to hope and rely upon, at least partially, their moves from their past two offseasons. The clock continues to tick on McBeane. If they don't make the playoffs this year I suspect that failing to do so next season, 2020, will usher them out of Buffalo. They may already be at risk if Allen doesn't make enormous strides in the short-medium passing game or if they once again fail to win more than 6 or 7 games. They'll certainly begin to take heat at that point. If Allen struggles and makes no improvement whatsoever this forthcoming season may be their last.

That would be correct, I was confusing power-5 with FCS. Thanks for the catch. Point-being, swap out P-5 with FCS then. aka small football schools. Also, on that note they need for someone in their draft office to sit down and actually go thru why a player was successful" in college, particularly if they put up gawdy numbers as Jones did against a second-rate slate of teams. If they had done that, as I did, they'd have seen that he did it in a major spread offense, often 5 receivers, typically playing in garbage time. That's hardly a good indicator. They'd also have seen that Hardy, I think Justin, also from EC who put up more prolific numbers over more than merely one season there, with more prototypical physical dimensions for WR in the NFL, and playing with a very good QB in Matt Ryan, hasn't done much at the NFL level. If nothing else that should have been a flag re: Jones. Again, this is what scouts should be getting paid for, or someone with analytical abilities at OBD. Heck, even a part-time person from January thru April would do it. So why isn't it getting done? If it is, why wasn't it heeded? Allen had his own set of concerns including horrific play, as in worse than just about every QB from that same draft, against P-5 competition. No need for further comment, he's here now, but gone unbeknownst is that his short-medium passing game is even worse here than it was in college. He's going to have to make an enormous leap this season in that way. Deep balls and running are far from the basis of franchise QBs, eh. They may be "exciting" but clearly they didn't result in points or winning. It's always a flag to me when coaches or GMs, or both in this case, get caught up in the "strong arm" thing, which I consider to be of a "kid in a candy shop" thing. No franchise much less top-10 QB has huge deficits in the short-medium game. Here's the thing, unless a "strong armed" QB is lofting TDs from outside the red zone with regularity, the vast majority of scoring is done from within the red zone where Allen has a DFL 4 TDs this season, two of which were in that last Miami game as were a third of his total passing TDs this season. This isn't a good thing. Once a QB hits the red zone there's no need for a strong-arm anymore. I always have to raise an eyebrow when coaches/GMs don't seem to understand that most simplistic and fundamental of concepts. ... or do they understand it but just ignore it? they can pick their poison on that one, but when one makes a risky decision as such, one's future necessarily hangs in the balance.

I'll disagree that the first year was run by Whaley's cronies. In fact, they got rid of a few before the draft even. But it was McD's personal choice for WRs coach, forget his name, a former EC coach, that was high on Zay Jones when the obvious pick, even then, was Smith-Shuster, particularly over an FCS candidate like Jones. So not letting them off-the-hook for that one so easily. One minor trend is their lack of concern over going "small school," again, FCS in this case, with two enormously risky picks on Jones & Allen, both times in very critical spots. Jones clearly hasn't stepped up to anywhere even remotely approaching what's expected from a 37th overall pick and 4th overall WR taken. Point-of-note, five WRs after Jones have logged more yards, significantly in four of the five cases. And if you don't think that Peterman was McBeane's pick, well, LMAO. Otherwise, I see as a trend McD leaning on his experience as a DC over emphasizing, or should we say neglecting, the offense. WR has been critical and yet Jones has flopped and the only others they've taken were late day-3 last year. Other than that the only offensive players have been the two Gs, Dawkins and then Teller, also on day-3 this past draft. He really can't afford to tinker with more defense at this point, and given that they're going to sink or swim on Allen. So it's in their best interests as HC and GM and their futures as such, to use all three day-1 & 2 picks on offense, presumably a WR, an OL, and what, another OL, TE, another WR? They literally have needs at every offensive position. We cannot argue that they're "set" anywhere. Foster isn't a proven starting WR although looking good for a handful of games. We'll see how things change when DCs plan for him. Otherwise we need capable WRs, a TE, every OL spot could stand an upgrade, and of course there's a need for RB too. That's a lot to overcome in a season, two tops. They won't have more to produce another playoff appearance. Again, not sure that "making the playoffs" last season was a good thing for them in their long-term interests. They've been fortunate with several late-round picks but that's hardly a trade-off for a spotty history in rounds 1-3 and it suggests just that, fortune/luck as opposed to knowledge, otherwise they'd have done better in those 1-3 rounds. There are so many needs and IMO not enough time for them to rebuild the O as such, particularly as key players (Hughes & Lorax) diminish in play on the D side due to age. Remember, over half our paltry sack total came from Kyle, Lorax, and Hughes. Also not mentioned is that their abject failure to be able to adequately assess the O. Anyone should have known that for one reason or another great things are typically not expected from a 30-year old RB no matter how good he's been. Sure, he could beat the odds, but that's a long-shot bet and frankly it didn't work out. The better thing to have done would have been to trade Shady last year as I said repeatedly and move on. Instead we get nothing, either this season from him or going forward. But the point is that to rely on things like that demonstrates a lack of awareness of tried and true NFL tenets if you will and frankly, of NFL history in general. That's one thing I always look for in a coach. So far they haven't proven an ability to improve the offense. The one thing that should be clear to the world is that if Allen doesn't make a huge stride in his short-medium game then they won't be long for Buffalo. I don't see how they're going to do that with the current offensive (double entendre there) roster. I'm just not sure that it's possible to build it as such, essentially from the ground up, so quickly. I guess we'll find out, but again, there's nothing on record suggesting that they know how to do it, here, Carolina, anywhere. More picks like their 2nd rounds of Jones and 3rd of Dawkins aren't going to cut it. And if I were them I'd avoid any FCS school period on days 1 & 2, where they only have three picks, one each in the first three rounds.

I honestly can't believe that you cited that game against Iowa. I don't think that there's an Allen apologist out there that would even touch any of the three games he played against Power-5 competition. As I've often said, most QBs that weren't even drafted or were drafted in rounds 6 & 7 played notably better against P-5 competition, often on horrible teams, than Allen did. Now, as to your comment above, it seems that you agree with me then. Allen too will need to "improve considerably" in red zone performance if he's to become a franchise QB. I will also disagree with you that Allen played equally in the red zone. Allen's red zone stats are skewed by the proverbial country mile from that last Miami game. Outside of that emotionally hyped game, a rarity, Allen's RZ performance wasn't even close to Wentz's unimpressive rookie RZ performance. But we agree, which is my entire point, Allen will have to "improve significantly," as you implied, if he's to become a franchise QB.

Year 3, agreed, particularly since he made the playoffs last season. Throw Beane in there too since Beane came in on McD's coattails. The drafts of his (Beane's) office have been dicey at best. If not for happenstance positives (aka low percentage moves) like Wallace, Beane's moves have been unimpressive. His biggest moves, trading for Benjamin, big contrat for average-at-best Lotulolei, have been swings-and-misses. The Draft has been some of each with him having given up a lot to get Allen. A pile of day-3 picks this season isn't the same as the draft opportunity we had last season. The sole exception will be if Allen makes enormous strides in his passing game next season to the extent that he becomes an above-average passer, that will likely stay criticism of McBeane even if they don't make the playoffs. If Allen can't at least double his passing TD production while minimizing his INTs, while simultaneously making enormous leaps in Red Zone play, methinks that the natives will become restless and reasonably so. Supporting your statement, the schedule is favorable based upon this year's outcomes, so there shouldn't be a lot for them to hide behind there. There isn't one team on the schedule besides the Pats that won more than 10 games and only two that won 10, Baltimore and Dallas.

Most appear to have gotten it. It's also of benefit to all readers to substantiate their opinions, and ROFLMAO if that typically happens. About the best we get is the iconic "eye test." LOL

Just curious, everyone made so much over an emotionally charged win over this team that is now formally in rebuild mode, but honestly, did they have talent better than we did? Not seeing it. Heck, their all but led by a completely washed up 35-year-old RB. If they're so bad, why did that final win have such relevance as harbinger for next season for us. Just sayin'. McBeane have a world heap of work to do, not sure how they can possibly get it done in time to save their jobs. one more move like Lotulolei, Benjamin, or Murphy, ...

Hence the wording, "interesting point-of-note." Perhaps for your benefit I should have said "side note," maybe you'd have gotten the point then. I'll try to choose my words more carefully next time for your benefit. Errrmmmmm, see the post before this one. But as long as you want to dwell on the rushing, what doe sit say about McBeane for utterly failing to recognize that Shady's performance could and likely would diminish rapidly while making no significant plans for replacing him? Nice way to continue to heap team needs onto a single offseason. At the rate we're going perhaps they'll figure all this out by the time Allen's contract is up. Are we the only team in the league that has significant needs at every offensive position besides QB and one or maybe two spots on the OL?

Funny, you quote me but then ignore just about everything in the quote. Meh ... as long as you're convinced. I just think that it's odd that the only time he's ever made the playoffs is with Brady and that he's pretty much sucked as a HC when he hasn't had Brady, as in Jauron sucky. Belichich has a .456 winning pct. w/o Brady. Jauron's career win pct. was .423, a relatively negligible difference. It's interesting because Jauron, in most cases, did it with a crappy D. Just sayin'. As I said, I hope that Belichick keeps coaching once Brady falters/retires. I think we'll start seeing a very mediocre coach again. What would that suggest if true?

As long as you're convinced. That's all that matters, right. Otherwise, there's a wealth of resources for your to consult online. You mention PFF? Did you bother to look there? Did you bother to look there for his prior seasons in Carolina? I'll ask you, how do you come to the conclusion that he's great or put another way, worthy of that fairly large contract they gave him? Surely you've done the research since you're so sure, right? So please, feel free to list the same links that support your argument. Seriously, I'm highly eager to find out where you look for this besides your own personal "extensive viewing." Seems to me that you're largely on an island there, even the regionial media's been down on him all year.

Yeah, LOL, and you said he was good. Bigger error? And that's what your argument has boiled down to? LMAO You know what they say about holes, the more you dig the bigger it gets. Say hi to the Chinese when you get there.

OK, start there then. So using that, do a contrast in comparison for Jackson. Compare WRs, RB, OL, TE, etc. D's were comparable, no? #1/#2. As well, do the same contrast/comp for Allen's draft peers in the RZ? Darnold way better. Do the comps for Darnold, I'm simply not seeing much of a difference there. So why are Darnold's RZ numbers so incredibly better? And frankly, I'm hardly convinced that Darnold's a franchise-QB in waiting either. What you say is fine, but don't simply apply the part you want to Allen for purposes of Analysis, show how the same doesn't apply to the players we're comparing him to.

Well, I'm not sure that I said the first part of that, to start. As to what's coachable, how do you get into a QB's head and teach him to read D's? NFL history suggests that QBs that enter the NFL with that flaw typically do not succeed, regardless of where they're drafted. I have to side with NFL history in this case. To put Allen in the same catgegory as Marino as a passer is ridiculous. Marino was in a completely different era to start, which is very relevant. I mean why not go back tot he 30's or 40's then when it was a completely different game. The NFL has never made it easier for QBs than the current NFL. But if you want to prove your point more relevantly, it might be a good idea to put together a short-list of NFL franchise QBs since say 2000 anyway, that entered the NFL with a poor track-record of red-zone performance in college coupled with a knock for not being able to read Ds. Put that list together and perhaps that may be more convincing. To simply lean on the word experience isn't really saying much. And BTW, it should be pointed out that Marino only led the Fins to the SB once and lost. His Fins made the playoffs 10 of 16 seasons and were typically ousted in the WC or divisional round.

Again, we agree for the most part altho I will comment on a couple of things. You he looked more comfortable in the red zone at the end of the season. His RZ performance thru 16 weeks was abysmal, not even mediocre or just bad, bottom-dwelling. So if "the end of the season" you mean the Maimi game, who can argue. Here's the thing, it was an emotional game against a team in disarray that typically doesn't play well in the cold venues. The Bills have a history of getting up for games like that, win or lose. The home-opener is typically a game in which they overachieve like they did vs. Miami. But almost everyone on the team played so beyond their typical play for the rest of the season that I'm not sure that it's wise to use that game as a guide in the same way that it was unwise to use the Minnesota game as a guide. Allen's gotta steady-state improve his RZ game in spades and then some if he's ever going to become a franchise QB. Right now he doesn't even rank in that category, even with the Miami game. Whether that happens we'll see. As I always say, us sitting here talking about it ain't gonna be a factor in that development. LOL Unfortunately too many posters seem to think that pop-opinion determines outcome, which is always part of the amusement of message boards. As to predicting QB play, I wouldn't say that it's "futile" per se, it can be difficult, but there are definitely significant indicators, several of which I rarely hear "draft experts" even cite much less use, that are very relevant in determining the odds of a QB's future success. So many posters seem to think that watching a highlight reel combined with reading a handful of superficial bullet-points by some "draft expert" is an analysis. But the reality is that in order to properly conduct an analysis on the future prospects for a QB, one must watch hours of film and also consider "lowlights" as well because those often tell as much if not more than the highlights. And in Allen's case, if the lowlights are all against Iowa, Oregon, and Nebraska, and in a big, big way, to the extent that he was worsee against those power-5 teams, way worse in many cases, than QBs that weren't even drafted. That's relevant, and to overlook that one does so to his own detriment in any analysis. Unfortunately I almost never (never say never) see this kind of stuff, and other stuff like it. Sometimes in order to get certain information you have to dig fairly deep too. I don't even remember where I found college RZ stats, I'm actually PO'd that I didn't bookmark the link. But here's the 2018 RZ for NFL QBs. Note the difference between Allen and his peers, and keep in mind that half of Allen's positives were in that Miami game and keep in mind that Jackson's were in just over half the games that Allen played. It's not good. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2018/redzone-passing.htm This is the kind of stuff teams should be doing, and much more, before drafting players, QBs or others. It's how you can determine that players like Spiller will be a bust, as one mere example. Whether it's "futile" can be argued IMO, but what's perfectly known are several things: Franchise QBs are never built around their rushing games. (Fact) It may be that a franchise QB like Wilson has a solid rushing game, but his status as a franchise QB has little to do with that. Franchise QBs do not all have a "deep/strong arm," but they all do have a top-notch short-passing game, which is a requisite in teh red zone since there is no deep game down there. (Fact) That was Bledsoe's problem too, strong arm but useless in the red zone all but, and consider, he was world's better than Allen is/was in the RZ this season or in college. The long and short of it is that his status as a franchise QB hinges directly upon his passing, not his rushing. And while his rushing may help his passing, although IMO that's debatable as a propensity to run an also be a significant hindrance to the development of a passing game. But if we strip away Allen's rushing and look exclusively at his passing, he's all but DFL if not DFL outright as a passer in the NFL. So that's the hurdle he has to overcome and mountain he must climb. Whether it's futile to project whether or not he does that is arguable, but the odds of him doing what he's A, not shown that he's even close to doing and lags his peers at in the NFL, much less what he was never good at even at Wyoming, will all of a sudden occur to that extent here is hardly an odds-on proposition. Look at it this way, would you lay say 10% of your annual income on that happening? I wouldn't at this point. Wonderlics I'm not sure translate in this case, but to play devil's advocate, if he's so sharp, why didn't he do this in college against vastly inferior competition and at a far lower level of play. Why has this stigma followed him as a QB? Rhetorical perhaps, nonetheless food-for-thought. He also can watch all the film that he wants, but he'll have to do this on the field and his peers are way ahead of him, why? Also, keep in mind that opponents will also review film and know better how to prepare for Allen next season, so that's a double-edged sword, also a simple concept that I rarely if ever hear the talking heads mention.

I think that it’s an interesting point-of-note that of the “rushing-est” QBs in the league that only one is a franchise QB but that’s entirely because of his passing numbers. Having said that, TD/INT ratio is a far better indicator as to franchise QBs. Wilson’s was 5/1 this season and is 3.1/1 career. The others’ this season were as follows: Watson’s is 2.9/1 Trubisky 2/1 Newton 1.8/1 Jackson 2/1 Bortles 1.2/1 Prescott 2.8/1 Mariota 1.4/1 Winston 1.4/1 Fitzpatrick 1.4/1 Allen .8/1 Point being that no QB made franchise status predicated upon his rushing much less his raw athleticism.

It's interesting tho, doncha think, that Belichick is supposed to be a great defensive mind, but then why have his D's over the past decade ranked 20th or so? It certainly isn't because he's been in a tough offensive division, he's consistently been in the single easiest division offensively speaking. He's also never done anything w/o Brady at QB. On the Pats he was 5-13 with Bledsoe. It's not as if he recognized Brady's talent either. While I was lecturing my Pats fan buddy that they would never wing a SB with Bledsoe at the helm (and for the same reason I didn't want him in Buffalo), the only reason why Brady ended up starting was because of the injury to Belichicik's go-to 5-13 QB. Otherwise it's quite likely that Brady would have ended up elsewhere just like all the other QBs that have come and gone on his watch. Belichick's had somewhat better than 20th ranked defensive talent, yet, he hasn't done anything with it. Brady is his own boss and always has been, Belichick has zero track record of developing QBs, none apart from Brady and it's extremely bold to suggest that he made Brady. I just hope taht Belichick keeps coaching for another decade, if he even makes it that long before the chants of "his days are over," after Brady's time lapses. IMO Belichick, while good, is hardly as good as everyone says he is. Brady runs that offense regardless of who the OC is and always puts up numbers even with second-rate cadres of receivers. IMO Jimmy Johnson was a better coach, as one example. It's a tough argument to counter. Belichick is 52-62 with 0 playoff appearances w/o Brady. With Brady he's 209-61 with Brady and has made the playoffs in 17 of 18 seasons. Brady was an accident for Belichick. Not sure how much credit he deserves for that. If Bledsoe hadn't gotten hurt I don't think that that "accident" even happens. How good would Belichick have been had it not? It's rhetorical, but there cannot be an argument that claims Brady as the GOAT, even arguably, without having that impact how "great" Belichick was, particularly given that Belichick's not even taken care of his end, the D, which has been below average in both regular season as well as playoffs while how far the Pats advance is almost always tied to how well Brady, not even the running game, plays, ... or not, which is when they lose. Also, the fact that he's been in the single worst/easiest division otherwise throughout the Brady era is sheer and utter luck. Some will point to the 2008 season under Cassel, but they had the easiest schedule in the league that year and despite that, saw the Dolphins (with a second-rate roster offensively under Pennington) edge them for the divvision title. Many teams that are mediocre do well with the easiest schedule in the league. That happened to Jauron too in his 13-3 season that the brass at OBD failed to recognize when they hired him back then. Jauron's may not have been the easiest, but he didn't beat many if any good teams that season. He beat a bunch of medocre ones. Obviously more luck since he was 5-11 before that season and 4-12 after it and 22-42 otherwise in four seasons there. Clearly schedule had a lot to do with it that one season.

Once again, great analysis. LOL

Well, he also stepped into (or away from) a whole bunch of sacks, which is another issue altogether involving pocket-awareness, and something that numerous announcers and writers pointed out so it's not like it's a secret or anything. We agree that Allen cannot be the top rusher, but my point is even simpler than that. Look, he may be our QB for a decade, but if he doesn't end up being a "frachise caliber QB" then drafting him as such will have been a waste. If all we get is Cam Newton, and right now Newton's short-game is world's better than Allen's, then the strategy to draft him will have failed. Newton's not a franchise QB. My point all along in numerous posts, is that if Allen is to achieve that status, and that's all I'm talking about here, I'm not talking about whether he can function like yet another QB to keep the seat warm until we get a true franchise QB, then he's going to have to very seriously address a bunch of issues involving his short-game. IMO the more he runs the more likely he is sustain a very severe injury. I mean isn't that common sense? And yeah, I get it, he's "very durable for a QB" and all that stuff, sorry, but that doesn't make him immune to serious injury. Also I've heard absolutely no one factor in now that team's know Allen how they'll plan against us for his skillset, whatever that happens to be. As of now not even Allen's rushing is winning us games. In the four big rushing games he's had we're 2-2. We're 4-3 when Allen throws for a TD. We're 1-4 when he doesn't. That should spell it out.

Boy, lots of good factual information in there for readers to chew on. LOL "YOU are a joke." I see that you've thrown in the towel. Always so much fun to come here and challenge people on the statements that THEY make.

As I said, who pissed in yours. I'm simply commenting on readers' posts. If they don't want comments, then here's a thought, how about not posting. Not sure why you care other than as I said, simply to argue which right now is the crux of your issue. If you'd prefer to discuss something amidst some facts and data I'd be happy to engage. No. If that's the way it came across I'd recommend reading the entire thread of responses that contributed to mine. Not at all. What I'm saying is that relying on free-agent and waiver-wire pick-ups and undrafted free-agents to build a team is no way to go and clearly isn't going to build a playoff-competitive team. If you think it is, then great, good luck with that, we disagree. OTHERWISE, McBeane and their "Process" hasn't exactly lit things up via their free-agency methodologies. Does that sound like me complaining about spending less to get a player that they wanted? If anything I've complained about the absurd contract to land what was known to be a well-below-average guard in Lotulolei. Sorry, but free-agent pick-ups like him all the way around, are hardly the ticket to success.

Say what you will, but in terms of efficiencies, Jackson's numbers are better. At the end of the day it's numbers, not potential or correctability, that counts and assists in putting points on the board, which could very well be why the Ravens with no more offensive talent than we have as the Ravens have scored nearly as many points in weeks 11-17 under Jackson than we've scored all year. The arguments for Allen are all these mystical elusive prognostications of future success without the evidence at present to back them up, while the if the criticism of Jackson holds sway then he'll be a backup, ala Taylor, in a few seasons. Could be, but my point entirely is that two different standards are being applied. In another thread talking about Jackson I noted all the comments slamming Jackson that could very well be applied to Allen but which for Allen in the very same thread are entirely excuses. That to me simply doesn't seem to be good business in the realm of analysis. Yes, I realize that we have different takes, but mine's rooted in NFL history and the traits that typically define Franchise QBs. Sorry, but at the present time, and apart from intangibles where Allen's got them all just about if not outright, and better than any of his draft peers except for possibly Mayfield, the other far more substantive stuff simply isn't there. We can argue about that, but I don't see it. How many that don't go on to become franchise QBs?

LOL, OK Funny how without them he couldn't "make" anyone else, isn't it. Either way, OK, then talk about 2017. HORRID season. No one saw much rendering Allen even worth a draft choice much less a 1st-round pick. QBs that put up 16 TDS with 10 of those going up against teams ranked in the 100's defensively don't ever get on anyone's radar. New Mexico, Texas St., and Gardner-Webb, an FCS team, he should have been able to "make" someone in those games. Still, barely over 200 yards w/o clearing 60% against two of the worst defenses in FBS. I won't evven bother commenting on Gardner-Webb other than to say that they occasionally have a helluva basketball team from time-to-tome. Your comments on HIll are silly, a QB doesn't "make" a RB at the collegiate level. Frankly, Allen hasn't "made it" yet by a longshot in the NFL either the rhetoric aside. Brady and Brees don't need a 100-yard runner to win games, that's been more than proven. Neither team has been blessed with top-notch RBs. That comment is absurd as well.

LMAO Star will be fine? I see that weed has been legalized in your state. He's never been fine, he's been a below-average OL-man throughout his career with no end in sight. Then again, I suppose what the definition of "fine" is. Foster, McKenzie, and Wallace are ALL desperation waiver-wire pick-up moves. Kind of like when we traded Kelvin Sheppard for Hughes. There was no expectation that Hughes was going to go from underachiever at Indy to above-average here, it was a "what-the-hell" type of trade. You can't be serious here. I mean if Foster, McKenzie, and Wallace were so high on their list then why didn't they get them for a song instead of trading for Benjamin, for example? Besides, what has McKenzie done? Nothing relevant as a WR, he may not even make the team next season despite our sore need for WRs. He's not even average as a returner. K or P. Same thing with Wallace, if they knew he was going to be so good and to keep him off the post-draft FA-cy market, why didn't they draft him in the 7th ahead of Proehl who isn't even on the team anymore, or even in the 6th ahead of McCloud who's literally done absolutely nothing relevant whatsoever. Either way, given your statement you're arguing/implying that you trust McBeane to build our team with undrafted free-agents and waiver-wire pick-ups. Well, OK, but IMO that ain't gonna work. An entire team full of guys playing to their level won't even get you to .500 on a regular basis. As to Foster, we'll see, but same there. Either way, two of his biggest plays this season have been on broken coverages and he's rarely drawn the best CBs on teams that already have dicey defenses this season. The AFCE defensively is pathetic apart from us. Even defensive-genius Belichick has his defense ranked in the 20's yardage wise. The only reason why his scoring D is ranked 7th is because he's in a division that's bereft of offense as it's been on Brady's watch. In six games vs. AFCE teams this season the Pats have allowed 12.5 ppg. In five of those games they've allowed an average of 8 ppg. It's only that unlikely Miami win with Miami scoring 34 points that pushes it up to 12.5. We'll see how Foster does down the road. I have a difficult time believing that he's our answer at one of our two starting spots tho. He's never played to that level.

Yeah, we'll see. As I see it, Allen took longer to throw than ANY QB in the league this year, which also suggests that the OL didn't play nearly as bad as everyone thinks/says. The times that I watched there was some pressure as there is on all teams, but I also saw plenty of times where he had much time to throw and simply botched it. I should have noted the games and times but wasn't thinking about it at the time and frankly, didn't think I'd have to, but I saw countless times where there was someone wide-open in the flats or on a wheel-route or fade, etc. on plays that would have gone for considerable yardaged, that he simply missed and threw incomplete OTM or downfield and at least once resulting in an INT. That's what I'm talking about in terms of his short-game, it simply isn't there, not even close. Here's the thing, I'm not sure that talent alleviates that. If he's not seeing things, he's not seeing things. We can argue about why, compare to other rookie QBs, etc. until we're blue in the face, but if he's going to become a franchise QB then THAT SPECIFICALLY, is going to have to change. Here's the proglem with that, he's struggled with that according to everyone that's known him in both HS and college. He continues to struggle with it now. Not that I have the answer, but what are the odds that it changes in the NFL? I can't imagine that they're high. That's a tremendously difficult thing to coach-up if it's coachable at all and IMO it is not coachable.

No one. Who pissed in yours? Did that post seem temporamental to you? If so, thin skin?