hondo in seattle

If you think it's just a narrative, you don't understand the NFL. The best teams manage the cap well and there's a huge correlation between active roster spending and win totals. This season we're dead last in active roster spending. We're still paying for the sins of our past. Beane didn't inherit a wisely managed roster. He's using this year to fix it. He's doing exactly what we'd expect a good NFL executive to do.

Because the best two players on the OL retired. And our QB wasn't a Super Bowl calibre QB and had to be replaced. And our dead money and bloated contracts made sustained excellence impossible. Seriously, just go to Over-The-Cap, or a similar site, and within minutes you'll figure out what Beane is up to. Yes, losing organizations use "rebuild" as an excuse. But good GMs and HCs do successfully rebuild teams from time to time. That's why the excuse sometimes works. We don't know yet if Beane and McD will succeed. But the plan is obviously. We're going to start loading up in 2019 and continue into 2020.

You make it sound like Beane has a track record of wasting picks. He's been in charge of one draft. While the Bills have been rebuilding for decades, the current GM and HC have only a short time in their positions. Here's what Beane's accomplished so far in his short time with us. #2 defense in the NFL. #3 most cap space in 2019 #1 most cap space in 2020 10 draft picks in 2019 This year we had the lowest active roster spending in the NFL. Beane had exceptionally little money to spend on free agency by - as much as possible - taking hits this year to free up cap space for the future. So this season McD had a talent-poor roster to work with and never had a fighting chance. This year was all about making 2019 and 2020 good years. Let's see what Beane and McD do next year before judging them on a plan that was never designed to produce a lot of wins in 2018. $100 million in cap space and 10 picks in the draft can fill a lot of the holes you mention. And no team is entirely without holes.

Bill Walsh in his book (The Score Takes Care of Itself) talks very eloquently about the intentional execution of his rebuilding plan for the 49ers. Walsh (as both HC and GM) went 2-14 his first season. But he got rid of his excuse-ridden vets and brought in a bunch of young guys who fit his culture. That worked out okay. When Pete Carroll and John Schneider took over the 'Hawks they turned over the entire roster in two years (save two players). All that transition was difficult and Pete had a losing record his first two years in Seattle. Then he won a SB in his 4th season. Are you saying rebuilds are never done on purpose but instead happen only by accident???

I'm not sure what the main point of this post is... or why it warrants its own thread. While I agree with the OP in some cases, his post seems like a collection of random thoughts that belong in existing threads.

Most of the people who looked at this year's - and next year's - roster spending realize that 2018 is very intentionally a rebuilding year. Those who have not grasped this before aren't going to grasp this now because we've added yet another thread.

I agree, it is weird. It makes you wonder if maybe there's some kind of cause-and-effect thing going on. I once watched Willie Ellison of the L.A. Rams rush for an amazing 247 yards (on just 26 carries) - the NFL record at the time. Most folks on this site probably don't remember Willie and I don't blame them. He spent most of his NFL career as a backup because he wasn't very good. I'm not really sure because football is a complicated sport and I'm not a smart man. But the Mack truck sized holes opened up by the Rams OL that record-setting day may have helped Willie in some strange way. Then again, maybe it was something else. Who knows? Maybe there's no connection at all between OL play and RB production, and RB stats are determined solely by the RB.

I suspect the relationship between McD is what they say it is: Beane is in charge of adding to the roster and McD has the authority to drop people from the roster. But they also say they talk a lot and influence each other. McD has input on FA signings and draft picks. Beane has input on roster cuts. I do think you're first question is a good one. Normally, you'd expect the GM to outrank the HC. But did McD - in effect - hire Beane? Hard to know. If so, does McD have greater input in Beane's world than they let on? I don't blame Beane for putting us in Cap Hell this year to make next year better. And I don't blame McD for losing 10 games with the lowest paid roster in the NFL (by far). But you're right - next year is different. Next year puts us 3 years and 2 drafts into Beane's regime. We ought to see progress.

How do you know what McD "wanted"? Wanting is a feeling that exists within a person. Unless McD articulated his wants to you - and I suspect he didn't - I don't think you know what he wanted. All you know - to a small degree - is what he did. Coaches are rarely in the position of doing what they really want - which is fielding a team with Pro Bowlers at every position. What we see on the field is what they've been able to do with the resources they got. It's the negotiated compromise between aspiration and realism. And McD is clueless in assessing talent? McD is the coach, not the GM. In any case, if you are going to evaluate McD's performance, please share your qualification to make such extreme global remarks like "McDermott is clueless." How many rings do you have? McD - like all coaches - has made mistakes but he's far from clueless. The question that remains is if he's making smaller mistakes than other NFL HCs? And is he counterbalancing his mistakes with enough good decisions to create a winning team? These are questions worth arguing. NFL coaches exist on a continuum. None are perfect geniuses and none are entirely clueless. They've all worked many years to improve their craft. Some are more successful at this than others. I'm not sure yet where to rank McD because this year he's been saddled with the lowest paid roster in the NFL. It's hard to look good right now with these players. I do believe, though, that everything going on with the salary cap is purely intentional. Beane has talked very openly about the need for clearing up cap space. We have tons of cap space available in 2019 and 2020 because of Beane's cap management decisions. Bean's roster moves hurt this year but give us a better future.

I'm uncertain about your knowledge of stats. Yards-per-game is a meaningful - if imperfect - stat. We're #18 in points-per-game which, granted, is a more meaningful stat. That puts us in the middle of the NFL, not at the "bottom" as you state. We're #1 in forced fumbles and # 8 in interceptions so I'm not sure why you say we're in the "bottom" of defensive turnovers. Defensively, besides yards per game, we do well in some other stats that matter... #1 in forced fumbles #1 in passing yards #1 in yards per completion #2 in yards per play #3 in yards per drive #3 in net yards per pass play #6 in drive success rate (a FO metric) #6 in passer rating #8 in interceptions #9 in passing TDs #10 in rush yards per attempt

The stats really aren't that misleading. We're #2 in yards allowed because we've been 'gashed' less than other teams. Our D had a bad day against the Pats. Every team has bad days. Other teams have had more bad days than us and that's why they're below us in the defensive stats. Point differential is a blended O/D stat and our popgun offensive isn't helping that number. The O is not producing points, not holding onto the ball, and not winning the battle of field position. All those things put stress on the D and effect point differential and points-allowed stats. Our D isn't great. But it is good.

Those aren’t tears in my eyes. Thanks fir posting, PIZ.

Obviously with one of the worst offenses in the league - and one of the better defenses - the priority is offense. But I'm sure McD and Beane both have a few defenders on their Xmas list. And - like most GMs - Beane will probably blend BPA with need. So I'm expecting a few defensive guys in the draft and/or free agency.

While I don't agree with everything, I do appreciate a well-thought out, intelligent post. Nice job, jwhit. It's going to be a very interesting free agency and we'll learn a lot about Beane. I suspect he'll go after value signings rather than overpay for stars - we'll know for sure in a few months.

After we got into the playoffs last year, I thought "This could be the start of something good!" Then we lost the better half of our starting OL and traded away our QB. And then I noticed we had the lowest paid roster in the entire NFL." And so on. So I decided to treat this year like a very long preseason for 2019 and watch what the young players offer and how they develop. I'm not disappointed. McD's club shows a lot of teamwork and grit. The younger players are getting better. The D is ranked #2 in the NFL. And we have an immense amount of cap space to build a better offense next season. I guess "lost season" isn't a bad way to describe the 2018 Bills. But this was a necessary step to a good 2019 squad. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic.

This a false comparison: a rookie versus a vet.

Being an OC in the NFL is a lot like being a contestant on the Food Network's "Chopped" tv series where contestants are given "mystery baskets" of ingredients and asked to make something good with them. Sometimes the ingredients suck so bad that even the most talented chefs struggle to cook anything palatable. But owners want a HC who has produced gourmet meals. Daboll hasn't done that in any of his gigs as an OC. I don't think he gets a HC shot until the O becomes productive.

I'll take passer rating over QBR but they both fall way short. Passing games are so dependent on scheme, talent and execution that you can't take box score stats and evaluate a QB - no matter what stat lines you include or how you weigh them. Some of the analytics guys start looking at how many passes are catchable and so on. But that still doesn't capture everything. For example, ask a QB how frustrating it can be when WRs don't run their routes precisely. No stat will take that into account. Good QB stats mean that team has a good passing attack going. And that reflects well on the QB. But it's far from the whole story.

My coach used to say that if you're not in the game, your role is to be a cheerleader. Maybe they don't teach that anymore?

It is scary. But I think McD has a better sense of Daboll's skills then we do. While we only see the product on the field with all its warts, McD gets to see Daboll's "process." He gets to watch him game plan, coach and prepare. McD should be able to determine if Daboll's doing the right things. We know the result is wrong but is the "process" right and just needs better players?

I mostly agree but want to add that being a good OC does far more than just playcalling. A good OC attracts good position coaches and then coaches them to be even more successful. He leads effective meetings and walk-thru's to and makes sure the team is ready come Sunday. He studies film and accurately dissects an opponent's weaknesses and tendencies. He develops an scheme to successfully attack enemy defenses. He motivates players to give 100% effort all the time. And so on. The thing is, it's hard to evaluate all that when the basic talent is lacking. Good players can make average OCs look like geniuses. Bad players can make any OC look like an idiot. At this point, I just don't know if Daboll is a good OC.

Nobody knows if Allen is going to be a franchise QB. On the one hand, anyone who says he's so bad that it's just not going to happen is either delusional or just not watching. Allen has proven his ability to make big time NFL throws. The question is: can he do it consistently? And that depends on his biomechanics, ability to read defenses & find receivers, the talent around him, and all that. NFL QBs sometimes get better and sometimes they don't. There's no foolproof way of prognosticating this. On the other hand, those who think it's certain that Allen will be franchise QB are also delusional. There's just no guarantee. In the end, one camp will be proven right and we'll hear the gloating told-you-so's. But any certainty at either end of the spectrum at this point is misguided. As I fan I see positive signs. I see why Beane drafted the kid and hope for the best. I don't care at all what Barnwell thinks or writes.

Shady's not a bruiser. He needs space to do his thing. If we trot out the same OL next year that we have this year -then no, don't keep Shady. Shady and this OL don't work well together. If we upgrade the OL, then I say yes for the same reasons others have given: Shady still has some gas in the tank and his competitive fire/leadership are useful. As an aside, back in 1971 I watched Willie Ellison break Cookie Gilchrist's pro football record for most rushing yards in a game. Willie ran for 247 yards on 26 carries versus Cookie's 243 (AFL record) and Jim Brown's 237 (NFL record). Don't remember Willie Ellison??? That's because he wasn't all that good and spent most of his NFL career as a backup. But the OL in front of him on that magical day was freakin' dominant. They opened gaping holes the size of Texas. A good high school back could have easily rushed for over 100 behind that line and many college backs could have gone over 200. It's hard to imagine what OJ or Brown might have done but it would have been incredible. On the flip side, I think Barry Sanders would have had trouble getting yards running behind our offensive line. OLs matter hugely. The 1971 Rams OL made Willie look like an Olympian god toying with mortals. Our OL makes Shady look like Elmer Fudd.

The Bills outgained the Jets 368-248. If talent can be measured by roster spending. The Jets ($150 million) have a much more talented roster than the Bills ($111 million). And yet - if not for special teams - we would have won. I don't think this is a clear case of their coach outcoaching our coach.

Gug, you're right. He had a mediocre overall career. But when at his best, he was extremely talented.