hondo in seattle

He's never been a scout, nor has he ever led an organization, but now he's going to lead an organization of scouts. Makes perfect sense. If I was scout for the 49ers, I'd be dismayed that I have a raw neophyte who doesn't know what he's doing for a leader. If I was a scout looking for a job, I'd stay clear of the 49ers. If I was a fan of the 49ers, I'd be worried. Lynch just might prove himself to be a quick and able learner. But there aren't a lot of good reasons to predict success here.

My first thought, too. I have friends in the Bay Area who are 49er fans. I feel for them.

Depending on strength of class, I think we should draft a QB every other year. This would be an off year.

And that's hard to do. I always thought journalists were supposed to report the news. But in this case - and many others - they're inventing the news. Other than this article, there is no speculation out there about the Bills moving. Goodell has given every indication he wants the Bills to stay in Buffalo and I feel certain the Pegulas have no plans to move. Nonetheless, the media will make stuff up. Just plain dumb.

How many did we carry in the Super Bowl years when Marv made ST a priority? I think it was more than five though I can't right now come up with more than 5 names.

Most of us prefer to forget Gary.

The two things that define a team are the coaching (HC responsibility) and the roster (GM responsibility). The Bills have been roughly a .500 team. If the HC and GM were both bad, we'd be a below .500 team. If the both the roster and coaching is bad, you don't win half your games. When good and bad are in equal balance, you hit .500. Bad coaching + good roster = .500. If we all agree that the HC was poor last year, then we kind of have to conclude the roster was good. And that's to Whaley's credit. However bad you thought Rex was, that's how good Whaley was. The accountability balances. While I still regret letting Hogan go, every GM makes mistakes. The decision on one guy doesn't define a GM. Overall, Whaley gave Rex a decent roster and he did little with it. Now McDermott is getting a decent roster, we'll see if he does better. If he doesn't, we might start to wonder if we've been blaming the wrong guy. In any case, with Whaley in charge of both the roster and the coach, it's now all on him.

I think we can agree to disagree, though for a Pats fan I do admire your Bills knowledge.

I still think Bill Walsh needs to be in that conversation. As I recall... He transformed a 2-14 into a Super Bowl winner. He won 3 SBs as head coach. The staff and team he built won 2 more SBs after Bill retired from the HC position but stayed on with the 49ers. This is true. But isn't it partly true because the Pats have so much money invested in their passing game? Brady earns a big paycheck and even Hogan's something like the 8th highest paid player on the team. Then there's Gronk, etc.

Dear Jerry, When you start writing balanced, nuanced articles, I might start reading you. When you start providing your readers with useful, inside information, I might start reading you. When you start writing articles that help me develop a better understanding of the Bills the their players, I might start reading you. When you stop whining and complaining, I might start reading you. In the meantime, I just have to interest in anything you have to say. When I've read your articles in the past, your columns brought me neither joy, hope, insight, or new information. So I don't waste my time any more. Sincerely, ~ Bills fan in Seattle

Actually, the alternative fact is that Flutie was a good QB. He wasn't. Not for four quarters. He did perform some late game heroics in contests that shouldn't have been close in the first place if our offense had been any good. Let's compare Flutie's very best year with the Bills (1999) with Tyrod's 2016 season. Both had 15 starts... Flutie: completed 55.2% of his passes for 3171 yards with 6.6 ypa and 19 TDs against 16 INTs. Flutie added 476 yards rushing. Tyrod: completed 61.7% of his passes for 3023 yards with 6.9 ypa and 17 TDs agains 6 INTs. Tyrod added 580 yards rushing. They kind of look like the same guy. If anything, Tyrod's stat line might be a bit better. The big difference? Flutie's Bills had the NFL's #1 D in the NFL and Rex's D sucked. So Flutie played on a team with more wins.

Holy crap, man! Good find! This was the first Bills game I ever watched. It was 1969 and I was ten at the time. When Mini Max got hurt, there was a report - or maybe just speculation - that he had 'swallowed his tongue.' I had never heard that expression before and was horrified. I had only recently started playing football and was scared that I might swallow my own tongue and live the rest of my life tongue-less. I asked my mom if it was actually possible for someone to swallow their tongue. Ridlehuber was also the guy who scored the dramatic game-winning TD in the Heidi Game.

My wife just bought me an ugly Buffalo Bills holiday season sweater for my birthday. I wasn't sure how to react.

A very weak list. And I get the Fergy vote. In his prime, maybe '79 to '81, he was a good QB who was capable of making big throws. In 1979, he had the 8th highest yardage total in the NFL, right behind Roger Staubach. in 1981, he was 6th in yards - ahead of Joe Theisman, Joe Montana, Doug Williams, and Terry Bradshaw. Earlier in his career, Fergy's main function was to be a game manager and hand the ball to OJ. Later in his career, his skills were in decline. But there was a moment in between when he was pretty good.

I agree. But since of us are not paid to have opinions, most of us are assessing McDermott with an open mind. We know we don't know. But the media gurus more-or-less have to say coaching hires are either good hires or bad hires. It's boring journalism to say, "Well, I don't much about the guy so let's wait and see." In his best year, Doug Flutie went 10-5 despite throwing for barely 200 yards per game and leading an offense that only scored 20 points per game. Under Lynn, TT produced 27 points per game - a full TD more - while passing for virtually the same yardage total as Flutie. But TT was only 8-7. The big difference was, of course, the defense. Flutie's Bills had the best D in the NFL that year. Last year's D sucked. TT produces similar passing stats to Flutie, better running stats, and better total offensive stats. Yet Flutie is revered by many and TT is reviled by many. I don't get it.

I can't say I'm a huge TT fan but I do think his contributions in the run game are sometimes underestimated. We led the NFL in rushing and ypc. Not only was TT's 500 or so yards a part of that, so was his presence in the backfield. Roman drew up, and Lynn play-called, a scheme that made use of TT as a running threat. Even when the D loaded up the box, the defensive players often played cautiously, indecisively with multiple running threats in the backfield. DEs had to play contain even when they say Shady going up the middle... In short, Shady and MG were more productive because they were playing alongside Tyrod. Did this offset the plays Tyrod failed to produce with his poor vision and accuracy. I don't know? But the fact we averaged 27 points per game when TT was under center and Lynn was calling plays suggests that it did.

As Utah John commented, that defense had us in the playoffs, not Flutie. 1999 was arguably Flutie's best year with the Bills. He had a 10-5 record as a starter. He thew for 3171 yards (barely 200 yards per game) - his most as a Bill and the 2nd best yardage total of his long career. Our D was ranked #1 in the league that year. The D allowed a paltry 14.3 points per game. Our O, on the other hand, was pedestrian. We were 16th in the NFL in scoring, managing just 20 points per game. And that's despite a defense that gave the ball to the offense in good field position. To make a modern comparison, when TT was playing with ALynn as OC, the Bills averaged 27 points per game. And that's despite a D that typically gave the ball to the O in bad field position.

Maybe so. But he wasn't viewed as being talented when he was completing less than 50% of his passes in his years in New England. All his stats were better with the Raiders, even 1983 when he was sacked 42 times (more than he was ever sacked in Beantown). I think the Raider offense better suited him. But I also think he grew as a QB over the years.

I agree with what AlphaDawg7 is saying about any QB being a risk. But I don't agree with the conclusion. The Bills have historically been risk-averse in the draft. Typically, instead of taking the risk on a QB, we've avoided QBs to take guys theoretically with a higher probability of success. This approach might make sense in the short-run but leads to problems in the long run. You just can't avoid drafting QBs because they might not work out. While all QBs are risky, the earlier a QB is taken, the greater the chance he'll work out. You have to roll the dice on an early-round QB maybe every other year. The Bills strategy of taking an early round QB once every decade or so just doesn't work. It's exactly because QB are big risks that you have to go after them frequently even though that means wasting some picks.

I always use Plunkett when we talk about late bloomers at the QB position. It took that guy a long time to turn into a good NFL QB.

Our history with RBs is so much better: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/career-rushing.htm Darryl Lamonica mostly sat the bench for us and had his best years elsewhere. Bledsoe was good for about a half-season for us. Flutie, IMHO, is the most overrated QB in Bills history. The D would play good for 4 quarters while Flutie would play good for 1 quarter - the 4th - and get all the credit. Ferguson's job in the beginning was to hand off to OJ. But over the years he eventually developed into a fine QB. Jack Kemp had better leadership skills than passing skills. Dennis Shaw was offensive rookie of the year way back when. But was never actually any good. I'll go with Kemp at #2 but it's a sad list.

Meanwhile, Greg Rosenthal at NFL.com says McDermott - of the 6 new HCs - is the least likely to be successful. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000778807/article/ranking-nfl-coaching-hires-anthony-lynn-at-no-1 Few of these media guys actually know any more about the Bills than an informed fan. They're more sports entertainers than sports experts. They can write a better column than most of us, or sound more interesting on the air. But their prognostication skills are questionable.

There are no new insights in Rosenthal's article and no reason to believe his opinion is any more valid than the opinions expressed here on TBD. I probably think the roster is better than he does. And without inside information on our HC and coordinators, I'm not sure how well you can predict their success or failure. The resumes of our guys look a lot like the resumes of the guys coaching other teams. No better maybe but no worse. It's hard to know how good they really are. We'll just have to wait and see. Of course, Rosenthal is paid to have an opinion even when he's not particularly well-informed. He writes this stuff cuz he has to.

Some of those tweets are curiously childish, as well as pro-Pats. One more reason not to like the guy.

My point of view is more like this. Who would you want to quarterback your team if you could have that QB in their prime? I think you could make good arguments for a few others but I think I'd have to take Brady. He excels against a variety of schemes. He excels under pressure. He excels no matter who's at wideout. He can get the ball to any part of the field with accuracy. And he continually drives himself to get better.