2003Contenders

Give me a break with all of this "regression" nonsense. Love him or hate him, Bill B. has made a career out of making QBs -- young ones and veterans alike -- look foolish. The biggest problem by large is that Josh kept trying to play "hero ball". You can be sure that the Pats schemed to bate him into situations like those. Obviously, they were not too worried about Gore and the passing game, because the ageless Gore probably could have rushed for 150 or more if they kept feeding him the ball. Instead, the plan was to make the young QB very uncomfortable -- and they succeeded in a large way. Josh needs to learn that sometimes, especially with the defense he has to back him up, a punt isn't the worst thing in the world. Dabol could also help with plays designed to get the ball out of his hand quicker. They seemed to figure this out a bit in the 2nd half.

This smells of a national media outlet that did't even watch the game and relied solely on box scores: "Josh Allen 1 passing TD, 1 rushing TD, 2 INTs, and 2 fumbles. He sucks." Anyone who actually watched the game would have seen more positives than negatives: 1. The inaccuracy narrative (at least in the game) seemed quite unjustified. 2. He stayed poised and made plays when he had to in the 4th quarter 3. In the first half, he was pretty much the entire offense -- and did a nice job moving the ball. 4. Once could argue that NONE of the turnovers were his fault. 5. The rushing stats are usually not factored into the equation for QB quality analysis. Yet, Josh didn't just take off when he felt pressure; he actually scrambled with purpose. Meanwhile, these same clowns are likely defending Mayfield and his 3 INTs against Tennessee yesterday because it fits their analytics narrative. "This game was an aberration", etc.

... Except for celebrating prematurely on the first offensive play of the game, where he beat the secondary over-the-top and was caught from behind and fumbled instead of scoring the TD.

All good points. The thing to remember also is that, when Bill Polian built that team in the mid-80s, the goal was to win the division first -- which meant besting Marino's Dolphins. That is exactly what he did. The 88-93 Bills were a team that offensively was prolific enough to keep up with the Dolphins aerial attack -- with a defense that placed a great deal of emphasis on the pass rush and secondary. Alas, those teams were NOT built to match up well against the smash-mouth teams of the NFC East. As fate would have it, all four Super Bowls were played against the NFC East. A pity none of those Buffalo teams matched up against the 49ers in the Big Game.

Interesting that WR is glaringly absent.

MSN? We need say no more.

That is about how I see it too. I keep saying that if you simply look at contract numbers, the money that the Bills are paying Nsekhe is starter money, and he has played well at OT when called upon to do so in the past. Another option, I think is: Nsekhe - Dawkins - Morse - Spain - Ford

I doubt Jones goes anywhere before the season starts, given he has definitely shown signs of progression since his rookie season. I really think that rookie season was essentially a slump that started with the just-off-the-fingertips near game-winning catch against the Panthers in week 2. It was likely mental for him after that -- with Tyrod not helping the rookie out with often less-than-catchable passes. Zay seemed to get past that last season. Yes, I would like to see him do a better job of fighting for contested balls (see: the sideline/goal line play at the end of the first Miami game). But he has developed into a nice route runner and his hands now appear to be as advertised when he was drafted back in 2017. This will be Year 3 for him, so hopefully we see a true breakout performance (a la Eric Moulds back in 1998). With defenses having to account for the outside speed of Foster and Brown, Zay should have his opportunities, especially if we get better TE production too. If not, we move on from Zay in 2020 (when the WR draft class is expected to be very deep.)

Think, Travis Henry.

Considering the amount of coin they signed Nsekhe to, I am hard pressed to see him serving in a backup role. Regardless, after last year's fiasco it is nice to see depth -- and so many options.

Funny you should bring up Kelsay because I was thinking about that too -- in terms of the current situation. I remember when Buddy Nix signed Kelsay to an extension, he said not every player can be "great" but sometimes you have to do what is necessary to keep your "good" players, as they serve as the back-bone of your team. I see Shaq in that "good but not great" stratosphere as well. Remember, he missed most of his rookie season with the bum shoulder, then had to learn an entirely new defense in year 2 under McD before showing real signs of improvement last year in season 2 under McD. I agree with those who suggest trying to sign him to a contract extension now that is more beneficial to the team than exercising the year 5 option -- before he potentially increases his value this season.

I agree that this may be how it will go. Everyone keeps forgetting about Nsekhe, but if you take a look at the money, it is clear that the Bills signed him to be a starter.

If all the reports we hear are true about Kingsbury's infatuation with Murray, the Cardinals' level of interest in him may have artificially upped the perceived value of a QB who may not even be viewed as the top QB in this draft by any of the other 31 teams in the league. My guess is that there is probably a battle being waged among the Arizona decision-makers. First, there is the new head head coach and his camp that want to invest the #1 overall pick in Murray. Then there are the scouts, etc. who have numerous other players with a higher grade. If I were the Cardinals, I would take a page out of what the Chargers did back in 2004. They favored Phil Rivers over Eli Manning (especially given Eli's public desire to play somewhere other than San Diego). However, they understood that Eli was the hotter commodity. So they went ahead and drafted Eli #1 overall and made a deal with the Giants -- that if the player they wanted (Rivers) was still there at #4, they would trade Eli for that pick. That trade netted the Chargers additional first rounders AND they got the QB they really wanted. If my assumption is correct about the scouts' grade of Murray being less than that of, say, Bosa or Q. Williams or whomever, then maybe it would be in the Cardinals' best interest to draft that player at #1 overall and then have a trade in the works with another team in the top 5 to swap that player for the later draft pick, provided that Murray is still there. That would enable the Cardinals to get the player they want AND pick up some extra high draft picks. Of course, if the scouts and Kingsbury are on the same page regarding Murray, then they ought not fool around and should simply take him #1 overall.

They were both stud defensive linemen coming out of Alabama. The similarities end there. Dareus had some focus/maturity issues even before his contract extension.

The team has historically been very fluid with the 2nd round picks. In fact, in recent years they have RARELY stayed still with their original pick and made a selection. Much depends, I think, on where they see the sweet spot in this draft. If they see someone they like still on the board late in the 1st, they could package their 2 and 3 to move back into the 1st. They have done this sort of thing before (with John McCargo, for example, which turned out to be a mistake). Or, if they see plenty of starter-level depth in the 2nd round, for example, I could see them packaging their 3rd and one of the 4's to move up for an additional 2nd rounder.

The two will forever be linked given that Pancho annouced his selection at the draft last year.

The extra 4th and 5th round picks give them plenty of flexibility. Right now they have: Round 1 - i pick (9) Round 2 - 1 pick (41) Round 3 - 1 pick (75) Round 4 - 2 picks (113, 132) Round 5 - 2 picks (148, 159) Round 6 - 1 pick (182) Round 7 - 2 picks (227, 230) They could package the 2nd and 3rd rounder to move back up into the 1st round if someone falls into the 20's. Across various regimes they have moved around in the 2nd round a lot. So, if they don't move into the 1st, they could use one of their 4's to move up in the 2nd. Also, they could use the 3rd an done of the extra 4's to pick up an additional 2. For a team that is draft-pick-needy, they could use volume like a 4 and both 5's to move up/down in the 2nd or 3rd round as well. And so on... So many options. I get JW's point about the Bills being more prone to move up than down this year.

The main reason I do not see this mock happening with Williams falling all the way to 9 is because if he somehow slides out of the top 4-5, I would expect some team to trade up for him (possibly the Bills). But who knows? Stranger things have happened.

Actually, if a trade like this happened where Beane trades down and acquires multiple 3's, I would think that it would be a precursor to other moves that would allow the Bills to either move back up for an additional 1st round pick or move up for multiple 2nds. Remember, they have multiple mid-to-late round picks already. I would think that the team at this stage would be more inclined to package these picks to draft potential impact/starting players rather than add to depth/camp fodder via multiple late picks.

I have not seen anything about it here, and he is still listed on the Bills' official site roster. However, his Wikipedia page lists his as a free agent as does the Bills' depth chart on Ourlads. Hmmm.

While the test may not be indicative of future success, it does provide one useful measuring stick to help evaluate a player's ability to learn and process information. The Fitz score has been a running joke for years -- but think about this, for a minute. For all of his short-comings, Fitz has been around the league for a long time. 2019 will be his 15th year in the league. He has had to learn multiple offenses -- often with no off-season to do so. His headiness has allowed him to hang around the NFL for many more seasons than his underwhelming physical traits would otherwise merit. Josh's relatively high score suggests that he should be able to learn and apply concepts. He has all of the physical tools that any QB would ever want. Aside from pure luck (staying injury-free, supporting cast, etc.), the key to success will be his motivation and the quality of those who are guiding/coaching him. Given how much improvement we saw pre and post injury for him last year, the arrow is pointing in the right direction.

Dillard has been a late riser on draft boards. Many scouts say that he may be the best pure LT in the draft -- whereas Taylor projects more to RT in the NFL and Williams to OG (or possibly RT). I would not be surprised to see Dillard go in the top 10.

I think this is probably how it went down as well. So all of the reporters were essentially correct. Rappaport said that the Steelers and Bills had agreed on a trade in principle. However, both Vic and JW said that a trade was very unlikely. Beane wisely decided that the risk was to great to pay a player who has made it abundantly clear that he would be more than willing to sit out a huge new guaranteed contract.

He had some productive years as a pass-catcher with Andrew Luck in Indy (521 yards in 2012; 8 TDs in 2014). As recently as 2016 he scored 6 TDs.

IIRC Payton actually interviewed for the HC job back in 2000/2001. Remember that Donahoe was the only GM to wait until after the Super Bowl to interview various assistants. Marvin Lewis was the big name, and everyone assumed that it was Lewis's job given the Pittsburgh ties to Donahoe and the great season the Ravens had on defense. But Donahoe also interviewed Jon Fox and I believe Sean Payton, who were the Giants' coordinators at the time. Of course, we all know that Gregg got the job.