mjt328

C - Matt Paradis $5 RT - Ju'Wuan James $3 LT - Trent Brown $3 DT - Sheldon Richardson $3 TE - Maxx Williams $1 Move Dion Dawkins to LG and Wyatt Teller to RG. Trade down in the draft to get an additional 1st or 2nd Round Pick. My targeted positions in the first three rounds (4 picks): WR, RB, TE and DE In this scenario, I think Sheldon Richardson is a good deal and would fit better at replacing Kyle Williams.

Has Bobby Johnson stated what kind of blocking scheme we will be running? He was with the Colts last year. From what I've read, the Colts ran a mix of power and zone concepts. Since we are giving our O-Line a total overhaul, I think Johnson would have the freedom to adjust to whatever talent he is given. In terms of Mike Iupati, I think the Bills should definitely take a look. The guard market is very thin in both free agency and the draft. When the guy plays, he's really good. If he manages to stay healthy, you may get a huge steal.

Sure. You are always going to find examples of Day 3 picks (and even undrafted free agents) who become good/great starters. But if we are truly planning to compete for the AFC East next year, then we can't go into the season relying on rookies drafted 4th Round or later. In my opinion, that's not truly "addressing" a position. It's crossing your fingers and hoping for the best.

It's hard to say what our best move is, until we see: A) What we land in Free Agency B) Who is on the board at #9 By my count, the Bills need serious upgrades at Center, Guard, Tackle, Wide Receiver and Tight End. Even if we re-sign Jordan Phillips, we still don't really have a 3-Tech Defensive Tackle. And even if you are in denial that Shady has lost a step, it certainly can't hurt to add another Running Back. That gives us seven glaring problems in the starting lineup, which need to be addressed if we truly want to compete for the playoffs/division in 2019. Personally, I think everyone picked on Day 3 of the draft is a long-shot to make an impact (at least during their rookie season). Which means (barring a trade-down), we can only really expect to address three of those seven holes on draft day. The rest need to be filled with free agents. Considering how much cap space we have, I think landing a half-dozen starting caliber free agents is certainly doable. But we aren't the only team competing for those guys, and some of the positions we need (WR and OG for instance) are very thin with guys that could truly be considered upgrades. If we strikeout in free agency, then Beane may have no choice than to move down for more Day 1-2 picks.

If employed properly, a good gameplan trumps everything. Even talent. The problem is, most coaches in the NFL are average. No creativity. No innovation. No forward thinking. They usually branch off from a coaching tree (like Andy Reid or Bill Parcells) that started running a particular scheme and style decades ago, and has been passed down for years and years. If they have right players and pieces, it works. If they don't, they fail, get fired and become another retread bouncing from team to team. Sean McVay is a small notch ahead of the pack, because he actually built a successful offensive scheme (as opposed to just copying someone else). But on Sunday, he proved that his ability to prepare for an opponent and make adjustments is just as poor as everyone else. Belichick figured out how to stop his bread-and-butter, and McVay looked like a deer in the headlights for 4 quarters. I would say that Belichick just gave the NFL a blueprint for stopping the Rams offense next year. But honestly, how many coaches are going to study what New England did and use it? My guess is that most of the Rams opponents next year will just try playing the scheme they play every week.

Bill Belichick is light-years ahead of every other coach in the NFL when it comes to preparation and strategy. The other coaches aren't even in the same league. It's pathetic and (as someone who hates the Patriots) ridiculously frustrating to watch. Belichick is literally the ONLY coach in the NFL willing to change his scheme weekly, in order to adjust to his opponent. It's been this way for 15-20 years. He knows what other teams do best, and he builds his gameplan around stopping it. Meanwhile, his opponent comes into the game expecting to have success just running the same scheme he does EVERY SINGLE WEEK. Then the coach looks completely flabbergasted when New England is (shock!) running a different defense than what he saw in the film room. Then he looks totally surprised when the soft-zone coverage scheme has somehow failed to stop Tom Brady. I don't know if other coaches just aren't smart enough to make weekly adjustments? Are they too lazy to put in same amount of work as Belichick? Or are they just too arrogant to think New England's mid-level talent will be unable to slow them down?

Do the rating numbers just take into account total viewership, or can it be affected by people turning the game off somewhere in the middle? If viewership started high and then there was a large drop-off in the second half, then I think we could probably assume the low score played a significant role. But if the Super Bowl had low ratings from the very beginning, then the cause would have to be something else. Did people not like the matchup? Are they tired of seeing the Patriots? What about the non-football fans? Was there less interest in the halftime show, or the commercials?

Well. The chances of making the Super Bowl increase dramatically when you win your division and get a bye in the playoffs. It's not just about beating bad teams 5-6 times per year. It's about the other franchises in the AFC East being virtually incapable of winning 10+ games, and actually competing for the division title. Since Tom Brady came around, neither the Bills, Jets or Dolphins have managed to land a Top 15 franchise QB (not counting Sam Darnold and Josh Allen yet). The closest we have come was Drew Bledsoe, who played good for half a season and regressed. The closest the Jets came was getting Brett Favre during his last pathetic pre-retirement year. The closest the Dolphins came was Chad Pennington. Now, name one other division (AFC or NFC) where only ONE team has managed to land a franchise QB for 15-20 years.

Troy Brown Deion Branch Wes Welker Danny Amendola Over the last 20 years, these guys have had equal/greater success in the EXACT same role that we see Julian Edelman play. None of these guys has been remotely good outside of Tom Brady and the New England Patriots system. Most of the time, Edelman finds himself matched up against a linebacker in the slot, or totally uncovered for the first 5-6 yards of his route. His limited skills are a perfect fit for the New England offense, and how Brady has always preferred to attack the defense. Put him on literally any other team, and he would be lucky to have HALF of the production he's got now.

For an offensive genius (who was reportedly the model that every coach-hiring team wanted to follow this offseason), it was absolutely astounding how poor Sean McVay did at adjusting to what the defense was throwing at them. No. Jared Goff didn't play well. But the pressure on him was non-stop, and every time he threw the ball (at least from my vantage point), the receivers were blanketed. This was just another case of a team going against Bill Belichick with FAR superior talent, but losing the chess match on the sidelines. Belichick had a plan to shut down the misdirection plays that worked so well for the Rams during the season. And when those plays weren't working, McVay had nothing to counter with.

Hmmm. I wonder how much a site like that brings in.... I agree with all of your points. I actually like Pro Football Focus, and love to read their grades - along with multiple other All-22 Reviews. Just like with any "statistic" - a person needs to understand the limitations of what it has the ability to tell you. They can be valuable and fun to discuss. But all the film in the world simply can't tell you what a player was supposed to do, unless you are part of the coaching staff. It's the same way when looking at passing yards, touchdowns, etc. Statistically, Kirk Cousins was a Top 5 quarterback this year. But most Vikings fans feel he was a tremendous disappointment. Statistically, Josh Allen was near the bottom of all starting quarterbacks this year. But most Bills fans are excited and optimistic about his play. Bottom line. Sean McDermott's defense has always been about letting the linebackers be the stars and make the plays. Guys like Star Lotulelei do the grunt work, occupy blockers and keep the LBs clean to make the plays. Not all 1-Tech DTs have the same job. Just the same alignment.

It's too early to get a read on Brandon Beane's drafting style. During his entire time in Carolina, he was playing second-fiddle to Dave Gettleman. Last year, he was dead-set on doing everything possible to land one of his targets at Quarterback. And like you said, 2017 was an anomaly with some combination of Sean McDermott and Doug Whaley making picks. I think you can be confident that Beane isn't afraid of moving around the board. But that doesn't necessarily mean he is going to be a wheeler and dealer type of GM. His top two picks last year where both high-risk/high-upside guys. But that doesn't mean he will shy away from the safer/low risk prospects.

Nobody has time to watch every player in the league. I'm convinced that 99% of websites out there are using the same source (Pro Football Focus) to rank players, which is why everyone seems to have the same negative opinion on Star Lotulelei. As I've said before, PFF grades are fun and interesting. But they have holes in their system, and some positions get a raw deal in their grading. When it comes defensive tackles, they expect everyone to play like a 3-Technique and be like Aaron Donald or Kyle Williams. But for some DTs, their job is not to penetrate into the backfield. Their job is not to push blockers aside, but to keep them from getting to the second level and reaching the linebackers. How does a PFF grader know the difference? The truth is, they don't. So they give high grades to the players who appear to be "beating" the guy in front of them, and give low grades to the players who appear to be in a stalemate and not going anywhere. Our coaching staff has not been shy calling out players who aren't performing. They have had nothing but praise for Star, and how well he's doing the job they signed him to do.

This is the way free agency works. If you stomp your feet and dig your heels in the ground as a GM, refusing to overpay for anyone - then you are going to get the scraps that nobody wants. We've had the GMs in the past who "took a nap" during the first round of free agency, and the complaining from people on this board was insufferable. Of course there needs to be a balance, and you can't just throw stupid money at everyone. You have to pick your spots, build the majority of your roster through the draft, and hope that your big signings don't turn into somebody completely worthless like Albert Haynesworth. The frustration is... some fans want the best of both worlds and criticize every move that our front office makes that doesn't live up to those standards. They complain and whine that our roster has holes and weak spots. They complain and whine that Beane didn't "address" certain positions. But when Beane addresses a position like DT and we see significant improvement in that area, they complain and whine that he wasn't able to sign that player for $2-3 million less.

Lots of great information. Getting tired of the constant uninformed nonsense of ripping on Star though.

Football is similar to any other job. There are a multitude of factors that can influence a player's decision. Ask the average person what it would take to change jobs. Most will probably say that money is a huge factor. It's not just a sports thing. Others may consider: - Comfort with the coaching staff - Scheme Fit - Being part of a winner For every person that wants to live in warm weather, another person may prefer a cooler climate. For every person that wants to live in an exciting place with lots to do, another may prefer somewhere quiet and laid back. Buffalo's weather is usually blown out of proportion. The snow and cold doesn't keep players from signing with New England, Pittsburgh, Green Bay, Philadelphia, New York, etc. Even though people say it every year with Free Agency coming up, I doubt it's truly a major factor. If anything hurts Buffalo when signing Free Agents, it's our perception as being a losing/unstable franchise. If we get back to being a powerhouse, players will be taking pay cuts to play here.

Players need to be in a scheme that amplifies their talents and hides their weaknesses. It's been said that Nickell Robey-Coleman is a better fit in man-coverage than zone (like we play). Our coaching staff also puts a premium on tackling from the slot-corner position, and NRC is a little bit undersized. Don't get me wrong. I wish that more coaches made the effort to build scheme around players, and not vice-versa. But at the same time, no coach (even Bill Belichick) is going to cater his defensive system to fit his nickel cornerback. No doubt that NRC was a good player in Ryan's scheme. But the new staff was clearly skeptical about whether he could be good enough in theirs. At least Beane/McDermott are smart enough to realize what pieces are necessary to make this system work. Unlike Whaley/Ryan who never seemed on the same page, and were always trying to shove square pieces into round holes.

Just because JP Losman wasn't a good NFL quarterback doesn't mean he can't be a good coach. Only a select few on the entire planet are good enough to succeed in the pros.

I agree that it's very unwise to pay Running Backs big money in Free Agency. But not just because of the draft, or how successful teams are finding them in the mid-late rounds. The main reason is that FA running backs are already close to passing - or have already passed - their prime. The average Free Agent running back is 25-26 years old, and already has LOTS of wear and tear. We are usually talking 2 years of heavy college usage, along with 3-4 years of heavy usage in the pros. Numerous studies have been done on this, and have shown RBs peak around 24 years old and start declining around 28 years old. And in most cases, it's not a gradual process. A team doesn't get warning signs, so they can have a younger replacement ready to step in. It's usually a sudden drop-off (like we got with Shady this year), where you are counting on the guy to produce and he just can't anymore. By my count, there are only THREE starting RBs in the NFL who were obtained in Free Agency. Adrian Peterson, Frank Gore and Lamar Miller. You can bump the number to FIVE if you toss in LeSean McCoy and Marshawn Lynch - who were technically obtained through trades. Either way, all of these veteran guys have seen better days. Pretty much every other team is relying on younger guys, still on their rookie contracts.

Not saying I necessarily support that idea. I'm just saying that as long as subjectivity is involved, you can't completely fix the problem. You can't just make Pass Interference reviewable sometimes. If you do it for the Robey-Coleman plays, then you open it up to every single passing play.

Drafting BPA simply means that you are valuing the player over the position. It does not mean that you can't maneuver your way around the board to target a specific player. In terms of Tremaine Edmunds, I know that Beane has stated there was a huge drop-off on his board after him. It wasn't just about getting a linebacker. So even though he traded up, his goal was going after the BPA. If there wasn't such a big drop-off in talent, he may have been willing to stay put. When it comes to the Quarterback, I think most GMs are willing to make an exception to their general philosophy. Most aren't going to spend a high pick on a QB if they are already set. And most will reach a little bit early or trade up to get their guy, if they don't have a franchise QB on the roster. For the 2019 draft, I think what Beane is trying to suggest is pretty clear. The Bills biggest holes are clearly at O-Line and WR. However, the strength of this draft (particularly in the Top 10) is on the Defensive Line. Beane is not going to pass on a ridiculously talented D-Lineman for a much lower ranked offensive player, just so he can say he addressed a particular need.

There are basically two types of penalties. Objective and Subjective. Objective calls (Offside, delay of game, facemask, etc.) are clear, obvious and indisputable. Either a guy is over the line before the snap, or he isn't. Either the facemask is grabbed, or it isn't. These types of plays should always be immediately reviewed by a referee upstairs in the booth, who can rewind and watch the play again within seconds of it happening. He can radio down to the crew if a call is missed and get it changed before the next play. Subjective calls (like taunting) are the ones which are completely up to the refs discretion. One player does a dance or uses a cuss word near the ref and gets a 15-yard penalty. Another player does the same thing and nothing happens. These kinds of calls need to be 100% eliminated from the game. If you want to stop taunting from happening, then issue fines afterwards. Don't let those calls affect the game itself. The tricky ones are the calls/penalties which can sometimes be in either category, like pass interference or holding. These are places where NFL has somewhat vague rules in place, where penalties are sometimes very clear (the Robey-Coleman play) and sometimes dependent on how strict the the game is being officiated (the Gronkowski no-call). The best thing you can do is try taking out the subjectivity of those calls. For instance - allow holding and pass interference. Obviously, this would drastically change how the game is played. But it would also help lower penalties and give officials a smaller impact in the outcome of games.

Probably. Just because it's the Super Bowl. But yesterday took my enthusiasm for this sport down another notch. I've often stated that officiating was the worst part of professional football. And yesterday was a historic screw-up, which will go down as one of the worst blown calls ever. I don't want to hear about how good the rest of the game was, or how the Saints had other chances. If the refs make the call they should, the Saints are in the Super Bowl. The Rams simply don't belong there, and I can't cheer for a team that has no business even being in the game. On the other side, the inability for other AFC teams to knock off the Patriots and their 40-year-old QB is embarrassing. It's been the same script/story for almost 20 years now. I don't even have the emotion to get happy or upset watching these games anymore. I had zero excitement when the Chiefs took the lead, because I knew what was going to happen. And when the Patriots won the game, I just shrugged and turned off the TV.

It's still a little early on the mock draft front. Once the Super Bowl is over, the media will start putting more resources into draft coverage. They will start diving into game film, and begin talking to NFL scouts to see what they really think. That's when some of these QB prospects start sliding in the mock drafts. I'm not sold yet that an NFL franchise will invest a Top-10 pick into Kyler Murray. We all know how GMs shy away from short quarterbacks. Much less one that hasn't 100% committed to playing this sport. With that said - It would be really nice if some trade-down possibilities present themselves.