ctk232

For the same reasons QBs are over-valued, RBs are the inversely proportionate positions in terms of NFL draft value at present. RB talent is there in the 3rd and 4th rounds, but I still don't feel that RB is as high a priority for the FO at the moment. If a scenario presents itself, then maybe, but the low cost and risk for the highest potential comes from drafting an RB. Looking at our current roster and the guys that will be demanding contracts in the next two years, it would make the most sense to find our RB replacement through the draft rather than overpaying in FA. But we first need the OL - even the most average or solid RBs can become newsworthy or stout backs with a consistent and effective OL and blocking scheme.

The Denver scenario is what has me hopeful, but if Murray and Haskins go before 9 with no trade ups, are there any QBs left worth trading up with us before Denver? Even Denver might trade up if they feel the Giants or Jax will go for either, depending on how they come out of FA. It's an especially hard year to gauge that scenario just by the nature of the draft class, not that it's easy to do so any year, but given the QB class versus the class talent by position it's just that much hard to estimate. I would love a trade back scenario as it would likely open the door for more offensive value to become BPA in the late first early second. But if there's a guy we value as BPA at 9 and don't get a better offer, look for Beane to go BPA. As far as OP mentions with the starting line, I'm more and more willing to entertain Dawkins moving to the interior. I like the idea of Risner as well. I'm not sure D. Williams could seal the LT, but I'd imagine something along the lines of Williams/Dawkins/Paradis,Morse,Kalil/Teller/Risner. Wildcard FAs like Glowinski, JuWann James, or others come into play for a mix up. But assuming we're able to land 1-2 of the above, one of which capable of holding the left edge, I would really like to see what Dawkins can do from the interior as I think we've had Richie's replacement all along. Teller may develop into this role, but for now his ceiling is still unknown and development dependent. There's a million ways to address the OL hypothetically, but FA will ultimately determine who stays and goes. But should we trade back, depending on with whom and what we get back, I could see Risner making his way over here and addressing a skill position with the next pick (WR/TE). But should they stay, I could see BPA value at DL.

Haha, understandable, but Philly is a great place, big city small town feel - will always be home for me. Great Bills Backers there as well. Wore Bills gear all my life - the only time I got any comment was when the kiko/shady trade went down, but everyone was pissed with Chip and said we made a nice move.

Gotta side with Shady - entertainment plays a role, if that, but not nearly as much of a motivator as a winning culture and cash money. Most of the players don't spend the offseason in town regardless. This is a tried and failed trope in terms of winning FAs - they will sign for contracts and a promising team either in playoff contention or currently close to winning more, but can be swayed in contract negotiations and visits. Green Bay is always the sister market comparison, and it's hard to argue they don't retain or aren't able to recruit talent - albeit, their known strategy being to build from within through the draft.

Likely not - but I'd hope they're at least open to the idea depending on if we sign a tackle like D. Williams, and even draft another if the value pick is there at the right time. Dawkins in the middle as a pulling guard would be reminiscent of Richie if I had to bet one way or the other. Guy took this year off, admittedly, so nothing good there, but he clearly likes the physical aspect and was responsible for a couple pancakes. His mobility would also get me hyped for the pulling blocks and second level LB seals. Imagine if we were to land Glowinski via Bobby and either move Dawkins inside or developing Teller. As for Bodine, I agree he was adequate but I'm not sold that he's what we should anchor our OL with either. Those cerebral qualities of the Center to dictate blocking adjustments and trade-offs needs to develop. And who knows, maybe he will under Bobby and the new OL scheme, but I'm not one to hold my breath there. Keep him as the option until we have someone better. That being said, I too wouldn't be surprised to see him as our starter going into next year just based upon probability of landing guys in FA. Either way - with 2-3 solid holes to fill along our OL, our best approach to address as many of them as possible would be to sign whoever we can in FA and remain open to adjusting positions to best fill what holes are there. I'm also curious to see how existing guys may develop/change under Bobby as opposed to Castillo - Miller may be a lost cause at this point, but had a great first year, and I'd like to see how Teller gets along this year as well. Lots of unknowns with the new assistant coming in but with so many holes, you've got to keep your options open.

Depends on how they interpret each case, if the replay rule goes forward. Much in the way court precedent affects how subsequent cases can be decided/interpretted. Otherwise this is another potential scenario for sure. They just need to establish some sort of precedent with consistency and let the game play, whether replays are involved or not.

Don't disagree necessarily except for a couple points. Even average to above average RBs can be made consistent or even great with a stout OL and run game coordination with blocking schemes. While I wouldn't hate to see us add a counter punch to Shady, I don't think Shady is done showing out if he has an actual OL in front of him or gets the ball in space. Curious what options can be had at various rounds in the draft, but RB would seem a priority falling behind OL and WR in terms of offensive upgrading and spending for it like you would with Bell. As for the spending piece, I can agree and certainly see how easy it is to say we should spend a good chunk of it, given how last year panned out. But there are some key contracts coming in the next year or two that will demand high value, and may prefer to test the FA market offers. To tier these contracts long term and project spending to make sure we have the capital to re-sign the guys that constitute the foundation of this team is just as essential as filling holes in the offseason, if not more so as you create more holes by letting them go. There's an equilibrium to be had, but we should be wary of wanting to overspend in FA this offseason just out of visceral response to last year's performance at many positions (albeit warranted for some).

He's been reported to have the ability to shift inside to Guard, but that was mostly coming out of college those assertions were circulated. I don't think he'd be worthy of starting caliber. My assessment is more in terms of depth along the OL, as I don't think we'll bring in as many OL guys as we need, and likely not as many as people think. No reason to be cutting anyone until we have to, but I agree with Groy's scenario not much left to salvage there. I'm still entertaining the idea that the answer to our interior woes on the right side is currently playing LT, but two Tackles in one year is a much taller order to fulfill. But we have options for how we approach and offer FAs if the FO and Bobby/McD are open to moving guys around on the line.

For sure, I'm just trying to accurately gauge my expectations for FA though. Not entirely sure what the likelihood of us picking up more than one OL guy is, for a multitude of variables. But we will still always need depth regardless, until we don't.

Why not? His contract isn't going to kill our cap at its current rate and it's competition to yield strong results. Saying he should compete for the job isn't the same as arguing he's deserving of the starting position. There's just no reason why he can't push the guy we bring in, if we happen to land any at all. I'd honestly prefer him for depth over Groy in the interior, too.

Signs so far point to them looking to make those moves - I'd expect them to also make a run at Glowinski and prioritize RG/RT just as equally knowing they likely won't land all three guys, they could make pretty aggressive offers. I'm fine with Bodine as depth as he can also play interior guard. Injuries are crucial along the OL when they happen, so I'm fine with keeping him at his current price. We'll obviously know in a few weeks when they start hosting and signing where the priorities likely lie, but I'd imagine the larger chunks of money to be spent along the OL.

Pretty much - don't understand why it's either move on and replace or keep him and scheme around him. Bring in another guy, let the best player win the starting job. Also, "not as bad as we feared" is not what you want to hear if you're trying to be a perennial playoff contender.

That's the million dollar question isn't it - specific to offense here? I'm always of the opinion that to jumpstart any offensive playbook, you start with the OL, but particularly the Center. I get having a quality LT is key to protecting the QB, but if you have a line without an anchor calling out adjustments and recognizing stunts/blitzes/etc., you have to wonder what you are hoping to stop. OL notwithstanding, and given the current FA and draft pools and assuming there might be some pass catchers rumored to be available for trade - it's hard to speculate, as most of my answers depend on how FA shakes out. Given the percentage of deep throws from Allen, assuming these are mostly if not all playcalls specific to his deep ball, I would want to get him another deep threat beyond Foster, who would likely be more physical. If Duke is somehow that guy, that opens this conversation up a bit. If we're looking to the WR FA pool, I'm more keen to offer either Funchess or Tyrell Williams as options. I know a few people are high on Humphries but after watching the bucs and hearing my buddies give bills fans a run for their money, there are a lot of question marks regarding his hands as well as ability to get separation, especially for what the cost to get them might be. Even Funchess and Tyrell would be stretches for what it would likely take to get either here, in my mind. But with a decently deep WR pool in the draft, I actually like the FA TE pool better in terms of options. And upgrading this position would certainly open Daboll's playbook for his hank concepts. Given the added speed at WR toward the end of the season, I would love to open up the hank/mesh concepts more and hope that Allen's accuracy can improve on delivery here. Short quick crossing routes with McKenzie and Foster or Zay, coupled with dual TE seam and hook routes or zone coverage beating routes could be a deadly combo. Maxx Williams could be a potential upgrade over Thomas as a primary blocking TE with some pass catching ability - young and otherwise under-utilized in the Ravens offense, might be worth a depth consideration. Wouldn't mind us offering Jesse James, and could entertain a nod to Geoff Swaim or AJ Derby for a potentially cheap, young pick up to fuel camp competition if nothing else. The interesting one that I find myself in conflict with would be to go after Jared Cook. I'm not usually about overpaying 30+ FA guys already making a decent premium for the position, especially coming off a good year in Oakland. But if he's looking to get out from under Gruden, I could see throwing our hat in the ring there. All that said, I still find it likely that we only sign one of the above TE in FA, if we are able to land any at all. But I feel like our biggest impacts could potentially come from the draft. Depending on if anyone reaches for WRs in the first, there's potential that Okwuegbunam, Fant, Irv, or Nelson become BPA in the second and may likely provide that two-pass TE look that Allen could thrive within. I like Ok's speed for his size and red zone mismatch; Fant is more the pure pass catcher and I could see as interchangeable with drafting a WR here in the second; loooove Irv's route running and hands for a TE, again lending itself more to the pass catching role - especially where route running is a premium need amongst our corps; some people are high on Nelson though I don't see much of his upside beyond YAC potential. The late round pickup here that might be around? Gentry - more the pure blocker with his size, he could also be a mismatch on short yardage situations and wouldn't mind seeing him picked up in the 5th or 6th if he falls. That kind of late round pick to get us a true blocking TE with pass catching threat (to avoid defenses scheming against one-dimensional players), is something we desperately lacked in our offense this past year, and OL notwithstanding, our run game desperately needed efficient TE blocking. So novel aside we know it's entirely dependent on how FA plays out, but if we're looking for names that's where I've tended to fall in the little research I can get to. As far as guys that might go UDFA, can't honestly say any names with certainty there - but I hope we continue our late round luck, even if it does happen on the defensive side of the ball.

I could see the potential for that depending on how FA shakes out with a couple teams. Not sure what's happening with Foles and Flacco, but could think of a couple teams named the Jags and Phish that might make a play at either. I just think that the BPA talent is so heavily defensive leaning for the top 32 that I don't know if any teams are willing to forego specific talent to reach for a QB not necessarily graded for the first round overall in the pool. Much less the equivalent of a round 1 QB comparable to most other years. All four will go, but don't be surprised to see one or two drop beyond the first - the hype on Haskins and Murray might be enough to ink them a first round consideration though, despite my personal disagreement with that. That being said, totally wouldn't mind seeing all four of them go in the first 8 picks and watching the likes of Greedy or Allen fall to us...

Not sure Redskins fans will want to watch their team trade up for a QB again and mortgage their next three years. Not a comment on RGIII but I'd be curious what they would have to give up here to even go for it. That being said, I don't see how any of the QBs are actual first round grades in this draft beyond the position they play...but at least one maybe two will likely go in the first just for that reason alone. Is Alex Smith done for good? I get it's doubtful he comes back, but I feel like them trading up this year is dependent on FA and Smith's med status.

The Raiders context would lead me to also want a 2 this year, or 1 next year - we'd essentially be giving them the chance to have two top 10 picks, and they certainly have the capital to ante up another pick for it.

Came here to read about Foster and Edmunds, wound up reading a Jackson v. Allen debate...but there ya go^ Jackson's entire game is predicated on the RPO and being a successful runner. Chargers were able to minimize this impact and forced him to be more one-dimensional in their second meeting. Credit where credit is due, the offensive scheme and approach by the Ravens with Jackson maximized his strengths and built upon his RPO scheme familiarity. Whether he can develop beyond that scheme, the offensive personnel is retained, and whether or not he succeeds in the NFL as a QB is entirely dependent on his performance next year. Unless they are able to evolve the scheme, it's likely that defenses will be able to effectively counter the Raven's RPO once enough tape is there. Many will attempt to replicate the Chargers' playoff model at first. While I don't say this in attempt to discredit Jackson (as he was the only rookie QB to make the playoffs), I question how much of it was Jackson vs. the rest of the team, and not having any real tape to study the scheme and player until the Chargers playoff meeting. That being said, I do think the Ravens had a better chance of winning that game with Flacco - even though I'm not a Flacco guy, still felt he gave them the best chance to win there.

I wondered if Clay would retire as well - especially after Wood even commented about it in his article how his blocking role has taken a huge toll on him physically, and has potentially impacted his pass catching game as well. Either way I'm anticipating he's there this year barring retirement, or at least until a potential replacement is found and tested through camp. While certainly desirable, I do think it's still wishful to hope we pick up 2 TEs over the course of FA and in the draft just purely based on chances. I think it's more likely to happen if we land one in FA as I can see a couple TEs becoming BPA in rounds 2 and 3, but overall it may not be as big of a priority in FA for the FO to really pursue what players are available while being "judicious" with contracts, as Beane would say.

Would really love to see Croom take the next step in all honesty. Kid showed flashes of pass catching ability, but would certainly give him the next season. I'd have to go back for his blocking ability though, as I think that's where he drew the most criticism outside of his situational fumble plays. To the OP - I would much rather prefer drafting one this year given the pool available. Would likely prove the wiser investment in the long run as well if we could land a guy like Wilson or Hockenson. I doubt we find two solid TE replacements this year in total, and it's more likely that we end up with one and one depth guy to push Clay/Croom if anyone else at all.

Obviously no scout, but I could see him being rated way higher than his performance merits simply due to the draft pool and a good amount of team's needing to protect their QB (most newly found). I'll be interested to see when he, or either Little or Taylor, go off the board as I don't know that I'd take any of them in the top 10. If we stay there, I would really rather prefer BPA at 9 over Williams, even Little or Taylor. I get we need OL guys, but not if the value for talent isn't there. Personal preference aside, Beane wants to go BPA in the draft and has communicated he never wants to pick by need (we'll see how true that is this year). Whether or not we pick WIlliams or any OL at all in the first round will be determined by our luck in FA. But even then, I don't see us going OT in the first with our 9th, unless we trade back and an OL guy does become BPA. Which lends to my personal preference, go BPA - and I don't personally see any OL guy as top 15 talent overall in this draft pool. Again, no expert but just fwiw.

Saw that too - McD does want a focus on culture and attitude in the lockerroom, and while his focus is finding guys who put football first, he's open to guys who may have character flaws if they are willing to buy into the system/process and commit to working on themselves. I think that's the important piece we miss in this conversation about culture - it's not that McD wants character guys first, and only that, and I think Dareus was a prime example of this. We parted ways with him halfway through the season for myriad reasons, but McD attempted to get him to buy into the system as far as I can tell as a third-party reader/observer. Dareus simply didn't want to buy in. It seemed his lack of motivation and commitment to working on himself and buying into the process was likely the impasse the FO and him couldn't get past (among other issues like skipping workouts, practice effort, etc.). To me, AB is clearly more the media cancer as his WR drama is of the thread that guarantees sports writers high readership with enticing titles so they will beat his dead horse well into its next life, and exacerbate any transgression into a larger issue than it likely is as it means a higher paycheck for them. But if the FO believes he has the potential to buy into the system and team, and work on himself, they'll forego the past transgressions for a chance to prove himself differently and obtain an elite WR talent in the league for however long. To Woodsy's point here - because McD emphasized culture in his first two years, he's established that base for moving forward, and has identified team leaders to see it through. If they believe that culture has stuck given this, it makes sense they would be open to testing the waters with guys like AB. What's more, I feel this FO would have no issue dealing with AB if he did somehow become a problem for the guys on the team.

Word - thanks to two bucs friends, I've paid more attention to Tampa than most other teams outside the division, and would agree on McCoy. Guy is a talent through and through and while he can still play, I would wonder what a big deal like this might look like in three years time as he ages. He would be an immediate upgrade for us given the roster, but to make this work long term in reference to cap % you'd likely have to restructure Star or let him go. This would especially be taken into consideration when it comes time to pay Tre, Milano, Dawkins, Edmunds, and whatever other young talent we need to address in 2 and 3 years time. The obvious counter here to McCoy is the draft as the depth of DL talent and lack of depth at our other positions may make DL less of a priority in FA, despite Beane's BPA strategy. Either way, wouldn't hate to see this happen, but would worry about anything we'd be giving up down the line in terms of young talent on the team.

I was wondering the same thing - though I don't know enough about the Colts to know if they plan on re-signing him, but my guess would be he'd want to stay on the playoff team trending up if he could.

For sure - and to be honest, while they don't hold the ultimate decision making power - I do trust our talent evaluation from the scouting level based upon our most recent drafts. The one thing I don't know is how much of a role Marv played in those discussions and evaluations which may change those draft outcomes moving forward.

Thanks for entertaining the questions - and don't entirely disagree with you here. I agree they could have handled the QB situation better, to a point, and assumed AJ would be the established vet he wasn't, instead forcing themselves into a corner, especially when Allen got injured. If the goal was to sit Allen for a year, then in those terms, yes it was an overall failure. But he did end up starting, and through the well-established growing pains we all knew we would see, ended up trending on a positive note for the future and left many of us here hopeful for the next couple of seasons. So I can't sit here and say the QB situation was a complete disaster, as they were responsible for identifying Allen at least, but while you have every right to be skeptical, the track record is not quite there yet on offensive talent evaluation to say definitively. Likely more so after this season and next. I'll agree to disagree on Star as I think his contract is outweighing his role performance to many, but is still a valid point of contention. And the resulting product of Murphy was overall lackluster and injury prone - but contributed when active to a point of influence, but not dominance for the contract. And you're right, anyone of us would have loved to have seen Norwell, Pouncey, or Gabriel on the team. Again I'd have to check, but even if we entertained an offer for them, we wouldn't know for sure whether they turned us down, or if we even made an attempt to sign them to begin with. They decided to take a chance on adding a few guys that we could see the red flags for beforehand, but couldn't fully predict the end result, Vontae being the exception as no one saw that stunt coming. Either way, I can see reason for skepticism based upon this past year, but I can't bring complete judgment on a GM in his first year after one round of FA, and determine complete lack of faith in assessing offensive talent - would seem quite the extreme in that regard. Granted, I did come into the season expecting 6-10, or like record, and didn't expect anything more, which may very well be clouding my judgment of Beane here. But I'd prefer a dataset of greater than a single year is all.