ctk232

I would hope Saffold falls into the same boat as Morse with upcoming contracts in LA, it's likely they look to either restructure an offer for him if they want to keep him, or cut ties with what's coming up in the next year or two. Either way, with a good amount of teams looking to strengthen their OL after this year, and some also for their newly found rookie QB (i.e. Zona, Jets, even Houston, Tennessee, and Carolina) we will likely end up paying more for any OL guys we bring in, than they will ultimately be worth. As FA goes.

To selfishly continue my post from the Castillo firing thread...NEW YEARS WISHES DO COME TRUE!!!!!!!!!! It's official, I really didn't ask for much as I've learned not to expect it from the Bills over the years, but I just really wanted to see us cut the chord with firstly, Castillo - more so than anyone, and secondly, Crossman. Sad part of this is now I'm wondering if I shouldn't have just asked for everything and if my 2019 luck officially ran out three days in....

Could very well be the case, too. Robiskie was never one of the guys I would've guessed would get shown the door in all honesty though. But whether or not it was mostly the talentless corps we had, his job as the coach makes him literally responsible for their performance. There may have very well been more to it behind the scenes either in terms of not meshing with McD, or simply that Daboll has now been given more authority to go out and find his own guys. Either way, I wouldn't have included Robiskie in the same conversation as Castillo and maybe Crossman deserve.

Let's be honest, the OL needs a major facelift at least at three positions. And while I enjoy the speculation, in reality, FA will ultimately shape our line and who stays and goes. While the reality is that we need OL in the draft, Beane likely won't draft OL by need unless it coincides with BPA as well, in the first. Where he looks to fill need is in FA, and it's more likely we're only able to fill one OL position with a top/average name, less likely two, and nearly improbable we land three. If we are looking to address the biggest needs along the OL specifically, it starts in the middle with Center. The majority of our OL resources should go to finding a stout replacement that can anchor the line, call assignments, and not get bull rushed on every pass rush...Paradis or Morse do seem to be the best options there, but depending on how much we pay to get a guy like that will affect our next priority, Guard. I like the thought of swinging Dawkins in at Guard and maybe Teller at the other - very mobile and physical guys that do better on interior schemes (based upon college careers), and maybe look to address Tackle instead. But whether or not FA goes that way will depend on whether we keep guys like Miller, Groy, Bodine, and Mills. But on a pure numbers standpoint, it's likely Mills ends up staying, and maybe Bodine or Groy for depth. If Miller somehow ends up staying or getting extended for cheap, I'm really hoping his regression was due to Castillo and can now get back on track to his rookie form. Novel aside, I see our line going two ways next year, depending on who we pick up in FA, and if we end up drafting a guy as well: Center and Guard addressed in FA: LT - Dawkins/Draft Pick LG - Teller C - Paradis/Morse/FA RG - Saffold/FA/(Potential for Dawkins depending on draft pick) RT - Mills/Draft Pick Center and Tackle addressed in FA: LT - FA/Draft Pick LG - Dawkins C - Paradis/Morse/FA RG - Teller RT - Mills/Draft Pick

I don't think he was the worst WR coach in the league, but our WRs had terrible route discipline and running. The route awareness was pretty poor all year long, and it wasn't until the last few weeks that we saw Foster, McKenzie, and less so, but still, Zay come around. Curious how much of that was due to Allen's improvement over that course of time as well, but since Week 1 we had some of the worst route running/awareness in the league and it showed regardless of who our QB was. It's not a lot to ask for and I think McD may have had one too many practices where he had to tear the WR corps a new one - HC shouldn't have to do something that menial in an ideal system.

Agreed - got a buddy who is a Jet's fan and would gladly have the second rounder over Robby any day. He had great games against us, but the talent in the draft in the second like Metcalf, Harry, the Browns, Arcega, etc. all have greater upsides and higher ceilings for the value. Would be a terrible trade in all likelihood.

Don't know if they're all worth redoing in 2019, but including contracts with upcoming extensions that I'd like to see us address sooner than later (and in no particular order): Hughes Shady Phillips Poyer Tre White Milano Dawkins Zay As much as we need help along the OL and WR, not to mention the DL need and LB depth - I'd really rather see us use our cap to lock some of these guys down longterm, especially the young talent that will be the foundation of this team moving forward. God forbid Allen turns into a franchise guy and we need to pay him accordingly, would be better to have these contracts in a manageable situation once his rookie contract is up.

Might not even need to trade up with pick 41 - right in the WR sweet spot, but look to the Jets and Raiders to likely add WR if they can, so a trade up may not be so crazy...it's a tough second round spot to gauge for sure, but between Metcalf, Harry, and Brown, there will likely be valued talent there at our pick in the second.

Good points, and I certainly agree; definitely feels like more could have been done. I'm just always curious exactly how much a GM/FO does to resolve x issue or y position need, versus the ultimate outcome, as does everyone. But I understand we can never really know until way after the fact if at all.

I think they can manage both with a focus on locking down young guys like Milano and Tre, and extending other key guys like Poyer, Hughes, and maybe even Shady. Given Beane's focus on fulfilling need through FA, the likelihood of us actually landing two OL, a WR, defensive depth with DL, LB, or DB isn't high at all. It's more likely the case that we end up getting one or two OL guys, a WR or defensive depth and that's it. One thing we learned from this past offseason is that, while Beane was reticent to make moves in consideration of his "calculated approach" to the cap issue for this year and extending guys longterm, it's that guys don't always want to sign here despite us offering them. Beane did offer to more people than we ended up getting obviously, but in FA there's never a guarantee you land any players much less over pay for the ones you do get. We've done it before and FA is always more prone to overpaying average talent, but with the space we do have this year, it at least allows us slight cushion in how we can approach this year's pool while maintaining focus on extending key components of an existing team. Especially along the defense.

I'd give this +2 upvotes if I could, though I do wonder about the above emboldened component. While I agree in retrospect that given the timeline of events, more could have been done to address the OL issues than just adding Bodine, do we know for a fact Beane didn't try to land more guys? I could easily see him saying Bodine is enough, after his most recent press conference and all the mentions of a "calculated approach" to the cap issue, and conceding that some of the issues this year were due entirely to his "calculated strategy in approaching the cap space issue." But do we know that he didn't offer other guys and just have them John Brown us, or sign with another team? Looking back, I'm also wondering who we might have signed that would've actually helped us for what we would pay for versus the crop of OL guys this year - I'd need to look into that more.

I would agree with everything here except that Beane has repeatedly stated he doesn't draft by need, and prefers BPA. We'll see how that all goes this year, but I have to say I can't disagree with that philosophy here, as especially in this year's draft, it will be so easy to overdraft for a position of need at a pick where the value just isn't there. In the first, it's almost always better to go BPA and get that player that is a game changer. That being said, I would be perfectly happy with Jonah Williams in the first - I love me some OL picks. But drafting a WR in the top ten would be ridiculous this year - and I'd much rather we fill out our defense with BPA if that's how the cards fall. If Allen is there at 9? I'd go for him over Jonah in all honesty, but would certainly go BPA with that pick or trade back. Trade back is interesting this year given breadth of defensive talent.

^this. If we attempt a trade for anyone, go after Julio. Hell, I'd even entertain AB but that would be quite the potential migraine for a young rookie QB who needs to develop more. AJ is an elite receiver but is on the down slope of a career we would likely end up overpaying for, versus his ultimate production and likelihood of being injured. I'd rather we get a young top guy with our early pick in the 2nd and let him develop with Allen to become his career long wideout. Even more so if we happen to land a solid possession receiver in FA somehow.

Agreed - we just had our longtime defensive leader and stout middle DT officially retire. We all hope Hughes continues to show out on the plus side of 30, and Star to keep stuffing double teams and getting crazy jump off the snap. The issue we have is in pass rush and disruption. While Shaq isn't going to be the JJ Watt talent guy along the line, he bought into an incredibly valuable role and has done so with improved performance. Never underestimate a guy who has actually bought into the process/system in place and will continue to develop along with the team. It likely won't be a popular opinion, and while a trial year of picking up the option seems a decent idea to see if the progression continues - but now would seem an opportune time to consider an extension on terms that the FO would be okay with in case he does continue to develop, and demand more in an eventual extension. Given his buying into the system and turning his game around, it would appear he'd like to stay and may objectively consider an extension at this point, from his perspective, locking up something that is otherwise uncertain in terms of his career. In a year where we can ill-afford to lose any guys along our DLine until suitable replacements are found, picking up the option at least makes sense here, if not a reasonable extension as a rotational DE/DT and role player.

This being slightly tangential to your point, but considering we have at least two positions of need here (Center, Guard, and another Tackle along the OL), look for it to be filled in FA per Beane's strategy. I'd love to see Paradis and Saffold in a perfect world but would take either if not both. We could certainly do with picking up another Tackle in FA, and if we do end up drafting one as well, I'd love to see what Dawkins could do as a pulling Guard/Richie 2.0. Regardless, I would like to see our resources invested here first and foremost if we can make it happen. FA is fickle and no guarantees we land anyone at all. To me, having the 9th pick is certainly interesting given his stated philosophies. He says he goes BPA in the draft, which is fine, but considering this year's strengths in BPA being defense do we pass up Jonah Williams if he falls to 9? Do we trade back hoping for top WR talent late in the 1st/early 2nd? Or do we go BPA with a DT, LB, or DB? Would seem like we're getting a defensive guy if he stays true to his strategy.

Super late to this after spending yesterday away from media, BUT NEW YEARS WISHES DO COME TRUE!!!!!!!!!! Or at least half wishes...Crossman next would be the icing but I will absolutely take this any day. Outstanding

Posts always appreciated! Slightly different perspective on the above, but not necessarily in disagreement: 6/Shady - I do think age is catching up to him to some degree, but I don't believe we need to move on or offload him just yet. I wouldn't be opposed to picking an RB in the later rounds if the right value is there, but I do think we see more from Shady with a competent OL. Simply due to his running style, he was never effective in breaking tackles, just evading and avoiding them which he has proven he can still do when healthy. Health and remaining healthy is certainly another piece to the conversation, but his success has always been predicated on the quality of his OL to prevent rushers from contacting him in the backfield, and in getting to the second level to seal off LBs for him to create larger gains. He's still able to create in space and if we can truly address the OL this year to improve by any measure, it's worth seeing what he still has left. The complimentary running style between him and Ivory though is something we should maintain when we do eventually look to the future at RB. I also wonder what regression has occurred since Castillo was instituted as run game coordinator and how much incognito and wood compensated for his lack of success in that role (evidenced through his previous coaching tenures as run game coordinator as well). Beyond simple roster depth and talent, if Castillo is truly responsible for our blocking schemes and more as the run game coordinator, I wouldn't put too much of our regression on Shady here either. In a season where we desperately need to address the OL for more than just an improvement in the run game, certain positions will not be addressed and I'm okay with not addressing the RB position this next season if push comes to shove. If nothing else his leadership on the offense with Josh will likely be worth more than not. 9. So if I had to choose, I'm 100% with letting Crossman go. Mostly as I have yet to see a modern ST unit. I get this isn't really a thing in the NFL, but beyond executing ST coverage on a fundamentally consistent level, there's no reason we cannot also be more innovative here either. The Titans opening kick return was a pretty good example of mixing up return schemes to gain even 5 or more yards on returns where traditional return schemes are lucky to break a touchback. That being said, I do wonder how much of the talent on the roster affected our ST this year, similar to how our offensive roster was simply offensive to production. I'm admittedly no ST guru, but it seems that the guys we had and have are capable of putting together solid ST performances and I would be happy to show Crossman the door for it. The one name I'm wholly content with letting go as of the moment he was hired? Castillo. Still waiting for that headline...might be waiting awhile here sadly as well. 10. Agreed - I do believe we have the greater upside in terms of the immediate future and competing within the division. Though, in my mind, the Jets position is still a pretty sexy opening to me as an HC candidate, and may not be as terrible as you think - they have more cap than we do (last I checked, could be wrong) or at least comparably as much, a stout rookie QB with upside, a top 3 draft pick, and for what it's worth, a rather attractive market for bringing in talent. I'm skeptical, but it could be just as likely the Jets team does a 180 next year with the right offensive coaching hire, and with the talent they do have in their defense (despite current season performance).

I think this is the likely scenario, but voting more on hope than realistic expectation. I liked ST yesterday, but as a season effort it was pretty bad. I honestly can't say how much of that is on Crossman and how much of it is lack of an ST roster/young guys, but there is more than room for improvement in terms of our kick return packages and how we approach the ST aspect of the game overall. While it was only one play, the Titans opening kick return last night caught everyone off guard and we should look to incorporate some of that as well. The lack of innovation in the ST part of the game seems oddly overlooked, despite the belief that it's a part of the game long in the past.

Beyond the face value of stats (which are always grain of salt conversations regardless) - the biggest pieces to be concerned about are how they demonstrate his growth from beginning to end of the season, not so much on the end results overall. I would like to look more at the other rookies this year, but taking the offensive systems into consideration, I would say Allen has shown the greatest progression and development since he first started, and especially within the context of how little he had to work with. While not identical, I feel the Jets and Bills situations were similar enough this year, but I don't know that I saw the same development from Darnold that we saw from Allen this year. Anything can happen and to call anything now before we get through next season would be ridiculous, but I'm comfortable saying Allen has shown more development and growth than I personally expected to see in one season given the supporting cast, and it gives me more hope for the future as a result. Also gives me hope for Daboll as an OC here if he is deserving of any of the credit, as well as having Barkley and Anderson to help if similarly deserving.

I think they also took their starting RT in the second round as well - but might be slightly off-base there, just remembering from the commentary in last night's broadcast. Either way, goes to show that if you would like to see your offense improve at every level in one year, invest in the OL. Offensive success begins, and in a lot of cases this year, can stop right there. One of the larger reasons for Shady's regression this year was a lack of Wood and Incognito pulling for his running style. If we revamp successfully I would expect him to bounce back more next year, within reasonable context.

For sure - Lorax showed he still has the ability to identify those sweeps, but has lost a step in his years in getting there. Milano usually is able to get good initial contact/pressure on those sweeps as well allowing the rest to converge to the ball effectively. I think the All-22 references that too, where the Pats ran the same run play against the first time and were stuffed much more than they were last week, primarily due to Milano. Beyond this one game though we've needed LB depth since the beginning of the season. It may not be as pressing a need as is another pass rusher or DB2, but we're very prone to being gouged on the run without Milano and until Edmunds develops into his role more in the next two seasons. I know Allen didn't play his best game, but I feel like everyone had the same take away of "if only he had some help." But I feel like saying Allen was bad isn't fair if that's the reaction you're also having? Might just be me, but with an OL and a few throws being caught I feel we have a very different, better, takeaway from Allen's game. Not sure what Thad is getting at there exactly.

Milano...can't explain all of it, but that was pretty much it. I get the analysis is out already and I'm just stating the obvious, but the real issue is lack of any depth at the LB position. Our entire defense is predicated on both Edmunds and Milano being healthy, but primarily the latter. Until Edmunds develops, losing Milano basically means we have two rookies at LB and no run defense, which is any team's run game wet dream. Especially against our DL which is okay against the run when the LBs are playing. But since Week 1, Milano has been our run defense with his ability to identify and retain gap integrity. Many of the gashed chunk runs were a result of us not getting any initial disruption. Most of the backs weren't touched until they were in the secondary, forcing our safeties to stop a RB who has already gained momentum. Milano might not make all the tackles on running downs, but his ability to shoot the gap and identify running lanes disrupts an RB's ability to get momentum going and drive downhill, if he doesn't end up making the tackle he almost always disrupts enough for the rest of the line to converge on the ball carrier, or force him into more defenders.

I think you're right in terms of timeline - but we have too many holes to fill on offense to begin with and it's damn near impossible to address them all in a single offseason. Look at it this way, we could offer 25 guys contracts in FA and have none of them sign. While I'm not necessarily advocating for defensive FA moves given this year's draft, it is still likely that a couple will be made. Second, our defense is very good, but to not address it at all this offseason would be damn near an even greater mistake than this past year with the QB carousel. Despite our deplorable offense this year, you cannot let that blind you as a GM looking to improve the team - you should address both sides of the ball each year to varying degrees. It's abundantly clear our DL needs a top pass rusher, and our secondary could do with a stout DB2, and our LB stable some more depth. These can be mostly addressed via the draft and it's likely some will. To only spend money on the offense right now means that we are okay with our defense only ever being this good next year. Interestingly, this may very well be enough with a good offense, but I don't think that's the plan of the process here. Beane is going to take what he can to help the team whether that be defense or offense, but he's well aware of the team's needs as are we all. That being said, we should prioritize investing in the OL as much as we can if we want to see the largest jump in offensive production, as those moves aren't sexy, but bolster and raise the level of play of every other offensive skill position. But take care not to neglect our defensive needs, especially along the DL.

Yep - does anyone wonder why no one ever heard DeMarco Murray's name after he left Dallas? Many "top" RBs are made so by the play of the OL and the blocking schemes of the OC and OL Coordinator. A "top" RB can just as quickly regress as the OL regresses over the years as well. This isn't to discount any elite RB's ability, but at least half or more of every RB's game is due to the OL. Could say this about most offensive skill positions, imo. Anytime you're building an offense, or even a whole team, always start with the trenches.

To be fair, we do the exact same thing here with players from other teams. Some of us may intently follow other teams as well, but the vast majority of people here, as well as any sports "expert" or "analyst" simply refer to stats and highlights. That being said, there are accurate analyses out there for every team, and certainly groups that cover each team well. But stuff like this? Armchair research at best.