ctk232

I honestly had fun watching our defense. And if not for already defeated confidence in our offense, I would have been ecstatic to the fact that with a competent offense we were 14/21-9 at the half, and 21/28-12 going into the 4th quarter. That being said, even with our pathetic offense, I still had hope at 9-3 and 9-6, but just knew we wouldn't score without some fluke play or penalty help. It was very much like watching a legion of boom seahawks game, before Seattle invested in Marshawn and some WRs for Russell. If I'm being completely honest, even after they scored the TD I thought the game was still within some reasonable realm of possibility that we show some competitive edge to round it out. It's tangential to the comment, but relevant to the thread: You can't expect your defense to hold out when it plays bend don't break, as it is predicated on offenses being able to extend drives and put up points. If our defense forces three and outs every Patriot drive, then 9-6 would have likely been the score going into the 4th. This isn't that type of D. The unfortunate thing is that a bend don't break defense relies on two things: 1) offense to score TDs, not FGs, TDs, and 2) stay on the field. It's pretty obvious but bend-don't-break d's spend A LOT of time on the field. But on a team with literally no offense, they can't outlast opposing offenses like we've seen dominant defenses of the past do with mediocre offenses.

I'm sorry, do you mean the 2015 and 2018 Panthers? Because I'm pretty sure the Panthers brought themselves to the playoffs, not Anderson...he was in the pro bowl because Brady didn't want to go and he was the alternate. His last great season was when Braylon Edwards was a top WR name in the league. He might not be as terrible as Peterman, but he is not anyone to be relied upon to win games. He hit his ceiling over ten years ago, ceiling meaning things don't go up from there, and he is certainly not maintaining that level of performance. He's serviceable, but will otherwise lead us to 4-12 at best - which, let me clarify, I'm all for at this point in the season. But Peterman would give us the first overall for sure.

If it's high enough for Oliver or Bosa why not? Top 5 picks usually go BPA, unless you need a QB or trade down. While I'd love to see Harry or AJ drafted in the 2nd, or late 1st if we trade down, and we certainly need OL, spending a top pick on either of those two wouldn't be all that terrible. While it's not the team's top need, our DL doesn't get much pressure beyond Hughes and Williams/JPhillips, one of which may not be here next year.

The offense is that bad. ANY other competent offense and we're likely 14/21-9 at halftime last night, and 21/28-12 going into the 4th quarter. I couldn't honestly say how having a better back up QB would've helped, if at all, but with any other offense right now this team is competitive for much more than a 2-14 season. Our defense is playing incredible ball considering what little help they have on offense.

ALWAYS start with the OL. Makes the floor for every other position that much higher/more average compared to the league overall. I don't agree with McD on everything, but 100% agree that if you win the line of scrimmage you win the game. If you don't have solid lines/line play on both sides of the ball to win you the LOS, you likely can't count on the rest of the team perform well enough each game to win.

I don't consider the announcers last night as experts of the game in any regard despite having actual NFL experience. However, even from their varied observation throughout the night, the things I heard most: Witten had a lot to say about our offense, but his primary complaint was receivers not getting separation at the top of their routes. He continued to say that even the throws we do complete go for little to no YAC as a result as well, and almost every throw is contested. This is not a corps to inspire hope in anyone. Along these lines, Book made a comment about how KB was one popeyes biscuit away from being a TE - as off-putting as that might sound, IT'S TRUE. KB is sorely misused as WR1, which he most certainly is not. He isn't some unknown talent waiting to be put in the right situation, but he would be a mismatch in an offense with an actual WR1, even 2, and using KB as TE1/2 in certain sets. He's quick for a TE and can make contested catches - Witten made the comment he thrives on the push-off as he isn't quick and his game is much more like that of a TE. All in all, whether KB stays or goes, they need to re-evaluate where they are using their players. While our OL barely suffices as serviceable, the QB situation is deplorable. Allen is honestly our best chance at winning games this year as he has room to grow. DA hit his ceiling in 2012, or whatever year he made the pro bowl. Since then he may have seen more NFL games, but easily more so from the sidelines. Adding the fact he was literally on a golf course three weeks ago, to expect anything more than him lasting this long before getting hurt at 35 yr old was and is absurd. What's crazy is that despite all of our offensive needs in watching this team, it's evident that a true back up QB is needed, someone beyond Anderson who they more so brought in to coach. While Cleveland is much more the s***show right now for a rookie QB, I don't like who we've surrounded Allen with from a coaching stand point. Culley, Daboll, and Anderson are not the group I'd like to have bringing this kid up, but we need to bring an actual player QB to backup Allen, not Anderson. Novel aside - to your point malone, I'm still willing to give Daboll next season to show us more. But the more I watch this offense, receivers not getting separation on their routes is mostly attributable to the receivers as a corps and the way they are being used. KB is clearly not a WR1 and should be used more like a TE - we don't have anyone else to fill a WR1 role so Daboll can't do much with that. Zay finally learned to catch the ball, but has always thrived in a slot role. We have no one else to fill the WR2 role so Daboll can't do much there. But what he can do is scheme route concepts and combinations to free up players, and utilize the RB in space more. Our OL vastly limits what we can do with our routes in terms of giving them time to form, but I'd still like to see more from Daboll at least attempting to scheme for what ability we do have in the right ways. So while I'm still willing to give him the year, there's only so much you can excuse from the OC with an offense like this - the bottom line is that while our talent is questionable, these are still NFL players, and to not score in a league where offenses have pretty much a red carpet to the endzone on most drives is suspect for an NFL OC.

Funny thing, I've been on record here saying I would love to pick up failed head coaches as our coordinators as they tend to pan out well (i.e. Schwartz, Wade Phillips, Mike Pettine, granted all defensive i know). But even so, Hue Jackson would not be one of the failed HCs I would pick up. Ever.

Hue wasn't any kind of solution, but the GM for sure needs to go. Browns basically committed to tanking this season now by removing both at once. Not to mention people complain about the environment provided for Allen, but I don't care how pro ready Baker is (not as much as people thought it looks like) that is not an environment for your franchise rookie qb. Makes me feel better about us at the very least.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for being critical of Allen - there is certainly plenty to be critical of. But in regards to the future of the franchise, if nothing else the Browns are making me feel better about us. Although I'm sure many on here wouldn't mind seeing the same dismissals from the Bills FO...

By no means am I intending to limit expression of critical and constructive opinion, but starting a thread asking the question did we draft the wrong Josh when it's been discussed and asked in numerous threads ad nauseam seems a bit superfluous to me is all. If there was something added like, "let's compare the tangibles of Allen and Rosen and why each office thought they might be the better fit" (also already discussed), or actual analysis of other QB play. Not just "Oh woe is us we drafted the wrong guy because Rosen led a game winning comeback." Fwiw, I also think that providing final judgment on Allen based upon his performance thus far is a bit nonsensical and obnoxious. There's a difference between being critical of his current play, and declaring that his future as our franchise is over and not going to happen. I get the red flag argument, I do, but fact is there isn't enough efficacious data there to make a decision one way or the other yet. It also, for the benefit of mental health and sanity, prolongs any potential negative outcomes.

Just think about Bucs fans yesterday watching their first overall pick throw four INTs (quite Peterman-esque performance), and have Fitzy come in and continue the Fitzmagic Curse. There's a time and place for this, but it's too soon and not here. There's being critical of Allen, but the "should we have," "had we had drafted him," and "what would've been" conversations don't do much to help anyone out here looking to make it to retirement before having a coronary.

Well to start, the defense is not as bad as you believe it to be, while it's certainly not an elite defense imo, it's most certainly a top 10 unit at present. It's still lacking depth along the line and one or two spots in the secondary and backer corps, but for a unit that logs more time on the field than most any other defense, what we're seeing is remarkable. And from his play as nickel db, Johnson has more of an impact than any other DB outside of Tre on the roster. Up until last week Milano was graded as one of the top players in the entire league at the position. Neither of them are perfect, but for 4th and 5th round picks? That's an absurd level of production. Through his one draft Beane has done nothing to cause me to question what he'll do with these picks. Allen was the biggest question mark but he did something we've all been crying for years for our FO to do and draft a top QB. Whether he was the prospect we hoped for or not, Beane went and got his guy. As far as I'm concerned, Edmunds, Phillips, and Johnson have all contributed to their corresponding pick values or more. Not every pick in a rebuild is going to be a knockout starter - sustainable successful teams have middle contract guys filling out the roster that positively produce and help the team. Milano and Johnson are both guys that fit that role and will likely continue to develop as the seasons go on. While Milano wasn't a Beane pick, I still have faith for them to use these. I also feel it highly likely Beane attempts to move up either for a first or second round pick using this added capital based on his single draft record, but I could be completely off base there.

Take your break and pick a different word then but both Matt Milano and Taron Johnson have thus far played beyond their draft pick value and continue to do so. Therefore demonstrating, at least in the past two drafts, that we can likely scout talent out of those rounds. To expect anything from the Bills draft picks beyond the 3rd round is usually pushing it, but of the last two drafts? Absolutely. Nothing is ever guaranteed, but I'd rather have the picks than not.

Right? I mean, I've seen this happen before and other missed calls lead to TDs. I get it's likely due to a track record of missed calls, but how have there not been more firings/suspensions, or was his track record just that egregious? My confusion arises with how this situation was handled and why it deserves this treatment when, by the seemingly same standard, they should fire half the officiating crews out there? (Half being a bit hyperbolic here, but certainly more than one down judge.)

I almost like the idea of bringing in Garrett at OC to replace Daboll - not that Daboll is going anywhere. But I'm just of the opinion that most failed HCs make great longterm OC/DC hires after the fact. Chalk it up to something along the lines of something to prove, no one will hire them as HC again so they're less likely to leave an organization barring HC replacement, and most were first hired as HCs for having great OC/DC track records. Examples like Schwartz and Wade Phillips come to mind.

Yo they meant no one cares about a running attack being the primary offensive focus/scheme. Every defense wants to stop the run, it's called playing defense. Regardless of what the BIlls have done, it's not how teams win in the NFL today. The run can be used effectively to win games in conjunction with a top passing attack, otherwise you'd see the niners, browns, panthers, and boys doing way better than they currently are. Like it was stated, even the Rams with one of the most productive, if not best RB in the league, are currently 12th in rush yds. If the way you win in the NFL is through the run - why does everyone draft a QB over a RB in the top 5? Outside of Barkley, Fournette, and Zeke, the last back taken in the top 5 was Trent Richardson in 2012...it's a pass first league at the moment, and the run helps aid the pass.

Still think he gets replaced by a more "current" veteran QB next season. Anderson might be retained until that happens though. BUT as of right now, Peterman is still on the roster...tomorrow is another day.

Sorry - not trying to be lazy, appreciate the follow up

Can't view the article - likely on my end, but this was what led me to believe they didn't provide a public reason from the post itself, "The NFL Referees Association has not responded to our requests for comment, and an NFL spokesman declined to comment."

This is what I'm most looking forward to on Monday if Gronk plays. My assumptions going into this are that I think Edmunds can cover Gronk in man coverage, but anytime we play zone Brady will be able to pick it apart and fit windows that would otherwise negate his ability to cover. I also think Edmunds is about to see the game of his life backing against Brady and being able to call out schemes and make defensive adjustments where needed on the line. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised but my guess is Edmunds has a rough game overall, some success covering Gronk, and I'm otherwise happy if I see this kid able to compete and keep up in certain regards. As a 20 yr old rookie against Brady able to keep pace and force Brady to be uncomfortable or adjust would be great to see for this kid's development and confidence. Exactly, hope Edmunds lights his world up if Gronk plays, then White can come over and ask him how he's doing while he doesn't elbow slam him like it's Monday Night Raw, while being on MNF to boot.

Fair enough, meant more of a long term trend analysis. The extreme polarity of our defensive performances is what gets to me - turnovers are great and yes are part of the game, but without them our defense can't stop a running nose. So I have a difficult time agreeing this unit is either "elite" or a "top unit" in the league. And I'm honestly wondering how long it can last... To extrapolate, tangentially, in a year where offensive positions are of much greater need, in a defense heavy draft, I wonder how this unit can continue to be built without regressing in performance, or sacrificing our needs on offense.

When did this become about the offense? Don't we have enough threads about how terrible the offense is? I was curious to see what people were saying about our Defense after a game (regardless of the score) where we couldn't force any turnovers, nor get pressure on the QB and how it looked as a unit. In a likely fruitless attempt to bring this back to the Defense, people claiming it's an elite unit seem too early to the party. I like where the unit is headed, and we're about a year or two of development within the current roster and two to three more starting talent level players from having a truly elite unit that can keep us in games where we don't force turnovers, and where we can get better pressure on the QB week in and week out regardless of the OL we're facing.

I'm curious if this was due to personal transgression, or if it's just the NFL making a marketing move to the fans saying that they do care about the quality of refereeing in the league. I can't imagine it would actually be due to his game calls, otherwise why him over any other ref?

That all you got? Something extremely common? We also nailed picks in the 4th and 5th the last two years across different FOs. The past two drafts have more players contributing and still on the team than we've seen from most of our prior drafts this decade, and the one before. Having 10 picks isn't a guarantee, having 10 first round picks also isn't - albeit anyone would take those chances simply because of the larger pool of talent to pick from. But neither scenario is guaranteed to work statistically speaking. That being said, the reason why having more draft picks is beneficial really shouldn't be that difficult to understand: 1. You have a higher probability of finding more players that will contribute by selecting more players from the overall talent pool. 2. You give yourself capital to trade up in earlier rounds, if desired for extra talent, without having to give up picks that would force you to sit out a round or "sell the farm" to get one guy. 3. You give yourself comfort to trade back and either use even more picks, or package later rounds to trade up in round 2 or 3 if a player has fallen that far. Not a likely scenario fwiw, but one that you still have comfort within. 4. Allows you to bring more guys in via the draft, develop what talent is there on rookie contracts for cheap, and help to build a sustainable team for the future (kinda what we're trying to do now). 5. Can help give you comfort to not overspend in FA - something we've done before and are currently suffering from. By having more picks, you don't need to over-reach or overpay B list players as much as you do with a standard set or less (especially given our position needs). I don't see how any of this is a bad thing. While I agree the second 7th round pick likely doesn't mean anything, we've hit consistently in each of our last two drafts across different FOs - including the 4th and 5th round. Nothing's guaranteed, but I'll take this over 7 picks any day.

You aren't going to address all of those needs perfectly in one offseason, much less all of them period, no matter how much cap space or draft picks you have or how needed it is. There's an argument to be made for packaging late round picks (which is all we have capital of) for moving up to select more talent, or trading down later in the first and getting extra first/second round picks. I'm realistically only expecting OL and WR to be addressed via early draft picks, and depending on our first round pick, BPA which would likely be defensive. We can add what we get in FA, likely at the OL and WR positions as well. The only WRs worth anything on that list imho are Funchess, and maybe Enunwa and Williams - Anderson is garbage, just ask any Jets fan, and Humphries is along the same lines (former roomies were jets and bucs fans so we still watch all those games, and get to listen to the issues). Not worth overpaying for these C list players. For me, as long as we seriously address OL and WR this year - I'm okay either signing a B list TE or sticking with Clay and Croom one more year. RB is the same if we keep Shady for another year as well, though a late round pick on a RB wouldn't hurt. Not everyone we end up bringing in will obviously work out, but my priorities are maximizing our chances at OL and WR primarily - not so much the other positions. While it doesn't eradicate the issues, having a stout OL decreases the severity of need at most every other offensive position outside of QB. Our defensive position needs are there, but less warranted with an offense that stays on the field and puts up points. But alas, an uphill battle indeed.