ctk232

It's quite a spectacle, really - didn't think it got worse than here to be completely honest. I'd still take our dumpsterfire over both of their's fwiw. Nailed it - if this ship doesn't get righted and we don't see the franchise promised, you may want to archive that for when the first post comes out with that title.

That has been a concern that makes me more skeptical than not - I do think money will win out, but ultimately limit the amount of players we can bring in. Winning helps with FA, rebuilds are mostly done through the draft as a result of losing seasons as you state, so keeping as much draft capital is needed. Though we do have capital to work with should we want to trade up and add picks in the 1st or 2nd, or even trade down in the 1st to do that. Only caveat being if we land a top 3 pick, I'd be really tempted to pick Oliver/Bosa despite that not being a position of need if both are truly generational talent. Looking at the current crop of FA receivers, there are a couple I'd bring in, and plenty I'd avoid the contracts for. Honestly, I know it's a Carolina thing, but I'd like to see Funchess here if he doesn't resign, and draft a WR to help. KB can stay or go, but I'm curious how he will do as a WR2/3 on a roster (albeit likely overpaid for that role depending on his contract). It's hard not to, the writing is there - had we been the least bit competitive this year this tone of this board would be different. To me, at least, it's clear the severity of comments/posts is mostly related to that more so than the issues at hand, topically speaking. Hindsight is 20/20 but can blind you to potential future hope at times. There's still a lot of unknowns and no guarantee things would have worked out any other way - for all we know it very well could all just be Daboll (though unlikely) or all just be the QB situation (though also unlikely). The only certainty we have is we are currently playing our way into a top 5 pick, we have a ton of free cap which will make FA fun on here, and plenty o' draft picks, which will make the months leading up to April fun on here with the million and one mocks. It's not what we should be looking forward to in October, but it's not exactly recycling previous years where we had average to little cap and a standard slew of picks in the draft. Enjoy the unknowns with hope, while it's been our history since 94, no guarantee this goes the same way either.

That makes sense, though I have to say I know little about Sullivan with the Rams, and not sure Pugh would've really been helpful after watching him with the Giants. Isn't he on that atrocious line in Zona now? But yes, anything was better than Newhouse, Bodine I'll admit I was okay with and has been serviceable albeit not a Wood replacement. I thought Bridgewater had injury concerns and we just didn't want a QB with potential injury/health concerns - but I agree knowing what we know now the idea of having Bridgewater over McCarron makes sense, just don't think I would have thought so at the time.

I can agree with that. And I do see what you're saying. I wouldn't equate McD to Rex in terms of forcing his change upon the team - I think that mistake was much more detrimental to the team now than McD coming in post-rex. It's not fair to ask McD to take what Rex changed/f***ed up and make it work when they run entirely different defensive schemes. Offense is another question, but in order to bring in his defense they likely needed to offload what they could to make it happen. No one was sorry to see Sammy or Dareus go, albeit with small dissent among the board, and likely were more worried when Darby and Woods were dealt. There's concern now that Sammy is starting to actually play to his potential, and those who don't like Star suddenly forget people were calling out Dareus and his attitude not being worth his salary, much less his lack of motivation and play. Star does the same thing without the attitude. It's not an excuse to say Rex took an otherwise solid D, let go of a great DCoordinator in Schwartz, and continued to blow up this team.This is what McD had to work with and was no where near in line with the defense he was hired to create. The one specific I don't agree with is, unpopular opinion warning, I like having Star more than Dareus. I don't think we needed to pay him that much, though.

This is a good point - while not exactly causation there's a correlation here. I do wonder though what the contract/cap situations were when they inherited those teams and how it may or may not have affected the way they approached building their teams. Also, while not blowing up their rosters, how much of each current team is still around from when they began their coaching tenures? The one thing for the Bills is that, while it's not the reason for our dismal state and certainly no excuse, we did have a few players on stupid large contracts that just weren't performing close to what they were being paid, a couple are still here, in a cap situation that wasn't headed anywhere remotely sustainable. It seems that it would make sense to take the dead cap hits from their salaries sooner than later and offload for any kind of ROI, which would be better than putting up with middling performances while paying top 5 contract amounts long term. The Rams will lose their roster in the next 2-3 years, you think paying Donald, Gurley, and Goff not to mention other DBs and players will be sustainable? Wait til Mahomes is off his rookie contract and they need to resign Hunt and their WRs while still fielding a defense. Sure, they have a solid chance at a SB run in the meantime, which is certainly better than our current state. But unless they make it and win it in the next 2-3 years, barring any other roster moves it's unlikely their current situations are sustainable either. Lastly, I'm pretty sure neither McVay nor Reid declared their new teams to be undergoing a full rebuild, which McD and Beane have repeatedly confirmed they are doing - this is what rebuilds tend to look like in the NFL. Retaining rosters and adding select talent isn't exactly what people mean when they use the term.

There's a difference between excuses and evidence. We made the picks for Allen and Edmunds, I wasn't high on Allen and I am still not nearly convinced given what we've seen, but a lot of factors have to come into play that lead me to reserve judgment on him until he develops more and within a competent offense. What's your problem with Edmunds? Are you inferring Incognito left because of the paycut or what was the problem there? He literally quit on a mental breakdown, that's what happened. McD/Beane didn't inherit a dumpsterfire, but they inherited a team who's ceiling was proven to be 8-8, maybe 9-7, and in order to make the moves needed to perennially compete and especially compete for an SB (the end goal, mind you) would take giving up more of what we currently had. The cap absolutely plays a role in terms of who you can and can't bring in, it's not the reason we are where we are but it's a factor. I still don't know how I feel about Daboll and I'll admit I'm not high on him at present. These aren't excuses, it's just reality and we're approaching it very differently. While you've become fed up with blowout losses and what you've seen thus far and it's caused you to quit on what you're seeing for the future already, I'm choosing to wait and see more efficacious data before saying the ship is totally sunk and let's move on already. I don't know what is on the way in the next seasons - no one does. I'm not predicting a complete turnaround or a playoff berth next year. We can all be skeptical based upon what we've seen, I am as well. The issue is calling it now before anything happens and treating this like it was the result they've been building toward. I agree some decisions have been questionable, and others have actually been for the better. All I'm saying is it's impossible to judge something that isn't even here yet - and while the current state is one of complete lack of competitiveness and ability on offense, who's to say what will and won't happen next year or the year after? The reason it is such an unknown is because of the cap space and draft picks giving us greater opportunity to right things and fill holes than not. It's not an excuse, it's a reason why no one knows for certain what will happen after this year.

While a true statement, the two aren't exclusively cause and effect. It's a combination of that plus many other factors. And yes, to the point, KB is definitely not a WR1 weapon, but matched up against DB2's and safeties in third down/red zone scenarios where he can compete for the ball in one on one matchups I'd say he'd be able to compete very well. No, he's not a weapon right now for us and I question his attitude and motivation, but on a team with other WR talent that demands attention from the secondary, he could be very useful.

That's what the Vikes did...soooo you're saying there's a chance? Still think if our offense can show up for one game against this pretty piss poor defense, we stand a chance to compete. Our defense is only as good as the amount of forced turnovers and limited time they spend on the field. I really don't think we need to be using big nickel as much either...I get the strategy but just not seeing the results.

Fair enough - I agree the "very" comment was misguided. I'll still argue the line performed differently each year and that contributed more to the stats you posted than our WR corps did. And while I get it was in response to someone commenting on our corps, pick your battles, when you quote offensive stats and DVOA in relation to our WR corps over the years as though correlation equates to causation, you're going to have a bad time. Agree to disagree that Miller is the same player now as in 2015, and I agree Castillo was the worst thing to happen to this team from a coaching perspective. And an OC that was here 3 weeks into the next season is hardly anything to count, the issue people are having with your comment is that the forest is inclusive of OC and OL and they consider these to be more contributory to the issues we see than our changing WR corps.

So Mills being the only consistent piece among all four years? Not saying drastically different, but Miller isn't the Miller of the first two years, and Incognito and Wood were a large reason for our run attack succeeding as well as it did. Glenn set the edge and Dawkins took over the role. Not to mention the OCs we had each year: Roman, Lynn, Dennison, and Daboll - how are we supposed to put a consistent offense together with a new playbook every year?

The forest also includes the fact that we had a very different OL between those years. Has a lot to do with how receivers are able to run their routes and gives the QB time to throw accurately and on time. I always liked Sammy more than KB, but doubt he becomes the player he is now if he stayed on the team. Woods was just a solid WR with exceptional blocking ability, too solid to not deal for resources in a rebuild sadly.

That's really what will decide how close the game ends up being - win or loss, the score will reflect how long our offense can stay on the field. While almost all but hopeless, if our offense can stay on the field longer than three plays a drive, we'll be competitive. Their Defense is atrocious so that's all that is currently giving me hope. I'm going to be looking for a lot from Ivory, Clay, Zay, and ugh Holmes - KB will be mia all night with Gilmore on him. Though I like KB in jump ball situations Gilmore is too dirty of a DB to let KB compete in the least. Here's a formula that helps: OL shows up + Ivory healthy and on point = longer drives against a crap run defense team.

Easy champ - I'm not blind to the success of our former players. I pay for Sunday Ticket for a reason beyond just watching the Bills...but maybe you should re-watch our .500 record seasons. Maybe there's a reason they're doing well now but weren't succeeding before. And it's always easy to say "look at all our former players who are doing well now!" I can't remember many, if any, being sad that Sammy or Dareus were dealt, Sammy had to get kicked out of LA to start to show up, and Dareus is doing Dareus in Jax nothing worth his contract. Maybe more so for Woods and Darby, but these are the players that get dealt during rebuilds as they are actually worth something to teams. Preston was a solid defensive QB but not game changing for our defense nor really had a high ceiling, and good for Goodwin, he was always a great WR option but never an irreplaceable talent. Gilmore was hot/cold and had a fair amount of really questionable plays at times that gouged our defense, and part of one of the weakest defenses in the NFL at the moment. I always liked Reggie, would've liked to have seen him have a chance in our D but likely wouldn't be a scheme fit. The reason they are all doing better now? Different teams, different coaches, and dare I say different cultures. They were not the players they are now when they were on our team, and there's no guarantee they would have improved to this point under our team regardless. It's the same logic for Mahomes, no guarantee he ends up anywhere near the QB he is if we draft him. I'm not saying this out of loyalty to McD or Beane, I'm still reserving judgment for when they put together a team, just simple logic and the reality that we never made the playoffs when these guys were a part of the team. Context is everything and we were not winning with those guys, so what would've changed to help them perform the way they are now that doesn't include a new team? I have those thoughts too - I've always questioned defensive coaches ability to translate to HC, but factually there's no basis for that thought. It all depends on the OC/DC and the HC's role within the team and playcalling responsibilities if any. I've always been a proponent of hiring failed HC's that were great OCs/DCs to be our coordinators. They're failed HC tenure prevents them from being poached by other teams, and they seem to turn out for the better (i.e. Schwartz, Wade Phillips, etc.) HC's can have variable involvement and actual say for both sides of the ball, while maintaining oversight. As far as his ability to identify OC success, while it is his decision ultimately (I believe), I doubt he's making it all on his own. I also doubt our Defense looks this way with an offensively minded HC, need to consider that as well. But how is getting a new OC any different than this board calling for our coach's head every other year like we're the Cleveland Bills? It's fine to fire our Coach/GM every other year but bringing in an OC every year until we get it right is out of the question? I'm not saying your inclination is wrong, but continuity is being vastly overlooked by this board and the effects that it can have on players and player performance.

I'm right there with you - the frustration levels are real and I'm having a hard time explaining to my GF (newly converted Bills fan), why this is just so frustrating. BUT the objective reality of the situation is that this is the season we (some of us) expected to have, and that this team is still being built. A partially built NFL team is expected to perform this way. That being said I agree that this is still the NFL and there are no excuses for these blowout losses. It takes a toll on everyone invested in the Bills success, and only adds pressure to the FO and HC to get things right. But there wasn't much that could have actually been done to achieve a different result. Since the first game, here's how the blame finger pointed in succession: first it was the OL being porous, then it was the WR not running routes and dropping passes, then it was scratching our heads with the OC and play calls on certain downs given the passing yd per game, we moved onto the QB realizing hey I don't want to get down on our future franchise, but he isn't anywhere near NFL ready, which leads us to the penultimate top HC saying all the wrong things not foreseeing the future and getting this team ready, ultimately let's add in the GM too since we know everything about their professional workflow and decision making, and it's who's responsible for this whole mess. We've run out of people to blame and things haven't changed, reason being because we simply aren't competing this year. It's a hard pill to swallow, but it's one that sets us up for a chance at a future that we all hope for. Skepticism is certainly warranted, but people judging their moves on offense as though this is what they intended to compete with are absurd. If we, the armchair ethnographers of the Bills, can see the issues with this offense, you can damn well bet our team does as well. But the intention was not to make the playoffs or SB this year, it was to start the build of our offense and continue the process. It's long, arduous, and stressful, but it puts together a team that we can eventually judge based upon performance. No coach in the NFL would've been able to come in when McD and Beane did and give you a team that we could all be proud of at this point. We all signed on for a 3-4 year process and even that is pushing it. They inherited a ship held afloat by a .500 record, but was otherwise sinking in bloated contracts and mediocre play. If you want to patch the holes you need to do so by giving yourself the resources to do so. So far, we're on track. I couldn't care less about the culture talk, it has a place in the locker room and it's a part of what helped us get close enough to the playoff bubble last year. Criticism is necessary for a team regardless of W-L record, and accountability is needed - no one is saying be grateful for just having a team, although that in and of itself could also be true (looking at San Antonio and others). But this is not the team we should be judging and calling for people's jobs. While no one deserves to get their teeth kicked in every week and Bills fans have done nothing to deserve it, it's the reality we're in and honestly some expected all along. Suck it up and support a team for the future, calling for people's jobs now and saying everything is on fire literally does nothing to move forward.

Not commenting on the troll bit, but were you expecting to win the SB this year? Did any part of our playoff berth last year seem convincing? If so, what parts of that team that still remained at the beginning of this year still gave you hope for anything more than what we are seeing this season? Not making excuses here - there are much better ways to compete and still tank, but if it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck, then it's a rebuild, and this is what rebuilds look like. Most importantly, results are not overnight, and take closer to two/three full seasons of roster additions/movement to see end results. We might have given away "talent" or at least better skill players than what we currently have, "talent" is up for debate. But even if we retained almost all of last year's team (excluding Richie and Wood retiring), it's unlikely we are anymore or less successful this year. In fact, TT behind this line would be tragic in all likelihood. What matters is how this team performs after they address the offense and build the roster they want/need. Makes no sense to judge the team at present as no competent individual would claim this to be an end result, and anyone thinking that it's remotely close to the end result should just stop watching this season altogether. Patience is a hard thing to preach given the current state of the team, but I'm really happy some on this board are no where near the FO.

Gruden is tanking to build himself a team. He's already got the contract for it and stupid draft picks. While trading Mack likely would've killed me as a Raiders fan, at least you have the pick capital over the next couple of years. The Giants franchise seems to be the biggest dumpsterfire in the league at present, as much as we love to hate on ours. Hasn't tanking/cleaning house always been a thing? At least as far as I can remember

Makes tremendous sense to consider this context - would be nice to confirm. Either way, if they tinker during garbage time I'm fine with it. To be honest, the rest of the season is all but garbage time right now, so I'm more amenable to tinkering to see what works and what doesn't for given scenarios. Maybe even try new coverages/disguised coverage schemes. If our offense isn't going anywhere, might as well use the season to really find out what this D is made of, as well as develop our rookies on both sides of the ball.

Cover 1's comment re: the Hank concept throw by Anderson struck a chord for me there. The current Allen would likely see the edge pressure, which Mills just literally watches a guy run right by him, and roll out to his right looking for a throw to the flat. I like that Anderson noticed the rush and stepped into an accurate pass to Clay (looks like?) for the first. Hard from that angle to tell how "open" Clay was on the throw and how well timed the route/throw was, but that play in and of itself is what Allen needs to practice more than anything else. I hope he'll get there, but it's a great visual for how far Allen has and needs to go.

So you did anyway? Again, happy to discuss why McD will or will not pan out - just saying that the Bills passing on Mahomes is the reason he isn't and won't be successful, is not a viable argument to that end.

Well, the thing is if you're basing this solely on the fact that we traded a pick to the Chiefs who then drafted Mahomes, as though had we drafted Mahomes everything would be different, then to use a Stephen A term, yes, you are bloviating and really not contributing anything of worth to anyone but yourself. The fact is Mahomes would likely look like Allen this year had the Bills drafted him, and there's no guarantee Mahomes continues to progress once Reid retires in the future, or the talent level around him fluctuates. For his sake I hope he continues down this path since most wrote him off as an air raid arm that likely won't translate into the NFL. I'll entertain other reasons backed with logic and facts for why McD deserves a certain level of ire, but it's otherwise baseless. Especially when there are measurable reasons for why McD hasn't succeeded as a HC in his second year. I'm still 50/50 whether he is the HC answer we've been waiting for, but there is very little to go off of right now to make that determination outright and without question.

Zay is now progressing, finally. Not to where we'd like him to be but progressing with three QBs that wouldn't start anywhere else in the league. KB did help get us into the postseason last year and everyone liked until he started to regress this year. Dawkins is a long term keeper, too. Brought in Ivory, been solid all season long despite being an "aged" player. Since Bodine started our OL has been markedly better, not that he's the solution at Center, but hasn't exactly hurt us tremendously given he was the move made to fill massive holes left by Wood and Richie. To add, why don't we let them get through another draft so people claiming they suck actually have more efficacious data to use to back these baseless and tangential arguments.

Not a Peterman fan, but just saying one of those TDs was thrown by, god I can't believe it myself, Peterman. Anderson threw up some awesome INTs yesterday, and with his stellar performance we put up a whopping 5 points. While a lot of people have opinions about Peterman v. Anderson, and while it's the decision we've been forced into, it's not one that matters. What exactly was the difference in outcome between the Ravens game and yesterday? Heck, let's throw in the GB game too. It was a blowout loss in which our Defense looked anemic (for multiple reasons including possession time), similar score as well, the only difference being it was with our third time is the charm retired QB we pulled in, threw a playbook at, and said, here, don't throw more than 5 picks in a game. Okay I'll throw three and we'll still get blown out. All three of our QBs on this roster have given us a game like we saw on Sunday against the Colts, so why does it matter who we march out against the Pats in a season which is basically all but over at this point?

Yep - this is a great way to become a perennial bottom feeder with an 8-8/9-7 ceiling... Though I wonder how much of the raider's stat will be skewed by Gruden cleaning house and stacking draft picks.

What players/anything do you use from last year's playoff team to build a future? Tyrod? I'm curious what the blue print was that we should have copied here... Just because you don't play yourselves out of a season in which there was a year with borderline unprecedented parity among teams in the league, and where you can luck into the postseason, doesn't mean you have a team to build from for the future. It was clear that we weren't going to be SB contenders with TT under center, and two of our stout OL players retired over the summer with little to no warning (except for Richie really). We built a defense off of last year's success, and continued to add to it this year, with some success and some failure. Next up is the offense which was woeful last year still, yet appeared competent. With TT gone and our two top OL players, this season was only going to be worse, and it's fine. The rebuild was needed, and we're in it now - people either need to have their strokes now, or just let the process play itself out.

I thought he was more of the Star-type production player, silent but impactful - just from the left edge. I have to actually look to see how true this is though, since I've otherwise felt he hasn't been getting many pressures on pass plays and seems to have been completely neutralized outside of the Minnesota/Tennessee games.