GunnerBill

See I totally disagree with that. Which is fine, it's just a different way of looking at football and at playcalling. I would not send the house when I have a team down 3rd and 22 and I know I have two vastly inexperienced safeties. I'd try and protect them. Especially when the Bills defense is NOt a good blitzing defense. You go back and think about back breaking plays over the past two seasons and so many of them come when the Bills have tried to blitz. The playcall didn't work, so it's easy to second guess it, and I'm not saying he got the exact call right, but I am saying I think blitzing there would have been a mistake.

Cut Gabe? Why? 1. His cap him for a WR2 of $2.9m is cheap as chips. 2. He and Renfrow play different positions.

Diggs, Davis, Knox, Kincaid. Easy, easy, answer.

Yea that show is brutal now.

I think he is washed and won't make the 53.

I am not sure Brady's play got better as such it just didn't drop off noticeably.... although when it looked like it might be in his final year with the Patriots he ditched them for a team where there would be more talent around him to compensate for any decline in his play. EDIT: I agree on Rodgers though... he doesn't have Brady's mentality either. Not sure the "want to" will be as strong.

So does murder. Doesn't make it okay.

The Vikes don't have a defense.

It was Geno

Speculation, but not baseless. Two well connected posters here both reported that the Bills loved Addison. Ian Rapaport said too that he had heard there was strong mutual interest between the Bills and Addison. I am 99% convinced he was their guy had he reached their spot.

I wouldn't pay him as the Bills either. He will be signed as an expensive #2 on a team with a QB on a rookie deal. Gabe is a bottom 3rd of the league #2 option. That isn't showing him love. It is being realistic about where he is. But if he gets 10-15m he is at worst returning the 4th round pick we spent as a comp. So no, they should not trade him. He is on a rookie contract that he will massively outproduce again this year. You take advantage of that, and then you take the comp pick on offer. EDIT: but you are comparing him to a guy with 600 yards and 0 touchdowns in 3 seasons and then trying to put that difference just down to Josh Allen. That is ludicrous.

If he was there the Bills would have picked him. So if he turns out to be a moron we got away with one.

I think Mims would suck with Josh too. I don't see Gabe as like him at all. Gabe is a good ball tracker, he has a limited route tree but the routes he can run he runs well and his release package is the area he has most improved since the draft. I will give you his hands. They are sub-optimal. But he is just better than Mims. That is why Gabe is gonna get paid next spring and Mims just got traded for a conditional pick.

At the start of last year he definitely looked slow on the field which is what people were saying. Everyone knew he had speed, he showed it in college and he ran a 4.42 at the Combine... but he looked slow because of his indecision. I am optimistic he is going to take a big step this year.

Gabe is better than Mims. I believed that before the 2020 draft and took a lot of heat for that view. I still believe it.

Poor route running, can't track the ball, poor hands, no release package to speak of. He is a bigger guy who runs fast in straight lines. Can you coach it up? To coach all of that up is an ask.

He still tracked the ball better than Mims. He has the ball skills of a baton.

It is because it isn't enough for the Bills to have an elite QB we must run down every other QB to feel better about ourselves.

I don't think Badol is arguing the Bills should have kept either Beas or Sanders. I think he is arguing their attempts at replacing them with Crowder, OJ Howard and a 5th round draft pick.... all of whom were ultimately beaten out by McKenzie (ie. Beasley's backup) were not sufficiently aggressive. It was clear to me this time last season that the Bills had not got better on the offensive line and were weaker at receiver. This year coming I think they have upgraded the OL (though no sure thing) and while they still have a question mark in the slot I think they have better depth at receiver. I'm not expecting Sherfield and Harty to be stars but I think they are legit NFL depth receivers. Rookie Shakir and Jake Kumerow were not that.

You saw my guy Matt Miller's posts I take it.... draft one, run them hard through their rookie deal (5 years if you drafted them round 1), franchise them once (year 6) let them walk, rinse and repeat? I have discussed this with him before, because he does profess to understand that running back is not a premium position but then he will fall in love with a guy and justify selecting them in round 1 almost every single year - which is his error. I think it is because as well a being a draft guy he is a big college football guy and running backs still matter a lot more in college football. He just can't shake that I fear.

Yea think they will be decent on defense.

Of their 9 wins last only 3 - Houston, Cleveland, New England - were by more than 1 score. Teams now have a year of film on what they do to you with Hill and Waddle in this offense. Most teams started last year blitzing Tua and challenging him to beat them deep. Those were the issues in the Gailey offense but they had answers to that and early season benefitted from a lot of cheap touchdowns. I expect a LOT more sit in coverage, flood the zones, let Tua hold the ball but force him to make good decisions. And if you can negate Hill and Waddle to an extent.... then what is there on offense? An average QB, a below average OL, nothing at tight end, no other notable receiver depth and some role players at running back.

If only he could track the ball as well as Smoke.

I don't give Miami more than an outside shot of winning the East. Miami to win fewer games than last year is a safe bet IMO.

Even if you are not, Shorter's a 5rh round shot to nothing who is a very able special teamer. Mims was a very early 2nd rounder who can do nothing but run fast in straight lines.