GunnerBill

I think the second half of last season was very must a needs must scenario. It is not consistent with what we have seen from this team basically since Allen's second year. I have been a long standing opponent of the Bills wanting to be a team to featues the run as more of a change up. I defended Daboll agains the "he needs to build a running game" crowd and I will continue to argue that the long term route for success for this team is Josh's right arm. The team has always behaved that way as well take out that 8 or 9 game run the backend of last year. If your fear is correct and they wish to lean heavily into that as their identity I will be calling for change unless they make the Superbowl. You have my absolute word on that. I don't change my opinions based on what the team does. I am absolutely consistent on my view of how the Bills should play and should build and what and where the responsibility for the mistakes lies. EDIT: on the New England point my disagreement with you was not about the fact that it went to ***** drafting wise. It definitely did. It is just that your timing is out and it significantly post dated Pioli leaving. That is the bit I don't buy. I don't claim to know what the reason is but it wasn't the loss of Scott Pioli.

He also was NOT Sauce's guy on that play. Sauce was trying to rescue someone else's screw up.

If they go down the run the ball route - yes. I'd agree. Why do I blame Beane for the resource allocation so far? Because I look at what they did where he learned his trade and I listen to what HE himself says. He makes no apologies for prioritising the defensive front. That is how HE believes in building football teams. If the Bills try and be a "balanced" offense and run it more I will be for a house clearing. You can bank on it. So far that is not what they have done beyond a limited spell at the end of last year where after Allen Cook was almost all they had. If they want to become a run heavy team this year I will be wanting them all out. I guarantee you that. Great. He'd be wrong. They drafted better immediately after Pioli than before him. It went horribly wrong about 10 years ago. Not sure why. Don't claim to be close enough to know. But that way post dated Pioli's departure.

Id be stunned if Miller leads the team on sacks. Honestly stunned. I still don't think it completely put of the question that he realises he can't go in camp and retires before the season. That is how little faith I have in his remaining ability to play.

But the core of that time was still drafted in that era. They had Brady playing at an elite level pretty much throughout. That period of drafting was really solid. Definitely top 10 in the league. It was post Pioli. Who knows what happened after, and the last 10 years their drafting was shambolic. And it showed on the field.

Their best spell of drafting was right after Pioli left. So I don't buy that. It was pretty horrible his last 10 years, but that 08-14 drafting period was the basis of the second NE dynasty - the likes of Mayo, Hightower, Vollmer, Solder, McCourty, Gronkowski, Collins, Chung, Jones, White, Edelman, Mason.... and UDFAs like Andrews and of course Malcolm Butler. That was the core of that second era of Superbowl wins. Their drafting after that was pretty shambolic and Brady could see that group ageing out and the lack of talent coming through on the roster and it was a factor, no doubt, in his decision to go to Tampa. On the McCourty vs Gronk question, sure he didn't know Gronk was going to be a top 3 all time tight end. Had he known that he would have taken him first.... but if you think you have a really good corner (and McCourty was drafted as a corner though played almost all his career at safety where he has had multiple all pro nods himself... not like he is any kind of bust) and a really good tight end positional value means you should always take the corner first. I do suspect there was a key departure from the New England front office at some point that removed a check / balance on Bill and he ended up following his own confirmation bias down the rabbit hole from the mid 2010s. That said I have heard others say he just always values smart, physical football players and as the game became more and more about explosion and speed he didn't adapt with the trend. Could be that too. But I don't buy it was Pioli. They drafted top 10 in the league at worst for the 6 years after his departure, despite always being at the end of the round. It's after that it fell apart.

It's easily Von for me. I hope I am wrong because I think he is done. My expectations for his season are so low. If the over/under on sacks from him was 4.5 I'd still take the under. I hope I'm wrong on Taylor Rapp and Keon Coleman to lesser extents too. But the potential differential benefit of being wrong on Von is greater.

He's had better coaching, for absolute sure. Better GMs? Not convinced. New England had a really good drafting period between about 2008 and 2014 but otherwise their draft either side of that was sketchy. Whereas the Packers had Ted Thompson for much of that period who was a top level GM. Gutekunst has done a nice job re-tooling the roster since too. I think Rodgers had comfortably better GMs.

I suspect the answer lies in the lack of true game changing talents and @NewEra is onto something with that. McDermott's D succeeds in the regular season by being fundamentally sound, well coached and cohesive. In the playoffs it feels like actually they need one or two guys to make that critical play. But it is completely fair to say the D has underperformed in our playoff exits.

So I put the WR oversight squarely on Brandon Beane. The way he drafts is the way Carolina drafted when he was a senior exec in that front office. Loved defensive front 7, hates early picks on receivers. I don't believe that while he has control over the draft that will change whether the Head Coach was Sean McDermott, Ben Johnson or Bill Walsh. If they come out determined to be a ground and pound team I will be the first one to say that they need to clear house. They never have since Josh has been here. They have always been near the top of the league in pass %. So while I understand that fear, especially with some of what happened at the end of last year I choose to believe that was needs must rather than a sign this regime wants to play that way because the rest of the evidence from 2019 on is to the contrary.

We were healthy in 20. For sure. We just weren't ready to play at KC's level. They beat us twice that season and the gap was evident. They were relatively healthy but without Tre in 2021 and Levi Wallace was the player who made two critical mistakes inside the final 2 minutes. But ultimately 2021 was the day we should have beaten them in the post season and coaching blew it. No question there.

I mean sure. That is possible. But if we take every Head Coach in football and throw them in the barrel and pick one the chance you get one better than Andy Reid is remote. Now I accept we are approaching the point where actually you might just have to try someone else. I understand that and agree with it. But I don't think that is anything like a considered plan to get better. I think its a last roll of the dice. To get me there I have to be in last roll territory.

I see that line of thinking but I think we have a darn good Head Coach and trying to find a better one than Reid is the proverbial needle in a haystack. So I think the preferable route is to let the two of them keep swinging and hope one of those KC games that breaks out way in the key play or two happens in January not October.

I think Mahomes is the best QB in football. Reid is the best coach in football. And when the best QB and best Coach get together history says its really hard to beat them.

My position on McDermott has zero emotion attached, I assure you.

There really isn't.

They have those conversations before the season about their developments plans for rookies and Beane is in those meetings with Sean, Coordinators and position coaches and I am led to believe has a voice in them too. But there is an old phrase - even the best laid plans rarely survive first contact with the enemy. And once they are into the swing of the season he would, rightly, step back from that and it would be for the staff. So let's say they agree that Coleman will play 60-70% of the outside snaps (health allowing) through 8 weeks and then they will ramp him up.... but then they lose MVS and Samuel to injuries in the first 4 weeks.... at that point Coleman's snaps go up and McDermott and co abd not checking in with Beane on that. Equally if he was getting his 60-70% but running wrong routes and dropping balls and they decided to dial him back that would be a cosches decision.

The Lions and the Packers are GM success stories more than HC success stories IMO. That isn't to downplay the turnaround Campbell has overseen because turning around losing cultures is the hardest coaching trick in sport. Stefanski is an overpromoted OC. Too early to say on Ryans, but I do like him.

1. Brady was part of the reason. The numbers don't jump off the page, agreed. But the numbers the last 4 or 5 games of Dorsey were even worse AND his offense was so darn predictable I could almost call out the plays from my couch in London. No wonder defenses seemed to know what was coming. But the MAIN reason for 6-1 down the stretch was the defense really rounded into form before the injury bug hit again at the end of the year. 2. The change had to come. Dorsey was lost. The offense was turning it over at a crazy rate (13 in his last 6 games as OC) and he was just coming out and running the same stuff over and over. You might say "the DC in the same period was struggling" and you'd be right. I was actually advocating for McDermott to give up playcalling at the same time. He didn't and he found his groove. Maybe the same would have happened to Dorsey? Possible. But he was part of the problem. As for other options... well in-season you are really restricted to guys on your own staff. The Colts tried the "wildcard from outside" approach to a mid-season coaching change in 2022. It was a disaster. Joe was the best option on the staff. After the season they interviewed Joe and Thad Lewis. People at the time were sure Thad was some sort of token interview but his work with Baker Mayfield last year was impressive and he interviewed for four OC openings in this hiring cycle. His star is definitely rising and while Brady was always likely to get this job Thad was a credible candidate and will be an NFL OC soon enough. 3. As for the bonus... He hired Rick Dennison who was a very experienced, Superbowl winning OC. I hated it as a hire. And it predictably sucked. He hired Daboll a very well respected NFL position coach who hadn't had success at two previous NFL OC stops but with bad talent both times and had just OC'd a National Championship team. I thought that was a good hire and so it turned out. Then he promoted Dorsey, a first time OC, from within (after strong urgings from Josh to do so). I thought that was the right move but his limitations soon showed. It wouldn't surprise me if he ends up having success as an NFL OC at some point but he will need better skill position talent because he was running a very simple, very vanilla, scheme that essentially says "my guy is gonna beat your guy with talent." And the Bills skill position talent wasn't up to that. Then he hired Joe. As for candidates they have interviewed / tried to interview previously: In 2017 they interviewed Mike McCoy (experienced OC, had been a Head Coach) who was their first choice and tried to interview Brad Childress (experienced OC, had been a Head Coach) before landing on Dennison (experienced OC who was a non-playcalling OC on a Superbowl winner). In 2018 as far as I am aware Daboll (experienced NFL and college National Championship winning OC) was the only interview. In 2022 they interviewed Tee Martin (former college OC NFL position coach with Ravens) and Ken Dorsey (former NFL QB, first time OC, experienced NFL position coach). In 2024 they interviewed Thad Lewis (former NFL QB, current position coach, no OC experience) and Joe Brady (limited NFL OC experience but won National Chanpionship as college OC). Pretty wide range. Clear experience mattered more at the start when McDermott was a new Head Coach. Though I actually dislike the three names in the 2017 search more than anyone we have interviewed since. Which is kind of the point on hiring an NFL OC - if they are experienced and still an OC they probably haven't had much success or they'd be a Head Coach. Otherwise you are looking at younger, inexperienced but hopefully innovative. Half the league - 16 NFL teams - changed OC this offseason. The breakdown of replacements was: 6 first time NFL OC: Zac Robinson (Falcons), Brad Idzik (Panthers), Dan Pitcher (Bengals), Klint Kubiak (Saints), Nick Holz (Titans), Ryan Grubb (Seahawks). 8 with NFL OC experience but not been NFL Head Coach: Joe Brady (Bills), Shane Waldron (Bears), Ken Dorsey (Browns), Luke Getsy (Raiders), Greg Roman (Chargers), Alex Van Pelt (Patriots), Kellen Moore (Eagles), Liam Coen (Buccaneers), 2 with NFL OC and HC experience: Arthur Smith (Steelers), Kliff Kingsbury (Commanders). I think of those experienced names, other than Brady, Waldron and Moore were the two most interesting as potential Bills candidates. They both fall in the sweet spot for me as having had some success despite not having had a Head Coach shot. Arthur Smith and Greg Roman are both very good OCs but only if you are playing hide the Quarterback and running the hell out of the football. Moore's scheme has some similarity with what we have traditionally run as well so there would have been a bit of carry over. Waldron probably less so. None of which is to say I think Brady is a slam dunk of a hire. He'd have been in my top 3 of everyone on that list personally. I am more optimistic than you are based on what he was able to do in adding some wrinkles towards the end of last year using motion, leverage and more innovative route combinations. But it is cautious optimism and he still has to prove it. His Carolina spell does give pause. It is an argument that the "you must have an offensive Head Coach" crowd have used. The small window in which to find a good OC... and then lose them and start again. Personally I think as long as you find good ones that isn't an issue. The latest change in OC came because they hired the wrong guy more than anything else. If Brady proves it and at some point lands a Head Coaching job, good. It means in the meantime the Bills have has success.

This is mainly correct. Although Brown wasn't around in 2021. He had gone and we had brought in Sanders but by the playoffs Gabe had supplanted him as the starter. The OL had actually been a weakness for much of 2021 - it hadn't been able to do much of anything and had cost us defeats in the regular season but they did find a bit of something down the stretch and play well, at least in pass pro, in the playoffs. I actually think the current line is the one thing we have on offense better than in 2021. But I agree (leaving the defense aside for a moment and no argument the defense needs to play better than in our playoff exits) the offense hasn't been at its best in the past two playoff campaigns. They have missed Daboll's creativity (and arguably his chemistry with Josh) and the offensive weaponary hasn't been good enough. I am cautiously optimistic on Brady, he certainly added some creative wrinkles when he took over last year, I am less so on the weaponary. Think the WR room is probably another offseason away from being Championship ready.

Yea. And the McDermott haters find it almost impossible.

No they didn't.

Apologies. 15-1.

What was Reid's record in playoff games with KC pre-Mahomes? Reid is a great coach. A HoF coach. But Pat Mahomes is the reason they are 13-1 against non-Brady teams.

Interesting. Unusual for a team that has won its division every year. Especially as three of the four years second AFCE team has made the playoffs (NE in 2021, MIA in 2022 and 2023).