HappyDays

They didn't do that because our coaching inevitably fails in critical moments in playoff games year after year after year. There were multiple coaching issues during that final offensive series. Wasting a 1st round pick on the easiest offensive position to fill besides RB would not solve that problem. Even if you want to say center was a problem last year, fine. It's an easily solvable problem without using a 1st round pick. Outside WR is not so easily solvable.

That was Chris Jones on Dawkins, not on Morse. Anyways, Chris Jones is a mismatch against any offensive lineman in the final minutes of a game, other than maybe 6 or 7 guys in the entire league. You aren't going to get over the hump by improving at center and expect to just take Chris Jones out of the game. We get over the hump by out scoring KC. Which means when three perfect deep balls hit the intended receiver in the hands, we can't have all three of them hitting the ground.

The only thing I'll say is a lot, if not all WRs take some plays off when they know they're not getting the ball. But once you're pegged as a guy that takes off plays it becomes the entire story around you. Perhaps the Bills will find that the story doesn't match the tape. Nobody seems to question his willingness to play when he knows he might be getting the ball. My concern with Mitchell is that he doesn't have WR1 traits. I could see him being a very good WR2 but of course we want more than that from a 1st round pick. I would feel better about him being the pick if it came after a trade back.

I have warmed up to Mitchell. I'm not sure he has a single elite trait but his all around package plus his combine numbers make me think there is upside there to be a true #1. The only thing is I don't know if he'll be on our board if the reported work ethic/football character issues are true. That is one factor that the Bills have simply not been willing to look past.

It also has Chris Grier written all over it. To me he is the closest modern equivalent of Doug Whaley. He gets easily bamboozled by "off the bus" talent but has no clue how to build a team for a playoff run.

This was a coaching issue, not a roster management issue.

Drafting two WRs with our first two picks would just bump Mack Hollins off the roster and increase the chance that we come away with a stud at the position. It would also help us catch up to the rest of the league as far as investment at the position over the last four years. I would be all for this if the value is there.

How would you feel about Coleman after a trade back that netted us a 3rd rounder?

Correct. So based off that game our #1 need is an outside WR that can win vertically. A close 2nd is a pass rusher that can actually take down Mahomes. We didn't lose to the Chiefs because of our IOL.

The blips don't add up. Only the top 51 contracts count towards the cap. Vet minimums push other vet minimums out of the calculation. My hope is that the team will be more willing to let day three picks replace the likes of DeShawn Williams and Casey Toohill. But we still need a baseline piece in place before the draft because maybe we won't get any DEs for example on day three. At least now we are spending the vet minimum or close to it on these baseline depth pieces, instead of paying Jordan Phillips $5M to sit in the medical tent.

One of their reported top 30 visits is a DT projected to go in the 6th round (Khristian Boyd out of Northern Iowa). I think Beane has finally learned his lesson after years of wasting money 3-4 players deep at the position. The savings from Jordan Phillips/Tim Settle to the depth DTs he has signed this offseason is probably enough to cover the year one salary of Curtis Samuel. Small philosophical changes at the bottom of the roster lead to more difference makers at the top of the roster.

Cutting the fat was as much about bloated salaries as it was about age. I criticized the DQ signing for being too expensive for an older player. This signing however is probably vet minimum for a roster bubble player. Save your energy for moves that are worth thinking about. This one is a blip on the transaction wire. If it means Beane isn't reaching for a DT in the 1st round, all the better.

Beane is like a college kid who spent years overdrafting his credit card and now is finally forced to make smart spending decisions. Let's hope it's a long term lesson and not just a short term change out of necessity.

Sure but the goal isn't to have a passing offense that's described as "not struggling." The goal is to have the most productive passing offense in the league, one capable of simply blowing other teams out of the water and steamrolling its way to a #1 seed. Considering our annual abysmal defensive performance in the playoffs, that caliber of offense is the only way we're going to sniff a Super Bowl. And let's be honest. The offensive cast as it stands right now is not at that caliber. It's good enough to be a top 5 passing offense like it always is under Josh Allen, but it's still an entire tier short of where it needs to be to get over the hump.

No, I see him as more of a slot at the next level. His skill set is too redundant for what we already have on the roster for my liking. I want someone with physical traits, top end size/strength or speed or both.

Thomas, Franklin, Coleman, Legette, Mitchell, Worthy.

I don't think so. Beane called Samuel a "weapon" when asked about him and alluded to his early days in Carolina when he was a hybrid RB/WR. I think they see him as the much better version of McKenzie/Harty. Clearly they value that role, they just haven't been able to get it right yet. Throwing a lot of money at Samuel is a way of them finally getting that role figured out once and for all. It won't preclude them from drafting a true outside WR high in the draft.

All of us have our preferences for which WR we want. For me it's Franklin, Coleman, or Legette in no particular order. But if it helps, I'm not as tied to the specific player as I am to the position. I just want a projected X WR. If we take Mitchell for example he isn't my preference but I would still be happy that we followed the right process and wait to see how he develops as a player.

I'm at a point where I would still take the WR in this scenario, or at least trade down with someone that is eager to take the pass rusher or whatever position is sticking out as BPA, and then take a WR at the lower pick. I'm looking at it almost like a team that still needs a QB, not quite to the same level of course but the same idea - take a WR even if they're not quite the highest graded player on your board. The WR position is too important and we have invested less resources into it than probably every other team in the league over the past 5 years. In a draft class like this I really can't find any excuse to pass up on the opportunity.

What are you on about? I didn't respond because your post went all over the place and I decided we had each said our side and that was that. But sure I'll respond to your callout. Perhaps you don't realize that two things can be true at once? In this case, really three things: 1) 1st round WRs are much more likely to turn into 1,000 yard WRs. 2) WRs that play with elite QBs are much more likely to turn into 1,000 yards. 3) This WR draft class in particular is strong in the top 50 picks. That is my whole point. Because of these three statements all being (inarguably) true, the most likely valuable thing the Bills can do in this draft is pick a WR in the 1st round. I'll let you have the last word. Don't waste it.

Honestly really happy for him. I didn't think a team would give him this kind of money right now. I hope he makes us regret cutting him.

Adam Thielen got 1,000 yards last year, at the age of 33, playing in a hilariously awful passing offense. It really isn't that hard, especially when you have an elite QB throwing you the ball. The Bills just haven't made a serious effort to get a 1,000 yard caliber WR since 2020. By putting together that list of other WRs you're completely missing my point. In our offense with our QB a 1st round WR is most likely to end up being a high impact high value pick. If you draft them to a team led by Sam Howell or Mason Rudolph, probably not. @Kirby Jacksonsaid it best in another thread. If we are going to win a Super Bowl, it will be because of Josh Allen. Not because of our DL rotation. We have to start doing everything we can to maximize Allen's abilities on the field because his career will be gone before we know it. You do that by adding weapons when the opportunity is there. If this 1st round class doesn't represent that kind of opportunity, none of them ever will. FWIW I believe Beane knows this. He can go on McAfee and make a big show about how he's going to wait to take deeper position groups (like WR) later in the draft. His actions tell me otherwise. He called Curtis Samuel a "weapon," not a WR. He hasn't added a legitimate outside WR in FA. He didn't restructure Diggs' contract. They've met with all of the 2nd tier WR prospects. All of this evidence points to him drafting a WR high with the intention of them being our future #1.

My point pertains to this draft. Most drafts won't have this many high quality WR prospects available at the end of the 1st round. I'm not criticizing the Rousseau pick in that particular draft, I'm saying that if we took a Rousseau equivalent while passing on say a Kincaid equivalent we would ultimately be disappointed. And in this draft class specifically there are going to be WRs taken somewhere between 28 and 60 that become high impact starters. I know this almost with complete certainty. I am not nearly as certain that a pass rusher or any other position on defense is going to have a high impact starter taken in that range in the draft.

So to be clear, I'm not guaranteeing that any WR we draft in the 1st round will be a 1,000+ yard WR. There is obviously a chance they will be a complete and utter bust. That is the risk of any pick. My point is that if you assume you end up decently happy with the 1st round pick - not a bust, not a superstar, just a solid overall 1st round pick - if that player is a WR their impact is likely to be higher than any other position. Ideally a WR we take in the 1st round would get 1,500+ yards in a season at some point, but a good baseline for a decent value pick in that spot would be 1,000 yards by their sophomore season. I'll use Kincaid and Rousseau as examples. Kincaid had a solid rookie season. No one would say he set the league on fire. But that solid rookie season translated into franchise records, a clear measurable impact on the offense, and a TD in a playoff game. Rousseau on the other hand has been a solid player since entering the league. I haven't felt that kind of impact from him yet. His playoff highlight was grazing Mahomes' shoulder on a play that ended in a 1st down. To maximize the likelihood that the 1st round pick will have a measurably high impact on the team, it has to be a WR. Playing in an offense with Allen and a decent mix of supporting talent means their floor will be higher than any other position we can take.

Part of being a good GM is understanding your own weaknesses. I hope Beane understands that his board is not infallible. Which is no slight against him - nobody's draft board ends up being even close to right when all is said and done. If you're right even 50% of the time you're one of the best to have ever done it. All the talk about BPA assumes there is some kind of objective BPA. But of course there isn't one. So Beane should make the pick that is most likely to have a high impact ceiling on the team. Any WR he takes that turns out even just a decent 1st round pick will end up being a 1,000+ yard WR. Just like Kincaid ended up breaking franchise records. So drafting what he thinks is the best WR available is hitting the easy button on maximizing the 1st round pick. Drafting, say, Chop Robinson is hitting the hard button. That pick isn't likely to have the impact of a 1,000 yard WR. Do the easy thing. Get the franchise a likely win out of our 1st round pick.