Logic

Fair enough. I seem to see a lot of DK Metcalf, and even Kelvin Harmon lately. I also see Marquise Brown going in the 2nd round in a lot of mocks, which is just bananas.

Contrary to popular belief, I feel that Marquise "Hollywood" Brown will be the first WR off the board. Players with his speed and explosiveness always tend to go earlier than analysts predict. I also don't believe the scuttlebutt that he's just a slot WR. I see him as another DeSean Jackson, with the ability to singlehandedly change on offense. Tyreek Hill lite. Not only do I think Brown will be the first WR of the board, I'd also be thrilled if the Bills take him at 9. I realize they desperately need O-linemen and tight ends, but a player like Brown can really change an offense, as I said. With Brown on one side and Foster on the other, the Bills would be taking full advantage of Allen's arm strength, and defenses would have a HELL of a time stopping that much deep speed. Thoughts?

It's not often that a team's needs align so perfectly with the strength of a coming draft. The Bills desperately need offensive linemen and tight ends, and this draft is rich in both. Call me crazy, but I'd like to see the Bills draft TWO tight ends this year. It can be reasonably argued that it's a bigger need than WR. At WR, we at least have Foster and Jones and, to a lesser extent, McKenzie. At tight end we have oft-injured Clay (who may be cut) and then a bunch of JAGs. On top of that, a quality TE is a young QB's best friend.

Oh, and one more thing: Saquon Barkley dropping all the way to 23rd or whatever is just silly. He had 2000 all purpose yards as a rookie, right? And now he drops 21 spots in the re-draft? Nonsense.

In terms of the young influx of QB talent, I see the AFC playing out as a set of divisional duels over the coming decade: AFC East: Allen vs Darnold (some guy named Brady is still around for at least another year, too) AFC North: Mayfield vs Jackson (some guy named Roethlisberger is still around for at least another year, too) AFC South: Watson vs Luck AFC West: Mahomes vs....nobody, really. Once Rivers retires, it's an ugly QB division outside of KC. I'd be willing to bet the Raiders draft a QB with one of their three 1sts, though.

They have Levi Wallace going 20th to Detroit, too. So not one but TWO of the Bills UDFAs would now go in the 1st round in this hypothetical re-draft. If Allen and Edmunds turn out to be the real deal, then you add in Taron Johnson (who looks like a steal at nickel), Harrison Phillips (who looks to be, at worst, a quality rotational tackle), Wyatt Teller (who I'd be willing to bet will get a shot to start the coming season at LG or RG) and Foster and Wallace in UDFA...it will be considered one of -- if not THE -- all time great rookie classes for the Bills.

The holding call stunk. HOWEVER... Football is and always has been an imperfect game. It is subject to human error by the officials, whose jobs are much harder than they appear to us who get to watch the game from our couch in super slo-mo HD. The refs pretty much "let 'em play" all night long on Sunday, for better or worse. The play you mentioned was one exception. The bad holding call didn't cause Goff to throw too late to a wide open Cooks, negating a touchdown. The bad holding call didn't force the Rams to come out in base defensive personnel on four straight plays against the Pats empty sets, leading to an easy Pats touchdown drive. The bad holding call didn't cause Wade Phillips to choose not to double cover Julian PEDelman on numerous critical 3rd downs. Even DIRECTLY after that holding call, on 2nd and 22, the instant replay showed that Robert Woods got WIDE open for first down yardage on a deep square in. Goff missed him and chucked it deep to the well-covered flanker instead. I could go on and on. The bottom line is that blaming the entire outcome of the game on one bad offensive holding call -- when the Rams had NUMEROUS opportunities to win that game, needing only to score TWO touchdowns in four quarters -- is bogus. The Pats earned the win, the Rams earned the loss.

I appreciate the letter and I like Brandon Beane. But as our former GM Foghorn Leghorn once said: I don't wanna hear about the labor pains, just show me the baby.

Agreed. It was, hands down, his best throw of the year. Defenders in his face, good pocket awareness, stepped up and threw a laser. Not only that, he THREW A GUY OPEN into double coverage. Money play.

I believe the contestants in the Super Bowl had more to do with it than the game itself. Most of the country is sick of watching the Patriots in the Super Bowl. Add to it the national disgust at the Saints being cheated and you have a recipe for low ratings.

I agree with Miller's take on Williams: He has a chance to be able to be a good tackle in the NFL, but he's likely an all-pro level guard right out of the gate. Think Zack Martin. As the best available offensive lineman in the draft, Bills would probably be wise to just take him and let the rest sort itself out...ESPECIALLY if the top of the draft plays out the way Miller's mock does, with all the blue chip defensive guys gone by 9.

That's not what I saw at all. The teams were so well prepared for the opposition and the defensive gameplans were so spot-on that neither offense could execute. Not due to "poor play", but due to excellent coaching.

Sneaky great way to end the NFL season: All the teams who tripped over each other to hire "The Next Sean McVay" watching the ORIGINAL Sean McVay coach his offense to a 3-point output on the game's biggest stage. Buyer's remorse, anyone?

And to add to that: Each offense came out for their next drive trying new personnel groupings and play concepts to counter the defense they'd seen up until then. Each defense then accordingly adjusted, both staying one step ahead of the opposing offense. It was move, counter-move all night long. A chess match. It was beautiful, and tense, and close, and awesome. Boring? Psssshhhh.

That was a defensive master class by BOTH coaches. Wade holding the Pats to 13 points on that stage was absolutely amazing. I'll tell ya something, though: I hate how predictable the Rams offense was. They called the same stuff they've been calling all year long. The Eagles game last year showed that the only way to beat the Pats (especially in a Super Bowl where Belichick had two weeks to prepare) is to show them things they've never seen before. The Rams didn't do that AT ALL. There wasn't even a little list of 5 trick or surprise plays or ANYTHING. Nevertheless, great defensive job by Belichick, and great job by Wade Phillips.

And one more thing: There's a difference between a game containing lots of punts because the offenses are inept and a game containing lots of punts because both defenses and defensive play callers are elite. Last night was one of the latter, not one of the former. Most fans don't like watching quality defense, I guess.

Just gonna copy and paste what I wrote in another thread below. And by the way, with as many BLOWOUTS as there have been in Super Bowl history, it's pretty much ridiculous that anyone would call this the most boring Super Bowl ever. A low scoring but close affair is more interesting than a high scoring blowout every time. Anyway: I hate the Pats as much as anyone on earth.But anyone who says that was the most boring Super Bowl ever must have been watching a different game than me.That was a master class of coaching, schemes, and in-game adjustments and counter-moves. It was a constant chess match all game long. An even battle between two excellently well-prepared teams. A slugfest between two of the NFL's all time greatest defensive minds. In the end, the game came down to tendency breakers and the 4th quarter discovery by the Patriots that forcing the Rams into their base defense would allow them passing game advantages, which led to the only touchdown of the game. There have been so many blowout or otherwise uninteresting Super Bowls throughout history. To say that tonight's game was the most boring ever just because it was not high scoring is just...yeah...I don't even know. I can't get on board with it at all. I completely disagree. Even WITH the Patriots being the victors, I found it to be one of the more tense and interesting Super Bowls I can ever remember watching.?‍♂️

I agree that it was not a game that most casual fans -- and CERTAINLY most "Super Bowl only" viewers -- would enjoy. Luckily I am neither of those things. I felt the game had a ton to offer for fans of Xs and Os, great coaching, scheme adjustments, and strategic nuance. In short, I feel it was a game that hardcore football fans couldn't help but love, while casual fans -- to whom only touchdowns equal entertainment -- were bound to hate. As for it being a "coma inducing defensive borefest": Speak for yourself. I found it to have more tension and to be of greater interest strategically and schematically than many of the no-defense shootouts that happened in the NFL this year. We can agree to disagree. It's fine.

I hate the Pats as much as anyone on earth. But anyone who says that was the most boring Super Bowl ever must have been watching a different game than me. That was a master class of coaching, schemes, and in-game adjustments and counter-moves. It was a constant chess match all game long. An even battle between two excellently well-prepared teams. A slugfest between two of the NFL's all time greatest defensive minds. In the end, the game came down to tendency breakers and the 4th quarter discovery by the Patriots that forcing the Rams into their base defense would allow them passing game advantages, which led to the only touchdown of the game. There have been so many blowout or otherwise uninteresting Super Bowls throughout history. To say that tonight's game was the most boring ever just because it was not high scoring is just...yeah...I don't even know. I can't get on board with it at all. I completely disagree. Even WITH the Patriots being the victors, I found it to be one of the more tense and interesting Super Bowls I can ever remember watching. ?‍♂️

The fact that Don Coryell continues to get passed up year after year is absolutely unfathomable, unconscionable, ridiculous. The NFL in 2019 simply would not be what it is without his contributions to the game. A travesty.

Just wanted to pop into say this: I LOVE the fact that Sean McDermott populated his staff with super-experienced veterans that he could lean on in his first two seasons, then replaced those experienced coaching vets with young, hungry, high energy up-and-comers once he had a handle on things. A great and methodical and totally logical approach. Love it.

Oh, is Robert Woods available and I missed it? If you don't like Williams, it's fine, but to say he doesn't have speed and agility? C'mon, man!

I agree that he'd be a good signing at the right price. He already knows the playbook, could provide depth, add a few interesting defensive sub-packages, and mentor our young linebacker duo. I would think that McDermott's presence as head coach would make Buffalo one of his top choices as far as places to finish his career. Just the leadership he could provide and knowledge he could impart to Edmunds and Milano ALONE would be worth the signing, even if he rarely sees the field. All of this, of course, is contingent upon him not wanting a ton of money. Paying a bunch for a 35-year-old with bad knees is never sound roster building strategy.

And also because Thomas Davis is less good at playing football than he used to be. There's that, too. We're talking about a 35-year old linebacker who has had 3 ACL tears.

He'll end up being the replacement for Alex Smith in Washington. Dan Snyder loves him some non-threatening, unexciting, milquetoast, game manager QBs in their 30s. They're PERFECT for risk-averse teams that just want to keep team revenues up despite a crappy on-field product.