Logic

He played tackle in college and seems to have the size for it. He also seems to have a diverse enough skillset that a switch to the interior wouldn't be out of the question. I even saw a Twitter debate over whether or not CENTER would actually be his best position. Me? I would start him out at right tackle and, worst case scenario, he slides inside to guard, a la Zack Martin.

Give me a big money o-line and a mid-to-late round RB all day over an elite RB with a mediocre line.

I believe the scheme is largely McDermott's. Things like the Double A-Gap blitz package, the reliance on simple zone schemes but with great disguised looks by the safeties to keep opponents guessing, the reliance on the front four to get pressure but featuring lots of creative stunts and twists...all of that has McDermott's fingerprints all over it. So I think of it as "his" scheme. Leslie Frazier's defenses, while they have many similarities, also had many differences. For instance, I seem to recall Frazier's defenses when he was the head guy being much more Tampa 2 based than McDermott's. While it's McDermott's scheme, I think Frazier does a lot of the teaching and game day coaching of the defense. So all the emphasis on fundamentals and the teaching of the scheme largely falls to Frazier, and then I think Frazier is usually the primary creator of the defensive gameplan and the one most often calling the plays on gameday. With the defense playing McDermott's scheme, but with it being taught and coached by Frazier, I think of it as a true collaborative effort. Also, make no mistake: While McDermott coaches both sides of the ball and does his best to be an all-around coach and not JUST a defensive guy ...I do think more of his coaching energies and expertise go toward helping the defense. It's simply where his experience lies. I believe Daboll has a bit more autonomy with the offense than Frazier has with the defense. Just a hunch.

Excellent post, and I agree. Those who don't want to see the Bills spend premium assets on the defensive line are going to be the same people bitching and moaning in a year or two when the Bills suddenly can't pressure the opposing QB at all and, consequently, McDermott's defense suffers a huge drop-off. Two position groups that I never, ever get mad at my team for selecting in the high rounds: Offensive linemen and defensive linemen. If the first round is long on quality defensive linemen and short on quality offensive players, then by all means, the Bills should take a defensive lineman. You can never have too many good ones.

If the Bills are able to trade back 5-10 spots in the draft and gain an extra 2nd rounder, it would be AMAZING. I saw a national (non Bills fan) mock draft earlier that saw this exact scenario playing out. By the end of round 2, they had taken OL Jonah Williams, TE Irv Smith, and WR Marquise Brown and still had 8 picks left to work with. *Drool*

It may be a bit early in the process to ask this question, but there's not much else to discuss, so here goes: Every year, there's that one player that, for whatever reason, you really hope your favorite team drafts. Something about said player -- his intangibles, off-the-charts athleticism, whatever it may be -- causes you to watch absurd amounts of Youtube footage and mock him to your favorite team in every mock draft and so on. For me last year it was Harrison Phillips. His wrestling background, high character, and nastiness on the field just screamed "McDermott's Bills". So who is that player for you this year? Mine is Dalton Risner, OT Kansas State. Dude is a vocal leader, has all the measurables you want, could play RT or G right out of the gate, and there was even this, about potentially playing with the Bills: “I have a really good friend, Harrison Phillips, who plays defensive tackle for ya’ll. Another small-town, corn-fed kid like myself. I really like that guy a lot. I’d love to be in Buffalo and help out their offensive line.” If Risner ends up in Buffalo he’s looking forward to battling his friend Phillips in practice. As the saying goes in the Buffalo locker room under coach Sean McDermott: “iron sharpens iron.” “He’s a great player, man,” Risner said. “I’m sure we’ll throw hands at practice and I’m sure it’ll get ugly but off the field we’ll probably go get something to eat together. He’s a great football player and it’d be a battle in the trenches for sure.”

I believe that the Bills will have him on the payroll as an ambassador, just like they do with Kelly and Thomas. Down the line 15 years, after his kids have grown up and gone off to college? It wouldn't shock me if Kyle became a coach. Then again, it also wouldn't shock me if his competitive fire and still-awesome athleticism lead him to commit fully to golf. I'm not sure a lot of people realize just how good Williams actually is at golf.

Such an excellent and interesting read. Great job by Wickersham here. With regard to the importance of having a good owner, I always think of Marv Levy's autobiography. The part of Marv's book that stood out the most to me -- and which made me very depressed at the time -- was his saying that in order for a team to have consistent success, it needs to start at the top: Good ownership. That quote got me down in the dumps because, while I loved Ralph Wilson and appreciate all he did for the city of Buffalo, he was in the last years of his life and was, at the time I read it, an absentee owner most known for not wanting to pay his coaches or players. I saw the dysfunction trickling down from him, to the carousel of bad GMs, to the second rate coaches, and concluded the Bills were a hopeless cause. But then a funny thing happened: The Pegulas purchased the team, committed to keeping it in Buffalo, made it clear that they would spare no expense in upgrading facilities, hiring coaches, paying players, etc, and restored hope where it was lacking. I feel confident in the present and future of the Buffalo Bills, from the top down. I also feel bad for fan bases who don't get to feel that way. Devoted fans who have to put up with the Dan Snyders, Jimmy Haslams, and Mike Browns of the world. I am so thankful that we are not in that situation. I am so thankful for the Pegulas. On a side note: I'd LOVE to read a similar piece about the Brandon, Whaley, Marrone, Rex years of the Bills. It's probably for the best that that's all in the past and not in the public eye, though.

What you described (coaches being overly judicious in deciding whether or not to use their one flag) seems fine to me. It ensures that this no measure won't be overused or slow the game down on a regular basis. As you say, the coach -- knowing he only has ONE opportunity -- is likely only going to through the flag in a crucial, game-swinging instance. To me, to at least have that ONE opportunity is a better option than what coaches have now, which is no recourse at all.

Sure. As soon as he does something on the field.

LOL

Who knows. The only thing that would keep from thinking they're going to spend a 1st round pick on a running back is the degree to which they have made it clear that McCoy and Ivory are a big part of the Bills' plans going forward. If McCoy gets traded away, then sure. As things stand now, though? It doesn't seem like a very smart use of resources. If I was betting money on what position our 1st round pick will play, I'd bet that it's somewhere along the defensive line.

Not sure if anyone has said this yet, but the CFL gives each head coach ONE flag (separate from the usual challenge flags) with which to challenge a pass interference call. Since this rule was instituted, the average time of games in the CFL has actually gone DOWN. I don't see why we can't give each coach one flag -- say it's blue, just for the sake of argument -- and that's all they get. They can each challenge ONE pass interference play a game. Is that REALLY going to add a bunch to the length of games? I say no. If you're going to let PI be a spot foul, you have to let it be challenged.

Yeah. People completely overlook/ignore the fact that if McDermott wanted to be conservative and win low scoring games, he would have just kept Tyrod Taylor and possibly also Rick Dennison around. The fact that they jettisoned both the OC and QB right after they made the playoffs with them told me all I need to know about what McDermott wants out of his offense.

The Bills 100% need an upgrade at center. It's the third most important offensive position, after QB and LT. Everyone knows a young QB's best friend is a quality center. Ask Jim Kelly how he felt about Kent Hull. I really, REALLY hope the Bills don't rest on their laurels at the center position. It's a huge need. I'm fine with keeping Bodine as a backup.

Thanks for posting this. A lot of people rolled their eyes when Daboll was hired. Me? I was excited. I felt that his recent experience in the college game -- not to mention his added years being a part of New England's offense -- would mean modern passing concepts would FINALLY be coming to Buffalo, NY. Lo and behold, that's exactly what happened. The Bills incorporated more modern passing concepts last season than I've seen...well...maybe ever. It was refreshing and encouraging. For those that say McDermott prefers to win 13-10 defensive struggles, I disagree. And I think that the team taking a big-upside guy like Allen and pairing him with a creative mind like Daboll -- who, as the article pointed out, was running some cutting edge stuff by the end of the year -- is proof. McDermott wants to have a stifling defense, yes, but I think he also wants to score a ton of points. Couldn't be more excited about the 2019 season.

Personally, I think the Pats are going to handle the Rams relatively easily. Sadly, I think the SAINTS were the team that had the horses to beat the Pats. Why? Because the Saints held every rusher they faced this season under 75 yards. Stop the run and you beat the Pats. The Rams will not be able to stop the run. Sony Michel will have 100+ yards on the game, the Pats will shorten the game just like they did against the Chiefs, and they'll win easily. I'm STILL mad this morning about the non-call in the Saints game. I can't even imagine how Saints players and fans are feeling.

What a thoughtful and thorough response. So glad I spent the time. ? And with this, I'm logging off for the night to go have some dinner and watch a movie. I will happily pick up this conversation in the morning if anyone wishes to.

https://www.amnesty.org.uk/trump-human-rights-autopsy-report https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2018/country-chapters/united-states https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/421814-us-risks-human-rights-abuses-by-funding-border-wall https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/trump-human-rights-and-hypocrisy/ http://hrlr.law.columbia.edu/the-trump-human-rights-tracker/ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/06/withdraws-human-rights-council-180619173311272.html Above are six links from a variety of places, including Amnesty International, The Hill, The Seattle Times, and Columbia Law School's "Trump Human Rights Tracker". The second to last of these lists, among others, the following (and goes into further detail, if you click the link): - Ended Deferred Action for DACA program - Secretary of State lifted the human rights conditions on arms sales to Bahrain - Revoked protections for women in the workplace - Repealed a rule restricting coal companies from dumping mine waste into streams And as the Al Jazeera article discusses, the United States, under Trump's watch, withdrew from the Human Rights Council. As the above links detail, there have been a litany of human and civil rights abuses under Trump. Instead of immediately insulting me, feel free to click through the links and read the things that I'm reading that make me say that Trump is a human and civil rights NIGHTMARE. And before anyone comes back with "none of those are worse than human trafficking!": I NEVER SAID THEY WERE! NOT ONCE! I only said that to selectively be outraged about one (admittedly horrendous and important) thing while conveniently ignoring many OTHER horrendous and important issues (ranging from environmental destruction that will have far-reaching impact on many American citizens to civil rights abuses against immigrant and LGBTQ populations) was hypocritical. That's all. To keep claiming that I dismiss or don't recognize the importance of the human trafficking issue -- or that my dislike for Trump's wall plan means that I don't recognize the seriousness of said issue -- is just dishonest.

Your requests of me are flawed and unreasonable, and here's why: You're presenting Trump's wall as the ONLY reasonable way to curb human trafficking. You're speaking as though, by not wanting to build Trump's wall, I must support or overlook human trafficking, or that I don't think it's a problem. So when I said that Trump has done damage to human rights, you responded by asking me to justify how said damage is worse than human slavery, despite the fact that I said no such thing. I said that the ability to pinpoint human slavery as an issue to be passionate whilst also ignoring the litany of OTHER human rights abuses taking place under Trump's administration seemed a hypocritical position. I DID NOT say, nor have I at any point implied, that human trafficking isn't a problem or shouldn't be addressed. It obviously IS a problem. Trump's wall is not the only answer to that problem, though. Insisting that it IS the only answer, while also implying that I think human trafficking isn't a problem to begin with simply because I disagree with the wall, is inaccurate and unfair. TRUMP'S WALL IS NOT THE ONLY ANSWER TO HUMAN TRAFFICKING. NOT WANTING SAID WALL DOES NOT EQUAL NOT CARING ABOUT HUMAN TRAFFICKING OR NOT WANTING IT TO BE ADDRESSED!

Here's the honest truth: Everyone is free to use whatever language they want. And I'm free to think they if THEY think that using language that is derogatory to the mentally handicapped is funny and "no big deal" -- and choose to use said language over an infinite amount of other options in their FOOTBALL MESSAGE BOARD PROFILE -- then they probably aren't the most empathetic or kindhearted person around. DC Tom insults people CONSTANTLY on these forums. I think he has a lot of anger, and it's easier to take it out on internet strangers than to deal with it. It has nothing to do with controlling or censoring anything. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but its consequence is the freedom of those who hear said speech to form opinions about the empathetic and intellectual capacity of the speaker. Cue more mean-hearted, sexist, homophobic or otherwise vitriolic responses now from the likes of DC Tom and The_Dude now. If all that you think Trump has done to damage human rights in this country and abroad is "mean tweets", then your head must be irretrievably deep in the sand.

I truly appreciate the thoughtful response and your willingness to share. With regard to your notion that I am silently complicit in human trafficking by rejecting the idea of the wall, though: Respectfully, I reject the ability of someone who believes that Donald Trump has "advanced the cause of human freedom" telling me that I am silently complicit in anything. To support Trump (though you were careful to say you don't support him, you DID imply that you support his actions as president) is to be complicit in a staggering laundry list of destructive, racist, xenophobic, inhumane, and vile acts and causes. I'm glad that the issue of human trafficking is important to you, though I'm not sure how such an apparently thoughtful and empathetic person could turn a blind eye to the litany of OTHER human rights abuses for which Trump has been partially or wholly responsible during his national tragedy of a presidency. Here comes some sexist comments from The_Dude to defend the guy who thinks saying "retards" is funny! Everyone gather 'round! I've been through this song and dance with you before, guy. You've made clearly exactly what type of fella you are. Have a nice day! I have no interest in controlling what words he can use. I just think that the words a person uses -- and the things that a person finds humorous, no less -- are often indicative of the character of the person using them.

There you go again. Insults are all you've got. One-trick pony. I suppose I shouldn't have expected any more from someone who still thinks it's funny and acceptable to casually use the term "retards".

Ever notice that you contribute little to any discussion other than personal insults? It's not surprising, given your avatar and whatnot. But yeah. You're basically just a parody account.

You're an idiot.