Logic

I was planning to make this exact post at some point this offseason. We all know Joe Brady can coordinate a successful egalitarian offense. One where "everybody eats" and the ball is spread around and different players are featured each week. But can he, if necessary, feature a WR1 and maximize the talents and production of that player? When the Bills hit a week where "everybody eats" isn't working, or where the optimal strategy would be to exploit a certain advantageous WR vs CB matchup over and over again, does Brady have the goods? When the offense hits a lull or Josh Allen is in a "gotta have it" 3rd and long, does Brady's playbook feature a page that says "WR1's best plays"? I've heard it said again and again that in crunch time, in the big moments, playcallers should think players, not plays. They should have the ability to say "this is an Amari Cooper down", for instance, and then have a handful of plays they know that player excels on. People can question Diggs' ability and effort level in his last year here. People can wonder if Amari Cooper's wrist hurt him more than he let on or if he's lost a step. But me? I think the notion that Brady may not be able to effectively feature one pass catcher in a purposeful and productive way is a viable notion to ponder. He has not yet shown he is able to do so, and until he does, it's a legitimate question.

Fine with it. Specifically, using 1st and 2nd round pick(s) to acquire marquee players. I (and many others) have been saying for several offseasons now that Josh doesn't have enough difference makers around him. McDermott said as much in his end-of-season presser. Given the Beane's mediocre recent track record with 1st and 2nd round picks anyway, I'm fine with using them to acquire a star veteran (Garrett, Crosby, etc) instead. You can still use your mid and late round picks (which Beane seems better at turning into good players anyway) for depth. Those premium picks, though? If you can turn them into a star player and difference maker, you do it.

Yeah this quote from GoldenWheels is a great point. The typical mode of meal conception and preparation for most people is to think of a meal they want to make, then buy the ingredients to make it. With CSAs, I've found that it's more helpful to be able to work backwards. That is, to see what you get in your produce haul, and then to conceive or find dishes to prepare based on what ingredients you have on hand. It can also be helpful to have (or gain) a passable knowledge of food preservation, be it canning, pickling, or making preserves, so that if you have, say, too much red onion, you can pickle a bunch and freeze it rather than throw it away. Not necessary, but helpful!

Maybe he can help the linemen with their "block destruction technique"

Have done, yes. Very much worth it, in my opinion, BUT.... It can be A LOT of produce. It can particularly be a lot to deal with in, say, the winter months, when the produce you're receiving is not as attractive and easy to work with as what you're getting in the spring and summer. My best advice, if you do it, is to either share it with another family/friends, or to ensure that you know ahead of time the AMOUNT of food you'll be receiving with each share. Some companies that do this have different sizes of order you can get each time, etc. Aside from ensuring that you're receiving a reasonable amount of food (what good is it if you throw a bunch away?), I can't recommend it highly enough. It'll bring a bunch of delicious, diverse produce into your house that will superior from and oftentimes DIFFERENT from what you'd get at the store. And it'll likely diversify your cooking and force you to learn how to use some things you're not familiar with using. And on top of all THAT, you're also supporting local farmers, which is always a win. As long as you're willing to be a little adventurous and flexible (and do a little research as to quantities being sent), I say "give it a go"!

If the Bills run this same WR corps back (even with Amari), I'll weep. They need some guys that can actually separate. They need it badly.

The more time that's passed since this trade, the worse it looks. It has come out that the Mavs GM did not shop Luka AT ALL to anyone other than the Lakers. He just directly called up his buddy, Lakers GM Rob Pelinka, and made the deal. Didn't solicit ANY other offers or shop the guy around. NBA execs are adamant that the Mavs could've gotten waaaay more. Surely multiple 1st round picks AND good players. Also, if you don't love Luka's conditioning and reliability from a health perspective, that's one thing, but then trading him for ANTHONY DAVIS doesn't make a lick of sense. Any way you look at it, it appears to be five alarm roster malpractice. Somewhat akin to Brandon Beane trading Josh Allen for Jalen Ramsey and a 2027 1st without soliciting any other offers from any other teams. Insane.

The player I wish the Bills could have on an affordable one-year deal is Adam Thielen. Everyone can say what they want about his age, but the dude showed last year he can still ball. He can also play outside. I'm not suggesting he'd be "the" answer or anything, but I think he could make some noise with Josh for a season. You'd think he'd want to end his career somewhere other than a Carolina rebuild.

I feel like the Bills already have a plethora of talented middle-of-the-field guys in Shakir, Kincaid, and Knox. Curtis Samuel is arguably at his best in the slot. Many (including myself) think Coleman's best chance at sustained success may come as a big slot. In some ways, it feels like talented middle-of-the-field guys are ALL they have. What they DON'T have is an ass-kicking outside receiver who can add explosiveness, take the top off a defense, and open things up for those middle-of-the-field guys. I don't think adding Cooper Kupp changes that. If we added Kupp, we'd be going from a team that can win over the middle of the field but needs major outside help to...a team that can win over the middle of the field but needs major help outside. Simply put: While Kupp CAN play outside, he is primarily a slot guy, and more slot guys are not what the Bills need.

I just checked the WR thread from pre-draft last year to see what I was advocating for. At the time, I proposed trading our 1st and 2nd in that draft plus our 1st and 2nd this year if need be in order to get into range for Harrison, Nabers, Odunze, etc. People called me crazy. They probably still would. Who knows if it would've been enough anyway. I'd still make that move. Having Mack Hollins lead our team in touchdown catches did not talk me down from my crazy perch.

Where we picked, no. Trading up five or six spots doesn't seem like it would have been a prohibitively expensive thing to do. Of course we have no way of knowing which teams, if any, ahead of us were willing to trade with us. We certainly had the draft capital ammunition to do so, though.

I felt like the "big three" last year was actually a "big four", ending with Brian Thomas. I advocated for either trading up for one of the big four, or, if they stayed where they were, drafting Xavier Worthy or Troy Franklin. I wanted to add explosiveness and deep speed on the outside to open up the middle of the field for Kincaid, Knox, and Shakir. I figured there was no way Thomas would reasonably fall far enough for the Bills to have a legit shot at trading up for him. Once he fell as far as he did, I had my fingers crossed HOPING the Bills would make the move, but doubting that Beane was in a "trading up" kind of mood. Which, as it turns out, he wasn't. The funny thing is that with as far as BTJ ended up falling, I doubt it would've really taken all that much to move up for him. But EVEN IF it took a 2nd round pick and more, I'd have done it. Depth is great and all, but a WR1 like BTJ was worth the risk. I'm not giving up hope on Coleman, but he has miles to go to be anywhere near what BTJ already is.

In retrospect, I don't think there's a single Bills fan who wouldn't have been okay giving up an additional high pick or two to move up five spots for this guy. Would've given Josh a locked-in high end #1 with size, speed, and explosiveness for the next decade. I get that Beane felt the roster needed to be rebuilt with depth last offseason and was thus hesitant to give up draft capital, but no one can convince me that Coleman plus, say, Dewayne Carter and another mid round pick would be worth more to this team's championship pursuits than a bona fide alpha WR1.

I think this is the key sentence right here. I agree that this loss -- as most of our playoff losses have been -- was on all aspects of the team: coaches, players, and front office. The coaches didn't coach well enough, the players didn't play well enough and, in my estimation, the personnel was just lacking enough in key areas that that also played a part in the game outcome. But when you say the coaches need to strategize like pros, not like high school coaches, to me, you're speaking exactly to the heart of the matter of what this thread is about! In other words, you've got me wondering if we're on the same page, but stating it differently and arguing over semantic differences. The need for the coaches to coach better (specifically better defense, in my opinion) is what precipitated this thread to begin with. I have not in this thread advocated for firing McDermott, replacing Babich, completely overhauling our scheme, or anything of the sort. I have simply wondered why we seem to fail so consistently as a defensive unit in our five season-ending playoff losses under Sean McDermott. "Coaching" can be one of the over-arching answers, but there's more fine detail within that answer, and those are the suggestions for improvement I was seeking. Put differently: I know that you believe ardently that Sean McDermott is a "Growth mindset" guy and is always relentlessly self-scouting, always learning and growing, always improving. Well, the defensive outcomes every time we play the Chiefs in the playoffs don't seem to show much growth, much improvement, or anything other than "deja vu all over again". So that's my question: What's the lesson? What are the specific areas for growth? How can we ensure this doesn't keep happening?

Respectfully, I think it says more than that. There seems to be a lot of "hey, Mahomes and the Chiefs are really good, there's no shame in giving up a lot of points to them" going around in this thread. I don't think the recent actual performance of the Chiefs offense matches their lofty reputation, nor excuses the Bills defense from playing so poorly against them in the playoffs. In the most recent playoff game, for instance, the Bills allowed the Chiefs to score the most points they had all season long. It was the only time they scored more than 30 points the entire season. Should we be okay with that just because "they're the Chiefs"? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like I'm seeing a lot of fatalism and resignation in this thread regarding the Chiefs. That they're just going to score lots of points every year, and there's nothing we can do about it. As if we don't have a defensive minded head coach who's been spending years trying to figure out how to stop them. Yes, as you say, the coaches need to coach better and the players need to play better. If they do so, wouldn't one of the logical results be better defensive performance? So that's the point of this thread. What can the Bills do better from a coaching and execution standpoint to stop this from happening year after year after year? To stop being so absolutely futile in the playoffs defensively? Saying "coach better and play better", well...yeah. Sure. Of course. I suppose I was trying to dig a little deeper than that.

For those saying this thread is bogus...has this graph been shown yet? I mean...

I could be wrong -- and I'm happy to be corrected if someone can verify that I am -- but I feel like our d-line is way too vanilla in its rush scheme the vast majority of the time. That is: loops, stunts, games, etc.....we don't seem to do them at nearly the clip that other good defenses do. If you wanna be a "get home with your front four and not rely on the blitz" team, fine, but then you'd better have a darn good front four, and you'd better at least let those four do some different things up front in terms of how they rush. The Bills neither have a great front four NOR employ them very creatively most of the time. Also, not directly on topic, but a side note: The Bills defense is generally awful at blitzing. So often, when the Bills DO blitz in key moments, it's awkward and ineffective and rarely seems to get home in a meaningful way. Watching Spags employ killer blitzes at key moments in the playoffs, knowing that we NEVER seem to be able to do it, is wildly frustrating. You're telling me Spags is THAT much of a superior defensive mind to Sean McDermott? You're telling me McDermott doesn't have any killer blitzes of his own in his ol' bag of tricks?

Can anyone verify if the below Tweet is true? If it IS true, it is surely THE primary reason that Josh Allen doesn't have a ring yet. For a defensive minded head coach who relentlessly preaches accountability, self-scouting, and growth mindset, this is just mind numbingly bad. Unforgivable, even. What needs to happen for this to change?

I'll grant you that he had a nice rookie season. But one needs to weigh the value of the draft pick used on a player against the total production of said player to gauge whether or not the pick has been a success. One can also factor in the production of players taken at the same position in the same draft after the player in question was taken. Sam LaPorta and Tucker Kraft, both taken after Kincaid in the 2023 draft, just came off 700 yard 7 TD seasons, with Y/R of 12.1 and 14.1, respectively. Kincaid is coming off a 448 yard, 2 TD season, with a Y/R of 10.2. We needn't even get into the fact that guys like Jayden Reed and Rashee Rice were also drafted after Kincaid, while WR continues to be a weak spot for the Bills. Kincaid also generally plays no more than 50% of snaps in most games. It's great that the Bills have another talented tight end on the team in Dawson Knox, but is using a 1st round pick on a tight end that only gets 50% of the snap share really a good use of resources (particularly when you're already paying big bucks to the incumbent?) Again, we can talk about injury, sophomore slump, whatever. The reality is the reality: Kincaid currently appears to be, at best, the third best tight end in his draft class. He currently is not a full time player. His coach and GM just called his second season a disappointment and publicly let it be known that they view him as undersized and under-strength. He just played about 20% of the snaps in a championship game and dropped a key pass that may have led to tie or victory. As I said: I liked the pick. I have not given up hope on him. I don't think he's a "bust" or anything. But considering the draft capital used on him, the players taken after him (both at tight end and at other positions), the tight end we already had on the roster, and his production to date...I feel that "disappointment" is a perfectly fair label to use thus far. It's up to him to change that.

Kincaid has been a disappointment in his first two years. There's no reasonable way to state otherwise. He had a promising rookie year, but not earth shattering. He was outplayed by a tight end chosen after him. In his second year, he was hurt, ineffective, or both, all year long. Credit to him for playing through it, but it doesn't change the fact that he didn't produce. He ended the year being often outsnapped and outplayed by Dawson Knox, seeing like 20% of the snaps in the AFC Championship game, dropping a pass that would've put the Bills in tying field goal range, and being called out by his coach and GM as "not having the year they expected" and needing to put on weight. I liked the pick, too. I had high hopes, too. We can all play the "what would've been if he wasn't hurt?" game all we want, but it won't change the REALITY that the Kincaid pick, to this point, has been a flop, and that the tight end already on our roster and making big money has mostly outplayed him.

Always fun going into a new offseason with the exact same crying need you had LAST offseason, and having little more confidence that the team will address it. If only the Bills had been in position to draft a quality separator or field stretching pass catcher like Ladd McConkey or Xavier Worthy last year. If only they had had the ammo and gumption to trade up five or six picks and take a Brian Thomas Jr. Ah well. I'm sure another season of Mack Hollins and his funny outfits leading the team in touchdown catches will be just fine.

Josh Allen. That's it. Dion Dawkins, James Cook, Taron Johnson, and Christian Benford are very good. Spencer Brown, Khalil Shakir, Matt Milano, and Terrel Bernard are good. Only Josh Allen is elite. People over-apply "elite" status to players that are not elite. There is a reason that Sean McDermott brought up the fact that a team needs to have 2-3 difference makers on each side of the ball in this league during his recent press conference. He's never, to my knowledge, brought that up before. He followed it up with "I won't get into whether we do or don't have those players", which are not the words that you would use if you felt that you DO have those players. So...coach McDermott knows. Those with eyes all know. The Bills do not have enough elite players, have not surrounded Josh Allen with enough top end talent, and that needs to change FAST if the Bills want to win a Lombardi any time soon. I am a Brandon Beane fan. You don't reside over the team with the most wins in the NFL since 2020 if you're not a good GM. However...I can't seem to shake the quote I recently read from an anonymous league executive recently: "Josh Allen covers up a lot of problems in that building".

Out-of-nowhere Nirvana reunion at FireAid the other night, with four different lady singers doing Kurt's parts. I thought this absolutely slayed. Dave Grohl is still my favorite drummer. Just look at him in this thing!

Well stated. For all the deep dives, hand wringing, and arguing over the minutiae of the Bills-Chiefs rivalry, it really comes down to this: Both teams have all-world, elite, alien quarterbacks. Both teams are more or less equal across most of the roster most years. But... The Chiefs have a scheming advantage, Chris Jones, and Travis Kelce, and the Bills don't. Unless and until the Bills either put some difference makers around Allen or find a way to outscheme the Chiefs in a playoff game (and I'm not holding my breath on the latter), they will remain just a step behind them. Say...three points in a championship game or so.

I agree that all of that is necessary. I also think, as to your last statement, that NFL refereeing would be vastly improved from what we have now if these actions were undertaken. Of course it will never be perfect, and there will always be judgement calls. But there are miles and miles to go before we've reached the point where no further improvement in refereeing can be achieved. They haven't even STARTED. They haven't even TRIED. I also think there ought to be more transparency in the review process. The UFL, for instance, lets viewers see what the replay review officials are seeing, and talks viewers through the process as well. The point is this: The league doing everything in their power to improve officiating, get calls right using available technology, and add transparency to the review process would all, collectively, help alienated fans feel less like "the fix is in". There is much...MUCH....that the NFL can do to curb the swell of distrust bubbling up among fans, and they've done precisely NONE of it, and don't seem particularly interested in doing do any time soon. Hopefully it won't take a congressional investigation to force their hand. At the end of the day, Bills fans -- and NFL fans at large -- are pissed not just at bad calls all year long (and for several years running now), but because there are simple actions the league can take to at least PRETEND they are trying to fix it, and they simply don't. So when you have a game as poorly officiated as Sunday's was (and one in which the refs potentially played a part in swinging the outcome toward the Chiefs AGAIN), and fans become irate and talk about it all week long, the league has absolutely no one to blame but themselves.