Drunken Pygmy Goat

Tl;dr? IIRC, the common theme with them (and Goff as a rookie) is Jeff Fisher. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Here's an interview with John Fox from this morning that relates to the op topic, with some parallels to Allen and his athelicsm, and RPOs. Start listening around the 12:30 mark http://m.espn.com/general/play?id=24243476&cast=2445552

Goff showed flashes as a rookie, but the numbers were rough. Jeff Fisher is pretty much the anti-QB guru, and the Rams moved on from him in favor of an offensive minded coach, added some talented WRs, and VIOLA! A QB either has it or he doesn't, but they are also products of their environment. I'm sure Goff would have made some strides in year 2 had it been under Jeff Fisher, but I highly doubt that he or his offense would have played anywhere close to as well as they did under McVay. Everyone was calling him a bust after his rookie season, but not me, because I saw the flashes and knew what it could become under the proper tutelage, and also because I knew that Fisher had a reputation of "not being good" for QBs. Circumstance and environment always play a role, but that doesn't mean the same thing as "ruined by starting too soon". The term "too soon" itself essentially means "ill advised", a mistake. IMO, "too soon" as far as QBs goes is more about situation. Taking a beating behind a poor offensive line is one thing, but stunting a player's growth due to sub-par coaching/development is another. And in a league where you're really not afforded to much time, that can alter a career. With Allen, he has some of the traits you want, but still needs some work. You can argue that it's best to work on those things off the field, but I think it's better to put them on tape in real games. Showing progress in practice is different than progress in live action. The Bills may not have a very talented offense overall, but so far in camp, Daboll seems to be installing an offense that creates open receivers based on concepts (mesh, tossers, etc.), rather than relying more on WRs getting open and creating space on their own. And with an inexperienced QB (all 3 are really, in a way), it should help them gain confidence while they learn, and not have to play too risky early on. IMO, this team as currently constructed isn't as ill equipped to do this as many might think. They brought in McCarron as insurance, just in case Allen does need a bit more time, and (time will tell) they have a defense and run game that can be leaned on a bit more to keep games close. IIRC, Brady had a good D to lean on early in his career. Same with Big Ben. That allowed their teams to not have to give the QB more than they could handle early on, based on their lack of experience, and kept them competitive.

I'm pretty sure the broadcast team for all home preseason games will be local, even though it's televised nationally. It should be a Buffalo based network broadcast, so I doubt they'll show the rowdies.

IMO that idea is blown out of proportion a bit. Teams are still rather vanilla in game 3. It's really just the game where the starters see the most action. Not that there isn't anything we can gather from that game, but it's not so cut and dry "this is how they'll look/fare" this season. All teams approach preseason games a bit differently as well. Teams like Minnesota and Philly tend to play a bit more aggressively and with more onus on winning/setting a tone for their team in preseason games, while most others aren't as aggressively seeking wins.

Tall

What's crazy and amazing is the fact that either the Bills or 49ers had made it to the Super Bowl in 7 consectutive seasons, yet never faced off in one. And both teams had advanced to the conference championship in 6 of those 7 seasons. As someone mentioned earlier, those two teams were very similar and really evenly matched.

Thanks! Things should get live today. First camp "fight" possibly?

Of course it does. That factor only adds to my reasoning.

I like positive camp reports, but it's still way too early. In this case, the pads aren't on yet, and defensive lineman typically dominate offensive linemen during this time of year. Not that I'm not excited about Phillips and what he could bring to this team, but until he is able to show out consistently when the pads are on, I'm going to keep these camp reports in the proper perspective. And as for the "top 10/5 defense" talk, I'm not ready to make that kind of prediction without seeing them in the regular season. I really like what this staff has done and the players brought in, but IMO top 5 or even top 10 is an extremely lofty expectation this year. There's going to be growing pains on all 3 levels of the defense (secondary not so much; we'll see how Davis adjusts in a predominately zone scheme). I'm sure we'll see flashes of what's to come, but mistakes will be made, especially by the younger guys like Phillips and Edmunds. And by top 5/10, I assume people are refering to PPG allowed and not yards, because they'll probably give up chunk yardage quite frequently against the pass just like last year. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't expect this defense to be that good so soon. Middle of the pack, I can see, but there's a lot of "ifs" that need to go the Bills way for any extreme improvement to happen, as SouthNYfan says. Teams typically do not improve from bottom 10 to top 5 in one year. I'm a pretty optimistic guy, but I'm also a "wait and see before getting my hopes up to have them come crashing down" kind of guy. The makings are there, but they've still got to go out and prove it. A little sarcastic humor never gets old to me. You know what is old is your constant lack of contribution to threads. Your posts always seem to be about calling a guy out, of referencing usernames in a negative way. I get it; that post doesn't really contribute either, but lighten up Francis!

He also made several crucial FGs that season to help the Bills get some wins. Why is she your ex then???

No more imports...buy American!

Who really cares what they'll say, or won't say? All that will matter is the record, and how they finish. But if they do start out that well, or better than currently perceived by the pundits, it would mean a few things. First and foremost, the Bills aren't as bad as they thought. QB play will have been better than expected, and defense better. But it could also mean that a few of the "tough" teams on the first half of the Bills schedule aren't as good as perceived, like the Cardinals were a couple seasons ago for example.

Exactly. The coaches have been talking him up, but it's very early in his career to make any definitive judgements. I didn't think he had major, frequent insticual issues in college, as the quote you posted alludes to, but there were plenty of instances where he was a step late. Perhaps his age is a factor there. But I can recall several plays where his instincts were on full display. In time, I think he'll be okay. He was a steal for the Bills where he was drafted, but that doesn't mean much until the games are played.

I really like the idea of Edmunds instead of Brown, long term, especially given the defense the Bills currently run. But Brown has never missed a game in his 4 years, and led the league in tackles last season. He may be an average player, but the Bills can do worse. Any player with question marks is not better than Brown right now, until proven otherwise IMO. And who knows, he may bust. I don't believe he will, but it happens all the time. Taylor has his issues, but he wasn't terrible. He just wasn't consistently good. The grass isn't always greener...the Bills have 3 inexperienced QBs. We shouldn't expect any one of them to come out of the gate on fire.

He is a question mark, particularly as a rookie. The thread relates to this year. His skills and size are obvious, but he's very young and raw, and will be tasked with "quarterbacking" the defense. That's no easy task. What adding him (and the other new additions in defense) should do is allow McD to more adequately run his defense, and be more varied in his play calls, especially blitzes. But to say that he is not a question mark, without ever playing a down in the NFL, is wishful thinking. There's likely going to be some growing pains along the way, and he'll probably be doing a lot more thinking, rather than reacting early on in his career.

This has been beaten to death... Sure, the Bills did enough to make the playoffs...just enough. But they got lucky as well. The Ravens/Bengals game is the obvious one, but also at the end of the Cotls game. The refs blew a call, that gave the Bills life. If they get that call right, the Bills are 8-8 at best and miss the playoffs. When people point to the luck factor, it's not as if they're completely dismissing the idea that the Bills did their part. But you can say the same about the "the Bills did their part" crowd. You cannot completely dismiss the fact that the Bills got really lucky. But that's the NFL for you.

I'm no "expert" on the subject, but I've done a ton of research over the years. IMO, a lot of the "hold up" in talks/decisions is based on the looming CBA and its renegotiation, as well as the current stadium lease. The current G-4 program is based on league revenue, which is at an all-time high, and steadily increasing (despite claims of viewership decreases). As the revenue goes up, in theory, so too should the annual G-4 (likely to be revised as "G-5") dollar amount allowance. If it does, and to what extent, is unknown, but it did increase from the G-3 program of the previous CBA ($50 mil IIRC). One thing to consider is that the annual league allowance is for all stadium projects league-wide, not per instance. So if 2 teams request assistance with renovations at say $30 mil each in the same year, that $60 mil is deducted from the total annual allowance. If a team is planning to build a new stadium or a major retrofit that would cost hundreds of millions of dollars, it would be wise to receive that grant in a year when there are no other projects being partially funded by the league, so timing plays a role as well. I would assume that there are already 2 or 3 premliminary "plans" in place, that were based off of the stadium committee's findings a few years ago, and a general idea of the dollar amounts needed for each plan. That figure will increase with time due to inflation, but a general ball-park figure is known. And since there is more than likely going to be some type of state funding involved, neither the Bills nor the state will want to come out and give any truly revealing comments as to their intentions, regardless of which plan is chosen. But the comments in the article in the OP suggest that the state would prefer to spend on a retrofit of New Era, since that would be much cheaper than a new stadium (and the current G-4 program actually allows for more league funds for a renovation, than it does a new stadium, $250 mil as opposed to $200 mil). Plus, that would kick the "new stadium can" down the road 20-30 years, for a different politician to have to deal with...

Never too early for a "next year's draft" thread. Matter of fact, you're late... I know a lot can change between now and next spring, but the 2019 QB class looks pretty bad, IMO. It could be 2013 bad, or worse. Regardless of the premium on QBs, I don't see more than 3 going in the first round, and I wouldn't be shocked if only 1 or 2 go in round 1. If the Bills finish with a top 10 pick, I highly doubt teams will be very eager to trade up for one. Regardless of where the Bills end up drafting, it should be BPA. There may be some holes still, but that should be the approach in the first couple of rounds. Maybe reach slightly for an OL if it becomes a dire need, depending on their draft slot, but there aren't that many holes.

Trade the farm!!!

With no proven QB, it makes perfect sense. But would it be for 2 or 3 firsts?

1) He is reportedly not ready to return after missing all of 2017. His value on the trading block is very little. 2) Division rival, NE at that. BB would rob the Bills in a trade.

They'll work it out. Jones is going nowhere. This is just posturing, and timing and leverage to do so is right.

Which would be even more comical, since it's shaping up to be as bad or worse as the 2013 QB class.

Probably would get gobbled up in the trenches

There's a lot that Tre White and the entire CB group can learn from a guy like Davis. Adding him is about more than just what he brings on the field. He may be talented, but has good instincts, and he'll have eyes in the backfield more often here. The secondary was the biggest strength of the team last year, and they made plays without the benefit of a really good pass rush. Adding Murphy should help there, and with Edmunds, they have a guy that could provide more opportunities for double A gap blitzes (a staple under McD) as well as more range in coverage. And if Starr can help improve the run D, it should provide more 2nd/3rd and longs. Those 3 additions could be huge for the pass D.