Shaw66

I hear what you guys are saying about Cook. I agree; he's a special talent. I'd hate to see him go, especially because of what you're saying about going all in. I remember saying when last season started that the Bills would be fine in 2024, but the point of getting through 2024 was to get to 2025. Plus, not paying Cook would take an enormous amount of courage by Beane. Beane would lose his job if he let Cook walk and Cook put up 2000 all purpose yards for the Lombardi winner. That is, imagine Cook makes Beane look like Schoen letting Barkley walk. Every player at One Bills Drive will be asking what he thought he was doing. My point was from more of a long-term building point of view. Overpaying players always hurts some in the long term, and chasing Cook with dollars will hurt in the long term, too. If it wins a Lombardi, overspending will have been worth it. If Barkley returns to this planet this season, the Eagles won't complain. They have the trophy. Let me ask a different question. What if there was a trade to be made with Cleveland - Cook and Garrett and some picks, probably big picks, going one way or the other. Bottom line, lose Cook, get Garrett.

There are a lot of really interesting discussions going on here. Some of the best we've had. My take on Bedford is that he is simply too good a defensive back to let go. He can do almost anything. He isn't a top cover guy, but he's very good. And he's he's an outstanding tackler. I think he has to get paid. As for Cook, I'm not sure it makes sense to pay him. There seem to be runs on positions, and the inflation drives prices higher than makes sense for good management of the payroll. I think particularly in light of the Barkley deal, teams are probably entering a period of overpaying for running backs. I think it is smart to stay away from "hot" markets like that. There's better value to be had shopping for less glamorous positions.

Bringing this thread back to first page so all can admire how the Bills are building with their new generation of core players. Skakir, Bernard, Rosseau. Sweet. And as another thread said, now Benford.

I think people who say that his production was down last year aren't seeing his true value. This is a guy who gets to where he's supposed to be virtually all the time, because he's smart, motivated, and quick. He's a solid tackler. In pass defense, he regularly is IN the play, instead of AROUND the play, which was one of the problems with Edmunds. I like Dorian Williams, too - love his speed and his tackling. But the Bills defense operates by having 11 players managing their assignments on every play; Bernard does it on every play and Williams may do it on 8 or 9 out of 10. On the plays where Williams doesn't do his job, the whole defense suffers. I'm hoping he'll show the same improvement from year 2 to year 3 that he showed from his rookie year to last year. If he does, with him beside Bernard, the Bills will be said backing up the line.

This says it all. Can't say I don't worry about injuries with him but other than that, I think the guy is great. Clearly a leader and in charge on the field. Great penetrator in the run defense - I have no idea how he gets in there and winds up at the bottom of the pile with his arms around the ball carrier. Superb pass defense instincts. Excellent closing speed. Build around the QB on offense, and build around the QB on defense. I try not to get caught up in "what ifs" during the off-season, but if the Bills can get themselves a seriously good edge rusher, the rest of Beane's work is just filling in the pieces. Good, good news.

Mitch. Mitch. Mitch. Best choice, probably by a long shot. First, the point everyone makes: If Josh goes down for an extended period, you can probably kiss the season goodbye. One exception would be a 6-week injury early in the season. Scratch out a couple of wins without, then make a late-season run when he returns. So, the only point worth talking about is what if the Bills lose Josh for a couple of games? Then I think Mitch is the answer. He has starter talent, or he wouldn't have been drafted where he was. The style of his game is similar to Josh's. He can't compare, but he's big, he'll run, he has a big arm. He's a third-rate Josh. The Bills can insert him in the lineup without having to adjust the offense significantly. He's smart, he's dedicated. I think he and Josh get along well. Mitch is about as good as the Bills can hope to get. Here's the list of quarterback passing yards last season, starting at #32 on the list. I don't think I'd take any of them over Mitch as the Bills backup. Cooper RushDAL Anthony RichardsonIND Joe Flacco Mac JonesJAX Aidan O'ConnellLV Mason RudolphTEN Spencer RattlerNO Deshaun WatsonCLE Justin FieldsPIT Drew LockNYG Andy DaltonCAR Tyler HuntleyMIA Jacoby BrissettNE Michael Penix Jr.ATL Malik WillisGB Desmond RidderLV Dorian Thompson-RobinsonCLE Marcus MariotaWSH Joshua DobbsSF

I have to say his slow delivery scared me to death. He had a lot of kicks last season that came within a whisker of being blocked. I thought he was living dangerously.

This is excellent and right on the money. Brees was amazingly accurate. And you're also correct about the wide receiver screens and other short throws to the boundaries. The Bills relied heavily on those early in the season, and defense is adjusted. The simple fact is that passing is becoming increasingly difficult in the NFL, because defenses have figured out how to stop the deep ball and to make even intermediate passing more difficult.

I haven't read any of this thread, so I apologize if this is just what others have said, but this idea you expressed has been bouncing around in my head for a week now. I would discourage you about getting your hopes up about completion percentage. I was on that train a year ago, and I think it was misguided. Josh started 2024 with a lot of high percentage games, but as the season went on, the 70% completion expectation proved unrealistic. I don't think using Brees as a model makes sense. He played in a different era, an era when the passing game was taking over pro football, and many defenses simply couldn't stop the right QB in the right offense. Defenses have adjusted, and if you try to beat teams with your passing game, the defenses can stop you. That's why the running game has come back so strong. In the past year or two, every coach has realized that passing isn't as easy as it was 10 years ago, and they've turned to the running game to get the yards that are tougher to get in the passing game. For example, the bubble screens and the rub plays were easy completions and easy yards three or four years ago, and they no longer are. Now, they're just another part of a varied attack - if you feature that game, defenses will stop it. The result of all of this is that passing is harder than it was, and having a consistently high completion percentage has become tougher. The Bills are on the right track - a varied, multiple offense that attacks all over the field is necessary, because the defenses will stop you if you tend too much in one direction or another. In 2024, three teams got just barely over 70% completions - Detroit, Tampa Bay, and the Bengals, and all teams except the Browns and the Colts got over 60%. Bills were 63.3. I think the best we can expect is to bump that percentage 5 points or so, and on 500 attempts that's 25 more completions. That sounds like a lot, but it's only one or two more completions a game. That would be nice, of course, but they aren't the kind of numbers that are going to change a team's fortunes dramatically. And, of course, the Bills don't need a huge increase in offensive performance. In 2024, they were second in total yards, seventh in passing TDs and first in rushing TDs. So I'm not being a downer in saying that you shouldn't expect a big increase in completion percentage. As we've all said here, over and over for three or four months, it's the defense that needs to make a big step up.

Maybe each team can be allowed three Sumo wrestler. I like their outfits.

I like it. It's a massive mano a mano pile of humanity trying to simply overpower the other. I think it's pretty cool.

The drought ended before Josh arrived.

Not in his early years. He scrambled often. And Josh moves in the pocket in ways that are quite similar to Roethlisberger. The real point is that guys as talented as Josh generally do not hit a wall as early as people are suggesting. Hall of Fame quarterbacks play into their late thirties.

Allen is most valuable, for sure. He plays the most important position, and he plays it almost as well as anyone ever has. But the OP asked two questions - one in the title and one in the poll. If the question is most impressive, it's OJ. His season was completely unprecedented, almost unimaginable. Compared to seasons that other QBs have had, Allen's was very good but not outstanding.

Elway and Big Ben say hello.

Diggs wasn't extreme. I'm guessing McDermott will not knowingly take another Diggs. Two good years and two years screwing up the team chemistry. Yes, you find them, but they're accidents. If people knew how good those late first rounders were going to turn out, they wouldn't have lasted until late in the first round. Brian Thomas Jr. wasn't available when the Bills and Chiefs drafted, and the Bears thought Odunze was better. At the end of the first round, you take guys who look like they have promise, like Rousseau and Coleman, and you hope they emerge. It's a crapshoot for impact players at that point in the draft. I think the way a team that's near the top of the league adds impact players is through free agency. You make a bold move for a Garrett, or you understand that a guy like Zack Baun will impact your defense. In fact, it worked for the Rams with Miller; it just didn't work out for Beane. I wouldn't be surprised to see Beane do it again.

An attitude like, say, Stefon Diggs? Furthermore, drafting at 30, you don't find day one impact players. You find Worthy and Coleman.

That's interesting. First, it's a minor point, but even if it's true that every great coach has been to a Super Bowl if he had a great QB, it doesn't mean it can't happen. For example, for the last several years, McDermott and Allen couldn't get past Mahomes and Reid, and that is a comment more on Reid and Mahomes. And Shula had Marino for 10 or 12 years and only got there once, and Jimmy Johnson had Marino for four and never got there. But that isn't the point. The real point is that McDermott is light years ahead of Levy. After Levy lost one of his Super Bowls, maybe the first, he was asked whether he wished he had done more to motivate his players. He said it's the players' job to motivate themselves. Right there, I knew that Levy's reputation exceeded his coaching ability. McDermott understands that EVERYTHING is his job, and if his players aren't properly motivated, it's on him. As poor as some of the coaching has been in McDermott's playoff losses, it wasn't any worse than Levy in XXV. The Giants showed him the game plan to beat them in the regular season, and Levy never adjusted. And he let his players go out and get drunk the night before the game. And the talent Levy had was much better. Kelly threw to Reed and Lofton. And Thurman was better than anyone McDermott has had at running back. Put Bruce Smith on the Dline opposite Rousseau and the Bills would have one or two Super Bowls already. There were first-ballot Hall of Famers on that team. It's much harder to win now. It was possible to acquire enough talent to be just flat out better than most teams, and the Bills happened to do it. In this era, it's very very difficult to out talent anyone. Eagles did it this year. I think McDermott is much better than Levy. Much better. And thanks. You're saying some good and interesting things, and even if we may come out in different places, the things you're saying make a lot of sense.

Well, it depends. Probably yes, but it depends on whether he actually seems to be growing. I don't know, for example, whether his philosophy about the D line will evolve, but if he's playing the same 8 man rotation and getting the same results, that will be a signal to me that he isn't growing. The league is changing around him, and if he isn't changing with it, then his growth mindset won't be getting the job done. If Allen storms out training camp in 2027 and demands a trade, then maybe I have a different view. On the other hand, if Allen storms out and Trubisky takes them to the Championship game, then, certainly, keep the coach. It all depends on what the team is doing. I've come down to thinking that there is only one metric that matters - winning the Lombardi. All the other objective metrics - stats, AFC East titles, etc. really don't matter. But I also think that that metric, winning it all, is NOT the measure of the success of the coach. Some great coaches have never won a Super Bowl, and some bad coaches have. The measure of a good coach is more complicated and more subjective than winning a Lombardi. I think McDermott is a better coach today than he was three years ago, and he was better three years ago than six years ago. Four years from now, if I think he still growing and the quality of his teams is still growing, I'm still going with him. I like this, at least the first para. You're saying something similar, and the point is the same - if things don't progress, then it's time to move on. However, I don't agree with culture second. Culture's first, and McD won't ever change that, and it unquestionably has built great success. What has to change is football decision making. They need to be smarter about the people they acquire, especially in the first and second rounds. That's where they need to go after play makers - given where they draft, they won't get one every time, but they need to hit on one or two, so they have a true monster DT or a true shutdown corner or a real stud at some other position. To do that, I think their philosophy about players has to evolve.

Well, people have been dancing around this idea for a while now, and it's looking a little clearer to me now. Creating a championship NFL football team is an extraordinarily difficult thing to do. The process of building a team is complicated, the play on the field is complicated, everything is complicated. And it's made that much more difficult because you face opponents who are very talented and who are trying to do the same thing. Here's one example: Should you build to win in a window and then rebuild, or should you build to be consistently good and take a Super Bowl when everything falls just right. Most of us here look at that question one way or the other; we don't agree, and I'm not sure there's a right answer. Belichick and McDermott and Tomlin build for consistent success, while other teams build for the short term, usually with a cheap quarterback and some good luck acquiring star talent. But that is by definition short-lived, because you can't consistently have a talent edge over the whole league. Still, by building that way, when it falls right, you can race to a championship. The Eagles have sort of done that. Their QB is getting more expensive now, and they won't be able to hold on to all their talent. But that's just one kind of question about how to build; there are hundreds or thousands of decisions that have to be me made about how to build. Every team has the same objective - to win Super Bowls. It's not like the Bills aren't trying. The discussion here largely revolves around the basic question of whether the players are good enough and whether the coaching is good enough. But as someone just said, the Bills have drafted a lot of good players who just don't seem to stand up and make plays. Oliver and Kincaid (at least on one play) are guys we look at say, "If they'd make the plays we know they can, the Bills would be fine." I'm in that camp. Then the question becomes, "Are they the wrong guys, or are they coached wrong?" And we can debate that. Personally, I think it's a bit of both - they're coached to be consistent, and being consistent means they have to go where they're told, even if the opportunity to make a play is in the other direction. But they also LIKE playing that way, and they've been drafted BECAUSE they like playing that way. We all can talk about what we think the Bills need to do to get over the hump. Here's where I come out: McDermott and Beane understand more about what the Bills are doing right and wrong than any of us. They're smart football people. If they're drafting the wrong people, they'll figure that out. If they're using the wrong defensive philosophy, they'll figure that out. For example, I've said before that I think McDermott's eight- or ten-player rotation on the D line is a problem, because it means that you have take the money you can spend on D line and spread it around to 8 or 10 players, so that you have a light of guys who are at least decent. If you spread it unevenly, around maybe 6 guys, you can have more talent with that six. Then you play them more, and you hope do don't have a lot of injuries, which would leave with having to play some less talented, cheap talent that's been sitting on the end of the bench. The Eagles played the Chiefs like that, with a couple of guys getting a lot more snaps than McDermott gives to any defensive lineman. Chiefs play Chris Jones that way, too. Now, McDermott isn't stupid. He sees that and he understands it. He believes in the growth mindset and continuous improvement, which means he believes that change is necessary to get better. So, I expect McDermott's philosophy about his D line, and about other things, will continue to evolve, and I expect that what he tells Bean that he wants in a player will evolve, too. How do I know that? Well, McDermott's view of the wide receiver room clearly has evolved, and the passing game became more effective. His view of the running game evolved, and the run game got better. The growth mindset is characterized by a simple question: What is your response when something doesn't go right? Some people respond with, "I got it wrong." People with the growth mindset respond with, "I didn't get it right yet." McDermott is not going to keep doing the same thing, over and over. He has shown himself to be an excellent coach who hasn't gotten it right yet. If he weren't an excellent coach, there would be all kinds of things that we could agree are wrong about the Bills. The truth we pretty much all agree that the Bills are doing almost everything right, and if they'd only do a little more right, they'd be winning Super Bowls. Why is it that the Bills are doing almost everything right? Because Sean McDermott is the head coach, and Rex Ryan, and Doug Marrone, and Gailey, and Jauron, and blah, blah, blah aren't the head coach. The Bills have a guy who is doing it and he will get better.

Is It Time To Move On From Allen? I mean, really. The guy's been in Buffalo for six or seven years now, hasn't won a Super Bowl. He underthrew Kincaid on fourth down. He blew the quarterback sneak. He had Shakir wide open in the end zone a year ago. He's shown he can't beat the Chiefs in the playoffs. How many chances does get? There's a thread with a title that says Allen has five years left. Well, if he can't win the big one, and if he only has five years left, what better time to trade him than after he's won his first MVP? I mean, if McDermott and Allen BOTH have come this close to getting to the Super Bowl, and Allen has five years left playing and McDermott has 20 years left coaching, isn't McDermott the better bet to ride with? Okay, I'm joking. But really, McDermott has demonstrated that he is one of the top five coaches in the league. He got to the playoffs with a no-name quarterback and a rag-tag roster, he had one rebuilding year, and he immediately returned to the playoffs. This past season, clearly a transition year in personnel, he got to the AFC Championship game. He'll have a better roster in 2025. Let's trade Allen for a boatload of picks - maybe get Garrett and the Browns' number 1 pick for the next four years. The Browns will be terrible, and those picks will be worth a lot.

Excellent. Thanks.

I didn't listen to the podcast, but I think these are pretty fair criticisms. Drafting late in the first round, it's tough to get a real difference maker, but Beane has had very little success. Rousseau is the best of the lot, and even he has underperformed. Kincaid hasn't really shone. And I think the critique of the Coleman pick is right, too. First round is when you're looking to find someone special. I think even Oliver is that kind of guy - very talented guy, but a guy who's talents just make him very good at a lot of things, instead of really special at something. Part of the problem is, I think, that McDermott wants these all-purpose kind of guys. He likes them because they come with the attitude he wants - "put me in coach; I'll do whatever you want." I find I keep thinking about Jerry Hughes, and thinking that that's the kind of guy the Bills should be getting in the first round: a guy with some special skills who has to be reined in a bit to play within the system. That kind of guy will play the position you want, but will make a big play for you once in a while, too. The best big-play guy they have on the defense is Milano, and his big play ability is almost an accident. He didn't come out of college with people saying he was going to make the kind of splash he did. Comments about Garrett are interesting. Yes, go after him, but that's the easy way out. The plan that McBeane have been pursuing is to build through the draft, and just keep getting better that way. Build through the draft, fill holes with free agents. Beane tried to fill the edge hole with Miller, and it's a bit of a cop out to fill it now with Garrett. Still, Garrett would transform the defense by allowing the Bills to take advantage of Rousseau's versatility and not need him to be the primary edge rusher.

Yeah. I do it every so often, and SDS sends me a $25 gift card. 😄

Every once in a while I stop and appreciate how great this forum is. Late in the regular season, things slowed down here. There wasn't a lot to be said from week to week - just watch the games, react, then wait for next week. But now, things have really lit up around here. Here's a copy of all the topics on the first page this morning. People are posting in all of these topics fairly actively. There are all kinds of Bills-related subjects that people are interested in talking about here. I'm grateful to have a place to come where people who really know the Bills are talking the team and its future. Myles Garrett requests a trade 123460 Goin Breakdown James Cook on IG Live - Travis Kelce uncertain of future. Mulling retirement JP51 OL Alec Anderson signs exclusive rights tender Bills scored more points than any other team this season.. \ build through the trenches 12345 Tre White's back-to-back injuries were the begining of the end for the once dominant Bills D 1234 Matthew Smiley out as Special Teams coach 12348 S Jevon Holland FA Speculation Bills expected to hire CB coach Pellegrino from Patriots 1234 The Super Bowl No One Wanted 123 Did y'all catch Josh's fiance in the boob commercial yesterday? 12345 Is it time to move on from McDermott? 123433 This is now on Beane, no question he needs to step up. 12346 Was Hurts really the SB MVP? 123 Joe Buscaglia's early mock draft Mock draft season 1234 Bills hiring new special teams coordinator Chris Tabor 123 Slick Rick about to be Bills most valuable non player person. 123 Important NFL dates 2025 12 Josh Allen Super Bowl commercial only in the Wyoming area.... Unsourced rumor mill: Some Chiefs believe Allen has long wanted to play with (Hollywood) Brown 1234 Is Nick Siriani, the second best coach in the NFL currently. 1234 Terrance Gray interviewing for Jags GM position Bills hire Jason Rebrovich as assistant defensive line coach 1234 Anyone else feel the Bills would have given the Eagles a much better game? 12347 The Eagles beat the Chiefs by doing the opposite of the Bills 12348 Superbowl Game Thread - Chiefs vs Eagles 1234103 It's the defensive line, stupid! 12347 Xavier Worthy: So far, not much more than a gadget guy 123428