Shaw66

McDermott has talked about this. He wants to attack vertically and horizontally. He wants to spread the defense over the greatest possible area to create the biggest possible spaces to attack. Not all that novel an idea, but some coaches are more dedicated to the concept than others. It's going to be fun.

I yhink it comes down to OC and QB.

Are you coming around, perhaps, to having a receiver room with a true field-stretcher? Don't like, but can see what they're trying to do?

I've never really understood blitzing strategy - when is the right time to blitz. Contrary, in part, to what you said, it was a common tactic around the league to blitz on third or fourth and five with the game on the line - late, close score, opponent in the red zone. DC doesn't care at all that the other team knows he's bringing 6; all he knows is he wants to force the ball out of the QB's hands. Against the Bills and the Chiefs, that's absolutely the right strategy - get the ball out of the QB's hands, because ultimately he's the guy who's going to hurt you. But for other times in the game, I agree with you. McDermott seems to blitz when he's unhappy about the pass rush he's getting. Now, in a sense, I get it. You need pass rush, and if you aren't getting any other way then, well, I guess you need to blitz. But the whole point of his defensive philosophy, the basis of it all, is that he'll get pressure with four, with seven deep protecting all the passing territory. If he gets the right players, trains them well, and makes good defensive calls, the blitz shouldn't be necessary. If you're doing it right, the blitz is simply a tactic that when called at the right times can get you a big negative play.

Your entire post is excellent. I want to add one more thing to your discussion of the passing game: Run after catch. It is one more reason the receiver room looks like it does. Samuel, Shakir, Coleman, plus Kincaid and Cook. Yes, give Allen good passing lanes, but also complete passes in space for these guys to run. It is what the good, complex passing offenses in the NFL do. Bills look like they want to get on the bandwagon. Done right, Allen's air yards go down and his yards per completion go up.

Good stuff. And remember, I think the consensus around here has been that Valdez-Scantling is the one who's more likely to be a factor. So, if Claypool doesn't pan out (he's still a longshot), MVS isn't a bad alternative. So long as Coleman emerges as a real threat, it's likely that someone will step up as the complementary piece. It's looking like an interesting collection of receivers.

Yeah, I commented about Coleman but you're right, it was all of them. Playing against air, but every catch seemed to be hands. However, if you think about the plays that we've seen, there weren't any deep balls with guys making arm catches. There weren't any deep balls that I can recall. It might be a sign of what's to come, but mostly I think it was a day to work out kinks and practice some basics.

AVP was thick.

Those videos of course don't show any drops by Coleman, but it's pretty clear the guy is a hands catcher. Catches it like Kincaid.

Excuse me, but receivers are a dime a dozen. Just look at that list of near Pro Bowlers.

I agree that this was intentional on McDermott's part. However, people shouldn't infer from that that Claypool isn't doing a good job. McDermott meant what he said. McDermott wouldn't make it up just to motivate the guy.

Absolutely correct. If Edmunds hadn't been on the squad, Bernard might have gotten a lot of first-team reps in training camp, and who knows. On the other hand, when he did get in the game as a rookie, he didn't look anything like the player we saw the next season.

It's one of the rare cases where a player didn't know the rule, and the officials gave him a pass. Knowing the rules is part of the game. It was the same game, right?, when Dawkins or someone got called for that block ten yards behind the play. One player got the sympathy of the refs, the other didn't, and the outcome of the game was changed.

I'm long on hopes, hopes that I think are reasonable. I'm relatively short on expectations, because I just don't know. Coleman - I have the most confidence in his being an impact player as a rookie. The Bills weren't going to get one of the top three in the draft, and I think they got the guy they wanted. (Kudos to Beane for trading back twice and still getting him.) I think they drafted him because they can see how he fits in. Bishop - I want to believe, but he won't play until he understands what's going on out there. Bishop, like Bernard two years ago, comes with a reputation for being a coach-on-the-field-type player, and Bernard couldn't sniff the field his rookie season. I have high hopes, but I think he'll have to work his way into the role over the course of the season. Carter - I hope he's Kyle Williams. I think he'll be in the rotation day 1, or very soon. Whether he has an impact remains to be seen. Davis - I agree with others; he will be the #1 backup, and get significant snaps. I hope he can push Cook for the #1 spot. Van Pran-Granger - highest hopes; if he can take over at center, the offensive line looks great. Whether he can is anyone's guess. Ulofoshio - rookie linebackers don't play on this defense. Solomon - great hopes. It sounds like he has some physical skills that will make it hard to keep him off the field. Defining his role will be tough. Again, great hopes, but expectations? Bills likely will give snaps to a veteran before Solomon. Hardy - I expect him to make the 53.

That play was amazing. Maybe i underestimate the guy.

McDermott believes in the growth mindset, and I do, too. Not only was I a better lawyer at 40 than 35, but I was better at 50 than 40. And not just a little better, a lot better. Last time Lebron won an NBA championship, Van Pelt asked him, "You're 37. You won you first championship at 27. If 27-year-old Lebron was sitting next to you, what would you say to him?" Lebron said something like, "27-year-old Lebron, you don't have a clue." It was Lebron's way of saying that he was so much better at 37 that it was hard to explain. I have no doubt McDermott is better at being a head coach today than he was a year ago, and he was better then than the year before that. Now, there are limits, as you say, and for intellectual growth, which is what we're talking about, natural intelligence limits growth. For some people, it's either impossible or extraordinarily difficult to learn nuclear physics. Without at all meaning to demean the man, but it's certainly possible that McDermott has maxed on his growth as a head coach. I seriously doubt it, but it's possible. I think Brady is going to be fine, and because he will grow, too, he'll get better in coming seasons. Problem is that if he has a lot of success he'll be sucked off to some head coaching job, and McDermott will have to choose again.

Oh, I wasn't aware that Aiyuk had been whining. That gives me less comfort. I don't like Metcalf's attitude, at all. Whenever I see him, he looks to me like he thinks that because he's the biggest fast receiver and the fastest big receiver that he's God's gift to the world of football. Running back is about the only position where physical gifts and instincts can make you a winner without dedication to the finer points. Metcalf has never impressed me as a disciplined route runner or a guy who makes big plays. Spectacular plays, yes, because his skills are so special, but not big plays. When the chips are down, I don't think you can rely on him. Just my impression. I think, for example, that Diggs was a guy you could count on for the big play, until last season. I don't think Metcalf ever has been the go-to guy that Diggs was in his earlier seasons in Buffalo.

When my grandson was 10, we went out in the driveway, and he made four free throws out of ten. Now he's 15, and a couple nights ago he made 93 out of 100. When I was 35, I was a smart young lawyer. When I was 40, I was a much smarter lawyer. Point is, people learn and improve, especially motivated and dedicated people. McDermott never hired an OC until seven years ago, and prior to that he had zero training in the subject. There is every reason to believe that he is getting smarter about all kinds of things head coaches are asked to decide, including hiring coordinators. There isn't any more reason to think that he will always go 1 for 3 on OCs than I had to think that my grandson always would make only 40% of his free throws. Having said that, it bothers me that McDermott prefers to hire people he's worked with, particularly promoting from within. Brady's a William and Mary football player and has a Carolina connection. It makes me concerned that he doesn't cast a wide enough net. I get that he likes having confidence in the way a guy works, confidence that comes from working with him, but there are other things that are important, too. Still, McDermott is desperately about winning and about continuous improvement. He's not one to repeat the mistakes from the past. So, I have some confidence that Brady knows what he's doing and that in particular he will take Allen to a higher level.

Aiyuk yes, Metcalf no. And Deebo is just more Curtis. I doubt it is happening, but the 49ers have to do something. Maybe they will wait until after this season, but something is coming.

I thought this thread was over. Then this, and I had to respond. Part of the point that you and others seem to have missed is that 2019 is practically the dark ages in terms of the evolution of offense and defense in the NFL. The Bills' 2019 offense with that talent would be shut down completely by 2024 defenses. Longing for the way things used to be is like longing for an egg cream at your local drugstore soda fountain - the memories are nice, but the world has moved on. Not my intention, and I've said so repeatedly. I do think that the way the receiver room turned out reflects that McBeane agree some with what I think is an NFL trend, but I've said that the receiver room isn't my idea of an ideal group. I think it's because I, too, am stuck in thinking about the game the way it used to be. McBeane have been very good at getting the roster ready for September, and I don't believe that they've just completely failed at receiver. They do everything with a purpose, and that tells me that they believe they can win with this group. (Unless Beane has a deal in his pocket. I continue to wonder whether Beane and Lynch don't have a handshake on Aiyuk or Deebo Samuel - an agreement that after June 1, San Francisco is moving one or the other to Buffalo. The 49ers' draft loaded up their receiver room, which suggests they might be moving on from one of their studs, and if so, out of the conference makes sense.) Have another egg cream. Of course you were clamoring for a running back, just like plenty of people were clamoring for a receiver this year. Nobody's winning Super Bowls with stud running backs. Thurman and Emmit may have been the last great running backs on Super Bowl contending teams. Not Barkley, not Henry, not Tomlinson, not Zeke Elliott, not Adrian Peterson, not LeSean McCoy. McCaffrey is the only one in 20 years, and he's a freak. You can't build a team hoping you're going to find another McCaffrey. Fans clamoring means exactly nothing. Remeber last summer. Fans were clamoring for a linebacker to start. The Bills already had one, and the fans didn't have a clue.

I said best of his career. Classic Shaw66 homerism. Here's why: 1. Josh is still learning. The reality of pro sports is that the athletes keep improving until their bodies begin to fail them. For running backs and some receivers, that comes pretty early, often before they're 30. For QBs, they can last until their late 30s without serious decline in their abilities. For Josh, he will lose his running ability before then, but the important part of QB growth is mental. Josh is at peak physical performance, and he's still climbing the learning curve, so he will be a better QB in 2024 than in any previous seasons. 2. Brady's offense is going to be good, and well suited to Josh and his receivers. How do I know that? Because Beane and McDermott are trying to build a winner, they got to see Brady in a tryout half-season, have gotten to know how he thinks about the game and what kind of attack he envisions. McBeane have had an opportunity to test what Beane offers, and they obviously concluded that Brady can do the job. They might be wrong, of course - they thought Dorsey could do it, too, but the extended tryout means they are much more likely to have gotten it right this time. 3. The receiving room is matched to the offense that Brady wants to run. How do I know that? Because the receiving room has been substantially reshaped, and it must have been reshaped in a way that Brady wanted. There would be no point in trying out Brady at OC, deciding he could do the job, and then dumping Diggs and Davis and acquiring the guys they did. 4. The offensive line looks set (assuming McGovern or VPG handles the center position), so both pass pro and the running game should be fine. If it's a truly balanced attack, Allen may not have career passing stats, but if I'm correct, he'll run the offense even better than last season, which I though was a break-out year for him as a field general. This is going to be a good offense, and it all starts with Josh.

Exactly, as to both. MVS likely will turn out to be useful; Claypool is a shot in the dark.

How do you know that the WR is not what he planned for? It's just that you don't like it, and you think where the Bills are is inadequate. I get that. To be honest, I'm not thrilled with it either. I don't completely understand how they will make a productive passing attack out of that room (plus the TEs and RBs). But the fact that I don't understand doesn't really matter. I think Beane and McDermott and Brady talked extensively about what they needed in the receiver room, and I think the reasonable assumption is that they got what they wanted. That is, they came out of the draft in a way that followed the plan. I think the two trades back tell it all. If the McBeane and Brady were so desperate for receivers, they either would have taken one at 28, or they would have traded back to get additional picks so they could get two receivers. In fact, they traded back, but then they didn't take the second receiver. Why not? Because they didn't think a second receiver was necessary. The receiver room looks the way it did because of conscious, intentional choices made at OBD. How it looks is part of a carefully considered plan. Whether the plan works is a different question, and I can't argue with you if you conclude it isn't likely to work. I don't know if it'll work.

I think MVS at least replaces Davis, although I don't know how he measures up when asked to block. For me, they're both talented guys with good size who have demonstrated a level of inconsistency that means you can't make them the focus of your attack. (I also think Knox is one of those guys at his position, too.) However, both Davis and MSV have come through for their teams big-time from time to time, and for that reason they've been useful to their teams and worth keeping around. Once the price went up to keep Davis, he simply wasn't worth the money. So, the fact that MSV is at least in the same category and will play for less, it was a smart move. The problem is that demonstrated level of inconsistency makes neither of them is the guy you want on the field as a regular starter. Why? Because when you don't have stud #1, a guy who can give you something extra, when you've decided that receiver by committee is the best way to attack defenses, one of the basic requirements is that you execute at a high level. Over and over, you run the right route. Over and over, you catch the ball. Over and over, you make the block. This kind of passing attack is part of a philosophy that I believe strongly in: Get positive yardage on every play. Zero yardage on a play is a bad thing, and negative yardage is not even on the table. Throwing a 50-50 ball 30 yards downfield, is much worse than throwing an 80-20 ball 6 yards, even though over five plays the 50-50 ball gets you more yards. Inconsistency results in unnecessary zero-yardage plays, so this philosophy means that you don't want inconsistent receivers on the field. It's almost as though consistency is more important than greatness. I liked having Davis on the team, and I like having MSV for the same reasons, but I'm sure hoping Shakir, Samuel, and Coleman get the job done, because I don't want to have to depend on a steady diet of MSV.

Ah, that makes a lot of sense. You're correct. That is, if I'm correct, in the rinse-wash-repeat sense of how to manage the receiver room, then you must be drafting to replenish the veteran departures. That does seem to be the way teams, including the Bills are running their running back room. Draft good running backs, and be prepared to let them walk when their contracts are up. Draft some more. And if that's correct, and I think it is, then the Bills should have drafted another receiver. Looking at it cold-heartedly, there's a good chance that one of Samuel, Shakir, or Coleman is going to let people down this season. I like to think that they'll all be good, but realistically, probably not. The veterans are only stopgaps, and just like the starter, one or more of MSV, Claypool, and Hollins going to wash out, more or less. There already should be someone else, waiting in the wings. Maybe they think Shorter is that guy.