Shaw66
-
Posts
9,251 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Shaw66
-
-
exactly right about Sammy.Let me translate.
"If Sammy had a bad year we weren't going to sign him. If Sammy had a great year we weren't going to pay him. Rookies are cheaper so we are going to trade players or let them walk and just have constant turn over."
"EJ Gaines is short, but if you kind of squint he looks taller."
-
Perhaps here is another way to consider these moves and why the Bills hit a home run with the trades.
Lets assume both Watkins and Darby are healthy on week one. You remove them from the lineup and you insert Matthews and Gaines. These changes to the Bills lineup will result in a zero impact on the point spread according to vegas (good article on how players impact the line below). Now if Watkins is hurt and not playing and you have Matthews in the line up it might give you .5 point movement. So the Bills generated draft currency while basically keeping the same value according to Vegas.
https://www.sportsinsights.com/blog/nfl-player-point-spread-values/
Lets also consider this team is finally focused on getting their franchise QB. We are now in a position to do that next season with the stock pile of draft picks. I could be off here but I think this is the best move this team made in a long time.
[/quote
I agree with your point, but your 5 point statement is incorrect. Matthews over and Watkins' replacement isn't 5 point difference. That would mean Watkins is 5 points better than his replacement, and he isn't. That's almost a touchdown a game, and Watkins doesn't get 16 touchdowns a year. And his replacement would get some scores.
Still, your point is correct. It's a team game, and no non-QB is 5 or 7 or 10 points better than his replacement.
He caught long passes... he rarely made contested catches, ran routes over the middle etc.
Like I said, maybe that will be different in LA, could've been our awful coaches, mediocre QB etc. but he certainly isn't a dynamic guy like Dez or OBJ.
No. Lee Evans was a one-trick pony.
Watkins is the real deal.
Yea, but this new regime has no ties to Watkins. So !@#$ him.
Trade him away no matter how talented.
Ass backwards thinking.... The Billsy way of thinking.
There's plenty of doubt Beane and McDermott think the same thing.
If they thought he was going to be a top receiver they wouldn't have traded him for a 2nd rounder and a scrub corner.
As has been said and repeated several times, plans don't always work out. If McEgos plan is to trade away young talented players like Sammy for unknown draft picks he's not going to last long because he won't be winning.
You think the Giants(a better run organization by a mile)are trading away OBJ for a 2nd rounder? Not a chance.
Bad move that will look worse in a month or two.
I doubt their plan is to trade away young talent. They traded a guy they knew they wouldn't re-sign, because he will command more in the market than they were willing pay.
Watkins isn't built to take the pounding that possession receivers take. Matthews and Boldin have shown they can take that punishment. It's likely that's the kind of guy they want.
It simply isn't obvious this was a bad move.
-
Very well written. My points:
- I am NOT on board with the recent trades, especially for Watkins. I can understand scheme fit, but you do need play makers on both sides of the ball. It was the correct decision to not pick up his option but this was his 'show me' year. If he was healthy and produced on the field, he is a game changer. If he didn't in 2017, you do not renew his contract. Getting a pick is hardly compensation for a confirmed elite talented player
- Despite the proclamations of Beane and McD, this is a throw away year. It is the wrong time to do for a franchise bereft of playoff appearances. I can understand the thought of a long term build, but giving away your talent in the hopes of acquiring more future talent is unnecessary. We already had 2 first rounders next year. The plan should have been to win this year and replace the missing/wrong pieces next draft. There are many a team which has turned it around without shipping away their premier talent
- In addition to 'giving away' this season, the next season cant be that bright either if there are rookies all over the place. A team needs leadership, mentors and that seems sorely lacking in the locker room (save for K Williams, Boldin)
- The immediate goal should have been to change the loser culture around the team. These moves go against that goal and can further frustrate players and fans alike
I'm not sure you're right. I loved having Watkins. Amazing skills, and I still believe he's going to be a monster receiver in the league. No doubt Beane and McDermott think the same thing.
But that isn't the point. It's about building a team. If you have a philosophy, a plan, then you have to build to that plan. Part of the plan is how and where you're going to spend money. There is a good argument to be made that wide out is NOT the position you should be spending $15 million a year on.
Your offensive plan may mot feature the deep ball.
So if what I've just said is your philosophy of building a team, then the question is simple: Do you keep Watkins for the season so that your team can win maybe one more game, knowing that at the end of the season he'll be gone? Or do you unload him in a combination of deals that gets you a quality wideout, a presumptive number one receiver, plus a second round and a third round pick?
It all depends on whether there's a place on the team you're building for the next five years for a great receiver who will cost you more than you want to spend.
-
If their plan is a possession passing scheme than they're DOA. Tyrod is at his best playing a sandlot style with deep quick-strike options, which Sammy was perfect for. Trying to stuff this offense into a short-passing, tempo-based possession system is going to be a disaster. It'll be like what Rex did to the defense - negating strengths and requiring a full personnel rebuild.
This is so depressing.
We'll see, but I think he'll surprise you.
Tyrod is a superior athlete, one of the best athletes in the league. And he's coachable. This is an offense, I believe, that limits post-snap decision making, Make a presnap read, take the snap, one look at the defense and throw. That's basically athletics.
As I said, we'll see.
-
I think we are on the same page about which way the team is headed but we have different expectations for year one.
I agree. If I had to predict today I'd say 7-9, but I think there's more potential Give that run below. Absent big injuries I don't think the Bills will fall below 6-10.
-
We have already heard, and even you are saying it in this thread, that players (Matthews) fit schemes better than others.
You can't have it both ways when traying to make a point.
It is one of the reasons why the BIlls wanted the kid from LA. He supposedly plays better zone than Darby.
It will take some time to get these players in here.
Not sure what you mean. I did say that some players fit some schemes better than others. My point was that it makes a difference but not a huge difference. In the case of Watkins and Matthews my point was that the difference in talent is ls less critical because some of Taylor's talent is wasted in a possession passing scheme. So Matthews might turn out to be nearly as effective as Watkins in the new scheme.
-
LMAO
A drama queen at the very least. Rex Ryan built the Bills the way he wanted them. I'm pretty sure McDermott's system is much different than Rex's. To expect McDermott to go .500 with a Rex Ryan built team may be asking a bit too much. I think it is more than obvious Beane and McDermott have their own idea as to what type of players THEY want, hence the hording of draft picks and player transactions.
I basically am giving McDermott a mulligan in 2017. I want to reserve judgement until he gets his own guys on this roster. One off-season, with the team up against the cap, certainly isn't enough to bring honest judgement down on him when he is hamstrung with players from a coach that employed a different system.
I think that although some players fit a system better than others, football is football, and good players will play well in any system. Better in one system than another, but they still do fine. Look at Kyle Williams - he's played all kinds of systems, and yes, he's more valuable in some than others, but he was an unquestioned starter in every system. Dareus, too. The offensive line. The QB.
The running game is largely unchanged, and that's the offense's bread and butter.
6-10 is about as low as McD can go when I might be willing to say "Okay, first year, changing system, blah blah." 5-11 is lousy coaching.
6-10 I'll be really disappointed. Even 7-9. If McD is the right guy, he should go 8-8. Unless he gets hit with key injuries. If Boldin and Matthews go down, the offense will be in big trouble.
If the defense isn't better immediately, I'm going to be disappointed. Everyone says it's a simple, run-to-the-ball defense. There's talent all over the field.
-
This might help with your optimism:
https://mobile.twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/896100220341174272
I can't figure out how to post a pic of the chart, but it shows Ethan Young's MAVEM calculation for the trade. It's an "analytics" style tool he developed to value trades involving draft picks. In short, the Bills cleaned up on these trades, adding $17.85M in value. It's further proof that Beane and McD are using analytic tools to build this roster.
I don't understand this AT ALL. I don't know how you put a dollar value on a player for purposes of evaluating the player and the trades. These analytics must not consider Watkins' POTENTIAL, which is what we all loved and hated to lose.
-
Hey Shaw how much time ya got for all of this to come to fruition
My view is that the GM has two important decisions to make - hire the coach and find a QB. Both are hard, so you can't expect him get it right on the first shot. I give the GM three mistakes - when he's blown the HC call once or twice and the QB choice once or twice, totalling three in all, he's gotta go.
In Beane's case, he chose McDermott in the sense that when he came here, he knew he'd be riding McD. If he didn't like McD as a coach, he wouldn't have taken the job. He'll make his first QB decision in a year, when he either signs Taylor to a big deal or drafts a qb. If McD and his first QB fail, I'd give him one more pick each. Either of those fails, he's out. I think in reality I'm talking five years. Continuity is important.
As for McD, if the Bills are bad this season, I'm very worried. Those guys could play 500 ball under Rex, and Rex was horrible. If McD's team is worse, as I said, I'm very worried. I give him one more year, and if things don't look a lot better, I might move him.
If, on the other hand, the Bills go 8-8 and look decent, I give him at least a couple more years. He's a new HC, and he's going to make mistakes this year.
-
Good write up. I would caution not to make too many conclusions about this HC and GM yet. It is very early in the process and I don't think we have had enough time to fully see how they like to operate. For example, we traded down with KC for extra picks (like patriots) but followed that up by giving up picks to trade up in 2nd and 3rd (not like patriots). But I do agree that they have a plan and vision for this team and it will definitely be more about "team" than individual talent.
I like the Darby trade but the Watkins trade left me wanting more. Maybe if we had picked up his 5th year option he would have been more appealing to teams in a trade because there would have been 2 years of acceptable salary before the mega dollars kicked in. We were trading Watkins from one of his lowest value points and that is usually not a good thing.
Oh, I'm not close to annointing Beane and McD anything yet. I haven't seen much I don't like, but I've said all year that we won't know anything, especially about McD, until we see his teams play for a year or two.
As for Watkins, I guess I agree that in terms of the actual player, it wasn't the best time to trade him. Yes, if they'd picked up his option, they would have gotten more for him, but not that much more, because of his injury history. Two years of Watkins could mean 16 total games played, at which point he would have cost $10 million or more. I think he was attractive in part because his new team would only have to invest one year in him before deciding.
But from the bigger picture, now was the time. Yes, they might not have maximized value because of the option, but his value was only going to go down as the season progressed, and he'd be worth nothing in trade in February. I think he didn't fit McD's view of the offense, so they weren't going to resign him at the money he'd command in the open market. SO why not get what you can? It's the cost of retooling after you change coaches and GMs. When your coach and GM are succeeding and have been in place for 5 years, they aren't forced to make tough choices like this.
-
And you, Shaw are the opposite...rational, but perpetually positive. And yes...you are good at being optimistic, just like I'm good at being negative. What you must take note of though is that the Bills have been a disappointment all this time while you have kept positive through all of the misery and disappointment, so when you think about it...I'm more justified in my position than yourself. Yes, optimism is generally a better trait to have, but this is football discussion, and I'm not interested in pumping sunshine after all these years, and frankly I don't have it in me to talk myself into it anymore. I don't begrudge you for it, though...it's cool that you maintain such positivity. When I feel it's warranted, or I see things coming together, I'll be right there with you cheering and supporting. I still do now, but not to the level I previously did.
As for you're examples...I could give you the list of franchise QB's that were top picks and became franchise QB's, but it would be much longer than the handful you presented.
I'm fine with this regime stockpiling picks...this is always a sound strategy. I don't, however wish to go about it by dumping a top flight receiver for lesser value...it was a bad move when we moved Lynch (I was against that, too), and this is even worse than that. Watkins was not a guy who got in trouble, and he has much more tread left in his tires than Lynch did at the time.
I have no idea if it will work either. Maybe it will, but there's no way I'll ever get behind the Watkins trade, and I will remain skeptical until I see the plan start to unfold and it looks promising.
I guess I'm an optimist. But what I try to do most of the time is understand why management would do what it did. So I look for reasons that seem logical.
That comes off as me sounding like I'm always supporting the team and their decisions. And I generally do support them, because as I think about why they might of done something, I come to understand the logic in their choice.
But I actually recognize that some decisions work, and some don't. In this case, for example, I'm not saying that unloading Watkins was without question a good decision. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. But I can see why it fits what they're doing.
My views are changing about player personnel. I think the coach is the most important guy on the team, the QB is second, and practically no one else matters. In particular, as much as I love watching them, I think great receivers are pretty much unimportant. Julio Jones hasn't won, Fitzgerald hasn't won. Julian Edelman is far from being in the conversation about great receivers, but he wins. So I've come to think that wideouts are a distraction.
-
Section -
I like what you're saying. Makes sense to me.
My only addition would be if the Bills don't get a free agent qb and don't get a qb in the draft, I think the Bills will trade some of their 2018 picks to reposition for 2019 draft.
-
Taylor has now lost every WR he gained confidence throwing to less then 4 weeks before the season begins so this is cumulative on a QB thats being asked to throw with confidence.
with all due respect Shaw can we afford the extra loss and still reach the playoffs?
I'm not as worried as you because of the offense. Taylor's job is to read and throw. I think its less about communication than the previous offense. It's the receivers job to get to the spot and he has two for receivers, veterans, who can do that. Two guys with size and who catch in traffic. So I think the transition to new receivers will be easier than you say. I may be wrong.
-
This regime is doing things completely differently then the last 2. they are putting stock in the draft and bringing in the right players for what the coaching staff wants. We actually have options next year instead of being hamstrung because of trading away your picks.
Say what you will about Mathews but his stats are better then Sammy's over the last 3 years and we landed a CB that's better suited for a zone scheme. Then you add in a 2nd and 3rd round pick. So I'm confused how this was pennies on the dollar.
Shaw to your point even if this team goes 5-11 we stock piled picks for next years draft. Our worst case scenario on paper no longer looks that bad.
Crushed is difficult to respond to. He sounds rational but he's perpetually negative. If you notice, he said stockpiling picks to get a an doesn't work and being mediocre doesn't work. His solution is to tank, even though no team in the history of the league has done that. Well, maybe the Colts.
The packers have gotten TWO franchise QBs without tanking. The Psts got theirs withour tanking. Brees went in the second round. Crushers just good at being being negative.
And he accused me of being an optimist. My piece was optimistic only when I said I liked what they're doing. I have no idea if it will work. I think the season and the next seasons depend on what kind of HC McDermott is. My view is that he's 50-50 or worse to be any good.
-
Nice post. Good logic.
But make no mistake: This is a far bigger gamble than keeping Watkins/Darby and it says to the league and fans that this is a throwaway season.
I don't think it's such a big gamble. Losing Watkins and Darby means the Bills will lose, at most. One more game than if they'd kept them. And Matthews and Gained will cut into that considerably. Plus I suspect that Watkins wasn't a good fit for the offense. I'm guessing we will see run dominant, possession passing ball co tell offense, and a gifted burner like Sammy is a luxury in that offense. Matthews fits better.
Of course, everything is a gamble, and the Bills could go 5-11. However, if that happens, it will be because McD is failing, not because Sammy wasn't in the lineup.
-
It's a bunch of excuses and apologies. There was NO PLAN. THERE IS NO PLAN. Did he articulate a PLAN yesterday? NO! He said he wasn't planning to trade them! but people approached! He's an opportunist, without a plan.
He's not going to lay out his plan in public. What he thinks about players and the future is confidential for plenty of good reasons. All you can do is divine the plan from what you see him do.
They clearly have a good idea about the kind of cornerbacks they want, because they got rid of two expensive cover guys and went after a zone guy. They clearly have an idea of what kind of receivers they want, because with Bolding and Matthews they have two excellent possession receivers with size and who fight for the ball.
They also have shown and said that the draft is at the core of their player acquisition strategy. We probably haven't seen the end of top players getting traded for lesser players plus a high pick. Hughes, Dareus and McCoy all are candidates. Personally, I'd hate to see Dareus or McCoy go, but after yesterday, anything is possible.
First, I'd be shocked and stunned if the Bills were not already ready to move beyond Tyrod and if they don't take a QB in next year's draft, way up at the top of the draft. That seems to clearly be their plan.
Second, I doubt the acquired draft picks from the deals yesterday will be used as draft picks as you suggest; rather, they will be used as currency to help broker a deal that gets us high enough in next year's draft to get the QB we want, within reason.
Third: I agree the right way to go is to build through the draft; that is true for pretty much all N. American team sports.
Fourth: I agree current management is following a BB model and now doing things the New England way. That is a very good thing.
Fifth: The bold moves yesterday with some planning and forethought remind just how bad management has been at this organization for a very long time. Doug Whaley's stint here was laughably bad. Well, it would be laughable if it didn't make me cry.
I agree with what you're saying about Taylor, and I think I said the same thing. If I had to handicap it, I'd put a 10% probability on Taylor being the long-term starter. But I also think these guys are smart; they're going to see what Taylor does this season and make their decision about the future next February.
So they are about to allow the QB that they will soon replace to cost them all of their draft capital? In what world does that makes sense, if they have their mind made up on him then move him out and get a top 5 pick while playing Yates. That will eliminate the need to trade away all the picks!
There's plenty of logic in what you say; it happens in the NBA all the time.
But it doesn't happen in the NFL, and Beane said yesterday it isn't in his DNA. He hates losing, so he's not going to set himself to lose. He and McDermott think the Bills can be just as good with the new guys as with Watkins and Darby.
Plus, except for the losses and the high pick, there's no upside in unloading Taylor now. Can't get anything for him - he's on a short contract, it's already very late in the season to install a new QB in the starting role, and he doesn't have much of a track record. Unloading him would be purely a tank job; Beane won't do that and the fans won't stand for it.
As I said elsewhere, I'd think it's more likely that one or more of Dareus, McCoy or Hughes gets moved.
-
I liked Sammy and wish him the best. But I like this trade for a host of reasons - I know there is a thread on that.
What I would like to note in this thread is that with Matthews we get a player of exceptional character and intelligence. A team leader. Google it - I was going to paste in an article on this point, but there are SO many I did not.
He is disciplined, he is an incredibly hard worker, he gives back to the community. He is a chiseled, bulldog of a receiver - I can't remember us ever having one quite like him from a physicality standpoint (Moulds maybe, but he was almost more like Sammy with his downfield ability that I don't think Matthews can match). He is a great teammate- check it, article after article says he was one of the most respected men in the Eagles locker room. He is compared to Jordy Nelson, which I would take in a heartbeat. His story is similar to that of Zay Jones, he worked extraordinarily hard to become what he is and I think he reflects what the new administration wants on the field - and in the locker room and off the field. We should welcome him with open arms. A Buffalo kind of guy. Lunch bucket.
Go Bills!
I didn't know this. Beane and McDermott keep talking about the kind of people they want, and Matthews seems like he's in their sweet spot.
-
so according to your logic the Bills had 3 "good, dedicated, smart athletes" on their in Hogan, Gills and Gilmore...or else Belichick wouldn't have nabbed them, right? so why did he see this but not the Bills FO? haha i still see people trying to downplay Hogan's contribution to their SB path, and win. it can't work both ways.
Cousins is a strong possibility, but Jimmy G is a NO. they aren't getting rid of him. he's going to be championship ready and run this league, because he is being developed correctly. something the Bills can't seem to do.
Part of it is fit. Gilmore is the easy example. He's a man-to-man corner and McDermott is dedicated to zone principles. So he wasn't a good choice at any reasonable price.
Part of it is talent vs. value. That's Gillislee. Bills probably concluded that with Tolbert and Williams they're good at the back up running back. They didn't need to pay marginal starter money to a guy just to be a backup. And they didn't think, I suppose, that Gillislee was good enough to replace McCoy without a significant drop off in production.
If McDermott and Beane had been, they might not have let Hogan go. Athletic possession receiver with decent speed. He's a poor man's Boldin and Matthews.
The real point, however, is that although we can describe in general what the scheme is, the decisions about who fits and what he's worth are still very difficult, complicated and subjective. I'm not saying it's easy; I'm saying that they seem to have a plan that's clear to them, a plan that is more than just signing the best players they can find.
-
And if - IF - the owner has the patience to see it through. We don't know that, yet.
In addition to being in a good cap situation going forward, (i) there are a number of good WRs hitting the market next offseason, and (ii) Brady is in the twilight of his career; by the time the 2018 draft picks start producing, Brady might be retired and the Bills may actually have a shot.
So true about the owners. If McDermott succeeds early, everything is fine. If he doesn't, we'll see how much the Pegulas believe in the story he and Beane are telling.
-
The Bellichick way works because he has Brady and as douchy as Brady may be or seem, he works for the Patriots at a very cap friendly deal. If he wanted to really get paid what he's worth, the Patriots wouldn't have the money to pay 53 players.
First, I believe that Brady has a handshake side-deal with Kraft that will pay Brady millions after he retires. That would be classic Patriots bending the rules. It isn't written anywhere, but Brady will make public appearances for the team, show up at some games, etc., and Kraft will pay him millions.
Second, I don't think Brady's low salary matters that much. If he was getting $20 million instead of $14, or whatever the numbers, it would just mean that Belichick wouldn't have had the money to spend on Gillislee. I really do not believe that Gillislee is or will be the difference between the Pats winning and losing. Belichick ALWAYS finds somebody, because he has a system that requires good, dedicated, smart athletes. There are enough of those around.
-
You mentioned them wanting a star QB and replacing what they currently have. Fans that are still blindly supporting this team and it's personnel decisions are missing one major point. IF they don't not move Shady or Tyrod this team can fall into 6-7 wins. Those 4-5 extra wins will waste so much if not all of the draft stock they have built up just to move up for the star QB.
If they do have a plan and they are confident about executing their vision then they MUST trade more players away to better position themselves for the QB and the future.
As it sits it's a half ass rebuild that will only prolong the losing. If it takes one terrible season and then we have a franshise altering draft I could get behind that, as would many others.
I don't agree about the half-assed rebuild. The Bills are now in a pretty good cap situation going forward. They didn't pay Gilmore and now they don't have to pay Watkins, so they have a manageable number of high-paid guys - Glenn, Hughes, Dareus and McCoy. They can afford just to let those contracts run out. (Doesn't mean they might not unload one or more of them, but they don't have to.)
If Taylor somehow makes the big step up, they have enough cap room to sign him. If he doesn't, they'll go after a top rookie QB, and he'll come cheap for several seasons. So there are no worries there.
At all the other positions, Beane and McD can make all the changes they want, replacing guys making $5 million or less with other guys making $5 million or less. And all the while they're adding young, inexpensive guys through the draft.
The model works IF - and it's a really big IF - the head coach has the talent to build a team that's better than the sum of its parts. The foundation of this strategy is that system trumps talent - in a league where all the teams have more or less equal talent, marginal differences in talent don't matter - marginal differences in system make winners. It's all on McDermott: will his fundamentals-details-family approach win 11-14 games a year?
-
The Rockpile Review by Shaw66
The Brandon Beane Era Begins
Brandon Beane arrived in Buffalo three months ago. He was the new guy in town, replacing the last new guy, who replaced the new guy before him. Over time, each new guy made his mark on the team, and then he left. He made a mark, but he didnt win.
So Beane took over in May, and now its his turn to make his mark. He did a few deals, nothing very remarkable. It seemed as though wed have to wait until free agency and the draft in 2018 to get a sense of who this man is and what his team-building strategy looks like. Or so it seemed.
Less than a day after an ordinary and uneventful preseason opener, Beane reshaped the 2017 starting lineup and set himself up to build the team that he and Sean McDermott envision.
In separate deals, Beane traded Sammy Watkins and Ronald Darby and filled their spots in the lineup with quality starters. He also banked second- and third-round picks in the 2018 draft.
Yesterday, we could only speculate about how and what Beane and McDermott want to build. Today, its pretty clear.
1. They want to build through the draft. Beane confirmed it in his press conference. Why through the draft? Because drafted players cost less than free agents; acquiring less expensive players means more players under the cap with the talent and skills McDermott wants.
2. McDermott is confident that system trumps talent, that a lot of good players playing in the right system will beat great players whose talents force the team to adjust to them. He knows Watkins is better than Matthews and Darby is probably better than Gaines, but he also knows that Matthews and Gaines plus the two guys the Bills can draft next year are probably better, collectively, than Watkins and Darby.
3. They think they need a true franchise quarterback, not just a good quarterback. Taylor may be a good a quarterback, but he almost certainly isnt a franchise quarterback. Are they done with Taylor? Not necessarily. But the deals put the Bills in position to go after the QB they want if Taylor doesnt make major strides this season. And if Taylor has a good but not great season, dont be surprised if the Bills trade down again in 2018, stockpiling 2019 picks so that they can have one more year to look at Taylor.
4. Theyre students of the Belichick way. Belichick trades his top talent rather than pay it. He can afford to pay a GIllislee $4 million because he isnt paying anyone other than a QB $14 million. Beane and McDermott will take a good role player (Matthews) over a better, but costlier star (Watkins). Belichick stockpiles draft picks, often trading down. McDermott traded down in the 2017 draft, instead of trading up for a Watkins. In every practice McDermott puts his players into a particular game situation tells them the situation, tells them how to respond, puts them on the field to practice it. It was reported as innovative, but Belichick has been doing that for years.
5. The Pegulas have turned this team over to Beane and McDermott. The deals were bold moves, and Beane must have gone to the Pegulas, if not for their prior approval, at least as a courtesy. A GM that didnt have his owners confidence might have been told to cool it, to hold on to the guy who, at least on paper, was your biggest star. It seems the Pegulas response was its your decision.
6. Doug Whaleys approach to his job was to acquire and keep talent. He proudly announced that he had his top six, the highly paid guys who will lead the team: Taylor, Glenn, Watkins, McCoy, Dareus, Gilmore and Hughes). And in truth it wasnt a bad collection of players. But Whaley never articulated, and his acquisitions never revealed, a greater plan about how to build a team. He was hampered by having had a coach (Rex) and maybe another (Marrone), who also didnt have a well-defined strategy. The GMs and coaches, to one extent or another, seemed to think it was enough to get good players and coach em up. McDermott and Beane have a plan; they have an idea of who players fit the plan. (Sounds a bit like Belichick, doesnt it?) Gilmore didnt fit, not at that price (he may be a fit in Belichicks, but not McDermotts). Watkins didnt fit, not at that price. Hughes, Dareus, Glenn, Taylor, McCoy all have gotten the message.
7. Beane may be young, but hes in charge. He handled the press conference like a real pro. Straight, on-point answers to some questions, always positive about the players he decided to trade while emphasizing that in return he got players who can play, and flatly and directly declining to answer questions that reveal his future plans.
8. Beane may be young, but like Whaley, he isnt afraid. First time GM, one of the youngest in the league; a lot of guys in that position would have backed away from the table and just let 2017 play out with the hand he was dealt. Not Beane.
9. Weve heard a lot about how the Bills will be running a variant of the west coast offense, with an emphasis on possession passing and strong running. We saw a lot of short passes in the preseason opener. The acquisitions of Boldin and Matthews reinforce that view. Big targets, possession receivers. The trades scream that the Bills want to be effective, not flashy.
I hated to see Sammy go. Hes a special talent, and its so much fun to watch special talent perform for the team I root for. Itll be brutal to watch if he puts up a monster season this year, and he could.
But I like the moves. I like them because the team may be better this season (and in any case not terribly worse) than 2016, and I like them because the moves should make the team stronger going forward.
Most of all I like them because they say that the Bills, for the first time in a long time, have men in charge who have a plan, who are pursuing that plan every day, and who wont be distracted froam the goal. They have men in charge who have the full support, emotional and financial, of the owners. I like that.
GO BILLS!!!
The Rockpile Review is written to share the passion we have for the Buffalo Bills. That passion was born in the Rockpile; its parents were everyday people of western New York who translated their dedication to a full days hard work and simple pleasures into love for a pro football team.
-
Great. Boobie Dixon 2.0.
Tolbert is a real running back. Just wait.
-
It doesn't make sense that the marriage occurred without this item prenegotiated.
Young and naive and, well, you know.
It's all relative.......after all, McD is following a clown of a head coach. IMO, we can't do any worse at the HC position. Whatever mistakes McD makes, I'm sure he won't come close to matching Rex's follies.
That's what I'd like to think. I think one of the smartest things I ever saw Rex say was a few weeks, responding to someone's prediction that the Bills would go 4-12. He said if the Bills have 4-12 talent, then he must have been one of the best coaches of all time.
I think Rex coached like his father, and coaching's gotten a lot more sophisticated since then. So I'd like to think that McD is one of the new breed, but we won't know for a few hours, a few weeks and a few months.
It's a good time to be on vacation
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I'm on the road, didn't see the Eagles game (nor the Vikings game), and I've barely read or seen anything about the Bills.
Here's what I think from afar:
1. Seems like the same old preseason we always get out of the Bills, and that's a bad sign, because the regular season always looks a lot like the preseason. The offense needs to be crisp, sharp and effective, and it seems they've been anything but that. No long drives, no touchdowns. Of course, Matthews isn't playing an Boldin is brand new to the team, but still, the Bills need more offense than they showed.
2. Most discouraging is that McDermott is supposed to be all about fundamentals, details and discipline, but his team is piling up penalties as though Rex were still the coach. I said all off season that we won't know what we've got until they start firing live ammo, and it's all up to McDermott. Well, at least so far, McDermott doesn't seem to be delivering on what the Bills needed most.
3. Taylor seems to be doing his best to demonstrate that the Bills overspent when they redid his contract. Both INTs Tursday were on him.
4. Boldin looked like an old man on the INT to Darby.
See you all in another week.