SoTier

Not necessarily if the offense is explosive. We saw this with Philly under Chip Kelly. They scored a lot but they scored fast, so that their Ds were always on the field. This also was part of the problem with the Bills in the 1990s when they faced the tough NFC teams in the Super Bowl. IMO, a team can win a Super Bowl without a top offense but I don't think they can win consistently without a top defense. I think it's easier for a good defense to disrupt a good offense than vice versa, and the playoffs are a gauntlet of good defenses leading to the SB. The years that the Pats have made the Super Bowl, they have always had a top D even if everybody was looking at Brady and the O. The times they've lost Super Bowls, they've been beaten by superior defensive performances.

I think this is a good reply. Having an elite QB isn't going to help much if the team around him isn't very good (Indy comes to mind as does SD for the last 7 or 8 years). "Elite" QBs like Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, and Drew Brees have probably won fewer Super Bowls than you would think they would simply because they played for so many years on "flawed" teams where their play masked a lot of deficiencies on their team, especially on defense. When it came to running the gauntlet of good teams in the playoffs, their teams struggled ... just as Pitt struggled against Jax yesterday. OTOH, I think a strong defense combined with a good running offense can enable a competent QB to find success. I think both E Manning and Flacco are perfect examples of this. Elway was an elite QB in his day who didn't win the SB until Denver got him a team with a good defense. If you go back, you can look at both the 2000 Baltimore Ravens (Dilfer) and 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs (QB Brad Johnson) as teams with great Ds and great running games with only competent QBs.

Ummm ... given that the Eagles have still been winning without Wentz and that the Rams changed coaching staffs and added significantly to their offense (2 WRs compliments of the Bills plus signing a FA OT), you can't just pretend it's all on the QB, dude. Wentz looked decent in 2016 as a rookie, but Goff was already being labeled a bust because of how clueless he looked ... and Minnesota, Philadelphia, and Jacksonville are the current poster kids for building a strong team and then making do with a competent QB. I don't think that trading up for a QB pays off unless he's the very best QB prospect in the draft, which means he'll likely be the consensus #1 pick, and even then, it's chancy. The Bills don't have enough picks to do that ... if there even is a QB in the draft who's that good, which I'm not convinced there is. I have no problem taking a QB in the 2nd round; some decent ones have come out of the 2nd round in recent years. If Baker Mayfield was available late in the first or in the second, I might take a shot on him. I think we've seen in recent years that it's not how short ( Brees, Wilson) or tall (Osweiller, Glennon) you are but how you play the game. I wouldn't trade up for him, though.

Philly's D stopped Matt Ryan and Julio Jones when they had first and goal from the 2 yard line or whatever to preserve their win while Pitt's D couldn't stop Blake Bortles and Leonard Fournette all game despite Roethlisberger's 5 TD passes.

Actually, in points allowed, Minny is #1, Jax is #2, Philly is #4, and NE is #5. It ain't the yards allowed ... it's the points.

Good. You'd deserve it for rooting for the Pats.

Agreed. Mariota has always seemed to me more like a running back who throws than a QB who runs.

Well, just because you hate the Jags doesn't mean all Bills fans do. I certainly don't. In fact, along with KC and Pitt, they're among my most liked AFC teams. I don't hold them beating the Bills last week against them; it was a decent game, and their D was better than ours. I certainly don't hold them having Marrone and Dareus against them ... if watching ex-Bills have success in the post-season bothers you, that's your problem not mine. I DO hate NE, however, so it's Jags all the way. The truth is that the Jags are built just the way I would like to see the Bills built: tough, mean defense, excellent running game, and competent QB. It seems to me that they have the best shot to beat NE of any AFC team simply because they have the nasty D to get after Brady with their regular pass rushers as well as the DBs and LBs to take care of NE's receivers. They also have Tom Coughlin, the man who beat NE twice in the SB with similarly built teams, as their "guru". Go Jags!

I think you might have your Bills coaches confused. I thought it was Gregg Williams who complained that his family was harassed and even threatened. I thought Mularkey said he quit because he couldn't fill assistant coaching positions because assistants didn't want to sign on when the HC had only 1 year left on his contract. That made a lot of sense since Mularkey was Donahoe's guy, and not only was Donahoe out in Buffalo after 2005, he seemed to become a persona non grata throughout the NFL.

Pretty much this. Dalton can be a decent QB ... if he has the right supporting cast (ie, good OL and AJ Green) around him. The Bills don't have that for him and even less so without Glenn, so he'd be doomed to failure from Day 1. Pass. Contrary to some claims, the Bills are NOT a great team in search of a QB as is Minnesota. They are the NFL's Over-Achievers of 2017, a team that played far above its talent level. They need to keep the talent that they do have plus add more, including a QB taken higher in the draft than Day 3 rather than chasing after a "name" QB who hasn't shown that he can produce with limited talent around him.

I seriously doubt that Ducasse has finally "gotten it" late in his career. Sometimes OLers who actually played poorly look better on film if the context of the play calls and blocking assignments are ignored ... and the guys playing next to them get blamed for letting a rusher hit the QB or for failing to open a hole for a RB. Ducasse's play at RG hasn't made Eric Wood and/or Justin Mills, the guys playing next to him, look better; in fact, their play could very well be adversely affected by poor play by Ducasse. The fact is that the play of the OL needs to be evaluated as a unit, and compared to the previous two years, the Bills OL just isn't very good. With the same QB and feature RB, the Bills OL has played worse pass pro and worse run blocking. 3rdand12 pretty much sums it up below. The Bills desperately need to take an OG high in the draft, no later than Day 2 and maybe even in Round 1, preferably to replace Ducasse, but Incognito might be need to be replaced soon, too, since he's 34 this season. Taking a center if there's a good one available wouldn't be a bad idea, either. Well said! Dawkins is very promising, which is a good thing because Zay Jones has been a major disappointment. That's what teams get with rookies, though. Some individuals are just more precocious than others, which is why I'm reluctant to label first year players "stars" or "busts" based on their rookie seasons. Again, well said! Excellent analysis.

The Bills OL sucks in pass pro, and it hasn't been all that great in run blocking either despite the spin that the statboys at PFF try to put on it. The Bills "good" stats stem from several factors including having a mobile QB as well as not playing that many teams with fierce pass rushes. How'd that "good" OL do with a pocket passer under center against a team with a good pass rush? Peterman didn't throw 5 INTs because he had all day to find receivers and just missed them. Dawkins is NOT "great". For a rookie LT, he's been decent but then so was Mike Williams, the OT the Bills drafted at #4 in 2002, who eventually turned out to be a bust. He's got lots of room for improvement before he comes close to being even "nearly as good" as Cordy Glenn. Many rookies who look good in their first year never improve much and sink to JAGs or worse as their careers progress.

Well said! The Bills had a chance to grab a first round prospect in 2017 with either Watson or Mahomes, and they chose to trade away that pick. Maybe history will be prove them right to do so, but as of right now, it doesn't look too good for getting a good first round QB prospect in 2018 simply because of the Bills and KC draft positions and the number of teams that will be looking for QBs. The fact is that it's NOT that the Bills have not "swung for the fences" for a top QB because they've done that twice since 2000 but that they chose the wrong QBs. Taking a first round QB does not guarantee getting a franchise QB, especially if said QB prospect is being overdrafted. JP Losman and EJ Manuel proved that.

Have you watched him play much? He's not any better than Taylor and might be worse ... and that's over the entire course of his career, not just this season, because the Titans have much more offensive talent and a much less conservative offensive system than the Bills have. The Titans win because their defense not because Mariota plays like a "franchise" QB.

Geez, don't confuse good propaganda with facts FCOL!

Awwwww ... the truth hurts and ol' joesixpack doesn't want to be reminded of it.

Yes, but he was a first round pick so he must be better than Taylor. Too many of these Taylor bashers don't actually look at how the QBs actually play but only at their draft order and reputations. Many others only look at their numbers which are often inflated by playing in pass heavy offensive systems.

I think it might be a case of Kraft sabotaging the Pats future rather than Belichick doing the deed. As the rumors went after the Garoppolo trade, Brady complained to Kraft that he felt that Belichick was going to trade him and go with Garoppolo, which prompted Kraft to insist on getting rid of Garoppolo. That would explain both why a new deal with Garoppolo fell through and why the Pats were willing to part with him for less than teams had offered earlier. It's not the only scenario that would explain both results but it also explains the anomaly for a football team would keep a forty-year-old QB and send the bright young prospect packing -- unless the team felt the bright young prospect wasn't going to mature into a starter (although if they were trying to negotiate a deal with Garoppolo, that kind of negates that idea). Keep in mind that the last time Belichick faced this choice, in 2002, he sent Bledsoe, who was in his early thirties at the time, to the Bills and kept Brady when it was still debatable how good Brady would be ... so Brady might have some reason to be concerned. Right. Because the Pats have been finding and developing great QBs regularly since they drafted Brady.

Point 1: Garoppolo has made 5 starts in his career. Point 2: Wilson wasn't worth 2 first rounders until he took the Seahawks to the SB ... and won it. Maybe Garoppolo is the next Aaron Rodgers but he hasn't proven anything yet. The history of the NFL is littered with crappy QBs who managed to look good for 5 or 6 games. Both Colin Kaepernick and Brock Osweiler come to mind. Trent Edwards looked like "the real deal" for several games at the beginning of the 2008 season, too.

Three good games = HOF ... apparently.

Teams don't give up franchise QBs unless they believe that franchise QB is hurt or otherwise compromised. Occasionally, they might get lucky enough to have an older franchise QB and a younger prospect, and might let the older one go. San Diego did that with Brees vs Rivers, and I think they made a mistake; Rivers never plays clutch in big games. Green Bay did that with Favre vs Rodgers, and they hit the proverbial jackpot. SF did that with Smith vs Kaepernick and crashed and burned. NE has made a fortune in draft picks trading their backup QBs because teams seem to continue to believe that NE finds "diamonds in the rough" because they found Brady in the 6th round. The truth is that they got lucky and won the lottery. None of the QBs the Pats have drafted since Brady have been close to being franchise QBs although Matt Cassel had a decent career. If Garoppolo was so good, why didn't NE keep him and let Brady leave? For that reason alone, I wouldn't have traded for Garoppolo in the first place, and if San Fran now wanted to trade Garoppolo after trading for him and re-signing him, I wouldn't go near him because I would think that they know that he's a dud.

I think Jax is exactly the kind of team that can beat the Pats in the playoffs because they've got the D to stifle Brady by constantly hurrying and hitting him even if they don't actually sack him plus they have an excellent running game, and they've significantly improved their passing game because of improved QB play. They can stop a lot of NE's offense but I'm not sure that the Pats are up to stopping them, especially their running game. The stench of sour grapes is strong in this one.

Have you watched them play this season, especially recently? Bortles has improved immensely while Winston seems to play "streaky" good or bad much like Eli Manning. Winston's decision making hasn't improved at all IMO.

Early in the season, I pretty much thought like you do, but Bortles has been playing pretty well since about mid-season, and has been even better the last three games or so. I don't know if the proverbial light has turned on or if he's decided he'd rather be an NFL QB than a party boy or if Marrone is some kind of "QB whisperer", but he seems to be more than competent. I would definitely take him over either Winston or Mariota at this point as both of those guys seem to be trending down rather than improving.

I think Jones was pushed to start too soon and without good mentors, and maybe not really good coaching, either. With Woods and Goodwin tearing it up on the Left Coast, it makes the kid look even worse. He needs to make very significant improvement by early next season or calling him a bust is fair. He really ought to be showing better than he is by now.