Zerovoltz

You may be entirely right or wrong about Mahomes, Garrapolo...etc....I do kind of smirk at the love DeSahun Watson gets.....he put up some big TD numbers....and good for him...but he was also on pace for 30 Turnovers....given that a good portion of his his long TD plays were of the catch and run variety and not so much the long awesome throw type...he might not seem so awesome.....agian....we'll have to wait and see...but it's as if people discount the fact he had so many turnovers...

I'm here. My thoughts on Mahomes haven't changed because of this. We expect Mahomes to throw some INTS...he'll take chances that Alex Smith simply will not. He'll rely on his arm and make throws at times that he shouldn't make. That's fine...that's part of the deal. He is never ever going to have a 5 INT season like Alex Smith....very few QB's do. I've said it plenty of times before when discussing Mahomes and Smith...Smith was a good QB who was especially careful. He made it a point to take care of the football. That isn't a bad tihng in and of itself...but Smith's QB rating drops from the first quarter to the last, and his red zone efficiency is HORRIBLE. This isn't because Smith is an awful QB, it's because he is a very safe one. At some point, Smith figured out that you can do well by not turning over the football. .....what Smith does that you can't see on a stat sheet very easily is taking a 3rd and 8 and rushing for 3 yards instead of making a play to move the sticks, keep the ball, and the clock and score more points. I will trade the 5 INTS for 15 Mahomes INTS if Mahomes makes 30 plays to score points or extend drives that Smith did not make If you read that article and consider that panic worthy, then you are reading into that what you want it to tell you and not what it's actually saying. How many is an acceptable number in a practice? How many do we know the defense did or didn't know the play call? How many were the QB actually making a mistake? Looking forward to preseason game action...

...um...North Dakota State plays in an indoor stadium. The argument about Allen is this: Given his physical tools and mental makeup, either A) he really does suck because we have a BIG SAMPLE size that says he does. or B) He has sucked so far because in his youth and college years, he never was around good coaching or other players that would push his development along and he won't suck anymore after he gets good coaching and has teammates and opponents who are better quality. That's it. I love metrics...I think metrics are really useful.....but it doesn't take advanced metrics to tell any reasonable person that Josh Allen's actual performance in football has been poor. That includes the Bills staff. The Bills staff believes the answer is B....because you don't take him if you think it's A....and you also don't take him even if you believe it's B, but you aren't sure you can fix him. They think he's undercoaced and underdeveloped. I don't think they can do it. I would only say, in this case, where you may actually have a guy with a ton of talent, who just hasn't been developed properly for years...that could be something the analytics would miss because the analytics are analyzing high level football players, and makes no assumptions where they came from or how much football they played where, or against who. This is where you'd not rely on a number spit out by a formula...but a human judgement. Again..I don't think it will end well, but I can see a case here about why the analytic numbers may not apply.

I also thought the Giants made a mistake passing on QB this year...and that Manning is toast...they made some investments in their line and Barkely betting he has something left...we'll see. Denver is an interesting situation....I think they'll be caught in between thinking he is the man to not really being good enough, but too good to move on from....even though they probably should. JAX......They did sign him to that extension...but they can easily get out of it....they basically bought themselves another season or 2 of figuring out if he can or can't. He's probably going to last as long as that D is good and they can run the ball I'd think. Washington...will need a guy in a year or two to start preparing to take over..but I don't think they will need that after this year. Miami....Tannehill quietly signed an extension....he's an interesting case..was having something of a breakout year when he got hurt...really had that completion pct up there at 67%...now has injury history....you are probably right...he has to show big this year..and probalby wont. Pats, Saints...need to find someone to groom. Tampa may be the one team that ends up truly needing to find a new no.1 to start over with. Titans....I think Mariotta isn't very good..but in his defense, their weapons have been lower end....and I don't think internally they consider him a bust. Cincy....this is one where I would have been in that derby in this past draft...Dalton isn't that good...at least not consistantly enough.

I don't know what the Bills would want or need...but I do think a few things are worth noting here for 2019. 1. This upcoming offseason may well be the most stable all 32 franchises have ever colectively been at QB...with this past season free agency and QB rich draft...I can't think of a team that would even really need top of the draft QB....New England might look for Bradys eventual replacement....in a year when so few other team would be in the market, they once again can zig when everyone else is zagging.......New Orleans..and maybe the Chargers could be in market for their teams future QBs.....throw the Giants in there as well...but in those cases..they are talented teams and those guys are still producing....otherwise...maybe Tampa if they decide they are done with Jameis....is about it really. 2. Part of the big push in this past draft year to nab that QB...was that 2019 has long been shaping up to be a poor QB draft year.....Drew Lock is the early leader, and he needs lots of work. So, should the Bills find themselve up high or even at no.1.....they may find their pick to have lesser value than 2018 no.1 had....more like 2013...a year with no QB prospects worthwhile.

.....you keep suggesting Mahomes will be a bust but this is a huge part of his game....getting a ball to the target like a lazer. The writer didn't really think this through....the evidence that Allen would be great are his combine measurables...wich are optimal for an NFL QB....that alone got the guy drafted 7th overall....the size, arm, wonderlic...GREAT STUFF.....and all of it is evidence that points to the idea the kid could be successful. What he, and pretty much anyone should be saying isn't that there are serious questions about why that has not translated very well to onfield results.....that's been the question since pre draft....who is Josh Allen? Another in a long line of perfect size, arm strength etc that just couldn't make it happen....OR....is he that perfect specimen who came from a small nowhere high school, to a small no where JUCO..to a small D-1 program...and never ever did get coaching or play around the kind of up and coming talent to grow his skill set with? I've been on record all over this forum saying I don't think he will make it...but I have always maintained that HE COULD if you believe the scouting reports and your own coahces.....and that goes right along with who they think they got...the super talented kid that never did have the proper environment to reach his potential. I'd hate to use a soccer analogy, but in that world...it's often said of american players...in order to develop to the fullest and take their game to the next level, they need to go play in Europe, around better players and better coaching. Someone had mentioned the QBASE metric that suggests Allen will fail....because all 27 other QB's who ever had negative QBase like Allen, also failed...that poster correctly pointed out doesn't mean ever QB who ever scores that low will fail.....because it is a metric...and it doesn't know if Allen really is this star talent that just hasn't been put in position to grow. learn and improve with the right conditions etc. Frankly, its an incredible gamble and very interesting to see how it works out.... I disagree this would be a victory for the "old school" ...but rather this WOULD be a victory for folks who really did identify a talented kid and realised that he was FAR FAR off from his actual potential.......other prototypical QB's who failed, came to the leauge much more developed and polished...having played in higher level programs from youth onward. Again, I don't think he'll make it...BUT....I'm very willing to believe that he COULD....I do think there is something to the idea that his developmental years were not well spent on football development and there is a lot of room there to be couched up, unlike so many other prospects. Should be interesting.

I think we've about talked this out as far as it can go.....can't wait to see how he looks in preseason to get a better idea where he's at.

IF they thought he was on the verge of starting, he wouldn't be running with the 3's. .....Actions speak louder than words...when he is running with the 1's at least half the time in practice etc...that will tell you what they think. ....they can tell a media person all they want about how he "isn't raw" or "further along than the scouting reports suggested" .....ALL these statements the staff is making are subjective....you can't quantify any of that....you can quantify what unit he is running with...the 1's, 2's, or 3s. I'll try this one more time....if McCarron reaches his full potential right now...and the best he can ever be is a "5"....and he's at a 4-5 right now..then he is as READY as he'll ever be. He can't improve through more film study or practice...he is what he is right now. ......and the coaches start him while the work on getting allen READY....and his ceiling is 8,9,10...but he's at a 5.5....that would mean he is still the "best" QB on the roster, but he isn't ready in the coaches estimation. Before putting him on an NFL field, with your suspect line and not dynamic skill players....they might want to build him up to a level 6-7-8 away from game action. I think we probably agree Allen is already the best QB on the roster right now....it's a matter of what we think the coaches determine the criteria to start is. I continue to contend that there is a lot of work to do....especially as that pertains to calling the correct audible, making a correct read, and an accurate throw. When they think he has made progress you'll know when he moves up and runs with the 2's, displacing one of Peterman or McCarron.

We are glad to have Ragland here....he fits what they want him to do wich is mostly be a run stuffer....as the season goes on you can really see that he excells at reading the play, getting to the gap, filling, shedding etc...as other here have mentioned, Ragland isn't all that adept at coverage...and that's fine. KC won't ask him to do much of it....for his role etc...now having recovered from the injury and seeing him progress, I'd say we got a good deal....we'll see how it goes this year. Another person mentioned we signed an LB (Hitchens from Dallas) ....that was to replace Derrick Johnson...a great LB in his time..but he was noticibly VERY SLOW.....no longer able to pursue sideline to sideline nor cover like he once did....major liability....loved him as a player but time caught up to him.

We'll have to continue to agree to disagree.......The problem with this most recent argument of yours is that McDermott says "Allen is more developed and further along in some ways than they thought initially".......well that's all well and good except nobody knows what the baseline is for any of that.....it's like calling your friend who is driving to town from Toledo...you call to see how far away they are thinking they ought to be just about to Cleveland, and instead they tell you they've made good time and are at the ohio/penn border....still far away from you, but closer than you thought....we have no idea the criteria they are talking about....has he made to cleveland or has he made it Erie? ....either way, what we KNOW the coach said was he still has a long way to go wich of course is subjective...but what isn't subjective is that the coach says he is not READY. That doesn't say anything about who the best QB on the roster is to start a game if one were played now (It's Allen) To put it another way, lets say there is a set of criteria that McDermot is working on with Allen and all of those have a rating 1-10...10 being fully developed...and overall Allen is at a 5 right now...but before he puts the kid on the field he wants to see level 7 and 8 in practice....even though McCarron is at 4 right now and Peterman is at 3. Allen is the best QB on the roster....but he isn't READY....if you have 3 qbs who all aren't ready...why not build up the actual future of the franchise and get him actually ready and burn up the expendable scrubs until he is? ....that's what is going to happen. The other 2 don't have big enough arms to overcome their lack of experience and wisdom. I expect Allen will see the field when they think he is READY....not when the other 2 prove they aren't.

This is the approach I have been advocating the whole time...the wording here is important....."We're not going to put him out there unless we feel like he's READY and that's the important part of this, that we develop a nice foundation of strong fundamentals and football knowledge so that he can go out there and execute." He did not say we are going to put him out there when he is BETTER THAN THE OTHER GUYS. He most likely already IS better than them. This quote shows your coaching staffs thoughts are right in line with the pre draft scouting report that said he'd need work to improve his fundamentals and football knowledge. .....again, I am normally an advocate of getting a guy on the field ASAP, but in this case, I agree with the scouting reports...and your coaches.

THIS.....is absolutely correct. Think of the best DB of all time...you pick...Darrel Green, Ronnie Lott, Dieon Sanders......doesn't matter..pick that guy....then think of what QB you could expect to get in a trade for one of those guys.....Aaron Rodgers...no....how far down the list of QBs would you get before some team would say....yeah...Ok...we'll take your stud DB for our QB......you'd get pretty damn far down the list.....and you certainly couldn't get Mahomes for White. or White and any combo of players and picks.

You absolutely could...but they'd miss YOUR training camp.....wich isn't a real big deal...and I would guess, that we are talking 6th or 7th round type compensation either way. Someone mentioned Tevin Coleman, and I have seen that name elsewhere on this board....he'd be a great aquisition if you could land him......would take something good to get them to move on from him now considering he is really good proven depth.

LOL...I don't spend anytime on Chiefs boards..I am part of one facebook group and I can't hardly stand that....WAY WAY too much blind homerism in KC. (Cameroheads) I really enjoy this place...good discussion here.......been interested in the Bills since the Mahomes trade....and have found that lots of good, smart fans to chat with on this board...even though I am not a Bills fan.....all the Allen talk....and just general football discussion...plus the recent trades between KC and you for Ragland....and also we have Watkins so interesting to read all of what folks think of him here....wish KC had a board like this.

sorry on that Tolbert....thought I had read somewhere you all had signed him...my mistake.

Considering the possible issue with "shady".....and frankly even with no issue with him....Ivory and Tolbert aren't excactly good RB depth. Considering the Chiefs have something of a glut of RB, and that both our team and the Bills have made some recent trades....it's perhaps worth considering another mutually beneficial deal should it become needed. For you consideration. Charcandrick West. Has started for KC at times and been effective. Decent pass catcher as well. Expendable due to Kareem Hunt and the signing of Kerwyn Williams, as well as others on a deep depth chart at RB. Started 11 games in the last few years for us. Spencer Ware, has started 16 games including 14 in 2016. Was out all of last year with injury. Career YPC 4.6 (with a large sample size) Also can catch out of backfield with 48 career receptions, 42 of wich came in the 2016 season....again, expendable due to Kareem Hunt, other signings and other depth at RB, including West above. Ware now healthy. Good NFL backs with some proven performance to look at. Just FYI.

I guess it is worth asking if you think even if Allen is the best option RIGHT NOW....is there a benefit to HIM and the team, staying on the bench until he shows some sort of tangibile, meaningful progress (in the eyes of the coaching staff) ? ....if you don't think there is a benefit (and you may well be 100% right there isn't any) then he should start. My whole point on this is that I believe the scouting reports and what own coach has to say about him...and that is he needs to develop on the bench. I would normally agree that a guy learns better and faster by playing, but Allen I think...as his scouting reports suggested prior to draft day....he is one of the few guys who can make tangible, measurable progress on the bench and on the practive field and in the classroom.

I can understand your point, but consider David Carr.....he was better than anything the Texans had the moment he was drafted. That doesn't mean he was ready....and behind a bad line, he got clobbered.....now, he may never had amounted to anyhting...or maybe in a better situation he could have....there's no way to say...but MIGHT it have been better to let some journeyman get killed at first while Carr had more time to practice good football in a controlled practice environment? maybe. Allen is a long term investment. If you really wanted a QB that was plug and play you could easily have outspent Denver and brought in Keenum.....All I am saying is that considering what Allen IS NOW....a physical specimen that the scouts all said would need some time to develope...AND who your own head coach has said will take time to develop.....I would say that even if Allen is the best QB on the team.....if the coaches say he isn't ready yet.....then let Peterman or McCarron go out there until he is READY. They are expendable. I also get how the veterans might take that wrong by holding back the "best" player to help the team win....I would think that your coach has enough credibility in the locker room for those guys to understand "the process" ....and consider once again, if Allen was plug and play ready, he would have gone 1/1. If you trust your coach...he'll know when Allen is "ready" and that is when he will see the field.

1. What Vigen says and what he actually did are two completely different things. For a guy who is supposed to be the best guy on your team, the best guy on the field...the play calling sure does suggest they tried to avoid putting it on Allen as much as they possibly could..... 2. Allen may very well be better than Peterman and MacCarron right now (in fact, he probalby is BETTER) but being better than Peterman and McCarron is a low hurdle IMO. Even if he is "better" than doesn't mean he is "ready". ....he should start when the coaches think there is nothing else to be gained by sitting. I don't propose to know what that means because I think QB's do the vast majority of their learning by playing in games...so if the coaches think ALLEN has improved and learned all he can while sitting, then he should start and see what he can do and how/if he progresses in real games. Whenever you get to that point, start him. That might mean week 1, or it might mean week 1 next year.

I agree with this. a good sports logo and branding is able to convey that you are strong, confident, a sense of tradition, it's iconic...something familiar to a community as times change... The Patriots HAD that look with their old logo. I don't tend to like logos that include a piece of sports equipments such as a ball, helmet, etc...but the old logo with the patriot ready to snap the football was classic, and met the criteria I set above. the current logo looks like the letterhead for a large life insurance company that formed after they merged two or three times with others. They've won a bunch in this look so it won't change..and will probalby become "classic" and "iconic" because of the winning tradition. The Broncos is another example. I hate those guys, but the D with the horse head in it was a really strong look....that thing on their helmet now screams "western city public transit authority". Jacksonville should have just stuck with their original uniforms....good clean look..they were a winner right away in those....no reason to have changed, but they did. I prefer a clean crisp, classic, look, like the Colts...or Steelers (hate them too, but nice uniforms.) Might I even venture to say that KC has decent, iconic classic look that hasn't changed and isn't made to look like a swoosh etc. I've always thought that it was arena league like to "swoosh": your logo....and another offense that comes off as minor league...having your font for the team name start with a Capital letter, have lowercase in between an uppercase, large final letter. .....are we advertising a tractor pull? (I'm talking to you EagleS, bring back the old eagle font and kelly green!) FWIW, I like the old standing Buffalo logo better than the current one. (but it's not awful)

I've never seen a QB who understand an NFL pocket better than Tom Brady. I don't like the Patriots...and I am certain the Patriots are hated universally here...but you watch the guy and litterally, the one thing he does that makes him elite instead of average is that he stands tall in the pocket...sliding left/right or moving up/back just slightly as needed to maintain himself in a small spot and area while KEEPING HIS EYES downfield. In the NFL, so often, the winning play is made when the QB has time to make a read and throw. And so often the QB is his own worst enemy, by taking your eyes off your targets and looking at pass rushers and tyring to see where you can run to...you are no longer looking for the best target. Plays can and are made from this circumstance....but once the QB no longer can see ALL of his available targets on the field..the chance the defense will win the play goes way up. Brady wins from the pocket at a HIGH RATE because he almost always is standing up straight, eyes downfield...finding the best target and delivering the ball to that target. That's it...there is no magic..and certainly Brady doesn't ahve a cannon arm and he can't run....his excpetional skill is understanding how to win in an NFL pocket. That is it.

I admit I overlooked the case of Brett Favre....probalby due to the guys I researched to compare being within the past 10 years or so...but since you bring it up, it does fit in with my thought that Allen COULD do this...but in my opinion, he'll need the good reps, good coaching, etc..and lots of it to get him "right". I can't say i know much about Favre's college career etc but playing at small school, that wasn't in a conference back then, with the big arm and good size....there may be some similarities there. ....it is worth noting that late 80's early 90's era NFL football, it was considered GOOD to have a mid 50's% completion pct....different era, different rules....that's worth noting....Favres college numbers would seem BAD if he played now.

you make a valid point about risk management here for sure. I would simply ask....that given the Risks with Rosen are based on his percieved aloofness and arogance...personality....and injury history.....vs the more tangible metric of completion percentage/results on the field for Allen....is Rosen the bigger risk? I don't propose to know, but some arogant jerks who can produce on the field have been good pros before...whereas this completion pct/stats issue for Allen has a lot of actual math behind it to suggest there is substantial risk. .....again.....I am not trying to say one or the other is a more worthwhile risk.....certainly an interesting take on it.

....probalby has to do with the notion that a college QB with such a low completion pct has never been successful in the NFL.....and even when there have been a few to imrpove...the best case is Jake Locker going from a 54% passer in college to a 57% passer in the NFL....3 pct...and still well below what most would consider good enough to succeed. The anger isn't so much at Allen as it is in the idea that for 2 years this whole series of trades, moves, jockeying, etc...was all to lead up to getting "the man" ....and when the pick finally came in, the leadership selected Josh Allen...a huge gamble/risk. (I have my reservations about Allen, BUT...I LOVE that your front office pulled the trigger and is shooting for the stars instead of accepting status quo)

1. - even if your first 8 games happen to be against what ultimately turn out to be the easiest 8 games played in the NFL all year....he should still be on the bench. 2. I certainly could be wrong about my evaluation of the Bills offensive talent. I'm not a scout etc. I wouldn't have a different opinion in regards to Allen if you had for example, the Patriots offensive roster. I THINK that Allen isn't ready to carry what appears to be an offensive side lacking the kind of talent to carry a QB. 3. McDermott did quite an impressive job getting the Bills to the post season. I certainly wouldn't have counted the Bills as a playoff team heading into last season. You and many others have stated that if Allen can show he is heads and shoulders above the other 2 running the offense in camp/pre-season, he should start. I AGREE with that....but since this is pre camp, and no preseason games to watch yet, we are speculating here....and so, I am speculating that his pre draft scouting report isn't wrong, that he is who everyone says he is...(a physical talent, a smart kid, who was inaccurate in actual games, on a bad team in a bad conference) I think this will manifest itself in camp and especially on the field in preseason. I frankly can't wait to see how it plays out. I think what will happen is that Allen will look like a guy who needs some work and time on the bench when we get to live action, but I'm certainly looking forward to seeing what he looks like in a game setting and having my views challenged. Also...I'm not ANTI Bills or Anti Allen. I've said on this board many times that I really want this all to work out for you folks. This board and fan base are GREAT to interact with...it's why I keep showing up here...great group. Unless you are playing the Chiefs, I will be rooting for the Bills. (and hey, I got my picture taken with Poncho Billa at the draft even) .....Anyhow....I am calling it like I see it....like I said...my worthless 2 cents.