Richard Noggin

This is not ALL wrong. I agree that Hackett's deferential approach to a Rodgers-led offense has some demonstrable merit, and is unrelated to his disastrous experience in Denver. The Dorsey question will be answered one way or another in 2023. At this very moment, there is evidence (both statistical and anecdotal) to support just about any subjective conclusion. Ken Dorsey's 2022 offense was objectively ELITE. Obviously it didn't always FEEL or SEEM elite after halftime on Halloween. So we're in a kind of Schrodinger's Holding Pattern of Angst: we might have predictions or hypotheses, but we cannot actually KNOW the 2023 results until they happen. So we're in a stressful state of uncertainty and multiplicity. Therefore, many are compelled to medicate themselves with premature belief in some predictive "take." Helps us to sleep at night.

So you're saying the AFCE sends 3 or even 4 teams to the playoffs? Or, who from the division falters?

Did the "special machine" John Elway win championships while he was young and athletically elite? Did Cunningham or Vick or Newton or Jeff George or Lamar Jackson or YOUNG Steve Young win championships? Brett Favre won only one championship being a relentless gunslinger. Manning and Brady weren't notoriously aggressive downfield throwers over the spans of their careers.

The thing about the word "can" is that it's either a matter of subjective prediction or a matter of objective past results. Neither of which are reliably predictive with respect to coaching failure/success. There will be a few well-known outliers (Cowher and Belichick and Reid and who knows who else to come) and there will be many more obscure supporting examples. But we don't know in advance, due to TOO many variables. It's a Schrödinger's thing: until someone's career is over, we don't know which way it went. It's fine to have ideas and hypotheses and whatnot about what could/should happen, but it's folly to think we ever actually know. It's ego. And that's only illuminating for the dimmest of bulbs.

Allen's best stretches of football to date are glued together by absolutely surgical, chain-moving matriculation. Of course, we remember the deeper shots when the defense cheats up and gets burned. But the Zen-Josh who was flat-footed and willing to hit the underneath and inside routes...that guy was becoming all-time great. Most of the greatest QBs ever were surgical checkdown artists at their best (winningest). Allen's 2023 Halloween halftime was spooky enough apparently to disrupt an historic run of QB play that dated back to 13 seconds. And in between, aside from some electrifying Gabe Davis deep posts and digs, was mostly efficient, chain-moving patience and distribution from the QB. Just because Trent Edwards became brutally and cowardly addicted to checking the ball down, no matter the down and distance, doesn't mean that patience and caution are bad. Many of the recent QB greats were boring surgeons and generals out there. Enlightenment at the position seems to include the maxim: take what the defense gives you. Foolish to force the ball otherwise.

You're self-identifying as a rash, emotional decision maker in the first two paragraphs, so I should probably not laugh so hard at the bolded portion. I appreciate your candor. Truly. But...Jairus Byrd, who I REALLY liked at the time, had one of the flukiest/luckiest seasons as a rookie that he predictably never reproduced. Your take on him is REALLY misguided. His stats are crazy in 2009 (and decent in 2012). That's it. His actual on-field impact was similar to Kiko Alonzo's unlikely, and also unreproducible, early turnover fortune. Flashy, but fleeting. Byrd was probably a better/smarter player than Alonzo, but marginal athleticism and contractual injuries capped his career beyond that rookie season.

"Well...we don't sit back very much; we're an attack-oriented defense." McDermott has pretty consistently defined his ideal philosophies on both sides of the ball as aggressive, attacking, dictating. It seems to most that when he has overtly intervened on in-game defensive play-calling/coaching, McDermott has sought more aggression. Sometimes that means the calls look similar pre-snap, but he urges the players to trust their reads/keys more and play downhill. Him pulling aside Milano during the Patriot MNF wind game and gesturing to knife through the gaps is my best anecdotal evidence of not changing the play calls, exactly, but changing the player's mindset/approach within that scheme. Don't play on your heels. Trust your eyes. Attack the play. We all of course hope for more aggressive plays called, too. Mug the A-gaps. Disrupt the timing. Disguise your pressures and coverages. Mix it up and don't let them dictate.

Can't believe I missed the W-2. That's just plain frightening. And sad. And hilarious.

No, it is.

The bolded half of the 2nd line is rarely premised by the first half. You said the silent part out loud for some! The righteous man online is beset on all sides by the disingenuous hot takes of the attention-seeking masses who don't care to discuss in good faith.

I'd like to push back on this one. The WRs brought in are not competing against a gadget slot/motion guy who never put it all together to become a consistent contributor. That's such a loser bar to clear. They are competing against a MUCH higher standard that AFC competitors have established for receiving target depth charts. The Chiefs and Bengals currently come to mind (although after 2023 it will be interesting to see how the Bengals receiving room "evolves"). You have to stack talent, and that's typically only manageable when you've got impact guys outperforming rookie deals. The Bills don't have much of that right now.

How is Ryan Bates a weakness at backup C?! Is it because he's listed only at RG in some arbitrary, cookie-cutter offseason content generated without any authentic analysis? Even IF Bates wins the RG job, he should still be the primary backup to Morse. We'd have Torrence, and maybe Edwards and/or Boettger, to step into the RG spot. Bates can legitimately back up ALL 5 spots. Even IF he's a starter. I think his greatest value is as the 6th man.

The ESPN content is designed solely to generate clicks and engagement; it is not a serious analysis derived from a deep dive. Obviously.

Totally fair. Now, if he does in fact remain healthy all year, THEN what do we think the floor and ceiling are for reasonable expectations?

Don't know what you're suggesting with that first line; and what you're admitting in the 2nd is obvious and nowhere close to what you had previously claimed.

Wait, you're increasingly pleased by your own perception/prediction of declining Bills fan satisfaction with team leadership, and looking forward to it getting worse? What a loser mentality. I'm happy when the team succeeds. I TRY to keep my own ego separate from my fandom. How foolish, to seek ego-validation instead of selfless celebration.

The NASCAR 4-DE package employed by the Giants was only possible if they were stout against the run and otherwise fundamentally sound when fielding more conventional D-line groupings. We remember the pass-rushing sub-package but not the early down base package. So it goes.

Your contributions to this thread are transcendent. Appreciate you.

It's also lame, or even cowardly, to predict that a top defense will statistically decline YoY. Because that's a likely outcome. Historically, team defensive rankings are fairly inconsistent YoY when compared to offense. So the quoted poster could likely be right without actually proving or knowing anything.

You're being hyperbolic and partisan. You aren't able to see the Bills objectively; it's all ego and polarized opinion and opposing "sides" with you. Imagine treating sports as a platform for tribal debate. So joyless and narcissistic. Consider focusing on the actual sport and all its variable, quantum chessboard violence. Open yourself to the possibilities of fluid uncertainty. Celebrate and dissect what actually happens, rather than your own narrative/prediction of what WILL happen. To do so, one must be willing and able to remove one's head entirely from one's own backside.

Paid for by Friends of Floyd. The opinions expressed herein are predictive of the candidate's play in 2023, we hope.

I agree with #1 for sure, #2 maybe a little, and #3 for sure based on 2022 on-field issues/inconsistencies. The difficulty in this debate, to paraphrase one of my favorite late-20th century US authors, is the subjectivity in: What We Talk About When We Talk About #2 WRs. Is it about an up-and-comer with all-around flashes of #1 potential? Is it about a positional (boundary) prototype of traits and skills? Or is it simply about a reliable receiving target (x, y, z, TE...whatever) who sees the 2nd most targets and produces? What we're really talking about with the Bills, of course, is if Gabe Davis is an acceptable starting #2 BOUNDARY receiver. Can he effectively hurt a defense that rolls coverage to the other side, i.e., win 1-on-1s and catch the damned ball. The problem is: we've seen him succeed in spectacular ways, and we've seen him struggle in ugly ways. None of us really KNOWS how Davis will produce in 2023. But maybe someone else steps up and into the functional, statistical #2 receiving role from a different alignment/position. Was my original point.

I have decent season tickets, but I do NOT anticipate extending them beyond 2025. Anything's possible, but there is only so much I can pay.

I think EVERY highlighted play shows Floyd aligned at 9T or even wider. Erik utters the phrase, "wide alignment," repeatedly. So obviously that's where Floyd flourishes. Can really use his speed, length, and flexibility. The Bills weren't really much of a "wide-9" defensive front under Frazier, right? Love this new weapon.

Precursor to a 3-month PIP (performance improvement plan) for the corporate crowd.