Richard Noggin

Jim Kelly could NOT have even existed in the era of social media. So let's please all take his sanctimoniousness with a grain of salt. He's not unimpeachable. LeSean McCoy is ALSO not known to be the most decent dude in real life (because of increased access to information). But McCoy never took shots at Jim Kelly's career (or holier-than-thou views) until Jim Kelly took shots at McCoy's efforts to amplify civil rights. All that being said (two flawed dudes on opposite ends of the political spectrum), this topic is mostly just a tribal whistle. It's not really germane.

From this perspective it's less about being accountable and more about organizational/coaching hierarchy. You disagree with McDermott's efforts to focus on the executive duties of his office, while empowering his coordinators to run their respective units. As a first time head coach, you probably think he was too humble in deferring to the expertise of those he hired. Which might not be entirely wrong, in retrospect. He was probably too deferential to Frazier's expertise and the respect he engendered amongst his players. So now is our chance to see a different approach. The one you wanted from the start, presumably?

He didn't take accountability if he repeatedly stuck with that overly complex scheme that his players couldn't execute in a changing NFL. So then let's not use him as some more accountable alternative to McDermott (as per your claim I was replying to)? I'm excited to finally see in Buffalo a definitively McDermott-designed, -installed, and -called defensive attack. So maybe we agree about that the clarifying lack of ambiguity re: who to blame for 2023's defensive performances.

As to the bolded: are you referencing a specific defensive failure under Rex that he took ownership of? Or a more general, post-tenure mea culpa? I'm not immediately remembering either scenario transpiring, save maybe for some off-handed, somewhat disingenuous self-deprecation (impossible to prove or defend, this subjective perception). I remember Rex being in love with his own system above all else. DID he ever admit that the evolution of the offensive game, especially its speed and the proliferation of motion-heavy, option-heavy spread attacks, essentially rendered his incredibly complex, pre-snap communication and check-based defensive schemes impossible to execute consistently? The Ryan boys weren't diligent and dedicated enough to keep up with the league's ambitious offensive minds. Did he openly wrestle with this during his tenure?

You can maybe do everything at the same level on day one. For an amateur athlete, that's entirely believable. Many of us actually achieve BETTER fitness levels in our early 30s. But the RECOVERY needed after highly strenuous exertion changes considerably with age. And 33 is still young enough for amateur athletes. We don't need to measure things in 1/10ths of seconds. We never possessed the kind of elite explosive movement traits that diminish by age 30. And let's be honest, that was probably NOT a 4.40 40-yard dash right there. T.O. has always been a freak, and he's always taken ELITE care of his body. But let's get serious. The guy with his phone out must have run a 4.6 turned sideways lol. I can't tell if this is actually a joke. Reads like sincere delusion.

True ONE TRADE mock here, with the Bills trading back from 27 and 130 for 33 and 65. Might be my favorite mock to date.

Love the post as both a thought exercise and as an actual attempt to compare different regimes' drafting. Thanks for posting. As for the bolded, however, why would you "subtract Allen from Beane"?! He got the most important pick right, the first time. And it wasn't a top-2 or even top-5 consensus elite prospect. It was a projection. And they were arguably the only team that got it right (long-term) that year. Before I hit "submit reply" I'm realizing you are only offering that Allen-less comparison to show that Beane is still average otherwise, and not some Whaley-esque disaster.

This is big "show me the baby" energy right here.

A lot of teams like safeties who can hit.

Fun itch to scratch, though, in this case.

I'd initially want to argue that the Bills depth chart is the reason drafting two WRs could be counterproductive: Diggs Davis Shakir Harty Sherfield Either one of those 5 is bumped off the roster, or one of the two drafted WRs is going to be a gameday inactive or practice squad poach candidate. Then again, the more I look at this, the more I disagree with my own initial reaction. Sure feels like Davis is a goner after this season, and it's probably smart to prepare for a post-Diggs future. Sherfield only signed for one year. Therefore, they should add at least one compelling WR prospect to the pipeline.

Pure BPA for the first few rounds, and I'm not mad at it:

As for the bolded reply to my 2020 San Fran observation, Edmunds DEFINITELY played, but on early downs was lined up a bunch on the edge in a 2-pt stance. On those plays, Klein was the off-ball MLB (he played 69% of snaps). As for the nonbolded paragraph on competing philosophies (keeping it simple to improve execution versus mixing it up to attack specific opponents), I tend to agree that the Bills probably mix it up on D a little more than many of us see, AND that during the regular season they have had a TON of success playing a core scheme...BUT we probably agree that this approach hasn't gotten it done when it matters most.

The bolded is especially intriguing, in that I really covet those games (that seem too few and far between) since 2017 when the Bills successfully employed creative gameplans tailored to stop specific opponents. I am especially curious if we might now see MORE of such opponent-specific personnel groupings, alignments, and schemes? Feels like when it mattered most (in the playoffs recently and just recently in general) the Bills fell back into predictable, passive defenses. You need ELITE talent to beat good QBs who know what's coming. Times when the Bills did things differently (and effectively): The 2017 Jacksonville playoff game sticks in my mind as it felt to me like Lorenzo Alexander was a revelation at MLB. Just an absolute beast. The perfect guy for that opponent, that game. Left me wanting more. The San Fran primetime game from 2020, where the Bills played a lot of 46-defense, with Klein lining up in the middle as the only off-ball LB. If I'm remembering accurately. Def a ton of 5 and 6-man fronts. Huge departure for them. The quoted stuff about Klein and the learning curve to figuring out how to best use him (attacking downhill, something Edmunds just was NOT good at). Similarly, I recall in the Patriots MNF blizzard, McD, knowing the Pats were only running, took Milano aside and was seen pantomiming how to attack the run gaps. Milano then made consecutive TFLs, if memory serves. (Might have been only one TFL and another solid play.) That's a lame list of competent defensive gameplans/adjustments, but I like to imagine that kind of aggressively tailored approach to specific opponents becoming more common. What a world that would be.

Which would mean his value had declined relative to the cap. My best case guess for him now is he plays on the tag, stays healthy, and then takes a deal that is NOT equal in value relative to the cap going into the 2024 season. And he made less for two years than he would have otherwise. It's a losing proposition in the vast majority of simulations. But hey, I'm wrong all the time.

What was lost this past season? Including the GUARANTEED money that goes beyond his annual salary...because nothing is guaranteed beyond 2023 for Lamar, until it is. He could have had a VAST sum of money even just passively earning interest all this time. And the current trajectory suggests he will go another football season without a lump sum (despite being handsomely rewarded on the tag). So much has been left in the accounts of his team's ownership.

But what about the past two seasons?! You keep ignoring the TOTAL sum he could have made. What's with that?

But Lamar Jackson declined to sign a GREAT deal (for him). His value since declining to sign has NOT kept pace with the market. He has cost himself money now and later. Even IF he stays healthy moving forward.

Seems like you're ignoring some obvious realities here. Repeatedly. Jackson WAS offered a pretty nice deal with serious guaranteed money. He WOULD have been able to invest that money (theoretically) and put it to work. He IS well behind where he would have been had he done so, even without much investment acumen (like me). And he IS highly unlikely to catch up to where he could have been by this point moving forward. It's not about future earnings, although even that could be compromised by betting big and getting hurt (and play leveling out). It's about total career earnings. Edit: it's better to secure the guaranteed lump sum sooner rather than later. Always take the sizable lump sum (that WAS offered to Jackson) now in such a fleeting profession. Why let some billionaire owners keep making money on that money for additional years.

Funny how obviously this tweet is coming from the agent: "reachable incentives" and "negotiated by X." Makes me so angry when people apply the term "journalism" to sports news reports (as though a blatant shill job like this--not inherently immoral or anything like that, just clunky and transparent--is somehow representative of actual adult journalism). We all know it's just quid pro quo proxy statements authored by competing interes➖ Wait a minute...

Really thought this was a bit, but I guess there are people who think what the Chargers did with the #1 pick, a seemingly no-brainer generational QB prospect named Manning, is potentially indicative of what the Bills could do with the #27 pick, an injured 25-year old QB who draws comparisons to Geno Smith. There is some compelling, hardline BVA (Best VALUE Available) draft thinking here, but I guess I don't see the player in question representing some masterful value maximization if he does in fact fall to 27. Most of the NFL will have decided they can live without him in the 1st. Why will they suddenly have the urgency to trade significant assets once it gets to 27? And if not, why would he then net some meaningful return a year later? Just because he's healthy? I guess it's possible, but in the meantime the Bills don't get to put that value on the field for far too long (which diminishes the real value of this move in 2023).

Another one trying to let the board dictate:

NO way 1st round falls like this, right? Love the results here.

Definitely appreciate this approach to identifying a range of "realistic targets" per pick, filtered by perceived roster need and positional value. It's a neat exercise, and I enjoy this type of pre-draft analysis. However, it would be unfortunate to use this type of projected/hypothetical data point to criticize any team's draft decisions, within reason. The Bills might very well have a couple-two-tree tight ends on their 1st round target list, or a couple linebackers, in addition to these receivers and linemen. And who could reasonably blame them (I type, knowing full well the answer is: anyone)?

Paris Johnson falling to 27 would be bonkers.