HomeskillitMoorman

I'd agree with this. They need to plan for their departures regardless because you never know, but I think both are still valuable as rotational players and as leaders.

"We'll still always be 4th and 1 from the 40 Punt Brothers for life."

I didn't mind that he basically rejected the man-hug. But I thought what he said was stupid. Hue didn't quit and join the other team in the state. He got fired. At that point, he's gotta do what's best for him, just like Baker would in his shoes. This idea that he shouldn't go to the Bengals out of some kind of loyalty to the team that fired him is a joke.

I would be interested in a deal like that...but he's not going to be.

Bring back Bobby April!

I think there's a better chance Rex gets a second shot in NY. Woody still loves that guy, he didn't like Marrone.

That drove me crazy, and that's why I don't like conservative coaches. It's my fear with McDermott in a possible big game.

Unless there's a guy on the staff that the owner thinks is a competent interim coach, especially with 5 games still left, they probably wouldn't be all that honest about his status. I really don't think this means anything in terms of whether he'll get canned or not.

I don't want that much of the cap tied up in Bell with all of our other needs. But wow...this whole thing about him not being a "McDermott guy"...what does that even mean? I've seen Kelvin Benjamin, who he know from his first go-around, give us some horrific efforts in his time here. I've seen Peterman look completely defeated when he's come in, really not even competing. Either way, while I do think a young RB is a need, I'd rather get one from the draft and spend the bigger resources on the O-line and at WR.

Well to be honest this team had earned the "soft" label after what Gronk did last year in what was one of the dirtiest, cheapest shots I've ever seen and then saw our guys do absolutely nothing about it. I was so mad about that. I was happy to see some of our players defend themselves today. You absolutely have to. I'm still irrationally holding out hope that we'll get revenge on Gronk but it probably won't ever happen.

Well done. That was my favorite EJ excuse for years.

I was cool with how Josh played today. But every QB has drops and plays called back. Everyone’s stats would look better if you factored that in.

Yes. And I like Allen. But Mahomes looks like an all-timer. I wouldn’t even hesitate.

Not really. Allen could poop the bed...but that's going to happen here and there with a rookie QB, especially with the lack of an offense put around him by Beane and McDermott. If he does, we'll see how he comes back from it, see if he learned anything. I don't really know what to make of him yet. His accuracy issues are concerning, and I don't think we have the best coaches in place for his development. Hopefully he starts showing something. I'd rather see him let it rip and air it out than care about trying to game-manage out a win like vs the Titans. But unfortunately I think the gameplan will probably be similar to that.

I would say maybe 3-3. Allen's going to have his ups and downs, and the bare cupboard that Beane and McDermott have provided on that side of the ball doesn't help that.

I actually think it's an angle to try to promote McDermott, like a "be happy we have him instead of Marrone" kind of thing. Even though I think the two are remarkably similar in their conservative style and mediocrity.

The last part of my comment there was a joke about people here saying Beane/McDermott earned extra time because of last year. I don't actually think they should stay in Jacksonville. I'd fire them all. To the point on the Bills, I don't like the vision or blueprint at all on the offensive side of the ball and don't agree that we're on the finishing touches stage on it. We have a ton of holes on offense and a couple on defense as well. But the offensive side is why I feel we're behind.

I think there are some similarities in the logic, which I think is very flawed. If you put the Jaguars situation in ours, a 10 year playoff drought and they had gone 4-12, 3-13, 5-11, 3-13 in the 4 years before Marrone was made head coach, and then in his first year went 10-6 and took us to the AFC Championship game and lost a competitive game and then had a clunker of a year the following season...there would be plenty of defenders here for him talking about how he broke the drought and deserves a few more seasons and how he hasn't gotten to develop his own QB yet. I mean does any of that sound familiar? I happen to agree that Doug should take blame for the defense as well because he's the head coach...but many on this board try to relieve McDermott of any blame for the offense because of his background as a defensive coach. A good head coach should have significant input on both sides of the ball, and therefore be responsible for the possible failure of either side. Personally, I disliked Doug for some of the same reasons as I dislike McDermott. One of the biggest being that both are overly conservative coaches. In fact, they've both punted on 4th and 1 on the opposing team's territory in the 2nd half of big games with the season on the line and an offense that was struggling to even make it to mid-field. That's the aura of guys who don't win championships. They both also seem to really struggle with evaluating and hiring the right offensive coordinators. To talk singularly about their situation...first and foremost whoever's idea it was to give Bortles the extension should be shown the door. At the beginning of Marrone's time here when I heard the rumors about the rift between he and Whaley because he had never wanted EJ had given me hope...but I didn't like his coaching style in the end anyways. If it were me, I'd can them all for the same reason I don't like McDermott going forward...because I think coaches like these are destined for long-term mediocrity. I will always "risk" losing that in the hopes of finding a perennial winner and championship-level coach.

Well by many on this board's logic, 1 playoff year apparently should buy you at least 3 extra years no matter what happens or what direction the franchise seems to be going. So I guess they should all stay.

Probably not. And it would've been incredibly bad organizational planning if they constructed an offense based on the "strengths" of Nathan Peterman. But I"m not sure which would have been worse, terrible planning or the terrible evaluation abilities we've seen on that side of the ball. They're the same guys who just figured out very recently that speed can help your offense. I mean, it kind of makes sense.

I said that in the offseason about Cousins, I wanted no part of him. Even though I think the Redskins are run pretty badly, they were right to not consider him an elite QB and to let him go. He's played pretty badly in every single big game he's been in.

There could have been notable changes with the offense this year, but the Bills failed on all fronts of that. I don't see your point at all. Just because we wouldn't have made the playoffs doesn't mean the offense couldn't have had more pieces or a better foundation could have been in process right now. People should be freaking out about the offense. It's horrific and needs a ton of work after 2 offseasons. There shouldn't be this many holes there after 2 offseasons. That's not even getting to the schematic stuff. We are still at least 2 offseasons away from being able to get to everything, and that's even if they are successful ones, which with what we've seen on that side of the ball from Beane and McDermott is so far from a given.

I actually liked the Edmunds pick...I just don't like your style of argument. You're trying to downplay Ridley because we wouldn't have made the playoffs with him...but we're not making the playoffs with Edmunds either. There's no 1 player that would have done that.

I want a coach that's ahead of the curve. Those are the guys that win long-term in this league, the proactive ones, not the reactive. Is this what we're going to have to expect from these guys? Failure before they know what to aim for? Do you see McDermott as a coach that's going to be innovative? I've seen the guys who've won long term in this league like Belichick and Reid and they introduce new principles and wrinkles into what they do. I don't see McDermott being that kind of guy. I mean it took them a year and a half to understand how important speed is in the most successful schemes with the rules in place? The good coaches and GM's in this league started to adjust as soon as they saw what was happening with the rules, before they even played, because they could see where the league was going. That's the kind of coach and GM I want, the ones who are part of setting the trend, not the ones who struggle to mimic them. I think it's all about a balance and having a WR core that can do a variety of things. I don't think your #1 necessarily has to be a high speed guy, but you want a couple of effective high speed guys in your offense not only for the big plays they can bring but to stretch the field to help the other facets in it.

Hill is not a gimmick. Most of the plays he's in for tend to work.