Jrb1979

The 49ers, Eagles and Ravens all were in the same position and all had better drafts. Draft position is a cop out.

Most are accurate. IMO most here look at who said it and don't read it. The guy was a failure with the Bills so he has no idea what he's talking about and he has an axe to grind.

Imagine that, the Superbowl losing team, a division winning team and this Super Bowl champ who had a better record than the Bills last season all had better drafts.

It is very ugly. IMO it stems from how Beane and McDermott view the draft. Most teams take BPA in the first 2 rounds cause thats how you find the playmakers and elite talent. Instead the Bills staff focus on culture and scheme fit.

I would trade 1 Super Bowl win over having a chance but never winning.

Yes hindsight plays a big part but when for example Coleman played out like his scouting report said, it would have made much more sense to try and move up for Thomas. As others have said it feels like Beane and company are too focused on culture and scheme fit over BPA

King of what? Sure he's responsible for the best run in Bills history. His record is still tied with Levy for Super Bowl wins.

Let's close this thread than as he knows nothing. Move along now, nothing to see here.

To add to my post. Regardless at how good the guy was during his time with the Bills, doesn't mean what he said is garbage.

Either way the point was you can get Coleman type receivers in later rounds. They should have moved up a few spots for Thomas instead of trading back for Coleman.

IMO he's still running the show.

There must be quite a few cause the teams that have won the Super Bowl recently always seem to have a few on their roster.

How many of those guys look like they will elite playmakers?

It's great they have a good culture and good players. They don't win you Super Bowls. Look at the past winners. All had playmakers on both sides of the ball. Outside of Allen they lack much for playmakers. That was more the point with Coleman. His type of WR you can find in lower rounds on average. Guys like Brian Thomas Jr are only available at the top of the draft. While Coleman will most likely be a good player, my bet is on Thomas having better numbers.

That's not the point. It's not about finding someone better than Coleman later in the draft. It's about not taking guys like Coleman early in the draft but going after elite talent. So instead of trading back for Coleman, trade up for a Brian Thomas Jr. Use the higher picks for BPA not culture or scheme fit.

This is the exact quote. Monos doesn't seem high on the Coleman pick and returned to his talking point about Buffalo not getting enough true difference makers at the top of the draft. "Guys that run 4.2's, they don't exist later in the draft. Coleman types exist later in the draft. You can get big jumpball wideouts that can't run. That's what the fourth round is for."

He didn't say Coleman was bad, he said Coleman was a bad pick for a 1st round as you can get those type of WR in later rounds.

Solid starters aren't what this team needs. They need elite game breakers and outside of Allen haven't had much luck drafting that. As @HappyDays mentioned, they put too much focus on culture and fit.

Are those 2 teams why going back to the 70s why only 3 coaches have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with their team?

Dunne noted that McDermott is entering his 9th year and only three coaches ever - Tom Landry, Hank Stram, Bill Cowher - have only won Super Bowls that deep into their tenure with an organization. "Even Andy Reid had to leave Philly and draft Mahomes before he got his first ring." That quote is the one that many dismiss a lot.

Dunne noted that McDermott is entering his 9th year and only three coaches ever - Tom Landry, Hank Stram, Bill Cowher - have only won Super Bowls that deep into their tenure with an organization. "Even Andy Reid had to leave Philly and draft Mahomes before he got his first ring." This quote is what I'm talking about. It's not made up numbers. That list is going back to the 70s. I do see things clearly and I do understand the other side of it. The clear belief that McDermott gives this team a chance to win the Super Bowl every season. You fire him there is no guarantee the next guy will continue that.

Because I can there is no guarantee that McDermott ever wins a Super Bowl. In fact the numbers are against him.

Again you dismiss the 4% odds of McDermott winning a Super Bowl after 5 seasons.

While it's a success and I will agree that there is a high probability they get worse with a coaching change. They also have history against them as only 4% of coaches since the 70s have won a Super Bowl after 5 seasons with their team.