In Summary

Mimimum list of those I'd rest: White, Poyer, Milano, Diggs, and Beasley.

Diggs

I don't see Davis as a direct replacement for Brown. Lose Brown and replace his speed with ...?

I'd choose that over reaching. Diversification via more picks is another way to handle the risk of not getting full pre-draft assessments on players.

Be it Tre or another important starter, I'm OK if the coaches have these key players sit out non-conference Arizona (and the Bye) so that they're healthier for the last 6 games - 5 of which are conference match-ups. Interested in injury reports later this week.

The Bills win did hurt their chances.

Gale had a big arm. Saw him practice at Fredonia.

As a rusher, coverage, or both? I'm not familiar with Lee.

LB certainly a concern. Poyer can't make every tackle.

$1.2 million? No problem. 6th round draft pick? You have our attention.

1) I think I can want better front 7 play from the D and not be caught in the moral loss trap. 2) The way the Bills beat New England, giving them hope like that on the last drive, then crushing their arrogant hopes in a single play. That was joyous.

Beasley

27-17 Buffalo

Even if Hyde/Poyer have peaked, they would still be a great combination if they didn't have to play default LB in addition to their other responsibilities. I actually think that with Wallace out, Tre injured (kind-of?), the D-Line ineffective, and the LB's invisible, Hyde/Poyer are by far the best position group on D. I will grant you that when you see one of them in a confused coverage play it doesn't look good, but maybe they are trying to do too much (??).

Bills often play only two LB's. One starter (Milano) is injured. The other (Edmunds) makes no impact. The backups are underwhelming. The D-line is (read above). The result is that the safeties are having to handle most of the run support (IMO) in addition to having to the whole D backfield having to cover longer. I really don't have too much to say that's negative about the defensive backfield given the injuries and the fact that many plays that should have been stopped at the line or 5 yards past it are now all falling to the safeties and DB's. The Bills were absolutely resolute about wanting to limit the Chief's big play pass offense at the cost of leaving the D on the field too long and getting slapped around on runs. Perhaps better personnel adjustments to the run could have been made if we had clear LB depth.

I got the same feeling as last week, Buff would have to score most every drive to win.

Too much of the run support falls to our safeties. LBs are invisible, even if we only play two of them.

There was a point after the 2nd half started that you felt the O would have to score on every possession. Quite a flip from the past when it was all on the D.

Re 7: I can't dump on the defensive backfield too much when the D line gets no pressure. I wish Edmunds had the heart and instincts of Milano.

Milano was greatly missed. Edmunds is a complimentary player. Oliver not making a difference.

The NFL needs to be clear on their penalty and game rescheduling policies. When the season is half over, I find it hard to think players on 1-7 and 2-6 teams will comply with strict precautions. By the end of the regular season, even less incentive. If you're a playoff bound team and you play an eliminated and/or irresponsible team as one of your last two games..........

I would like to see a young player be able to do one of the following: Reliable returns while also contributing in their core position role, or (a receiver) be able to run the McKenzie misdirection/gimmick offensive plays AND contribute downfield. This would allow the Bills to get more value from an active roster spot. McKenzie's skill set and play selection seem predictable to some degree with little likelihood of contributing as a down-field receiver. Roberts is a near-zero contributor as a receiver. It feels like when you have both a place kicker and a kick-off specialist instead of a complete kicker who takes only a single active roster spot. You would rather a player be more complete or "versatile" and McDermott/Beane prefer. I'm not predicting that either of the rookie receivers are necessarily this guy.

If he upgrades WR 4 & 5 that's a win.

Beane falls in love with players are pursues them. That or he sees someone that in his mind, falls so much relative to their assessed value that he feels what he loses in value by trading up is offset by the value of the position slip. I'd be very much ok staying as slotted. Rds 2-4 for BPA/need. 5-6 for depth/development. Rd 6, pick 207 for a punter.

I want more outright commitment to the right tackle position. I expect Ford to make a step this year, but I also sense that Bean has a certain stubborn belief in Ford the same way they did in Gore last year. I want better than below-average starter quality across the whole line. Arguably we're there barring the right side. These depth signings are kind of "blah".