Beck Water

Got a link to said podcast? I got a chuckle, is Dunne truly “hiding from an angry mob” on Twitter?

LOL Richard Sherman just called for Staley to get fired at halftime

In Staley’s defense, and I don’t want to defend the guy. I doubt he sprayed his players hands with Pam and told them to fumble the pigskin On the other hand…..he’d a defensive guy and his defense blows

Wow this is pretty much unwatchable, but not for the reason I thought it would be. Job .#1 Boys, Hang on to the freakin ball

Except that I don't think it's correct that "Kincaid is running short out routes almost exclusively", except in the same sense where folks here think any handoff to the RB from shotgun is a "Draw" For a rookie, Kincaid also seems to be excelling at being "QB friendly" by making an adjustment to find an open space when Josh is in trouble.

I'm sure this is good, but I just started watching. The first Bills play Warner breaks down: "It's all based off the play design and the creativity and stealing stuff from other people in the league" That just cracked me up.

In Tre's All Pro year 2019 he had 6 targets per game for 50% completion. 2020, it was 4.6 targets per game for a bit higher completion, 56.9% This season Tre had 4.5 targets per game, 50% completion These numbers don't support your contention that teams threw AT Tre prior to his injury this season.

The article on it says he initially injured his ankle in the 1st preseason game then tore in the 2nd. So the cause/effect could have been injured -> sliding down depth chart The concern I have (then and now) is apparently he didn't choose a surgical repair. I'm not sure he chose wisely.

I don't think this is true. You might consider watching The QB School Week 12 analysis of the Eagles game, for example. There are places where Diggs is downfield, and even could be argued to be open, and Josh targets someone else (he acknowledges that could be the order of the reads). There are also places where Diggs was double covered downfield and Josh still threw to him. That would be stupid if intentional. As Isaiah McKenzie used to say, "you're going to get hit either way so might as well catch it". Count the number of flags thrown because a player covering a WR hit the WR after they dropped the ball. I don't think you'll find many, if any. LB and DB don't pull up and not hit WR who drop the ball because 1) at the point where they're boring in, they usually don't know that he dropped it 2) what if he did some kind of fancy-butt 1 hand juggling catch then they'd look like a 'fool with their pants on the ground' 3) it's not something the league penalizes unless they target the neck or above - and then it's a penalty whether or not they catch it.

Dude, it's misguided if we compare his catch % to RBs (who are only asked to catch short slants and flats and checkdowns). It's not necessarily misguided if we compare his catch % to other WR. Now it's a fact that of the 56 WR who have more Y/G than Davis, only about a dozen have comparable catch %. Then someone could look at who those WR are and weigh in there. But riddle me this: You say we can all agree Davis isn't a good enough number 2. But you defend his catch %, and his Y/G do put him in #2 territory. So what are your criteria for saying he isn't a good enough number 2?

The Shnow (no C) spelling doesn't bother me. But you make a great point - shouldn't be named something that's about just 1 of the linemen It's how the Eagles do it and the fact that it's hella effective that way. Have you seen it? Their OL gets so low they're practically biting the opposing OL's knees (if not their *****s). Then there's "Did you know Jalen Hurts can bench 600 lbs?".

I can see the Bills drafting a safety early this off season and TBD losing its collective marbles in a gimondulous meltdown if it happens. Paying a younger guy they like might be a good strategy. But I think they may want to keep Poyer and try to groom a couple lower picks or a mid tier FA. I think they took a swing at the mid-tier FA thing with Rapp, and I would have to call the results "mixed". They took a shot at a lower pick with Hamlin, but he took a year before they were letting him see the field. Am I missing someone else? As for Hamlin, I felt he showed improvement through the season and occasional flashes before the Bengals game. It's not impossible that he might yet come back to form. We talk about the time to recover from something that has surgery and a pretty known timeline, like an ACL or Achilles tear, and how the player can come back in a year but it's often the 2nd season before they're truly themselves. But what Hamlin went through was a huge insult (in the medical and biochemical usage) to almost every organ system in his body. No one really knows what the timeline to truly come back from that to peak athleticism is, because no one has done it. Very few have had the opportunity to do it!

They really need to call it the "Snow Plow". But since they're trying to re-case "the Tush Push" as "The Brotherly Shove", I get how the "Buffa-Shove" works into that.

Well, to be fair, you're still 3 days out and the forecast isn't much more reliable today. Wait, what did I miss? I haven't even seen the injury report from today's practice, were they announced as out?

Ouch. But funny.

Some of the incidents discussed in the article are clearly from 2020 (the WR Christmas gift of a truck to Chad Hall and McDermott's reaction to that gift) or 2021 (13 seconds). These were described up thread. There were on the record quotes positive to McDermott from several players including Lee Smith, Pat DiMarco, Isaiah McKenzie, and a couple others - this was described up thread. So there were positive points of view presented. What there didn't seem to be in the excerpts that have been made available, is the direct juxtaposition of opposing interpretations or viewpoints on the same incidents which anonymous sources blasted. Example: 'According to a Bills assistant, McDermott would express his frustrations about Newton [ruining Carolina] in offensive staff meetings, creating an uncomfortable atmosphere, especially for Ken Dorsey, Newton's former coach and the man credited with his rise.' Put that way, it kind of makes McDermott sound 'stuck in the past' or even unhinged (why TF is he ranting about Newton and Carolina now, with the Bills?), and certainly insensitive to the feelings of former Carolina coaches who developed Newton. But maybe there's some missing context or a missing alternate POV? Maybe McDermott's point was that Cam Newton, as the Franchise QB in whom CAR invested a 5 year, $104M contract (huge for that time), was reckless of his body in his play (like Allen is now) and when injuries accumulated, Newton put CAR in the tank because they were paying a guy who could no longer perform up to his contract. If that's the case, it can be argued McDermott could have a point, especially if he's using it to illustrate why 1) he wants a plan to run the ball that doesn't involve Allen as the primary RB 2) wants Allen coached harder to give himself up, get out of bounds, or slide when he runs. [to be clear, the above is my speculation] That's the kind of direct juxtaposition of different interpretations that seemed to be missing from the excerpts presented. But there were positive quotes, some have been shared here.

It was pointed out in a response to you that you are using "personal" in a different sense of the term than others who say "it was personal". You are using "personal" in the sense of "involving my life and character outside my job setting" (kids, wife, church, home, dog) Others are using "personal" in the sense that behavior in the workplace can be described impersonally (by focusing on the situation, behavior, and what was said). If the behavior in the workplace is instead described by using pop-psychology labels, ascribing personal motivations, making generalized claims about the person's abilities to relate to others - then it is said to be "personal" or a "character attack". The latter is commonly described as "making it personal" or "attacking someone's character", even if it is 100% about their profession or workplace. I'm kind of surprised that you allude to having taken various workplace trainings about how to "not take things personally" but you were never introduced to this distinction because usually these trainings about "don't take things personally" (on the job) include "don't make it personal" (when dealing with issues on the job). But anyway, it really isn't debatable that some of the sources quoted in Dunne's article did, in fact, make it personal - according to the second definition. We had "he has zero relationship with any of the offensive players, zero". We had "he's jealous". We had "he's insecure". We had "he's mentally, psychologically, and physically incapable of relationships with the players". It's so blatant that one could practically use it as a training exercise for a workplace class on the topic of how to address problem behaviors without making it personal - on the "don't do this" side of the ledger.

as one of the replies points out:

This is a great post, thanks for putting this together. Three players you don't mention: Rasul Douglas, who is still under contract for 2024. I would be shocked if the Bills don't extend him. I think he's played very well, and would certainly be our #1 CB if Tre White can't come back (and maybe even fight for the #1 spot if Tre does come back) Taylor Rapp, who will be a free agent. I see him as a mixed bag. He can make plays, yes, but the Friendly Fire, Man! Sheesh! Cam Lewis. He has caused many Bills fans PTSD with some big misses in his play. He will be a free agent. The Bills have him as the primary backup at NCB and at Safety, ahead of Damar Hamlin. He can also play boundary CB in a pinch. The Bills love his versatility. I agree

Hyde will not be cut. He can not be cut. He will be a FA

What makes you say that about Poyer? Hyde is a free agent after this season. The Bills will have dead money on the books for him, which will remain dead money (I think) even if they re-sign him. Hyde has 2 young kids, the neck surgery clearly haven't prevented him from having neck and back issues, and you'd think he might decide it's time to hang up his cleats while he can still play catch with his kids and teach them to ride bikes. Poyer is under contract to the Bills in 2024. He's got ~$5M in new money coming into his bank account next season. I don't think he willingly gives that up.

I think the intent of the article was to identify questionable coaching decisions for which McDermott was accountable, and to raise questions about whether he has the coaching abilities to lead the team and make winning decisions in "crunch time". And it did that****...but it did so much else that it ultimately detracted from that intent. Whoever it was upthread who pointed out that Dunne would probably have benefited from an editor probably has it right. That's not intended to be a knock on Dunne's talent as a writer. Edit: ****and just to be clear, those are fair questions and until/unless we win the Superbowl and continue to contend, those questions will remain

I think that's probably TBD (to be determined). I think he was hoping it would draw in subscriptions. It probably did. Now the question is how many of them will find enough other content (or just be lackadaisical) to not cancel.

Thanks for your response. I think it's the "not cool" aspect (on which I agree with you) Josh and some others are reacting to. To me, what Josh said about "you can criticize the coaching (implied: that's fair game). You can criticize my decision making, (implied: that's fair game). But then expressing his view that some of it amounted to a character or personal attack, and that's as you say, "not cool, went way too far". So to that point, if Josh had said stuff that defended McDermott as a coach or team builder, it wouldn't have addressed the fundamental problem he sees. If the article had stuck to an expose' of who was responsible for many key on-field decisions like 13 seconds (McDermott) and factual reactions to various events (like Hall's truck), I don't think there would be as much problem with it - but it wouldn't have drawn in as many subscriptions as it probably did. Drama draws clicks. But I don't think we can conclude either way what Josh thinks of McDermott as a coach and a team builder, because it wasn't the issue at hand (if that makes sense).

Thanks, that's very clear on the coverage responsibility aspect. I missed that in McDermott's presser. How I interpret what you wrote is that Benford drifted downfield anticipating that Kelce might go vertical, and he should have stayed closer to Kelce ("sit on the route") and the LOS ("underneath the pick"). Is this correct? If you're willing to explain, though, what does "catch technique" mean? I had the feeling that Reid/Nagy must have studied our coverage carefully and mapped out how to cause confliction. I can see where Benford would want to give Kelce a cushion to avoid getting blown by if Kelce did go vertical. I hope McDermott and Co are working overtime on resolving because Sirianni was certainly taking notes and, as Milano put it in plain words about McDaniel and the Dolphins, "they want to make you run into each other" Edit: OK this may be above and beyond, but you're able to deduce a lot from body position etc - do you think it's possible that there was confusion between the DBs, where Benford expected Lewis to switch while Lewis expected Benford to stay with Kelce? Benford stays looking at Kelce, which is why I guessed that was still his man.