Beck Water

I mean, it depends upon what down and distance we're in? If we're 3rd and 16, no, it doesn't. Beasley looks slow to me in those film clips - even slower than last season. His cuts though 😍 and his quick feet 😍 - he still looks "surgical there. Ask and you shall receive. Here are Beasley's splits from 2021 by down and Yards to go: Overall catch % 73.2%, 6.2 y/tgt (per target, not per reception). You can see the Bills got the most mileage targeting Beasley on 1st and 10 or 2nd and 4-9: over 80% catch. 1st downs on 1 out of 3 receptions on 1st and 10. But Just a Minute! As far as "what we've had", I'll bite the snake and bring in the same for McKenzie this year: Overall catch % 69.1%, 6.9 y/tgt (not: per target, not per reception). You can see that when the Bills targeted McK on 1st down, they also got great mileage - again, Over 80% catch on 1st and 10, 2nd and 4-6, but also on 2nd and 10+, and 3rd 1-6. 1st downs on 1 out of 3 receptions on 1st and 10, 4 out of 5 targets on 3rd and 1-3, 6 out of 1 targets on 3rd and 4-6. That's pretty dang close to Beasley, honestly: catch % of 83.3% vs 86.5%, and 1st down on 1 out of 3 receptions. The main difference is the number of targets being less than half what Beasley got. Just for fun, let's do Dawson Knox as well: Overall catch % 74.0%, 7.4 y/tgt (again, per target, not per reception). 75% catch % on 1st and 10, and 1D on 1 out of 3 targets. HUH. I'm sure this will be well received and the intelligent erudite posters here will consider it and modify their views accordingly. (No I don't. I kid, I kid). I'm glad to see Beasley back, and if Josh trusts him and targets him when he's on the field and it takes some pressure off Gabe and Diggs and gets the Bills offense humming along again, I'm All For It. But longer term, Josh may need to develop a bit different "field vision" or work on developing a better rappore with receivers younger than 33 not named Cole Beasley, because these guys have been open more than they're targeted (to my eyes), and when they're targeted they've been catching the ball at a pretty good rate as best as one can tell from low numbers.

I think you are correct.

They don't necessarily give you the X's and O's understanding, but I endorse the recommendation. I must have bought about 5 copies by now. I can't keep them around, guests keep borrowing them and then I never see them again. It's a good introduction to the Chess Match of football. There are a bunch of Football Academies online that provide breakdowns of offensive plays, route concepts, and protections as well as defenses and coverages. For film breakdown, I like Cover1 JT O'Sullivan "The QB School" https://www.youtube.com/@TheQBSchool https://theqbschool.com Kurt Warner "QB Confidential" https://www.youtube.com/@kurtwarnerqbc - he has stepped up his youtube game and is much clearer than he used to be I used to like Brett Kollman "The Film Room" a lot but I feel he's kind of become a victim of his own success recently with his Whiskey and his sponsors - he seems to feel he has to choose a narrative to make each piece interesting, and then cherry-picks stuff to support it. You can find stuff where you're "well that aged well" about how "Mac Jones terrifies me" "the Dolphins and Chiefs are the same team". You can also find some really good stuff about run fits and his stuff from a couple years ago is IMO better. Baldy's Breakdowns are always worth watching (twitter #baldysbreakdowns) and despite my occasional concerns regarding his current replicant status, Jim Kubiak's weekly articles breaking down the Bills offense for TBN are always worth reading. What worked for me was to go from film breakdowns of actual plays from teams I was interested in, backwards into looking up the route concepts and protections and defensive coverages. Like I saw the finished product, and then wanted to know and understand the pieces that went into it. IMHO one of the best ways to learn used to be to subscribe to Gamepass and pick a play, then run it in slowmo and see what everyone is doing NFL+ has ruined this - no slomo, can no longer choose an individual play. I started out learning the game in more depth in the '80s and 90's when my family used to VCR Bills games and mail them to me and I could watch the same play over and over and in slo-mo and start to pick things out. Buffalo Rumblings used to have a bunch of good stuff too.

Well, yeah, directly. But if a player says "I want off your practice squad", a team will typically release them. Just as the team is not required to keep them on the PS all 17 games, they aren't required to stay there. They can take their ball and go home, so to speak. Then the team releases them, because they need the PS guys to run their scout team and there's always another guy in their Rolodex (dating myself), Then the player signs with a different team's PS. You're correct that team B is not supposed to be recruiting players from team A's practice squad, but players and coaches will talk and whaddarya gonna do. I can't remember what team it was, but I remember something like that happening a few years back and there was a mild grumble session about it but both teams moved on. Doesn't apply to Beasley of course since Tampa released him after he retired on October 5th. I do kind of wonder, if Beasley reached out around Thanksgiving, if the Bills waited a bit to bring him in to be sure enough time had elapsed that it didn't look like some kind of tampering with Tampa

Well, bear in mind that if the team huddles, the other team really shouldn't be hearing the play call - so what would the point be to change it? It only becomes an issue if there's an audible at the line of scrimmage, or if the team is running no-huddle. And in ordinary years where there is plenty of crowd noise, even the audible is not necessarily clear on film. Then there's the point that the same or very similar verbiage may encode different options, depending upon the rest of the call. As an added wrinkle, a team may call several audibles including a code word (that does change weekly) to indicate which is the actual audible vs. the dummy call So it's not necessarily so straightforward to decode, but yes, for a team that is resolute and thorough in its prep, it can provide an advantage and this was especially an issue in 2020 with minimal crowd noise and clearer audibles on film. For that reason, teams seeking the maximum competitive advantage should change up their audibles weekly, but I don't believe they all do. That's why a guy who knows the system and can help decode what info is available, can be an advantage to an opponent. Of course, I could be mistaken on any point and I welcome correction.

I actually really respect Beasley quite a bit more than I expected, from listening to that. He acknowledged that there were things he'd like back, that he didn't handle as well as he could have, and that he reached to Beane and to McDermott to talk things through. He gave an example of one of the family interactions that upset him (a child telling his 7 year old son he couldn't come to his birthday party because his mom "didn't like you") that I think would be hard for any parent to take. I'm hopeful that however much he plays, he'll be a good and steadying influence in the locker room and perhaps raise the level of WR play overall. And of course if he plays and contributes even better.

Actually, no, I surely didn't know that play calls change every game. I know that at one point, I think in 2019, Daboll was experimenting with 1 word play calls so the Bills could go no-huddle but change the plays easily at the line. Those 1 word play calls changed every week. The players were talking about how much work it was to memorize which words were representative of which play calls. And of course if they forgot, confusion resulted. It didn't last very long. Erhardt Perkins offenses can have relatively simple playcalls like "F-left 72 Ghost/Tosser" (F-left is the formation, 72 is the protection, Ghost/Tosser identifies the routes), but Josh Allen said that Daboll (and now Dorsey's) play calls tended to be lengthy. And as alluded to above, even if you change the play calls every game, mapping the formations, protections, and routes onto the new words is non-trivial. So my understanding is most teams don't, in fact, change the playcalls for every game. Some have said that in the AFCCG in 2020, the Chiefs appeared to have our offensive playcalls and that this may have been the result of all season in relatively empty stadia so that the offensive assistants were able to watch film and map the verbiage onto the formations and plays. For anyone interested, here's a video of Cam Newton on a talk show going through a playcall. Both Carolina and NE ran EP offenses.

One more time: Beasley was on the practice squad for Tampa. Primer about Practice Squad. As usual the best way to get correct info is to post wrong info, so if I'm wrong on any point I feel certain several will correct me. -Practice squad players are free agents. They can sign with any other team at (almost*) any time. So even if Tampa had not terminated Beasley's practice squad contract (which they did, after he retired), he could have said "See Ya, I'm gonna go sign a practice squad contract with Buffalo instead of you, Bye!". Exception* is 6 days prior to a scheduled game with that team. -If another team signs a player off a different team's practice squad (which they can do at any time, EXCEPT within 6 days of playing that team), then the claiming team has to sign the player to their active roster, and pay the player as though he's on the active 53 man roster for a minimum of 3 weeks. But the player does not actually have to go. This happened to the Bills a couple times in the "Bad Old Days" - they tried to claim a player off another team's practice squad to their active roster and that player said "Nah, I'm Good". -If the player has been signed to the 53 man roster, then if he's cut he must go through waivers before he can be re-signed to the practice squad of the team who cut him. Waivers are the part of practice squad signings/elevations that are not optional: you're claimed on waivers, that's your new team. After the trade deadline, all players (including vets) go through waivers.

Well, that was kind of the point of my original post. He's supposed to be a very smart guy and he was on our practice squad being prepared to be called up for injury, so he likely knows the defensive play calls (also carryover from last year, when he started). And he was on the scout team, so he would have had the opportunity to pick up the offensive play calls. So yes, I think he probably does know quite a lot.

In that video clip, the receiver before Beasley appears to be wearing #81 Who is #81 on the Bills roster? I had a good ol' look at https://www.buffalobills.com/team/players-roster/ and can't figure that out (Beasley looks sharp)

It's a bit of an advantage when the other team might know all your offensive and defensive playcalls, wouldn't you think? McDermott did sometimes, and so did Poyer. "Is there a question? What is the question?"

OK. How many (relatively impactful) mistakes in a professional context do you think employers should allow?

I'm not entirely sure about this. It depends upon the scope of jobs he's willing to take and where. If he wants to stay in conventional media in the Greater Buffalo/Niagara Falls area I think he was sort of at his last stand already working for the Niagara Gazette etc, so you would be right there. But more globally, there seems to be a market for journalists who want to be pricks and ***** stirrers on podcasts and so forth, and if the Buffalo Bills continue successful I would think he could go that route and successfully market himself there. I'm not sure that's what he wants at this stage in his career though.

Just a comment that I did not say the things quoted and attributed to me in your post. They were said by Einstein. I don't know how they wound up attributed to me, but for courtesy and to avoid confusion, I would be obliged if you could correct the attribution. You could edit your post to delete the quote and paste in this link instead. Thanks.

I'm sure that's true for everyone - likely including Jerry Sullivan. But we're really not talking about the "majority of stupid things" here, are we? Let's not shift the field. For Sullivan, you're lamenting that he lost his job(s) as a result of one stupid thing said in a context that matters to his profession: on video, in a podcast, from a journalist. It's not like he was in a bar with 3 friends and one of them was surreptitiously recording him and putting it out on TikTok. I don't think most successful professionals say that many stupid things in situations relevant to their professional career. And when stupid things are said in situations relevant to their professional career (or high profile to a friendship), consequences are not uncommon.

Am I the only one on this board who is a bit concerned about Justin Zimmer? Not because he's a game-changing player - he's only played 10-20% of the snaps for the Dolphins in the last 3 games, he's now on injury report with a back injury. But because he's said to be a "student of the game" and a very intelligent player who, having been on the Bills practice squad this season and started for them last season, is probably well positioned to give the Dolphins a lot of inside info on play calls, both offensively and defensively. I hope the Bills are planning to change things up as best they can on a short week.

Fixed #2 for ya.

That's beautiful.

Have I said something stupid or tactless in my life? Undoubtedly, including things that were taken differently than I intended them. And, thinking back, those things I said have had consequences - a job I didn't get, a role for which I was passed over, a friendship that withered etc. The point is - actions, including single actions, have consequences. That's life. That's how it is. There are people in prison because of one stupid choice. And, there are people fired because of one stupid choice. Now Sullivan is one of them. As for what Sullivan says here, this is shear "I can't be a misogynist, some of my best friends are women!" stuff. If those stories about women's sports have a readership, they won't go untold. The papers that employed Sullivan will....wait for it....employ someone else to write those stories, maybe a young hardworking reporter who has been waiting for their chance. It's not like there's a shortage of well-trained journalists looking for work. Sullivan lost his job, not his "livelihood". He is free to seek employment with other media outlets, or start a blog/podcasts as Ty Dunne did. If he can not obtain said employment or develop a following of subscribers, I think the chances are pretty good that will be based upon the full body of his work and demeanor, not this one incident. PS would also like to clarify that the stupid or tactless things I have said did not rise nearly to the level of the blanket stereotyping and prejudice of Sully's Bon Mots. And they still had consequences.

I don't think that's it at all. He was on our active roster as the #6 WR, replacing Crowder. We had to cut someone when we traded for Dean Marlowe and activated Tre White, and with Tre White apparently not ready to play and Poyer out for 2 weeks (but not injured enough for IR) it wasn't gonna be a DB. At the time Kumerow was healthy and plays teams, so he stayed and Hodgins went.

I'm trying to figure out the gestalt of this thread, so excuse me if I'm missing the boat. The last 2 games with the Giants, Hodgins has caught 5 and 4 passes for 44 and 38 yds, 2 TDs. 7 yds/r, and 6 yds/r If Hodgins were still with the Bills, wouldn't we be looking at that and saying it's not good enough? Wouldn't we say, he isn't getting any YAC , isn't breaking any tackles? He's only 12 of 22 in the 4Q this season, 54.5% - must not be very clutch. While here, his catch % was only 66.7%, not good enough for us. JK, for real, I was sorry to see Hodgins go. I think the Bills were too, but we ran into a bit of a roster slot pinch when we activated Tre White, but he wasn't ready to play yet, and Poyer was injured - so they had to keep extra DBs on the roster.

Yeah, I'd like to assume that Gentry fills a scout team role as well or better than any of the other WR so he contributes in that way. But he's 27 and has 3 NFL receptions (back in 2017) for 35 yds on 7 targets. He doesn't play ST. Perhaps next year the Bills should focus the PS on stashing and retaining WR who might develop into capable NFL WR and contribute to the team down the stretch when injuries strike.

I actually think the fact that they brought a cut player out of retirement speaks to the fact that we want 5 WR active on game day and we have -2 WR on IR who apparently aren't coming off soon -2 WR who we apparently consider ready to elevate on the practice squad -one has used up all 3 "free" elevations, the other has used 2 of 3 elevations -there are 4 games left in the regular season -we lost our "next man up" WR, Hodgins, to the waiver wire when we cut him -Shakir has not developed as I think the Bills hoped I could be wrong, I was wrong about "Beasley in town" being a kerfluffle. I will say this: if the Bills brought two 32/33 yr old WR out of retirement with the idea they'd be major players instead of hoping they can contribute a few good plays off practice squad and fill in for an injury, it's a pretty valid point that we don't have a championship-caliber offense. There's a lot of stuff in there that says McKenzie contributes a lot more than people think, and maybe last year Beasley was a bit less clutch than people think. But I believe folks have all made up their minds/don't care about data so I'm not gonna bother pulling it out.

Except that it isnt It sheds a pretty sad light on your personal life, though, what you said and what you believe That's on you though