Beck Water

I'd just like to point out an apparent contradiction. You say that Kupp and Kelce don't have any physical skill that stands out. Then you point out that they have "good physical skills to move where they have to move and to catch the ball". It seems from some of what you've written that you equate elite physical skills with measurables like size and speed. My point is that elite physical skills come in other forms. Kelce has (or had) elite physical skills - he has the fluidity and ability to cut on his routes of a receiver, and elite hands/ ball tracking perception, at the size of a TE. That means among other things, he can push off subtly and get away with it, and then of course that he's almost always open a foot over the DB's best vertical. Diggs in 2020/2021 had elite physical skills - not speed, but burst; ability to cut sharply and juke the defensive back; ball tracking skill and hands. Those are the elite physical skills I see that stand out in Kupp and in Amon-Ra St Brown and several other top receivers.

OK, so I think there are a couple of things here. The first is, I think that your idea of McDermott's view is absolutely correct. I think he 100% has the philosophy "teamwork is better than individual stars" and values generalists - a Taron Johnson who can cover the slot receivers like a DB, but who can also play the run like an undersized LB; a Poyer who can play interchangeably between free and slot safety, but also come up into the box and both cover like a slot corner/light linebacker or play the run (the way they substituted for Milano, right? play Dodson against the run but then bring Poyer up to cover and backfill safety with Rapp). So I want to introduce two contrary notions for you to chew over: 1) a guy like Milano or Taron Johnson, generalists who can play sideline to sideline and cover but is also a thumper against the run and can penetrate into the backfield, are far from "dime a dozen" - it may be actually harder to find and develop a guy like that, than it is to find a guy who has one great skill. That may mean the team winds up paying these guys, not like a top dollar star because the market doesn't value their position at top dollar - but significantly more than 'replacement cost' for longer, just because of that challenge in finding and developing them 2) when it's crunch time, in the playoffs, these generalists may fall off at specific skills leaving holes the opponent can exploit. So then you need some guys who are elite at what they do, period. I think McDermott reluctantly came around to that idea on defense, and that's why we saw the team taking some rifle shots such as paying Von Miller the Big Bucks in free agency and re-upping Tre White at a good price. Of course, we all know how that came out, with injuries. So now let's apply that to your idea that "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well". In principle, it's fantastic. But in practice, receivers do tend to have specialized sets of skills where they're elite, and other skills where they're good, or maybe OK. Justin Jefferson, for example, started his career with the Vikings as a downfield threat averaging 16 yds per reception. Then he supercharged himself into a league leader in 2022 by developing into a complete receiver who could play any position including from the slot. Is he a great slot receiver, no, but he can play from the slot well enough that the defense has to worry about it, and that's how he went from 88 receptions/1400 yds to 128 receptions/1800 yds at a cost of 2 yds/reception (from 16 down to 14). So he would be an example, perhaps, of exactly what you're talking about here: a guy where the system needed him to do more than go deep and who wound up with better production from that 'generalist' approach. Back to the Bills: we have two receivers in Samuel and Shakir who can technically line up anywhere and run any route, and a very promising TE who was used short last season but may be able to do more than that. But that doesn't mean they have elite or even very good skills everywhere. Shakir may be able to stretch the field vertically if the refs are throwing DH and DPI laundry and he's not facing the opponent's #1 corner, but when it comes to crunch time, in the playoffs, it may become a hole the opponent can exploit. We don't have that guy who can face the other team's #1 corner and double coverage and still get open. The thing is, with Diggs on the team last season, it appeared we still didn't - that's what Greg Cosell described as "the reality on film". That's the Achilles Heel of the "every receiver on a well functioning passing team will do multiple things well": 1) it's actually harder to find and develop guys of whom that's truth. There are plenty of guys who think they can, and long for a broader role, but can't (Beasley thought he could play downfield and talked about that when he came to Buffalo. Spoiler: against a top defense, no, he really couldn't). 2) At crunch time, you may wind up with several guys who do things well, but no one who is elite. No freakazoids. And that may be enough to win, but not enough for a Championship.

Hey. At least you can take props for your clear lack of prejudice. Yeah, Cover1 has been steadily moving from an X's and O's centered approach (which is hard to find) to an analytics/fantasy football centered approach (which is kind of dime-a-dozen IMO) When the X's and O's type guys are talking, I listen. There are 3-4 guys who post here fairly regularly who have stronger football backgrounds than the best of the Cover1 guys, Spoiler: if they disagree on a point with Cover1, pick them.

No question about it. But the fact is, his offensive output as a QB has risen and ebbed, and I tend to think the OC and talent around him did have an impact there. Just sayin! Fair points well made. Certainly I would argue that Denver showed that as HC, Hackett had been promoted above his level of competence. I guess from what @Malazan and others are saying, maybe there are questions about whether in fact Hackett had ever truly had responsibility for the game plan and calling the game, since people believe Matt LaFluer called plays in Green Bay and it was believed Marrone did so in Buffalo and Jax.

Obviously, if St Brown were projected as a league leading receiver, he wouldn't have been drafted in the 4th round. But as has been pointed out, the draft is no sure thing. Players who teams grade lower, outperform players projected to be better every year. That doesn't mean they're a "dime a dozen", it means something about them was over- or under-weighted. When you put up height, weight and 40 time and ask "what physical talent does he have that makes him elite?", it appears as though you believe height, weight, and speed are Where It's At for talent. When the Bills WR got together in Florida in the 2020 off season after the Diggs trade, Dion Dawkins said some thing to the effect of "until I watched Stefon Diggs that day, I had no idea a human being could be that good at football". Diggs (6 feet, 195 lbs, 4.5s 40) had at the time, elite physical abilities to deceive a DB with his hips and feet, to knock off DB hands with physicality, to run crisp and deceptive breaks, and to change speed during his routes so that good angles become bad. It's not his size weight and speed, it's how he is able to use them. And that's true of most of the elite WR in the league. Yes, the quality of the OC, the QB, and the other receivers also matter, but it's like cooking - the chef still needs quality foods. Just to be clear, by "you" here, you're not referring to myself, yes? Because I'm certainly not saying that. (I would say the same goes for St Brown)

Yes, as the league stands today, you're overstating the case. I don't understand the quality fact and analysis basis of saying that there is "nothing much about St. Brown or Kupp that allows them to demand targets, either". I would agree that neither St Brown nor Kupp appear to be diva-type WR, but typically when a guy gets that many targets, there's indeed something about him that's demanding them - he's getting open and/or he's demonstrated his ability to make contested catches or catches in traffic. They're getting the targets, not just because they're somehow in the "right place at the right time", but because they've demonstrated they have the physical and mental abilities to deserve those targets. They aren't just "dime a dozen" guys who showed up in the right place at the right time and could be replaced by any of 11 other receivers. I'm not arguing that Coleman (dark horse), Kincaid, Samuel, or Shakir could not become 1000 yd receivers - in fact, I devoutly hope that you're right, and one or more of them do. But the fact of the matter is, when it comes to Samuel and Shakir, they have had opportunity in the league and have not demonstrated the ability to do so. Samuel in his 8 year career has shown himself to be a dependable slot and gadget guy who can line up outside at times, and claim close to 100 targets a season in 60-ish % of the snaps, on the regular. Shakir has advanced to claim 50% of the snaps, and I thought he took a big jump last season in his route-running and his ability to release, but he just hasn't he hasn't shown signs of what Kupp or St Brown did their initial years in the league. Could he be a slow developer, sure. He did come from a lower level of competition at Boise State, with a lot to learn. Kincaid showed flashes. He is so smooth, he has great hands, he runs nice routes. Of anyone on the team, I have the highest hopes for him. The question is: how will the Bills use him? He had 91 targets and 9 Y/R last year. It's hard to break 1000 yds with that. He'd need like 140-ish targets. I was told that Utah used him differently, on deeper routes, and he did well. Time will tell I guess. As far as whether the Bills will have >4000 yds passing this season, well, the Chiefs did last year - 4,183 to be exact. And, they did it without a 1000 yd receiver, though Kelce and Rice came close. But again, the fact is, they weren't an elite passing offense last season until near the end and the playoffs. Their defense and run game carried them.

So this is a series of interesting points. First off, I would say, if we thought Shakir ready and able to lock down a top WR role, we probably wouldn't have used our biggest FA signing on Samuel, who actually is a more Shakir-trajectory kind of a receiver who started out slow and earned his way from 30-ish to 50-ish to 86% of the snaps, with production rising from 13 y/g to 38 y/g to 57 y/g (under Brady as OC). I think of both as Swiss-army-knife type guys, who can play from the slot but also run routes outside. I think it's pretty clear that the Bills don't want a stable of "Swiss-army-knife" type guys. They want a big guy who can get off press and win contested catches with DBs draped all over him, and they don't feel 100% confident he joined the roster when they drafted Coleman hence the shot at Claypool. They also want a fast guy who can stretch the field, hence the MVS signing. MVS is a guy who is a legit field stretcher. His lowest Y/R is 15, his best season was 20. Claypool, in his first two (successful) seasons, was a 14 Y/R guy. I think it's been pointed out that while Diggs managed 17 Y/R the year before Buffalo traded for him, that really wasn't his bread-and-butter either before or afterwards. Now to the elite offense/spreading the ball around bit. That's essentially what KC tried last season, and it took them to the Superbowl - but their offense was NOT elite last season. They were what, #15 on points scored? They rode their #2 defense through games. They had a rusher close to 1000 yds and two receivers close to 1000 yds in Kelce and Rice. But even Kelce, who I would argue has been the Chief's #1 receiver since Mahomes was handed the keys (there were 2 years where Hill had more yards, but in one of them Kelce had more targets and receptions) - Kelce's targets and YPG declined to levels he hasn't seen since 2016. A bit of an aside, and not intended to argue against your overall point about #1 and #1/#2 WR, but last season, 2 of the 4 final teams (Ravens, #4 offense on points, and 49ers #3 offense on points) were run-first teams who rush more than they throw, but in very different styles. Baltimore's leading rusher for yards is their QB Lamar and they were 30th for passing attempts. Zay Flowers, their #1 receiver, had 77 receptions for 858 yds and after him, they spread the ball around pretty well - OBJ and Agholor, their two TE Andrews and Likely. The 49ers on the other hand, despite being #32 for passing attempts, had two 1000 yd receivers in Aiyuk and Kittle, and a 3rd 900 yd-ish receiver in Samuel. And, they were not very different in targets - 105, 90, and 89. I'm not sure who you'd say their undoubted #1 receiver was. On the other hand, you can by sure and by damn tell who their #1 RB is in Christian McCaffery. Their offense clearly runs through him, one of the few big trades where one can seemingly say the receiving team got their money's worth, as long as he's healthy. Anyway, a bit off your point, but I thought it was interesting to bring up in the context of #1 and #2 receivers - that essentially, 2 of the 4 final teams were run-centric teams and, I would argue, the two who played in the Superbowl, really didn't fit the pattern of having a clear #1 target at receiver and 3/4 arguably didn't have an elite passing game. Then of course, in terms of top offenses last year, the Cowboys and Dolphins very much fit the #1 or #1/#2 target pattern. I just thought it's worth pointing out that there are other ways to win (defense) and to run an elite offense, but unless Brady envisions James Cook transforming into Christian McCaffery, I really hope he's not planning to try to adopt the Ravens run-Lamar-run model.

to amplify on this a bit: Kupp had close to 100 targets his rookie year and racked up 58 ypg. His second year, which was cut short by injury, was over 70 ypg which is pretty well the level he stayed at while getting more targets, until he did 'break out' during the Ram's SB season after they traded Stafford for Goff. But he was on the field 75% of the time starting his rookie year, and that only went up. The point is, he was on the field and contributing strongly from his first year, bar injury. Similar kind of thing with St Brown - he was contributing 54 ypg his rookie year and that went up to 73 then 95 ypg, but he was also on the field 75% of the snaps his rookie year and that only went up. With Shakir, I don't remember that "roster bubble" bit in pre-season. I think it was more we were looking harder at the guys who actually were, with the usual crop of "pre season heroes" from open practice. But while he had his "why don't we see more of him?" fans his rookie year, his catch % was 50% and he wasn't running sharp routes. He worked hard between his 1st and 2nd seasons, and it paid off big time in a huge jump in catch % from 50% to 86.7%, in playing time from 29% to 52% of the snaps, and a jump in YPG from 12 to 34. But no, Kupp and St-Brown were NOT on similar early year trajectories to Shakir. Nothing like. And of course, your point is valid that just because a guy looks good in limited snaps and when he's the #3 target in terms of how teams focus their attention, his production won't necessarily scale when he gets more snaps and a higher level of defensive attention (see Davis, Gabe)

I love your writing, as always. This is a drum you've been banging a while now, though, and I think it ignores a bunch of contrary evidence. First of all, on the "WR are the new RBs" thing. You omit all the rule changes the NFL has made to protect the QB and favor the passing game, in search of a more exciting visual spectacle. Bluntly put, the number of fans excited by a grind-it-out battle between two strangling defenses is far lower than the number of fans excited by an "oohs and aaahs" laser light show between a top QB and his receivers pushing the ball downfield. The NFL has taken that into account with the rules. This means that the passing game, favored as it is, has become more efficient than the running game. In the battle for who ends the the game with the most points, that naturally means teams value what gets them those points. You have valid and good points about the physical skills and abilities of players coming out of college these days and the narrowing gap between "great" and "good" players. But I don't think that's the major driver of the lower value on RBs these days. I think rule changes favoring the passing game, and a lag in the "arms race" so to speak, between the type of defenses and defensive players necessary to shut down a high powered passing attack vs. a high powered running game, are more significant. Also, please keep in mind that the strong contributions of a receiver drafted in the 4th round like Amon Ra St Brown or the 5th round like Stefon Diggs, is not on the face of it evidence that "WR are a dime a dozen" and many are able to succeed in a good offensive system, but that draft evaluators are trying to predict NFL success for guys coming out of different levels of college competition, and the draft is far from an exact science. That seems to be conflated a bit, above. You also seem to disregard the effects of "father time" when considering the career trajectories of players like DHop and OBJ. They went from greatness, to hired guns, not because "WR are a dime a dozen now" or because they were system fits who lost their luster in a new system, but because of the unrelenting impact of hundreds of hits and in some cases, the need to rehab and recover from significant injuries, on their level of talent. DHop had a great season full of luster the year after he was traded to ARI - #3 in the league, just behind Adams and Diggs. The next two years, he struggled with hamstring injuries and torn MCLs. Likewise OBJ - he had a top-notch career derailed by a serious ankle facture in 2017, put up similar numbers in 2018 with the Giants and 2019 with Cleveland, then he tore his ACL which he's now done twice. Last, I'd like to look at the impact of a Tyreek Hill. Tyreek Hill is a physical freak, yes. But he's had league-leading numbers with two different teams and QBs, not just because he's a physical freak, but because he played next to a future HOF physical freak of a receiver in Kelce in KC and next to another top WR in Miami in Waddle. I would say this opposes your argument about "dime a dozen" WR - not only are top receivers significant, but top offenses usually pair two of them together. Kelce and Hill in KC; Hill and Waddle in Miami; Chase Higgins and Boyd in Cincy; AJ Brown added to Devonta Smith in Philly. Then there's a point that however large the impact of truly top WR may be, it's ultimately limited by the quality of the team around him. Let's look at a guy like Davante Adams, who had 5 successive probowl seasons capped by 2 successive all pro seasons in GB. He had arguably as good of a season with a lesser talent in Carr throwing to him in LV the year after he was traded - #3 in the league, probowl, All-Pro - yet it ultimately lacked impact on team wins because of the quality of the coaching and team around him. Do you really want to make the argument that the Bills passing offense was as strong in 2022 or 2023 with Diggs, Davis, and who? vs 2020 or 2021 with Diggs, Beasley, John Brown or Emmanuel Sanders, and Davis? If WR are "dime a dozen", shouldn't it have been? Ultimately, I think talent level does matter - and the Bills have been fighting since 2021 to get back to that level of talent in the WR room. OK, enough opining. Let's turn our attention to some hard evidence regarding this "WR are a dime a dozen" or "WR are the new RBs" though. First, Follow the Money Franchise Tags. Currently WR have the 4th highest franchise tag values, right after QB, DT, and LB. Franchise tags, of course, reflect what teams are actually paying players at different positions. So why is that, if WR are now regarded as "a dime a dozen"? Next, Follow the Draft. Can we agree that teams tend to consistently take shots in the first two rounds, particularly the first rounds, at player positions that are of high importance to their team's success? That's why we see so many QBs consistently drafted in the 1st, even though teams know very well that they won't all become Franchise Guys - teams know they need a QB, and other teams will be taking their shots. Well, WR are one of the most numerically common positions drafted in the top 2 rounds and especially, the first round, for the last 6 NFL drafts. 2019 1st: 2 2nd: 7 2020 1st: 6 2nd: 7 2021 1st: 5 2nd: 5 - 3 of those 1st round WR were drafted in the top 10 picks 2022 1st 6 2nd: 7 - 5 of those 1st round WR drafted in the top half 2023 1st 4 2nd: 4 2024 1st 7 2nd: 4 - 3 of those 1st round WR were drafted in the top 10 picks. Seems to me that if WR were truly a "dime a dozen" now a days, teams wouldn't be using up so much top draft capital in the 1st round, and the 1st 2 rounds. Cheers!

The rumor at the time Hackett was OC in Buffalo was that Marrone was putting together the game plan and calling the plays, to the frustration of players and of Hackett himself. I agree Hackett was promoted beyond his sphere of competence to be HC in Denver, but he did manage to put together a pretty good offensive season in Jax with Blake Bortles as his QB. So there must be something there. Logic says that Rodgers wouldn't have the hard-on for Hackett he apparently has, if Hackett didn't bring something offensively valuable to the table. I really don't want to become a "Hackett apologist", I'm not saying he's all that and a bag of chips, I'm just saying that logically, it's unlikely he's trash.

Hold that thought a moment. Rodgers has been in the league since 2005, starting since 2008. That's like a 23 year stretch. If it's nothing to do with the OC and all to do with Rodgers, the reason Rodgers hasn't looked like that his whole time in Green Bay is ??

He did OC GB and Rodgers to 3 back-to-back 13-3 seasons where Rodgers had 2 consecutive All-pro and a league MVP. Yeah Rodgers had a long career with a lot of winning and multiple all-pros before that, but he was also coming off multiple "meh" years and was 38 at that point. Kind of hard to see Hackett as known trash with that background Agree that he was hired to attract Rodgers though For reals? Say more

I don't at all see it as a forgone conclusion that Malik Washington, or any other late round rookie, would play 40% of the snaps, but you could walk me through your reasoning and help me see it. The way I see it, the last few years, the Bills have been heavily a 1,1 team. Maybe 65-70% 11. But I think the "tea leaves" say that may change. -Shakir averaged 68% and that's lowered by 2 games where we barely passed and he was only on the field 50% of the time. I think it's a good guess they want that to go up. The Bills seem to think Shakir can play a bit outside, or in the Bunch formations Brady loved with LSU, so I don't expect to see him coming off too much. -Ditto Samuel - he was a 68% guy under Brady in Carolina -I think they're going to want Coleman to get on the field and let him take his growing pains and lumps Now let's say for the sake of argument that's 70% of the snaps. -Kincaid was on the field 58% of the time, and I think most people feel he's earned an increase. -But if they want a TE who can block in-line, and block downfield as opposed to get in the way, that would be Knox. So if you don't want to pull Kincaid off the field, that would mean 22 sets. I would love to know what our % 22 set was after Brady took over - anyone? It wouldn't shock me to see us play 20% 12 next season. -After Brady took over, Gilliam played an average of 7% of the snaps, so we were either in 2,1 or 2,2 7% of the time -Last 4 seasons, Mack Hollins has a low of 27% of the snaps (MIA) and a high of 94% (LVR). Last year with Atlanta 39%. So who knows, but because of his blocking chops, don't expect to see him much lower than 30%, I think. That might fill in for any breathers Coleman and Shakir need. Basically, I think there's room for a 4th WR to get in the field, but I don't see it being a 5th round rookie (even if he was a fantasmagorical blocker in college), and I don't think it's gonna be 40% of the snaps. And I think a 5th round rookie would be more likely than not to be "Shortered". What did you think of the year PFF ranked Tyrod Taylor in their top-10 QB with Buffalo? I'm not blanket dissing off PFF, but I don't think one really should put too much weight in their player rankings, OL grades, or DL grades for example.

Thing is, he's not the bottom of the barrel. That would be someone like John Ross (who? Cincinnati 1st round WR 2017) or N'Keal Harry or....Kadarius Toney? Guys who were drafted high and have not been able to live up to it. Or, for that matter, Andy Isabella and KJ Hamler. Claypool undoubtedly has talent. He showed that in '20 and again in '21. He can play at an NFL level. It's just whatever's in his damn Haid that's the question. There musta been something in the water of that Pittsburgh locker room, WR catching the Cray-Cray all round: Antonio Brown, Juju S-S, Claypool

Steelers drafted him mid-2nd round Bears traded their 2nd round pick for him (#32) I think Claypool got to thinking that his ***** smelled like Roses just because he was a 2nd round pick and laid down a couple of 800+ yd seasonss. Last year, the Bears benched him then shipped him off to Miami for a 2025 6th round pick after Claypool made any petulance/checking out Diggs might have displayed look like a minor toddler dispute. In case that didn't get the message across that he better shape up and do his 1/53rd, the Dolphins let him on the field with the offense for 51 whole snaps in 9 games, while expecting him to grind on ST. He was inactive a couple of games, anyone know what was up with that? Anyway, if the Bills are prepared to manage him I don't have a problem with it - given the Bills cap, it has to be a low $$ deal. Let him compete with Cetus and Shorter and Shavers for the #6 spot

Huh?

*blink* *blink*

It's the base, not the "up to" that I'll be wanting to see. If he's got a 1k year left in him, when is it going to emerge? It's been in there incubating since 2019, while he's been chugging along at 35-45 catches for 500-ish yards since Cleveland

Again, I'm not all up in the details of it, but there has been all sorts of skeevy business going on in the PSE front office from Russ Brandon, to Ron Raccuia, to John Roth and Kathryn D'Angelo being fired last Fall for being unable to keep their Bowsers Truckled. As I recall there was a shakeup and John Roth was brought on board in January 2023. Jessica Pegula's Players Tribune article was published February 7th. Unclear to me when her husband was fired. But the thing is, if the Pegulas had a culture of "lifers" as the Bills had under Wilson, it would stand out that someone close to the family got fired. As it is, it seems as though the business side of the Bills and Sabres has lived in a constant state of churn especially the last couple of years. Whether it's well-needed churn or destructive churn, I couldn't tell you. Taylor Gahagen was probably fired for cause, not just let go given the choice of words - but whether it was because Jessica and he are now "outlaws" to the Pegula family (as Graham implies) or because he was felt to be doing a poor job (maybe too much time jetting about to his wife's matches and not enough minding the business?) or because, in a culture where bousers seem to be untruckled all over the place, maybe his also unfastened Unless proven otherwise I think it's more likely than not that: 1) Jessica wouldn't have written that article for the Player's Tribune without at least running it by her siblings and father. So I don't think publishing that somehow cast her out of the fold 2) her husband's firing is most likely related to his OTJ performance and churn in the Pegula business offices Remember, Tim Graham is seeking clicks and subscribers for the Athletic, so it's in his interest to sensationalize where he can

Laura Pegula is 41 - not exactly a fossil. If I were guessing, my guess would be that the kids from the 1st marriage kept their distance from the Bills, regardless of interest, while the 2nd wife was the Face of the Front Office, and she not unnaturally probably wanted her kids to follow in her footsteps. Now that the 2nd wife is out of the picture, the kids from the 1st marriage may be saying "hey - we were here first, we have priority over your 3rd born who is off playing high level tennis, not grinding in your businesses as we've been doing"

I mean you can suggest it, I won't pillory you - as was pointed out up-thread, the Bills and Milano have both been un-forthcoming with details of his injury, and the upper range of the RTP time presented by BangedUpBills would put him returning in early September. I just don't think signing a guy who was a very good linebacker in his day, but was a vet minimum player who started the season on practice squad for Carolina last season is particularly interesting or out of line. It seems like SOP to me - try to grab some quality vets who can compete for spots at the back of the roster. We'll have Jones competing with Morrow and Spector for the backup Mike, and Morrow competing with Williams for the backup OLB. Ulofoshio's shot at the roster is on ST. We normally carry 6 LB on the roster and we carried 9 LB into camp last season.

Agree that the full picture of why the Bills called Klein is more nuanced than I presented, but I think the point stands that the Bills went into the season presenting Dodson and Spector as a serious options at MLB. Early in the season, when we were ahead in a couple games they pulled Bernard and Milano for Dodson and Williams. When Bernard went down vs Cincinnati, I believe they tried Williams rather than Spector (Dodson was already playing for Milano). I guess one can argue against shifting position on 2 guys, though the Bills have cheerfully done that on OL before. I just don't think they were comfortable with Dodson at MLB to start Klein at MLB ahead of him vs. KC, and certainly not comfortable with any of the rest of their depth - Matakevich, Spector, Williams. So I think it's a valid point that they acknowledge their LB depth needed overhaul, even though, overall, I agree with you that if they could have kept Dodson they would have.

Kirby, Kirby, Kirby. I can go with you that it's more important to have top starting WR than to have top starting off-ball LB. The fact that the Bills were able to splice together an adequate Milano replacement from a combo of Dodson, Poyer, and Rapp that allowed them to have a sound defense speaks to that. "INFINITELY" in all caps? Mmmmm I think what the Bills defense looked like in the playoffs while we were playing The Ghost of AJ Klein and One Winged Dodson, would show that's not true. So you're upset because the Bills valued a potential backup LB and STer over a WR drafted 24 slots later (meaning 2/3 of the league didn't see him as "significant snaps with upside") and 56 slots later (meaning all of the league didn't see him as "significant snaps with upside" and then again 2/3 again)? Mmmm Ok, if those guys turn into Puka Nacua or even play significant snaps for Miami and Dallas, I will come back here and give you your props. I think the Cold Hard Football Facts are that a backup LB who plays ST is more likely to play meaningful snaps this season, especially with the Bills having moved on from 2 ST stalwarts at LB. And if the Bills are counting on a 6th round rookie WR for significant snaps with upside, then we really haven't done enough to address WR. Which actually, I'm concerned about, but I can't get all fluffy about taking a LB over a WR late in the 5th.

You're likely correct that other things being equal, the Bills would have preferred to bring Dodson and Jackson back, because the Bills do love to hang on to their backups and STers and McDermott values continuity and leadership. But Beane and McDermott have also promoted the idea that their backup LB can step in and start - 'next man up'. And clearly, the Bills didn't have faith in Dodson as an MLB, or they wouldn't have persuaded Klein to park his RV and hop on a plane. When you have 4 backup LBs, two of them seasoned vets, and the answer to injury is "platoon the role" or "bring in a guy off the couch", I think it can be argued you need change at the backup LB position. And I think McDermott and Beane must realize that. I would argue that showed a different path at vet backup was needed. And at least on paper, Morrow looks like an upgrade - a guy who has had the green dot on his helmet in games, a low-end starter, but willing to play ST - potentially closer to what AJ Klein was in 2020/2021 when he was ahead of Dodson on the depth chart. Dodson wasn't getting vet min from the Bills, BTW - $2.1M, fully guaranteed. Matakevich was getting $2.5M, also fully guaranteed. Dane Jackson, also $2.1M IT's not like any one of these salaries is exorbitant, but one argument about the Bills cap management is that they've been spreading a lot of their cap out to backups and ST guys. That's served the Bills well in a lot of ways, but then Beane tells us he's not able to add top FA at edge and WR. It may be something Beane needs to do differently to get over the top is be willing to "churn" a bit more and have less seasoned players or vets like Morrow

Pretty much, This