PBF81

No. Does it read that way? Is this an either/or thing? Or do you think that there's more to the analysis? But Samuel's more like the WR2 that some are crying for. Do you think that it's irrelevant that Davis has nearly twice the TDs in fewer games played?

No disagreement here. But the focus should be on that second part. Also, I just posted, in response to the "best teams ..." about how Davis has outperformed Deebo Samuel in terms of TDs & 1st-Downs, on a per-start basis. Samuel is SF's #2 WR. They are the current favorites to win the Super Bowl. So logically, if a team needs a great #2 WR to win a Super Bowl, why is that the case. (rhetorical) What a team needs is a solid offensive philosophy and a coach that's capable of carrying it out in optimizing/maximizing the talent that's on that unit. Pretty simple really.

Agree with that generally speaking, but not with the bolded part. Here's evidence in support of that. I posted it elsewhere already. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axzo6SP7hSE

San Francisco's the leading Super Bowl contender right now. Deebo Samuel is their #2 WR. He's had one notable season, otherwise borderline #2/#3 seasons. He's currently on pace for 800 yards, 3 TDs, and 30 1st-Downs. Davis is on pace for almost 1,000 yards, 11 TDs, and more than 30 1st-Downs. Samuel has averaged about 1 TD for every 4 starts and 3 1st-Downs per start. Davis has averaged about 1 TD for every 1.5 starts (nearly three times the rate) and 3 1st-Downs per start. Would we rather have Samuel, ... for example? Would he perform better here than he has in San Fran? If so, why? He's currently on a 3-year $72M contact as a former high 2nd-round draft pick. Thoughts?

Oh, it's feasible. So then what should be the obvious question is why hasn't it happened? Your last sentence is key. But we don't seem to be willing to point the fingers at the core causes for the problems and issues.

Well, to start, when I referred to consistency, I was referring to our game-to-game offensive consistency under Dorsey, so this and last season, with a premier QB. This season SF has been notably more consistent offensively speaking. 17, 30, 30, 30, 35, and 42 So has Miami, whose lowest two scoring games were 20 and 24 points. Ours, 14, 16, an 20. Detroit has been. Philly has been. KC, given the literal bunch of JAGs that they have as WRs has been suprisingly consistent. Not high-scoring, but consistent, more consistent than we've been. Dallas has been inconsistent like us. Our highs are high, but our lows are low. Some of it may have to do with Allen, but for that I would suggest that coaching, or lack of proper coaching. Look at his ratings over the course of last season contrasted with those of the other top QBs, he's easily the least consistent in that regard. Run the standard deviation for scoring for every team's games and it'll be clear.

That's a great answer that implied many more things than perhaps you realize. I'll break it down into the three sentences. So this one, ... He does have chemistry with Josh, but that chemistry produces. Our issues seem to be, generally speaking, that we either are not satisfied with his level of production, and/or that we're not content with his style, aka the way and manner which he produces. But until someone can explain to me why a 1st-Down logged one way is not the same as one logged via another, all other things being equal, it would still seem to be a 1st-Down. My position is that as long as it produces, then who cares how he classifies as a WR or whether or not he's a classic #2 WR, right? Maybe our system, aka "The Process" apparently, isn't designed for a classic #2. I don't know. We don't know. There are complexities to it all, and it's a fair assumption that the coaching staff hasn't even figured it out, based on the premise that if they have, then we wouldn't perpetually having this discussion about our WRs and WR corps. But let's be clear, it's their system, it's what they have obviously wanted here. But here's the thing, how can we honestly entirely dismiss what you said, that Davis knows the offense and has chemistry with Josh, as being insignificant enough to warrant bringing in a more traditional #2 WR that won't necessarily have chemistry with Josh and for sure won't know the offense off the bat. Maybe he would, over time, but it's hardly guaranteed. And with Josh we don't have the typical Brady/Burrow type pocket passing game. Which WRs besides Diggs would you say that Josh has a chemistry with? I don't see any in particular. He had chemistry with Beasley, the only other WR that he did have it with on a consistent basis. They should have done a lot of things, including upgraded the OL too, ... at some point over the past 6 seasons that Beane has had to do so. Granted, he did it this season effectively, but again, defenses appear to be figuring out our offense so we'll see how that progresses. But more relevantly, maybe having that classic and far more traditional #2 WR would require more time in the pocket and therefore a QB that's more prone to pocket-passing and all predicated upon having a notably better OL. I don't know, just throwing that out there. But again, it's more complex than most of us realize, and not finding a classic #2 WR that is, but the entire situation. Some cart/horse stuff in there IMO. The reason why Davis is still here is because there's no chance on earth that they were going to cut the only other WR besides Diggs that Josh had chemistry with, and that has come at a price tag of less than $1M/season and not even that for this season. Is he worth $5M/season? Yes, obviously. $15M/season? I can't say but probably not. So where's that dividing line? Suppose we bring in another "#2 WR," to start, how do we know that he'll have any chemistry with Josh? And then how do we know he'd be any better? Wouldn't it make more sense to keep Davis until such a time? IOW, fine, bring in the desired #2 WR, if he works, great, let Davis operate in "his role" then also. I see no conflict there. I do see a huge risk, particularly given the game of musical chairs that we've been playing for Beane's 6-year tenure, of not having Davis and plugging-n-playing the next big signing WR on the list. Let's face it, their methodology in staffing the WR corps has been on the opposite end of the spectrum from inspiring. Even before this season, the arguments I got into about how Harty and Sherfield were not going to make a significant impact, getting hammered as to the opposite, which has essentially been the take every preseason, how "the experts know more than we do," yet here we are, again, and "the experts" aren't getting the job done. At least that's the recurring theme and narrative, now with Chris Simms chiming in with his two cents. At the end of the day the Bills should have done a lot of things, like bolstering their OL for Allen, their likely never-to-be-had-again generational talent at QB. But they didn't. If the situation is to be corrected, someone has look at the why, how, etc. of it all and pull the trigger on the corrections. But we've been shuffling WRs in and out for over half a decade now in this never-ending game of musical chairs and we're still discussing the issue. Apparently not as he wasn't brought in for that. But we're not even using him for what they said he was brought in for. That would appear to be a coaching issue. There was absolutely nothing but praise for Kincaid as sure-handed pass-catcher that could run routes well. The comparisons were of him to Kelce by many. The reality is that he's been more like Scott Chandler or Charles Clay. So why can't our team use him like that? It obviously shouldn't be talent and it seems to me that if he were on another team, Philly, KC, Cincy in particular, Miami, and others that he'd be doing a whole lot more in the receiving department than he is here, even others than aren't overall good teams, just with more competent offensive management/coaching. Same with Hines who was a prolific receiving RB, but not here, where he did zilch. So it's quite possible that they're also not getting what they can from Davis, but to ignore that it could very well be coaching that is the issue, is a mistake. But for anyone to suggest, other than on speculation that another/other WRs would be better, that Davis ain't cutting it or the equivalent, and in and of itself, is a mistake. I do think that competent management/coaching of our offense would correct the situation. I have no idea why that isn't the prevalent narrative and opinion at this point, with a "defensive-minded" and offensively laissez-faire head-coach at the helm of this rig.

Again, that's oversimplifying it. We're not talking about perfection here, we're talking about consistency, and yes, other offenses are more consistent, aka better coached. Any notions that Dorsey's doing anything approaching an optimal job can be argued using the same approach. If it were so difficult, then a bunch of other teams wouldn't be doing it.

I'm not making a direct comment on Davis one way or the other here, but if he weren't on this team right now the offense would not be nearly as good. Whether that would befall Beane, McD, or whomever is another related discussion. But if Davis were to get injured for the season this week, the offense would notice.

Food for thought. It's obviously not true only for Davis.

To your point more generally, after six seasons of Beane and Seven of McD, they're still unsettled offensively. Honestly, I don't know how there isn't more heat on McBeane for that.

It should give pause to the Beane supporters. And as if they're all identical on every team.

Agreed. But 22 games in, how many games should Dorsey/McD need to correct what at least partially are some blatant issues.

Interesting points. Again, I simply posted this for discussion, without adding any comment or context. But there is some context built in. I'll hit those points in a moment. But I would throw this back into your lap so to speak, for that added contrast, how about citing the WR2s above that meet the expectations that you set forth above, in that contrast to Davis? To your points on that, how many of those #2 WRs listed do not "disappear for many of the games?" But also, how many games has Davis "disappeared from" in contrast/context. If you're using that as an argument to support a point, presumably you've done at least a little research/analysis there, right? Include it with your statement. How do your next two bullet points compare to the other #2s? I would argue your fourth point at least somewhat. I mean here's every catch from the Jax game. I don't see one where Davis "broke off his route." Also, there is a little versatility there in routes run. Again, contradicting the narrative. But either way, who has a problem with those plays and catches. Not me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axzo6SP7hSE Here's his Miami TD, also doesn't qualify that way; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs6LV_GzLgE Here's the Washington TD, no broken route or extended play; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bufyoTi6xzI Here's one, but it's a heckuva play by Davis; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAn_Nk4Nps8 As to "moving the chains," to me that means 1st-Downs. How do you define it? Seriously asking here. But he ranks 10th among those on the list in 1st-Downs. Where does he need to be in order to be considered "moving the chains?" 10th is in the top-10. What, 1st? 2nd? Here's the thing, I've noticed that some of the people that are hard on Davis, also defend both Beane and McD. This is their "Process," whatever that is. The situation is what they have produced. So any dissatisfaction in it, without the accompanying criticism of them, is misplaced. Is it not?

Of course he is. LOL

If they can get this offense to run on all cylinders then it won't matter. It gets old in deja vu form, hearing every season how we don't have the weapons, signing a bunch, saying that we finally do, then deja vu. ... for what now, four years. Could be the people entrusted with putting it all together. Just sayin'. AKA Inconsistent The fault for that is obvious, many simply cannot bring themselves to see it.

And coming off of a game where we barely and with luck beat the bottom team in the regular season.

Davis' rankings in the cats.

The question should be, ... Is McD getting the most from this team/roster that's possible, particularly in the playoffs?

What do you mean? As to your original post, the first thing that hit me is that in 2020 Allen, suprisingly and in no small way, took the NFL by storm. In 2019 he wasn't even an average passer. Then he stepped into the world of the elite the following season. So my thinking is that being the enigma that he is to a large degree, that advantage played to our favor when playing teams for the first time and for a season or two on the newness of Allen being "superman." Not being sure which teams were the ones where we scored on our opening drives this and last season, I would be curious as to which teams we did that against this and last season, to see whether perhaps they were largely teams from other conferences and not KC, Cincy, or other division winners that have been on our schedule annually now. In essence, teams that we hadn't played before with Allen as our QB. Again though, at least some of that, the extent to which can be argued, can be thrown at the coaching staff. We need one of those TV preview announcers ... Previously on TSW ...

Speaking for myself, he's getting a pass for any issues that have existed in the offense whatsoever. In support of that, there haven't been many times, none that I recall off-hand, that he's been held accountable by fans or media for any significant issues related to the offense. The schtick is always "he's a defensive-minded coach" and the rest has befallen either Dorsey, Daboll, or Allen. ... or Davis I suppose, the evil one. LOL Mostly joking on that last one. No team in the history of the NFL has been perfect, ever. To start, "perfection" is your choice of words. I didn't use it. Also, I'm assuming that this is still in the context of the string here, namely re: the offense at present, so I'll refer solely to the offense per above, and I'm also assuming that you're still referring to my comments on McD, not Dorsey. So in that vein, I'll ask you, do you think that the team's offense is being optimized? Does the word innovative come to mind at all when you think of our offense? How about resourceful? How do you think it would be performing, relative to other teams that would have comparable talent if Allen went down? To me those are the questions that we, and frankly, the coaching staff from McD on down, shouild be asking. Instead, and once again, speaking for myself, it seems that the team is largely resting on the abilities of Allen to carry the offense, and by that I mean more than is typically asked from a QB, even the best ones. Top 5? With Allen? To start, I'll defer to the above that I just answered for this. I'm also slightly confused. Or is it ... what? We had the #1 and #2 ranked defenses in the league the past two seasons, but then gave up points in the playoffs equating to the 32nd (DFL) ranking. So regular season rankings don't always mean very much. But you've been competitive before, so allow me to ask; when you reach a plateau in a competitive element, even not in sports but something else, do you tell yourself, that's good, I'm satisfied with this status, even if you know that it could be better? Again, per above, do you think that McD's team is doing the best that it can with the offensive talent that we have? Has it peaked with it? Take KC for example, I see Reid/Mahomes doing everything that he can with a cast of WRs after Kelce that at best are a bunch of JAGs. IMO they're overachieving with the crap that they call a WR corps over there. Are we overachieving with what we have? I thought that the entire team and it's functioning was the responsibility of the head coach. Am I off? In your view, does McD bear any responsibility at all for the play of the offense? If so, to what extent or with what limitations? Let's suppose for the sake of argument that it were the offense holding the team back from winning it all, but for the reason that we were not getting the most from the offensive roster that we have. Whose lap would you drop that in ultimately, having had two different OCs that is?

I have to think that they're on top of that.

That's a good point. And our other Miami game is on the road too. Who knows, maybe that'll be the one to determine the division.

Easy there chief! I was referring to generally speaking, I (truly) didn't mean to point you out. A bunch of people have said that kinda thing.

I have none. I know he's a talking head for one of the sports networks. Don't know which one. I don't listen to any of that stuff. I used to listen to some stuff on GR years ago but stopped that too. There's way too much content today for more than a small fraction of it to be original or worth listening to or viewing. I prefer to do my own research, work, etc. I'm so out of touch with sports media. Half the time I'll even turn the volume down on games and listen on GR even though the sound is significantly out of sync with the video. Why are you asking?