PBF81

A 4th place schedule actually. They play Houston, Atlanta, @ Cleveland. We play Jax, Tampa, @ Cincy. Otherwise the same except for H/A. Or record's going to be determined by our play after Thanksgiving. Between us and the Jets, seems like the chances are that the two games we play vs. each other will be that determinant.

Nice hat! I'll bet that when you buy a hat like that you get a free bowl of soup.

Not in the 4-team division anyway. In the 5-team division it was pretty competitive in the late'90s.

It's gone from a one-team race every year (2001 - 2022) to a three-team race with NE refusing to go away.

That's a great point. Having said it however, there are things that we might do differently. I mean consider, many many other GMs have come and gone and made errors ranging from some blitheringly idiotic mistakes to moderate ones. To suggest that any given GM, including him, is flawless or perfect would also be a mistake. That's what leaves topics to discussion open. But yes, that would be quite interesting. Good points. Agree that there are some positions for which one has better luck in certain rounds. For example, if it were me, I would make it a rule as a GM to almost never draft a WR in the first half (16 or so picks) in the 1st-round. Other rounds are deep one year, not deep the next. Per our ongoing conversation, I would factor that in heavily into my methodology because that's how you get more and better value, by getting x-round guys a round or so later than they'd normally go in a draft with normal depth in the draft at that position. Correspondingly, I would also avoid putting myself in the position of needing a player at the K-position, when that particular Draft is sparse on K-position players. Make sense? You also implied a great point, that OL-men are generally unprepared for the pro-game coming out of college. Hence the need to foresee the need a year out. I've actually given consideration to the possible notion that the MLB position is being phased out as well, but I'm simply not seeing the reality of that. Could be me. LOL As to the italicized part above, the only other explanation is as I've addressed, a failure to properly plan. Despite what we each think individually, it is a possibility. Otherwise, coaches, from my observation, often (not always) focus on the part of the team that they're most familiar with in addressing first, i.e., when they first become head coaches. Using us as an example ,McD both played and came from the DBs/Secondary in terms of coaching. That's the first unit he spent resources on when he got here. Whether that was the fastest way to success, who knows, but that's what he did. Good coaches look at the team as a whole and spread out their resources in order to build the most optimal team. When I look at a roster for possibilities in FAcy or the Draft, I look at where I can gain the biggest possible margin of utility overall. As an example, let's say there's a position where we are currently getting a 3 level of play (1-to-10 scale) and we have an opportunity to add a guy that's a 7. That's a bigger leap in play, and likely overall performance of the team, than improving another position from a 6 to an 8 and at much greater expense, rendering the opportunity cost much higher as well. That's why I've always maintained that it's better to have a team full of players at the 5-7 level, minus a QB of course, than it is to have a team with four or five guys at a 7-9 level and the rest at a 3-5 level. The latter's likely to cost as much or more as the former. Continuity and chemistry also factor in heavily. We could discuss this to the nines. LOL They're definitely not stupid, but at the same time, for anyone to suggest that they're expert in every single facet of what makes a great coach a great coach, or a great GM a great GM, is also a mistake. They also do this as a full-time job and have massive staffs to assist, which is where they get much of their intel from on how good players are, which depends then upon how good those people are, not merely the GM. That's not to say that someone couldn't do similar analysis on a less broad scale and come up with astute and accurate conclusions. Again, that's what opens up the discussions. I'll finish this post with one close to home example. It may not sit well with everyone, but nonetheless. McD finally takes over the D this season. If it falters significantly, there are conclusions to be drawn. Right now, here, the narrative is that he's a defensive expert among the best. I've not seen that yet. In Carolina it wasn't true as his Ds were all over the map, below average in 4 of 6 seasons. So this season is pivotal in either supporting or challenging that narrative. BTW, I'm bigger on Torrence than you are. In fact, I was harsh on the Kincaid pick because of the status of our OL. I relented once we drafted Torrence because IMO OL was a desperate need and one that we've largely ignored other than in volume, but not quality. Torrence was projected as a 1st-round prospect by some. I think we'll be fine assuming that McGovern is as good as they say he is.

And BTW, KC won one SB and appeared in another with not the 1st-ranked offense, but the 5th and 6th ranked offenses, with 7th and 10th ranked defenses respectively. In those seasons, Green Bay, us, Tampa, Tennessee, and New Orleans were ranked better than them in points scored in 2020, and in 2019 Baltimore, San Fran, Tampa, and New Orleans ranked ahead of them in scoring offense. KC scored 473 and 451 in those two seasons. Our offense has scored 455, 483, and 501 the past three seasons going backwards. KC put up 496 points last season. I can see us putting up 550+ this season.

Likewise, thanks! See my prior post, all I was doing was laying out an very good option at MLB last draft as an alternate look that would have solved the problem, insofar as I mentioned the planning aspect. As to "saying what I would have done," I've been asked that many times by others on this particular topic, so merely anteing up there, and again, as merely an example of what I'm referring to. Take it any way you want, but it would have been a solution to a problem that we have that given the change, would have resulted in an advantage for us since Cook was hardly pivotal to our winning last season, nor is he likely to be anything close to a lynchpin this season. He's never carried a full-time load, therefore isn't a 3-down RB and likely never will be, and as such is a situational player or role-playing RB. I'd have more faith in Harris as a 3-down RB if we could only have one RB. A solid MLB may have very well been a massive difference. "Planning" in that way is a skill. There's a large difference between the skills of being able to ID talent and then managing that talent, largely positionally speaking as a collective, over the course of many years. Consider it the types of skills that Project Managers put to use, as merely one discipline. Some project managers are better than others, common sense. I find it to be along the lines of a Critical Path Method approach, which is a separate skill from "Sports Management," player development, contract management, or the like. I agree with most of your post, where I would differ somewhat is in that Beane's building of our roster is clearly heavy on free-agency, where the costs of attaining players, good players that is, much less impact players, are at a premium, and where the associated risks are therefore greater. We've also signed numerous free agents that simply haven't been worth the money. As to this year's crop, we don't know whether Floyd's going to play the way he did in LA yet. He's also not a 3-down starting LB, and he backs up Miller, so if Miller's fine, then our need for Floyd diminishes because presumably both would rarely be on the field. If Miller's not fine, that raises other questions in the context of our discussion, does it not. We also aren't sure whether Miller comes back at 80% much less 100%. If he doesn't, then the risk having played out will have been greater than the benefit of that signing. That much isn't even disputable. We'll see how it all unfolds. Simply because Miller's "sprinting across the field at near full speed" at camp is all but meaningless. Hopefully he'll be the same player, but if he were on another team, I doubt we'd all be betting that he will be at 34. It's because he's a Bill that we're all optimistic. In fact, the sentiment might even be the opposite. Where Beane's been heavily criticized by many, both internally as well as externally insofar as Bills' fans and media go, is in his drafts, where it's very difficult to suggest that he's gotten the value from his picks that he should be or should have gotten given where they were drafted. We can argue that, but more people than not take that angle. It is that which I am referring to. A simple analysis of our drafts will tell us that much. That's largely what I'm referring to. I would agree that our offense looks the best that it's ever looked, and we'll see, but I'm thinking that our defense falters to somewhere much closer to average this season, with at least some of that having to do with our LB situation. The DL may look great in camp, but that's deceiving, as anyone that's made such observations over the course of a bunch of years should realize by now. I don't even pay attention to camp stuff other than injuries and the like, in terms of performance standards. And how many times have we seen a player light up the preseason yet to be cut. It's far from rare. So to sum up, on the defensive side, given the wealth of draft resources that we've put into our D in general and DL in particular, IMO it's nothing to crow about. Offensively, we should have been drafting like this for the five years prior until we had a solid OL in front of Allen and better targets otherwise. Our defense, while good during the regular seasons in three of the last four seasons, very average otherwise, has failed us miserably come playoff time. On a side note, in two of those "better years," our schedule has been soft. This season it is not. Offense is what wins in this league today. If all goes well, as stated, I expect our offense to be #1 in the league, set records, and hopefully bring us a championship. If not, there'll be plenty of time to ask the tough questions following the season. Also, it's interesting that you mention Davis as such. I got into an exchange here recently whereby I'm told that Mahomes' second-rate WRs in KC aren't going to matter. But here, not having a solid #2 is a problem. LOL I'm not even sure KC has what Davis is on their roster. I agree with you on Davis, and I'm probably even more optimistic than you there. If I had to wager right now, I'd wager that Davis exceeds 1,000 yards and 10 TDs this season. He's been one of Beane's best draft picks, despite being a 4th rounder. He's outshone 8 of the WRs drafted ahead of him that season, including the 1st overall WR taken, and hast more TDs than all but one WR from that draft class, Jefferson.

You sure are cynical and like to find the best in people, don't ya. Actually, all I was doing was suggesting whom I would have picked instead of Cook. Beane's going to sink or swim on his own merits apart from my irrelevant opionions. Cook appears to be a fine RB, but as you said, it may (or may not be) the better/worse pick, time will tell. But he's never had a full-time load and really isn't a 3-down back. My point is that Dean was projected and is a 3-down MLB and would have filled one hole all by himself, apart from being a beast at UGA while playing against talent that was premier draft capital. RBs are much less expensive and easier to come by than RBs, which should be blatantly apparent. Feel free to spin it and my emotional mindset any way you like. So much for the civility in our exchange. LOL I'm sorryh I responded.

Thanks for the very nice reply!!! As to the bolded, thanks, but a lot of people here claim the opposite, which renders it difficult to have an honest discussion with some about that state of affairs. People often bark, "what would you have done." To me, while a lot of GMs and Coaches have their strengths, but among them are not always the replacement-planning aspect of it. As to what I would have done, I've been on record since last season's draft that I'd have either taken Nakobe Dean instead of Cook in round 2, or looked to trade up to get him in round 3 while he was still available. He's going to be very good at MLB and played the role tenaciously at UGA. He reminds me a little bit of London Fletcher. NFL.com quoted an NFL executive as having him be a Jessie Tuggle clone, which is highly complimentary. It's water under the bridge now. Having said all that, I'm not sure that anyone's as bullish on our offense as I am. I'm envisioning record-setting performance this season, not merely for the franchise, but some league records as well. I do expect the offense to be like KC's offenses in recent history while our D is also similar to their defenses of recent history. KC won two Super Bowls with the 7th and 16th ranked scoring defenses, and went to yet lost another with the 10th ranked one. Their offenses OTOH in SB wins were ranked 5th and 1st, and 6th in the lost SB. Time will tell how this season plays out. I'm excited though as I know all of us are. This preseason game should be interesting for the first quarter anyway, after that the starters will likely get yanked. Can't wait for the real games to begin. GO BILLS!!!

Buffalo (I see us switching places with KC, #1 Offense, very average defense, KC was 1st/16th last season) SF Jax Philly (Eagles were overrated last season, they played very few good offenses) KC (Chiefs don't have a single proven #1 WR on their roster. I'm not even sure they have a proven #2. a 34-year old Kelce's all they have that stands out. Mahomes is great, but that won't be enough to keep them #1 offensively. Of the 9 regular season games that they allowed 24+ points, they lost 2, won 3 by 3 points, won 1 by 1 point, and won 2 by 6 points. Their offense isn't going to be as good this season.) Cincy (Burrow's status is a concern) Dallas Jets Yes, I know, red X's and ridicule. I've got it. LOL No need to comment, I probably won't respond to any. Just adding mine to the list.

You're right, the rest of the D and team was stellar, if only he had shown up, we'd have won. 🙄

Yeah, by the time that I looked at the radar it had already passed. Either way, minor inconveniences.

If only we had a dome. Yes, ... JK

Who said I was referring to you there? I'm referring to in general. If you choose to enter the fray as such, that's your prerogative, just don't expect me to accept you telling me what my opinions are. And if you read the very first sentence of the very post you're hemming and hawing about, you'd have noted this. So I take the lack of your ability to put words in my mouth as crap as well, given that you simply expect me to accept what you say my opinions are. I think I know what they are thank you. And honestly, so many people here act and respond as if should we win a championship, that some posters are going to be sitting at home in their basements sulking and being pissed off. SMH Shame on those people. If you choose to include yourself, feel free, but that's your choice. Here's what you said; That's hardly me. I'm arguably Gabe Davis' biggest apologist and defender here. I'm the only one that I've seen that states that IMO we can have a historically good offense this season. Oddly, and in light of your comment above as stated earlier, I've even taken heat for those two things. So really what we're talking about here are sponsored narratives, which when not supported, become problematic, whether they support team decision-making or not. And funny too how Beane and McD "are the experts" and "know more than anyone here," but for some reason that doesn't apply to a player like Davis. Woudln't you say. Either way, if that's your sentiment, the quoted part, please take it up with those taht you complain about, not me, since it doesn't fit me. That's a fairly simple request. Now, GO BILLS!!!!

I'll tell you what, find a handful that did not, then let's reconvene. I never said that, can you please show me where I did. The exact quote please. Again, please show me where I said that, or any such thing. I'm on record here at least several times, where I've said the polar opposite. Again, exact quote please. In fact, and thinking that I know what my own opinions actually are, I've been an ardent proponent behind the notion that a team full of average to above-average players is better than a team with three or four all-pro players, some average players, and a bunch of mediocre players otherwise. It's all about chemistry and continuity. A good QB is also obviuosly necessary. No, what's going on in this message board is a shameless attempt to paint both McD and Beane without any significant flaws or decision-making whatsoever, whether personnel related or game related. Note, "13 Seconds" apparently has nothing to do with McD. Nearly the entire football media world mentions Beane's lackluster drafts, but here it's the opposite. Same for last season's meltdown in the playoffs, apparently it had all to do with Allen, Frazier, the defenders personally, but McD is all but completely absolved and blame-free. Their shortcomings are all minor according to most, with all of the major ones not having anything to do with Beane or McDermott in an effort to ensure that their halos are not tarnished. Meanwhile, "let's see what happens this season" is a non-starter for the people defending them. We'll see how it shakes out, but as is my opinion, I think that there's going to be an epiphany of sorts regarding McD and the defense following the season. And before you or anyone else continues to put words in my mouth and tell me what I think, I'm hoping for the complete opposite. I'm hoping once again for the #1/#2 D, a Championship as I've stated repeatedly, like any fan wants for that matter, and for our offense to set records, which I've also stated numerous times. In fact, I don't think you'll find a more optimistic person about our offense in this forum. The rest was a tantrum that I'm not going to validate or dignify. Otherwise, awaiting for your validation of the things you said I said. And it's funny, according to some here, some posters actually do know more than McD or Beane, particularly since they contradict them at times and yet are applauded for their takes. Just sayin'. Double-edged sword that you're wielding there. Otherwise, let's enjoy the season, hope for (finally) a Championship, and have these heated discussions following it.

Well, considering that the options, as stated by McD, are Dodson, Bernard who's now injured, Specter who's 3rd on the depth chart, and Klein, it definitely isn't inspiring. IMO it's going to be a significant issue. Whatever "workaround" they find that'll be interesting as well. I'm not saying that it's going to be an epic failure, but I wouldn't want to have to work with that roster and find a solution at MLB and have as a contingency some unknown plan-B. Definitely going to be interesting. IMO the halos that many perceive McD and Beane as having are going to get at least a little tarnished during/after this season. Hopefully not, we'll see.

I would in fact call the current situation a failure in the sense that it wasn't addressed in a timely manner. I mean is it a success? I don't see how. If it works out well for us this season, then it will make a huge difference. It will also make a significant difference if it doesn't work out well. Who knows which will happen. I do think that this is a key season for exactly things such as that. Once we play the season we'll find out. Frankly, I think it would be kinda cool if, for instance, they could figure out a D w/o a prominent role for a MLB. I wouldn't bet that it will happen, but I think it would be cool if it did. We'll soon find out. Let's just hope that it doesn't cost us dearly, as I would suspect that it will. Suspecting that it will does not equate to that's my hope.

OK, hedge it however you want, but your answer is essentially that yes, they did choose it. Correct? No one cares about circumstances that every other team is subject to as well. At the end of the day they are where they are due to the way that the roster has been managed. Would you agree with that? It sounds as if you're trying to suggest that they chose it, but it's not because it was planned that way, which seems to be contradictory. Choosing something ("chose") implies that there were other options.

Yeah, that "touch" appears to be a serious issue. I'm sure there were some drops, every team has them. His top two receivers were Pearsall and Shorter. How many drops did they have? From what I've read, Shorter doesn't seem to be the type of WR that drops a lot of balls. Seems like the opposite. What's interesting is that I just watched a few Richardson lowlight and other videos. Some of his passes were real headscratchers. Here's one of the videos; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HI04TAmrqD8 BTW, pay close attention to what he says beginning at the 8 minute mark. That's my thought as well. I sense a Jamarcus Russell/Vince Young career trajectory. You shouldn't walk away from that video thinking that a few drops were the reasons why he'll struggle in the NFL. Either way, I don't really care all that much about a Colts QB. If he's great, wonderful. If not, same. One of his most common descriptors seems to be "polarizing."

Since you ask, here's Allen's from one ofthe same two sources, I can't find the nfl.com one for Allen. I've deleted the identical ones. Here's what's left from each. My take on Allen, and I was one of the critics when we drafted him, was that I held out hope that he could improve because he is incredibly bright. As I recall he got a 41 on the wonderlic, which they don't do anymore I don't think, and was the highest scoring QB. Richardson is far from that. He got a 79 on whatever the test is now, while numerous other QBs scored in the 90s. This is simply the higher profile QBs, not every QB in the draft. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-draft-rumors-wonderlic-replacement-s2-test-scores-leaked-bryce-young-highest-for-qbs-c-j-stroud-lowest/ But what I noticed about Richardson's weaknesses, which is the first thing I look at for any draftee, was can they easily be coached out. I'm not seeing that with Richardson. He also had only three games in college with 3 or more passing TDs, and two of those games weren't generally good passing otherwise. The one that was was against Vanderbuilt which had the 125th ranked D out of 131. Weaknesses (Allen): - Has accuracy issues - Throws too many interceptions - Played at a low level of competition - Concerns about production and ability to be a clutch performer Weaknesses (Richardson): Weaknesses: - Extremely inaccurate as a passer - Consistently misses routine completions - Has a lot of passes go high - Struggles to throw a catchable ball in the short to intermediate field - Can get rattled by his own play, defenses, the flow of the game - Sometimes holds the ball too long - Plays down to opponents - Inexperienced; only 1-year starter Those are some pretty egregious weaknesses. That's fair, but in that light, Allen is an exception, far from a rule. But again, it was his smarts that allowed him to become who he is. It always is interesting to see how it plays out. I wouldn't bet a confederate dollar that Richardson becomes much. Then again, the odds are in favor of that, so it's not really a bold statement. LOL

You believe you did? I'll tell ya what, re-quote the direct answer to the question only that you say you posted. I'll admit if you did. Perhaps I missed it. I'm open to that.

BTW, I'm not quite sure what's so imaginary about our current MLB situation, or issue as many see it. It was either planned for as such or it was not planned for as such. It's not a difficult question, really.

OK, so you choose not to answer the question. That's fine. I understand. Let's see if Shaw answers it.

I quoted what you said, I think it speaks for itself. If not, choose your wording more carefully. Here it is again; If you want to backtrack, feel free. Honestly, I don't care, I'm not in this to make you look bad. But YOU said what I just quoted. LOL You also jumped into the middle of an exchange where someone was defending Williams' ability to play MLB, in defense of the person making that claim. Honetly, what do you expect readers to think. Absolutely no one's going to read your statement and think that you don't think that at some point Williams is capable of playing MLB. Again, all I'm pointing out is that these opinions that he can are unique to Bills fans, much in the same way that they are for many of our draft picks that never own up to expectations of McBeane. No one else out there in NFL circles, at least no one that I've seen, including numerous NFL scouts and GMs having commented on Williams, even if only anonymously as they do for draft profiles, agrees with that sentiment. Why is that so painful for people to accept? I'm not getting it. Again, entirely not the point. Go back and carefully read what I said. Getting tired of restating it over and over. It's impossible to have an intelligent conversation when you're not even responding to the actual points that I make and instead respond to implications that you seem to think stem from those even when I plainly state that they're not the case. Have a great evening Shaw. And I'll tell you what, I'll ask you the very same question that I asked Dr. Who above; Is this situation (MLB) deliberate, or not? Put another way, is the current situation planned by Beane? Put yet a third way, is THIS what they wanted re: our current MLB situation? It's a yes/no question.

Yes, I realize that about what Babich said. But saying things and reality are two different things often. This is one of those times. Look, all I'm saying is that there isn't anyone out there in NFL circles that claims that Williams is capable of playing MLB. You, everyone else, can argue that, whether it's for this season or future seasons. But we're talking about this season right now. Clearly Williams, at this point in time, is nowhere near being slated to play MLB. Do you disagree? If not, great, we're on the same page. At the end of the day, we have an issue now, today, for this season. Either this situation was planned, or not. Those are the only two alternatives, plain and simple. Wordsmithing it into something else does not change the situation for this season in the least. As to what McD wants or what Williams may become is also irrelevant for the time being. McD has wanted a lot of things from our drafted DL-men, Oliver, apparently Edmunds, Ford, Brown, Singletary, Moss, etc. They haven't all worked out to be what McD has wanted. Sad truths. My alternative doesn't matter. Why would it. If I'd been running the team my personnel decisions would have been different and I wouldn't have allowed us to get to this situation. Also, it seems as if they, the same coaching staff that everyone applauds, actually wanted to keep Edmunds if they could have, yet the same people applauding McD & Co., claim that Edmunds sucks, which appears to be in direct contrast with team statements. Allow me to ask you a question. Is this situation (MLB) deliberate, or not?