PBF81

Agree with that. But I just looked, the cut is from 90 to 53 on the 29th. Is this the first year that they've done the entire cut at once? I imagine that they'll cut some guys before that for purposes of simplifying the process in-house, but wow otherwise.

Was that the "He's givin' him the business down there!" game? Same game as the one mentioned?

Agree, entirely. In fact, other than for a QB, my position is and always has been, that a team is better off with 21 other players rated at a 5-7 (1-to-10 scale, 10 being best/premier/all-pro), than with a handful of players at 8-9 and the rest average or below-average. Also, chemistry, how long they've played together. Exactly, but more people think he hasn't done a great job than done a great job. Most haven't worked out well on the OL, but I'm not sure what anyone expects when the primary methodology employed after whiffing on a pair of day-2 OL-men, is to stock the team with cast-offs that aren't in high-demand as 1-2 year signees. I mean if every season the OL is average or below-average, and I can't think of a time on their watch that it's been above-average with any consistency, then it would be nice to hear people admit to that instead of defending the methodology and the decisions. Agree. But again, if they whiff there too, it'd be nice to hear some criticism of obviously failed moves rather than a defense of it all and apologetics. If they don't, great, we're all happy. Completely agree there. I'm one of Davis' biggest advocates. He's been a fall-guy for the most part.

Maybe you're right here. I get my starting line-up info from NFL gamebooks and ourlads. Possible one or both wasn't entirely accurate. Royale with Cheese just posted a stat that I was unfamiliar with as well, a general league wide stat. I do know that in his first season or two fans and media were both critical of Milano's run defending skills. Perhaps my timing on when that was was off. I'll try to do a bit more research next time. Sometimes I go off memory and that's not always a good thing I posed it to Shaw just now also, but one thing that think is quite possible this season, is that our MLB position remains unsolved. Should that occur, and should McD tweak the D to minimize the impact of that, again, merely as a possibility, what would you think? And related to that, at the same time, it'd be refreshing from time to time to actually here some criticism from your side of the tracks as it were, when McD and/or Beane make mistakes, errors in judgement, bad decisions, etc., and not always blame things on "anything but them." I think that some of this is a two-way street. Appreciate the info. Let's hope for the best this season, it's time to come together as fans. We can sort it out later if things don't go as planned, or all revel together should we finally land a Lombardi in Buffalo! Go Bills!

Well, I'm not, but many have been crying about Beane not properly getting receivers. You can take that up with them. But we have had needs, and how many draft picks on days 1 or 2 have expended on WRs? How about OL-men, which are 23% of the starting 22? So you tell me. It's a little bit of a trick question otherwise. A bunch of 1-2 year cast-off signees from other teams and 6th and 7th round picks technically are "filling a position of need." I think that the results are the important thing. But when every offseason there are a few positions where you constantly need to upgrade, then it suggests that perhaps they haven't done the best job to date. Not sure how else there is to spin that. That's correct. So let's see how they play. What if it turns out that the ones that we have, the ones that you just said that they think are adequate, can't handle the job? In my book that means that they either don't know what they're doing, or can't properly judge talent. We'll see. It's too early to tell. I'll tell you what I think has a decent chance of occurring, I think that it's quite possible that neither Dodson nor Bernard, nor anyone else, is going to be able to play the MLB position well. I then think that there's a good chance that they attempt to tweak the D to mitigate that. But let's suppose that were to occur, how would you spin it? To me it would translate to an admission of failure and having to adjust beyond what they wanted. Either that or we play with a weakness in the middle of the D, a pretty key spot that IMO most opposing DCs will exploit with a fair amount of ease. I see. Kind of like our OL has sucked for six seasons and they go out and continuously sign cast-offs from other teams that few teams are fighting with us to get in a revolving door solution leaving Allen and the O without any long-term chemistry on the OL. All I'm asking is that if they're wrong, don't defend them. Call them out on it. Why is that so difficult for most. I'm the one defending Gabe Davis, most others think he sucks. Who cares about all this stuff now anyway. It's time for the season. Two more camp days and the preseason games begin. I'm trying to reconcile it. I leave open the possibility that I am wrong. That's an interesting and telling stat. Thanks for sharing it.

A lot of party-line stuff in there, but he's well spoken, speaks impressively and has command. Hopefully that translates to the performance of his unit on the field.

BTW, other than Edmunds, here have been our draft picks for LB since Edmunds in 1018. Vosean Joseph: 5th round Bernard: Late 3rd 2022 Spector: 7th 2022 Williams: Late 3rd 2023 Bernard with the hopes of playing MLB.

I'm saying that factors heavily into the decision. For starters, has it been Frazier's D and his decisions, or McD's D and his decisions? If the latter, why the sudden change from his time in Carolina and our first three seasons here, to this, and only when the talent lacks to play that more classic 4-3? Well, I think it does make sense. LOL Nothing has stopped them from throwing resources at other positions on D, so why haven't they at LB knowing that Edmunds was gone? late 3rd-rounders aren't those resources. MLB is a pretty big hole. And if it's been their plan all along to play devoid of a classic MLB, then why did they draft Edmunds back then. If it's been there plan to play a 2 LB set featuring only a MLB and WLB (Milano), why throw good money at Floyd? It doesn't add up that "this was the plan all along." We'll disagree as to any notion that starts translate to how good a player is. None of our CBs last year were any better than average and I'm not even sure that any even played consistently to average levels. Yet they started. Lotulolei started many games, he sucked. Any number of players that started here were not average. While I disagree, the majority sentiment is that Davis is a below-average starter here. Just sayin'. Yes, so I do keep open the possibility that it's all planned, but the disconnects mentioned above seem to indicate that it was not, that again, it's more reacting to a situation that good or effective planning. We'll find out a good many things this season. McD's finally in charge of the D, no more potential scapegoats there. Dorsey's in his second season. We've finally drafted a seemingly solid IOL/OG in Torrence. If the lack of a bona fide MLB hurts us, it'll be a clue. If the OL is still below average or average at best, then that will provide more info. etc. We'll see how it shakes out. Hopefully just about 6 months from now exactly, we'll be discussing how we won the Super Bowl. If so, who cares, this is all then water under the bridge.

He was 36 in 2019. Yes, he wasn't what he was before that, he himself even implied as much back then. He had was obviously on the downturn, something that should be a reach to consider at the ages of 34, 35, and 36. His snap counts only dropped by about 20% from 2018 to 2019. 2020 was the season that we went from a 4-3 in 2019 to what we're doing now. It wasn't a smooth process. But leapfrogging all of this in conversation, is this notion that McD has always played that kind of 2 LB defense which is flat out incorrect. Up until and through 2019 he played a 4-3 both here and in Carolina. This was all new for him in transition that season. Let's not forget the context of our discussion, that we went to a different alignment than a 4-3 because we didn't have, and still don't have pending this season, 3 starting caliber LBs. I don't necessarily disagree with the approach, but the reason for it is clear. Remember, Milano still hadn't come into his own as an all-around top LB yet, he was excellent in passing D, but a liability in the running D dept. We were shuffling several players in and out of the LB role that season, the only consistent LB was Edmunds and to a lesser extent Klein, who started most of the season. There was some blurring from the traditional OLB/DE role as I recall. Now it'll be interesting since now we have WLBs and SLBs, but not a MLB. I'm quite curious how this shakes out. He started 12, 15, and 15 games at SLB for the Saints because they had no other starting LBs to play SLB. Have you looked at who the other options were in NO those seasons? It's not pretty. LOL Either way, he logged an average of 2 sacks, 6 TFL, and 4 QB Hits per season there. Hardly solid starting numbers. He's been around McD because McD likes him for whatever his reasons are, he seems to have a good head, leadership skills, and is respected by the team. He started 11 games here for the same reasons. I mean who have we had at LB otherwise? What, Matakevich? LOL Again, Milano was just starting to come into his own as an all-around great LB beginning that season. 2021 was the season that he really emerged as one of the league's overall best. That's interesting, and yeah, I think that there's some of that, but again, I defer to what I said above, it wasn't a clear-cut season in terms of D alignments, McD, or Frazier perhaps, was tinkering with varying combinations, for reasons that I view as having to overcome the lack of three LBs that were worth starting without sacrificing performance. Think of it as a sort of Hobson's Choice kinda thing. But yes, Murphy was a big part of that. The entire season was an in-progress kinda thing and very strange and not entirely consistent from game to game. So perhaps my memory is off somewhat, but again, keep in mind the point, the point isn't that McD or Frazier, depending upon who you want to tag for it, did not decide to go 2 LBs arbitrarily. Again, it was more of a Hobson's Choice thing where they simply didn't have the talent to run the classic 4-3 that they'd been running while Lorax was here, otherwise they would have been running it. And remember, Lorax was in between staying and retiring, so while perhaps Beane should have planned better for his Lorax's eventual departure, in fairness to Beane I'm not sure he knew in full that Lorax would retire before the Draft that year. IDK, maybe he did, but I'm trying to extend some latitude to Beane here. Klein is/was an OK SLB, but hardly much more than an average one on a good day. If he had been, then presumably he'd have been paid as more than a depth caliber player at some point in there. NO released him in favor of a 2nd-year player and a rookie, neither of which has done anything in the league other than backup duty otherwise. If he were that great they'd have kept him. I'll agree that well before the end of the season in 2020 the "new D" took root, but I will argue to the nines that the reasons behind it were far from some genius change in D alignment, particularly considering that they ran a 4-3 with regularity during the first three seasons that McD/Frazier were here. And look, maybe I am completely off. Maybe this is what Frazier, or is it McD, has wanted all along, but why wait then. It is a passing league and more coverage guys can be an advantage at times. But it would be quite the coincidence, for starters. Also, we've been told now that it's been Frazier's D, isolating McD from blame for our playoff failures. So if that's the case, it raises other questions.

Valid and fair points, but consider, then we can reasonably point a finger at our sourcing methodologies, right. If we're going to discuss an overall point, it can reasonably be that there's a reason why things haven't come together as planned via draft picks. Well yeah, but that's a cart/horse thing. IOW, we haven't had the starting caliber LBs to play 3 with any regularity.

Speaking of the new stadium, I didn't see that anyone had posted this. It's about time. Presumably they'll do this monthly. I would think that there'd be more excavation and earth-moving equipment there, what they have seems oddly sparse. Gonna take longer than expected at that rate.

Which is one among many strong points as to why our coaching staff and Beane aren't beyond second guessing. It's interesting, I had an industry person tell me when he was traded that we were making a huge mistake and that Teller would turn out to be a very good IOL, which turned out to be correct. I argued at the time, thinking that he might be OK but not nearly as good as he's been in Cleveland, but he was right, we were wrong.

That's not correct. How many starts Lorax had isn't germane to the central point. They started 3 LBs well into the 2020 season, McD's 4th season. Lorax didn't start because he was in his mid-30s and already slowing down. We officially started 3 LBs into McD's 4th season and only switched mid-season. Klein got a lot of starts that season too, which is why we went to a 2 LB set, presumably, because Klein has never been a reliable starter. He's a depth-caliber LB, STs player, or a role-player. That's why he's only averaged 6 starts/season with McD as either a HC or DC. He started in NO for the most part for 3 seasons, but that's only because NO didn't have a SLB worth a crap otherwise back then while fielding a very average defense. In Carolina, in all of McD's seasons there they officially started 3 LBs. Most notably the trio of Kuechly, Davis, and Thompson as you mention. That was a solid LB unit, very solid. They were the starting 3 in McD's last two seasons there in fact. Klein started some the year prior before they drafted Thompson. So how I laid it out is exactly the circumstance(s). What to do with that info you can decide.

I'm tellin' ya!

There's a real world?

He stems from the Dirk Koetter coaching tree, he'll be fine.

Yours is an interesting comment and stands to reason. There have often been disconnects between what this team says it wants to do, with how it drafts or signs free-agents. Elam may be one of them. Edmunds was, expect him to perform better in Chicago in a traditional 4-3, not the 2 LB alignment that we play. Here's there thing there, we played a 3 LB alignment while Lorax was here for three seasons, but then switched to a 2 LB alignment and went the next three seasons like that. Why? McD apologists will tell you that it's a planned thing, but that doesn't make sense, because they continued to try 3, but simply didn't have the talent for three starting LBs. So they went with two. Which begs questions. If the 2 LB thing was his innovation, them why not 2 LBs all all along. Why did they continue to try 3, and presumably had it worked and they had found that third starter, then they wouldn't have gone to 2. That's demonstrative of reaction, not proaction. Coincidence that once Lorax retired and all we had was depth level talent to replace him, is when McD changed it? They emphasize style and scheme, but seem to draft around it at times in their to picks, which could very well be why we have underachieving high draft picks. Same with this season generally speaking, the official narrative is "attacking D," but what does that really mean practically. All D's are attacking to one extent or another. By definition that's role of a D generally speaking. It's time for the season, the games begin shortly. This season will be a revealing one as things currently on the fence appear to be set to fall one way or the other. McD is a polarizing coach in some ways, and this season is going to be a definitive one in that way as well. Fans and media are going to become less patient with divisional much less wild-card round playoff losses as well. It's also camp right now, everything's unicorns and lollipops. Sit tight, enjoy the season, don't forget to lurk in the gameday threads, laughter is good for the soul. 😁 Several things are going to shake out this season, for better or for worse, ... hopefully for the better.

One too many mimosas at brunch today. Get OFF my lawn!!!

Indeed I'd be surprised if they're only $500M.

Apparently ... https://www.labattbrands.com/ Fosters has been for years. I was suprised to see Spaten on that list though.

9-7 on the merits of the D then?

Ah yes, I forgot about Losman as well. That four year stretch with those guys ... I wouldn't count Peterman or Brohm as I was primarily thinking of QBs that only started most or all of a season. As to the team, sounds like you are saying that the D carried the team however. Orton was OK, but even then an average QB at best. BTW, that was his last season and he hadn't started for several years prior to then.

Now that I think about it, I forgot about Holcomb and Edwards, who were both bad, worse. Very fair points. I should have thought that through a bit more.

I'm not sure that being judged while being handed EJ Manuel and Kyle Orton is fair. Where would McD be had he been handed those two stiffs, who are arguably the two worst QBs we've had here in decades, neither one of which started more than one season for us.

Who knows how good our D will be. I don't know how McD is regarded around the league in terms of a "defensive mind," we know it's his strength and that offense clearly isn't. I'm not sure how you measure that, but I measure it by his defensive rankings. Those have been all over the map and incredibly average in Carolina while he was the DC. If he was one of the "better defensive minds," why were his Ds, which had plenty of talent, ranked 17th and 13th, patently average, with Scoring (aka points allowed) being just below average. (rhetorical) Here everyone wants to give him the credit, but when it comes time to accept the responsibility for the cataclysmic playoff flaws, everyone points to Frazier. LOL "He did it." His defenses in the playoffs in Carolina weren't exactly on the impressive side either with any consistency. So which is it? (rhetorically) With the good comes the bad, to ascribe the good to McD but the bad to Frazier makes zero sense whatsoever. Either way, as a DC in Carolina, he posted the 18th, 21st, 26th, and 27th Scoring D seasons in four of his six seasons there. That's not good, and one of those was his last season there. His successor took, Steve Wilks, who sucks, took McD's 26th Scoring/21st Yardage D and turned it into the 11th Scoring, 7th Yardage D the following season. One of the two seasons McD had it ranked among the top-10, he had the easiest schedule of any team from 2011 thru 2022, 12 seasons, which obviously aided that. This season will be a big one in the enlightenment of what's going on. No more Frazier to blame should things not go well. If he produces a #1 or #2 D again, then that will also speak loudly. We'll see. But the word inconsistency is definitely there lurking when it comes to defining his D prowess. The playoff performance of the D however has been hugely problematic. To suggest that that's all in the rear view mirror is premature at best. Time will tell. What any of us hopes or wants won't make a damn bit of difference.