PBF81

Longer than it should have been to be sure, particularly now that we've lapped ourselves with Allen spinning his wheels. You think that this team as it now is has a decent shot to win the Super Bowl this year? Hence my statements "as of today" or "currently" as I'm careful to state. Having said that, barring us taking a WR in round 1, give us your take on how to propel ourselves forward given what's been laid out. It's great that you think that the trio of Shakir/Samuel/Shorter isn't going to make much of a difference over last season, I actually envy you for being able to think that way, really. That's a minority opinion however.

This is where The Process has brought us.

At the end of the day, this team is missing nearly 2,000 yards and 15 passing TDs of production from Diggs & Davis on last year's team. That's about half of Allen's passing production. If it were that easy to replace that with a pair of 5th round WRs and a seven year vet that's averaged 500 yards & 3 TDs, then we wouldn't be talking about drafting a WR in rounds 1 & 2 or if possible, getting a high-priced veteran WR. We're looking more like the Ravens than ever.

The point is that we're not going to win enough games to win the division on defensive TDs and getting to play teams that have their the best players out due to injury.

I suppose, but our wins were not all impressive. Remember, we needed unlikely defensive TDs to beat Miami and NE. I'm in the minority on thinking that Brady's not going to be good. Also controversial, although for the life of me I don't know why, is the take that we should be doing everything that we can to build around and support Allen, particularly the passing game. (WRs/OL). Rather, we have a coach that insists on focusing on the D and running game whether that running game is provided by a RB or QB being indifferent. Remember, Cook doesn't run on 3rd-downs. Our current situation is very unsettling. BTW, Allen ran twice as much under Brady. His rushing attempts went from 4.7/game to 9.1.

Diggs should be productive not in the slot where Brady had him playing often. It's difficult to envision that wasn't a huge part of Diggs' discontent. If he returns to his usual productivity it will tell us a lot. The concern for Allen which I have yet to see anyone mention, apart from the fact that if he only averages what he did under Brady, he's headed for more of a 2019 passing season rather than his recent ones, is that he's not a high-percentage short passing QB. That's far from his forte. But those are the WRs he's now saddled with unless someone steps up to provide what Diggs has provided over the past four seasons. Shakir seems to be out best prospect for that right now which isn't exactly reassuring. It's all but a given that we need to draft a WR at 28th, and possibly at 60th too, or maybe a trade up in the 2nd as a safety valve. While Diggs may not have put up great numbers under Brady, he still drew coverage of some sort. As many that have covered this trade have pointed out, which should be obvious, we don't currently have a WR that's any opposing DC is concerned about in the matchup category. That's an issue. And all a mere three weeks prior to the Draft.

Agree generally, but let's not sidestep the implication that it's his (Beane's) MO that is responsible. That MO was at least partially resultant from his inability to produce any elite players via his drafts over six drafts, for which he went out and took those unnecessary risks because of that. Which is why we are where we are. It was a balancing act as you said, now he's bouncing around in the net below. It is what it is. Now some defend it by saying it's a normal progression when it isn't necessarily. Homers, nonetheless. BTW, I just looked at Allen's per game average under Brady. If that's anywhere near what he does on average this season, we may be in trouble. On top of that Allen has a new Center and we have only one WR on the team that's caught a pass from Allen this past season, and hardly a prolific one. It's a reach that that's a recipe for even staying the course much less improvement. Then there's the changes on D which we didn't Even bring up. We should learn a lot this season. Unfortunately it will very likely be in the hard lessons category.

Completely agree. Except for my way, right. LOL Tell it to those that disagree. But when any are slammed for wanting a Championship ... SMH.

Don't tell me, I'm not the one arguing it by implication. But that definitely appears to be the tack taken by so many implicitly. I'm a bigger fan than that. What needs to be given a rest is this sentiment that we haven't underachieved come playoff time or that KC is invincible. If the latter is the case, who cares who's coaching.

From what I can see, absolutely no one on this team has consistently stepped up during the playoffs besides Allen. Davis has been our best playoff performer, like him or not, regular season production being irrelevant, and the extent to which Davis was consistent also being questionable, he was our most consistent playoff performer, which isn't saying much.

What did I say? That's what I said.

Sorry, meant New England.

Yup, if everyone just lowered their expectations, yes, yes it would.

And yet ...

Yeah, sorry for being disappointed that we've underachieved during the McBeane era with one of the seemingly greatest QBs to play the game. I'll try to tone down my expectations to merely being ecstatic to have a team in Buffalo and "making the playoffs." My bad. I guess I'll have to hold out hope that our next QB is better than Allen so that we can do a little better come playoff time. This notion that the Chiefs are unbeatable is built for homers. The Pats beat them, the Bucs who hadn't done a thing with what, a 44-year old QB, and so did the Bengals. But hey, who's looking at the details. What a defeatest attitude by those blathering on about how we'll never beat KC as long as Mahomes is their QB and Reid their coach. Either way, call me crazy for expecting more.

Holy ignoring of reality for our team.

Our playoff wins haven't depended upon Diggs. They've depended upon playing QBs like Skylar Thompson, Mason Rudolph, Mac Jones, a 39-year old Rivers in his last game ever, and in the case of the Ravens, a defense that had to defend a team who's top WR was Marquise Brown and whose leading rusher was their QB, otherwise JK Dobbins. Otherwise we can't win any playoff games. Pretty much agree with you there. Let's also contrast Caserio with Beane.

Insofar as that criticism goes, Beane knew the risks as such when he traded for Diggs to begin with. So this notion that this scenario has (more or less) now played out twice, if anything should add criticism to our originally having traded for him. Again, not my criticism, but for those taking that angle. My thing is that we had to pay for Diggs because Beane and his staff, A, never even tried to draft a WR on days 1 or 2 in 6 drafts now, and B, with their later picks haven't been able to do much for WR otherwise, besides Shakir, who's good but hardly great. We'll see, there are a lot of roster & cap issues right now. The one thing that's indisputable is that it's now fully McBeane's mess for them to clean up and deal with. At this point, and until we see our Draft in just over three weeks, I wouldn't bet that we win the division. I hope we do, think that we likely will, but I wouldn't put any money on it.

The point is that Stroud already has more talent at WR around him than Allen's ever had. Tank Dell had as good a rookie season as Samuel's ever had, slightly better. Nico Collins is likely to be among the league's best next season. Throw in Diggs, and when at 31 Robert Woods is your 4/5, you're lookin' pretty good. Stroud was incredibly impressive this past season. It's early, and it's Ryan's second season as a HC, but it shouldn't be unrealistic to consider that Houston dominates that division for the foreseeable future. And if all that Ryan does with that troop is see early exits from the playoffs for four or five seasons, I don't expect that he'll be kept on.

The point is that it's a season gone by. Same as if I offered you a free meal somewhere next year. It doesn't help you out now/this year. Beane keeps kicking the can down the road on certain things, but one thing he's never done is devoted even one offseaon, much less more, much less a string of them, into building around the one thing/player upon which our destiny hinges.

Which as they say, translates to a 3rd this year.

Yeah, it's great, isn't it. Our Center and therefore C/QB tandem chemistry is new. We have a couple of #2/3 WRs as our starters alongside a red-shirt rookie, the under/mis-utilized Kincaid, another TE that's become a cap albatross immediately after an extension, and a two-down RB. I know I'm optimisitic. But as you said, at least there's no one to challenge Allen's captain status, so I guess that's a good thing.

Except that I'm talking about what they've done on O. What they've done on D, I'm not even aware of since it's immaterial to my point. It's about how after Stroud's monumental record-setting rookie season, they're dumpe resources into building around him. We've never done that with Allen, ever, in any of Beane's 6 prior drafts/offseasons. The emphasis has always been on the D. It's a safe bet that's coming from McD, not Beane.

So far Beane's two biggest moves money wise in free-agency have both proven to be major long-term issues. Both would have been unnecessary if he and his staff could draft a decent WR and edge-rusher. Which of our players besides Allen has even approached stepping up consistently come playoff time?

Well, the original implication is that Houston's also building around Stroud, whereas we got Allen, made building around Allen secondary to McD building out his pet D to #1/2/4 standards. That would all be fine and dandy if the D didn't play like the 25th ranked D come playoff time, and Allen had some real help without spending $96 for four, ... rather three years, for a WR. We've taken a nearly completely opposite approach. We'll see what happens, but also paramount to my point is that the outcome of the @ Houston game will either validate or invalidate our and conversely their approach, generally speaking.