BillsFanForever19

Chris Hogan played a year of College Football at Monmouth though.

Jordan Mailata just signed a 3 year, 66m contract extension with the Philadelphia Eagles. He had zero NFL experience and entered the league from Rugby. He's now a top paid, top performing Left Tackle in the NFL. Is that common? No. But you never know what you're going to get when you bet on athleticism. The Eagles and Eagles fans are sure glad they took a chance on an athletic guy with no experience. I can't imagine getting upset over signing a Camp Body. It has absolutely no bearing on anything. You act as though we would have acquired a Pro Bowl player at another position if we hadn't brought him in. It doesn't preclude any other signing. We just traded out a guy who had no shot at making the roster for someone who most likely wont. It's no risk, no guarantees, all reward.

Really wild how he won the Gold medal. Got a 2 point grab to secure the win literally at the last second. https://youtu.be/fSXPmihrX3c?si=QpedPCJzdR1NfiFT

I never understand the uproar of signing a Camp Body who most likely has a ceiling of the Practice Squad. It's just a lottery ticket, gambling on his literal Olympic winning athleticism. It's not like signing someone like Steveson keeps us from signing a difference maker at any position. It doesn't have any barring on any other acquisition. Like, who cares?

You're probably right. But we generally keep 5 DT's. Ed Oliver, Daquan Jones, Dewayne Carter, and Austin Johnson are locks. But for the last spot, it's Dashawn Williams, Eli Ankou, UDFA Branson Deen, and him. It'll probably be Williams, but he only has 15k in guaranteed money. So if Steveson was able to translate his freak athleticism at an accelerated rate - it wouldn't be completely unheard of for him to take that last spot, as there's no real guaranteed money locked in to DT5.

Yes, because i'm sure there's absolutely no difference between you - message board poster, and him - 2 Time NCAA Heavyweight Wrestling Champion and Olympic Gold Medalist, when it comes to athleticism. Matt Haack would have been 30 years old if he was in Training Camp and had no shot at making the roster....

I would be. He'd have been traded already if anyone was offering us anything beyond a bag of balls. After spending a 1st on him, they're going to give him every chance to bloom before they trade him for nothing. And as others have pointed out, behind Douglas and Benford - all we have is Elam and a camp of Practice Squad and UDFA players. We've yet to replace Dane Jackson on the team - I don't see us replacing Elam too with the field of guys we have at our disposal beyond him. There's been a sentiment that our former CB coach was not a fan of Elam, personally or professionally, and that it contributed to both Elam's stunted development and the DB coaches firing. Beane reportedly told Elam it's a clean slate for him this season and I suspect much of that was due to having a new coach. He'll be given this season. If he underperforms in Year 3 - it'll probably spell the end for him.

I'm not saying that it's a sure thing that Shakir will be even better if given more opportunities. But it's unfair to point to Gabe Davis and say that since he didn't produce when given a promotion, that no one else ever should be afforded a bigger role. It's common practice that if you have a young player who exceeded expectations in a minimal role and is on an upward swing of ascension that they are rewarded with more opportunities. Sometimes the development continues and the player ascends. Sometimes they fall on their face like Davis. And I'm not saying we should make Shakir the focal point of the passing game. But it would be crazy after his production (especially down the stretch) last season in a minimal role to maintain him as someone who is no higher than 5th in targets on the team (as he was last season).

I wouldn't hate it. But I don't think we're adding another DE and Ngakoue isn't signing for league minimum. We lost Leonard Floyd (who was only really here bc of Miller not starting the year) and Shaq Lawson. Since then we've signed Dawuane Smoot (to some guaranteed money), Casey Toohill, and Drafted Javon Solomon in the 5th (who should have been Drafted higher). We also re-signed AJ Epenesa to a long term deal with a BIG pay raise. Of all the FA signings we've done, OJ Howard is the only one to ever be released when signed to guaranteed money. And of all the Draft Picks we've made higher than Round 6, Vosean Joseph is the only one to ever be released without ever being on the 53. If Epenesa were someone they felt couldn't be a Starter if Miller doesn't bounce back, they wouldn't have signed him and to the money they did. Between Epenesa and Miller and what they're being paid, one of them is going to start and one of them is going to be DE3. We're only keeping 5 DE's max. I don't see Smoot or Solomon being cut. And none of Groot, Epenesa, and Miller are going anywhere this season. That's your 5. As it is, there isn't much of a path for Casey Toohill or Kingsley Jonathan to make the 53. I don't see them also cutting either a productive DE signed to some guaranteed money or a 5th Round Rookie. Which is what it would take to fit Ngakoue on to the 53. I've said it before but when it comes to post 6/1 additions - i'd be looking at Cornerback. There's still a surprisingly decent crop of FA's left. And we never addressed the departure of Dane Jackson. We replaced White last season with Douglas. We replaced Neal with Hardy. But beyond Douglas and Benford (who is often injured), it's just Elam (still a massive question mark) and then Jackson's spot is currently to be filled by a UDFA or Practice Squad player.

Those of us pointing out that with what's in house combined with the moves he's already made lead to it being unlikely he's going to add more, does not mean everyone's 100% all on board with what's he done and think he's done a great job. Those two things aren't mutually exclusive. I too worry that the build of this room and him banking on potential over established stars might not work like he thinks it will. But that doesn't automatically equate to "he's definitely going to trade for a WR". It's not "bias" to look at things and say it's unlikely he's going to cut all but one player out of the field of MVS, Hollins, Claypool, and Hamler. You invoke the name of OJ Howard. OJ Howard is very much the exception and not the rule. As @HappyDays pointed out, he's the only player under the Beane regime to get guaranteed money as a FA and be cut. As i've said, it's just like last year with Harty and Sherfield. It's fine to say, you don't like Samuel, MVS, Hollins, Claypool and Hamler and that he should have acquired someone bigger. It's another to expect him to cut 3 out of the 5 of the guys he's just brought in. Which is what it would require if we were to keep the same number of WR's we kept last season. Much like Harty and Sherfield last year, regardless of your thoughts on Samuel, MVS, and Hollins - they aren't going anywhere. And then there's Justin Shorter, who would also have to be cut. Say what you will about Beane drafting him or drafting him where he did. But much like the Howard discussion, there's literally only been one time in Beane's tenure where we outright cut a player drafted before Round 6 without ever being on the 53 (Vosean Joseph in 2020). There's a large number of discrepancies with what you not only hope, but expect. But ultimately, it's a numbers game. And he's already brought in an equal amount of players that absolutely won't be cut, proportionate to the amount of roster spots that needed to be replaced. And that's not even counting guys like Chase Claypool, Justin Shorter, and KJ Hamler.

It's not "apprehension". It's a matter of it could be any of a number of 4 different WR's. All of them have the potential to be the #1 WR for this team. Did anyone have on their bingo card that down the stretch and in the playoffs that the passing game would run through Khalil Shakir and Dalton Kincaid? And to use the example of the LA Rams - did anyone have Puka Nacua, a 5th Round Rookie, putting up 1500 yards? You discount Keon Coleman and his potential. You obviously weren't a fan of him in the Draft process. But that doesn't mean he can't be good. Beane thinks he can be and that he is. You called him WR8 of the Draft. Sure, that's where he was selected. But if Beane viewed him as any worse than WR5, he wouldn't have traded down with KC and again with Carolina. He did that because he felt that after Thomas was taken by Jacksonville, the next group of 3-4 WR's were all on the same level. It's been alluded to that he would have selected Coleman at 28 as WR5 if he hadn't moved down. It's been outright said he was going to take him at 32 before Carolina called him and he knew it was for Legette. Coleman reminds me an awful lot of the Josh pick around here. He wasn't the guy for posters. But we were wrong. Much like Allen, there is cons to Coleman as a prospect. But that doesn't mean there aren't pros. Coleman could be the Top 10 WR you're thirsting for. We won't know until he is given the opportunity to show it. But it seems you don't want to even give that a chance in Year 1. We drafted Dalton Kincaid in Round 1 last year. And as a Rookie, he exceeded expectations down the stretch. So the team wants to give him more opportunities and hopes growth continues in Year 2, as it's pretty much expected that he will. He IS a WR first and foremost. He barely lines up as a TE, regardless of his title. He's a Travis Kelce clone. I'm not saying he is Travis Kelce or that he will become that. But i'm also not saying he doesn't have the talent level and potential to at least be close to that level either. He was a prime investment for us. If you take a WR in Round 1, you showcase him. To see him grow and evaluate what he is/what he can become - he needs to be giving a prime role in this offense, the same as Coleman. This room provides him with that. The addition of the kind of guy you're (somehow) expecting, would limit that kind of role. The same goes for Khalil Shakir. He's a guy that burst onto the scene in Year 2. No one expected the kind of player he was for us at the end of the year. I've listened to analysts say all offseason "I LOVE Khali Shakir" and he's been pegged as a potential future superstar, maybe as early as this year. Much like I discussed with Kincaid before him, how could you not increase his role and opportunities following his 2nd year? It'd be borderline malpractice to do that with either of them as they are continuing to develop. Either one of them could be the Superstar #1 you say we don't have. Then there's Curtis Samuel. A guy who has produced at a high level for a number of years, playing with QB's nowhere near on the level of Josh Allen. He was signed to a 3 year, 24 million dollar contract - with 15m in guaranteed money. This kind of investment denotes a decent role in this offense. Again, to add another WR of this level would be to push one of these 4 to 5th in targets on the team and a minimal role. There's only so many balls to go around. For example, 5th in targets for this team last year was a total of 45 targets all year. One of these guys would be denoted to an average of 2 and a half targets total per game. None of these players should be or will be relegated to such a role. You have an obsession with how things look "on paper". But the Super Bowl Champion "on paper" before the year is WAY more often than not the real Super Bowl Champion. Yes, KC had a top 10 player in Travis Kelce. But what was their core beyond him? MVS, Mecole Hardman, Rashee Rice, and Skyy Moore. While not having the established, sure fire Top 10 WR they had - as a core beyond it, i'd take the guys we have (including MVS) over that. And I do believe that odds are more likely than not that 1 out of the field of 4 of Keon Coleman, Dalton Kincaid, Khalil Shakir, or Curtis Samuel will be able to fill the #1 role at a decent to high level. They all carry the potential to do so. You seem to look at things as though if you're not eating at an established 5-star Michelin restaurant, you're eating garbage. Would I have preferred we had a more sure fire thing going into this year? Yes, I would have. But he's built this room in his vision of spreading the ball around, not having a Diggs like player that Allen feels he needs to target X number of times to keep him happy, and evaluating the growth of his investments. This room is not the garbage you portray it to be. There is talent there. But we need to see it grow. And that means giving them the opportunities to do so. He's betting on potential and development over established stars. You obviously disagree with this course of action, but that is *clearly* the course. Like it or not, and it's fair to not, the WR Room is set. We only kept 5 WR's last season (in large part because Kincaid is a WR) and we have 5 WR's that are locks. The likelihood of what you not only hope for, but expect/say will happen, is as likely as it was for us to move up in the Top 10 of the Draft. It's just like last season. It's fair to say you feel he hasn't done enough. But what he has done (just like Harty and Sherfield last year) IS done. And those guys aren't going anywhere.

What happened to the "Coleman will have a hard time starting the year" quote is that he said it only one time during his intro press conference. And to that, I think @HappyDays put it best in another thread when it comes to that quote: Since making that statement, he's confirmed Happy's sentiment by calling Coleman on at least 3 separate occasions "The X". That's his role on the team and that was Diggs' role on the team. Will being this team's X make him the #1 WR? It really depends on your definition. If your definition is the go to option or the WR with the most yardage - time will tell on that. But if your definition of WR1 is the starting X WR - then, yeah, Keon Coleman is WR1. As for the question of who I think the #1 WR will end up being, in terms of yardage and production, I don't have a Crystal Ball. But I imagine it will be one of Keon Coleman, Dalton Kincaid (a Big Slot WR in reality and a TE in name only - like Von Miller is a "LB"), Khalil Shakir, or Curtis Samuel. That uncertainty is something else that Beane has also spoke of multiple times since the Draft. He's said on a number of occasions that he wanted to create a room where week to week, that #1 option could change. Where the ball is spread around and there isn't just one Diggs like player that the Defense keys in on. And that comes to another problem with your theory. If they were to trade for a WR (unlikely at this stage IMO for a number of other reasons, as I've discussed) - that would mean that one of Coleman, Shakir, Kincaid, or Samuel would likely be no better than option 5 when it comes to targets and reps. And with what they've invested in that group, how they want to develop and evaluate the younger players, and the skill/production some of them have shown already - I absolutely do not see that happening. Again, you're calling out people for thinking they know how Beane operates (mockingly calling them "resident Beaneologists").... then claim to know how Beane is going to operate. It's pot and kettle.

Beane has said on multiple occasions that Keon Coleman IS the X on this team. That was Diggs' role. Like it or not, that's what he is this year. Like a Rookie starting QB, I'm sure there will be some growing pains. But he has said that's what he is already and what he's been brought here to be. Even if there is some growing pains, down the stretch, the passing game ran through Dalton Kincaid and Khalil Shakir - with Diggs (who Coleman is replacing) and Davis providing little to nothing. They're still here and they have good reason to believe they'll be even better in Year 2 and Year 3. Then they also brought in Curtis Samuel, to compliment Kincaid, Shakir, and Coleman. All of these players are expected to play big roles. To add another would be to have one of those 4 players play a minimal role with minimal snaps. I don't see that happening.

This is factually incorrect. You can't restructure or do a new deal until the player is in house. Until the trade goes through, that's not our contract to touch. For the trade to be approved, the contract has to fit under your salary cap *as is* first. If you can't take on his current deal without going over the cap, the trade will not go through. In another post, you suggested working out a restructure was the reasoning for talking to other teams when seeking a trade. This is also incorrect. They talk to other teams regarding a NEW contract. But, again, that can't be done until AFTER they've acquired their current contract. Now, is it *technically* possible for the player to restructure his deal with his current team before he's traded to make it fit better for us? Yes. But that doesn't happen because if we back out at the 11th hour (as such a restructure would have to be done before the trade is submitted to the league), the team is stuck with him on a contract done in our terms to best fit our books, rather than their own. You can't say to the league "this is going to put us over, but once he's here we'll make it work". You either have it on hand and it goes through or you don't and it doesn't. Just like any acquisition during the offseason.

I don't think you're going to see all that much, honestly. We don't have enough money to sign our Draft Picks right now. So that will take out a couple million. You need 2-3 to pay for the Practice Squad for the year. And we'll need to keep 2-3 for in season spending. That cuts into most of it. I think we'll sign a Cornerback. And there's a lot of good ones still left. Douglas was brought in last year to replace Tre. Daequan Hardy was brought in to replace Siran Neal. But we didn't add anyone to replace Dane Jackson yet. And with how often Benford is injured and Elam still being a question mark, I don't see them relying on UDFA's and PS players to replace Jackson - which is where we're currently at. Everyone says DE and WR. But Beane has already made more moves at those positions than players we need to replace. At WR, we lost Stefon Diggs (replaced by Keon Coleman), Gabe Davis (replaced by MVS), Deonte Harty (replaced by Curtis Samuel), and Trent Sherfield (replaced by Mack Hollins). We also added Chase Claypool, K.J. Hamler, and have Justin Shorter debuting off his Redshirt year, after being Drafted in Round 5. We're only keeping 6 max and he's not going to release *all* of the latter list. Or all of the latter list plus one of MVS or Hollins, if we keep only 5 like last season. Which is what adding another WR would take. At Defensive End, we lost Leonard Floyd and Shaq Lawson. We signed Dawuane Smoot (to some guaranteed money), Casey Toohill, and Drafted Javon Solomon. More than that, they re-signed Epenesa to a long term deal with a big pay raise. They wouldn't have brought him back and at the amount they did if they felt he was anything less than DE3 as the floor. They kept Miller, who they have faith will show improvement with an offseason of training and a full year removed from his ACL. Between Epenesa and Miller, one of them is going to start opposite Groot and the other will be DE3. And I don't see them cutting Smoot or Solomon. There's your 5. As it is, guys like Casey Toohill and Kingsley Jonathan are unlikely to make the roster. It's fine to question whether he should have signed or Drafted someone more prestigious than he did at either position group. But he's made these moves, most of which with roles in mind. He's not going to cut a bunch of players he *just* signed because you think he should have done more than them. Moves like MVS and Smoot wouldn't have been made if he planned on something more. It's just like the Harty and Sherfield situation last year. Many argued he should have done more (and they ended up being right) - but the moves were already made and they weren't going anywhere. Just like most of the 9 moves he decided to make at WR and DE this offseason to replace 7 roster spots.

Reggie Gilliam can be an H-Back, if that's what they want for their offense. That's actually exactly what his role was before they moved him to Fullback. That kind of versatility, combined with him being a core Special Teams player is what makes him a commodity for the team and why he's 100% safe - regardless of how many posters want to boot him from the team because he doesn't show up on the stats sheet. He's inexpensive, can be a Fullback, can be a Tight End/H-Back (which allows us to carry only 3 TE's when we always carried 4 before him), is essentially an extra lineman providing blocking on the field, and is an important Teams player. The latter part makes him safer than ever this season, as we've moved on from multiple long time Special Teams players already, including Tyler Matakevitch and Siran Neal. They're not going to want to completely rebuild that unit. He's also absolutely beloved by the coaching staff and the players. Gilliam is going nowhere. There's a chance Frank Gore makes it by beating out Ty or if they decide to keep 4 Tailbacks and 1 FB (which isn't completely unheard of, we've done it in the past). But they aren't going to replace Gilliam with Gore. Gore can't do the things GIlliam can that has made Gilliam a long term veteran for this team. They aren't going to remove Gilliam's role off of the team to carry a 4th Tailback that wouldn't dress on Game Day, unless there was an injury.

He's convinced Beane is going to make a 6th rosterable WR addition this offseason, in a big trade. So he needs 8 of our current 13 WR's to end up cut if we keep 6, or 9 of the current 13 eventually cut if we only keep 5, like last season - to keep that dream alive. That's his motivation for rooting against Claypool, creating scenarios where he's a "carcinogen" to the locker room, and wanting him cut quickly. But I don't see a scenario where Beane gives all of Shorter, Claypool, Hamler, Isabella, Shavers and the rest of the UDFA/PS field a 0% chance of making the roster, if we were to keep 6. Or all of the previous list, plus 1 of MVS or Hollins also being cut, if we were to keep 5 again. This is true. I'd go so far as to say posters around here would be *more* positive of Claypool's ability to rejuvenate his career if KC had signed him than they are of him doing it here.

Then you cut him. Simple as that. This idea that a guy who's on his last opportunity and is playing for the last spot in the WR room could be a "cancer" is a laughable take. He literally can't be and he knows it. He won't have an important enough role on the team behind Coleman, Samuel, Shakir, Kincaid, and (most likely) MVS to be able to make any sort of waves or problems. If he starts showing any signs of being a problem, he's out of here and we elevate Shorter or Hamler from the Practice Squad to take the minimal role he'd have on the team.

Any more additions went out the window with the signing of MVS, in my opinion. If they were going to go with something more, they wouldn't have signed him, after Drafting Coleman and (to a lesser extent) signing Claypool. We lost 4 WR's. We brought in 5 between FA and the Draft. And that doesn't take into account Futures/PS players like Hamler, last year's 5th Round Pick in Shorter coming off redshirt, and UDFA's. Keon Coleman replaces Diggs as the 'X', MVS replaces Davis, Curtis Samuel (greatly) replaces Harty, and Mack Hollins replaces Sherfield. Leaving Claypool, Shorter, Hamler, Isabella, and the rest of the field battling for one spot - the rest being cut.

He was worth the risk because he either carries himself how he should, or he'd be cut as quickly as Quintez Cephus was. He can't afford to have an ego or be a problem. He's on an incredibly short leash and has to earn a roster spot and prove he's changed. Even if he makes it, I see it being a tight race. So if this is a mask he's wearing now and he let's it slip in season, we're going to have guys like KJ Hamler, Andy Isabella, and/or Justin Shorter in the Practice Squad that will replace him just as quickly.

Great find @HappyDays! And I'm thrilled to hear the famous quote of "Coleman will have a hard time starting at the beginning of the year" was just a lip service one liner. MVS, Hollins, Claypool, and Shorter battling over 1 starting spot on the Outside makes me feel a LOT better than starting two from that pool to start the year.

I don't really consider Smoot or Johnson reclamation projects.

I, admittedly, bit on them too. Perhaps out of necessity because he didn't bring in similar type players as competition for them and in doing so (or not doing so) had me feeling like he knew they were going to work. He was wrong and so was I. I'm glad that this year he's not doing the same thing in just handing unheralded players spots on the 53. MVS, Hollins, Shorter (his Draft investment from last year), Claypool, and Hamler all battle for 3 slots - with 2 being cut. It's a better approach. Claypool will be handed nothing and will have to earn it, unlike Harty and Sherfield before him.