dave mcbride

This is my point! Coleman has been hanging around the far fringes of the league for four years, bouncing from practice squad to practice squad. And all of of a sudden this undrafted bum who has never done anything might actually be defense's focal point on run downs for the remainder of the season because he weighs a lot. The talent level is pathetic. yup - gotcha.

Really? They benched Losman for Trent Edwards (Losman was not out long in 2007) less than midway through 2007. They benched Edwards for Fitzpatrick early in 2009. They benched Manuel for Orton in game 5 of 2014. They benched Losman for Holcomb after 8 games in 2005. Christ, they benched RJ for Flutie in 1998, Flutie for RJ in 1999, and RJ for Flutie in 2000! Seems like it's par for the course, no?

I don't disagree. I like Taylor a lot, but he doesn't work in this offense. I think he works fine in certain systems, but the Bills don't run those. He still is good at protecting the ball, though - 2 of his 3 INTs this year were the fault of the receiver (Clay both times).

Oh yeah, it's necessarily a simplification. But as a defensive coach who has presided over some dominating defenses populated by elite players, McDermott has to be aghast.

This just doesn't cut it, and it's likely to get worse: The defense is less talented than the offense, and by a long way. The Bills o-line is at least decent, they have a decent TE, an elite RB, and a now-potentially OK group of receivers with the acquisition of Benjamin. On defense, they have one good CB, one good safety, one OK safety, and a sh*tshow on the front seven.

I'm not saying at all that they're giving up on the playoffs. As I say above at some length, I think that the defensive woes are driving a lot of the medium term decision making now. They've been absolutely dismantled a couple of weeks in a row, and they have KC and NE (twice) coming up. They're staring at an end-of-season defensive ranking of the high 20s/30.

The defense has been abysmal since the Tampa game, in which they gave up 447 yards. They got a bit lucky against the Raiders (rain; no Lynch; some lucky bounces on deflections), but it's pretty clear that they can't rush the passer and now they can't stop the run.

Can this thread be eliminated?

Josh McCown, who leads the NFL in fumbles with 9, has almost exactly the same stats as Taylor (although his team, which has better defensive talent than the Bills, has a losing record). He has a 93.7 rating and Taylor has a 91.4 rating. He has the same sack rate, but again, he leads the league in fumbles.

So there's no continuity in team management this century? Call me crazy, but I see it. Christ, this season alone is a freaking replay of four other seasons this century.

That could be the case, but I also think it's become painfully evident how bad the front-seven talent on this team is. It's really bad.

If you're committed to drafting a qb early, don't settle for the "best guy" at that slot. That's what gets you JP Losman and Paxton Lynch. Do what the big boys (Philly, Rams) do and trade up. I can almost guarantee you that the best couple of guys will be measurably better than the next two.

Cousins is a good player and he's someone to watch closely. But at the end of the day he is going to have a ton of suitors, and my bet is that he ends up back in Washington anyway. He's going to cost $25 million-plus a year too.

Front four players who can get to the QB are VERY expensive. Bear in mind that the Carolina D at its peak in 2013 was getting double digit sacks out of the LDE (Hardy) and RDE (Charles Johnson) positions. They were an overwhelming force that year. For a five-year stretch, Charles Johnson averaged 10.5 sacks/season at the RDE spot in Carolina. Look at what McDermott has now in that position. Plus look at what a player like Luke Kuechly does in comparison to Preston Brown. Night and day.

Every other Bills administration the last 30 years has acted in the same way, pretty much. Plus the guy they hired has more than a passing resemblance to another guy they hired nigh on about a decade ago - a former DB and longtime DC that went to an elite school and wants character guys who care a lot to populate his team. I'm not necessarily down on McDermott, but I've seen his type before. That other coach thought he had a gem with a Bill Walsh-endorsed mid-round pick who ran a pro offense in college too. We shall see. It's not impossible for Peterman to be the next Romo, but it's less than a 50/50 proposition. It'll be interesting to see how he performs and what his limitations are. They exist.

If they aren't panicking a little about the talent level on this defense, they're doing something wrong. Panic isn't always a bad response. The issue has to be addressed. As for "long term," this league is the not-for-long league. If they're 4-12 next season, I wouldn't bet a ton of money on them being back for season 3, and if they have a losing record in season 3, they will be gone as sure as the sun rises in the morning.

Actually, he was a 10 times better player in the late 1990s than he was in the mid-1980s. He genuinely blossomed and learned how to play in the CFL.

The simplest explanation is that the Bills will act like the Bills. Hence Occam's Razor. My assumption is that the Bills are the Bills and will act like the Bills typically act. Doesn't get any simpler than that. From the OED: "The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary. Cf. law of parsimony n. at sense 3." You're missing my point. Taylor isn't even in this discussion. He's gone.

Irrespective of whether the qb switch is the right move or not, I'm gonna throw this idea out there: the switch is a function of panic about defense and in a sense a hail mary throw with regard to the future of the qb position. Here's my thinking: McDermott and Beane have decided that Taylor, who is probably more likely to lead them to 9-7 than Peterman, is not the answer and not the future qb of the Bills. They need to find out what Peterman is, but not just for the reason everyone thinks. I susepect they always anticipated packaging picks and moving up to get a qb, but times have changed. That is, they may well be having serious second thoughts about that strategy right now. Why? They are presiding over a defense that is functionally devoid of talent on the front seven -- and I mean almost *completely* devoid of talent. Jerry Hughes is the only mid-level starting caliber player in the entire group (don't kid yourself about Lawson or Lorax), and it basically requires a massive overhaul. They need to spend high draft picks to fix this huge problem (late round prayers won't cut it), and spending a couple of firsts and a second in order to move up for a qb (which is usually the best strategy given the centrality of the qb position) won't let them do that. McDermott is a defensive coach at the end of the day, and overseeing this pathetic crew--which can't sack anyone and (post-Dareus) can't stop the run--has to be galling. Starting Peterman, who actually looks like a pro-style qb in his limited garbage time efforts (last week and preseason), represents something of a hail mary on their part. They're likely hoping that over the next few games he can show that he's potentially another Tony Romo or Kirk Cousins -- a guy who can evolve into a franchise qb in a relatively short period of time. Both of those guys have put up numbers regardless of who they were throwing to. That frees them up to draft defense throughout on the first couple of days of the draft. Whether this happens or not, I don't know. However, if you apply Occam's Razor to the situation, it is the most Bills-y approach (ignoring qb early in the draft and praying for the best with marginal talent) -- and history tells us that it therefore has a decent likelihood of happening.

The bills would be crazy to not package picks and move up for a qb no matter what. Peterman is a limited player and is not the answer. Good teams know what it takes to win: get a stud qb. You can't expect to luck into one.

No, he sucked -- and he sucked the way he usually sucked: by functioning as a sack machine. 6 sacks and a safety taken.

My recollection of that "benching" of Kelly is that there were other non-football related factors behind it (and which also were affecting his performance). That was a big topic of discussion back in the day. Jimbo's personal history isn't a clean one, and he has freely admitted that.

It looks like he will. If they lose, the season is pretty much definitely over. The best they'll do is 8-8 because they're going to be blown out by KC and NE twice.

yup. Dreadful.

You're not really going to argue that Flutie didn't have a good game despite a couple of mistakes, right? Are you also going to argue that Johnson was good against TN?