Dr. Who

I can't seem to get rid of a prejudice for WR1. I still think it's better to have one, but I acknowledge the hydra approach does have its selling points. If you genuinely have weapons all across the field, I'm not sure how you gameplan to stop that.

It might work. The theory sounds good, if Brady is good at OC. I'd still like to add a plus talent receiver post 6/1. I'm sorry that WR room just doesn't look sound to me, though I'm open to being pleasantly surprised. Try calculating low bar for those with multiple seasons. I bet it doesn't look so rosy.

Pretty sure the NFL comp pic formula follows the same "you're the home team against the Jags waiting for you in London" formula and the folks who determine penalties.

Does he have an apple in his mouth?

I don't see how this group gets the benefit of the doubt on managing the WR room. Coleman, a bunch of scrubs, and hope that decent role players can elevate above their pay grade is not compelling. Lots of folks buying it, though. Whole lot riding on Brady being a really good OC. I hope it works, because I want my team to win, but Josh Allen is more magnanimous than I if he is truly happy about it.

I don't think "many are not seeing Shakir as a player who will get more volume." Rather the opposite. Whether they made a decision before trading Diggs or more reactively afterwards, he will be the Z and get a lot of targets. What no one can know ahead of time is how effective he will be when asked to perform as a more significant element in the offense. I don't see an obvious fall back option if it doesn't work out. I definitely don't think Samuel is that player. It seems a risky projection to me without a better plan B.

Yes, I did not intend right people as moral approbation, but indicative of the folks who speak that way. I don't necessarily think, however, that folks who live in a rural backwater are bound to be backwards. Further, I live in a rural backwater, though I suspect you may find my own proclivities insufficiently advanced. Have no fear, however, I will not "bless your heart," no matter what.

No, you are the one who is presumptuous for not accepting an optimistic projection as fact. I tell you what, let's find a fella who was thrown to 5 times on the year and caught them all. That would be 100% catch rate. All you have to do is throw it to that fella ninety times instead of five, and your problems are solved. What, maybe his skill set was such that a low number of targets was appropriate, and you can't simply assume expansion will carry similar results? Nonsense, man, you are just willfully pessimistic.

I do think he prefers shotgun for the reasons you indicate. However, I seem to recall some metric that showed the offense was quite successful when employing play action, though I could not possibly trace the source of that information (or what season or seasons that would pertain), nor state with certitude that it isn't something I imagined. Nonetheless, I generally have a pretty good memory, so I suppose it more likely there is something out there that gives that data.

The top 3 have relatively high floors, I think, but the price would have been exorbitant. My concern about the draft is partly driven by the fact that Coleman was not a fella I was high on. I'm concerned about the lack of separation. He does have some good traits, obviously, including, it turns out, an entirely engaging personality and apparent good character. So, I hope Beane made a solid decision. We are in good shape for 2025.

I think Josh Allen excels in play action, so that would be a good thing.

I'm not at all thrilled with the available free agent WRs. I've already said so many times, it is boring indeed to say again, but I wanted McConkey, who went right after Coleman. There probably was no way to trade up from 60 to get him, and for certain it would have cost a 2025 second rounder and probably more. You wouldn't have gotten Bishop, who I like a lot, and it would have had cascading effects down the rest of the draft. In short, Beane would have had to sacrifice some depth and filling holes to accomplish properly addressing the WR room. I like Carter quite a bit as well, btw. I always took him when available in the mock drafts. He's the right kind of bowling ball, festooned with knives, and articulate, too. I spend most of my leisure reading philosophy, theology, and literature. I write a Substack, have a published novel, and a four volume work that may be published this year. I'd like the Bills (and Sabres, yes) to play well. I'd love to see a championship for both at least once in my lifetime. But it's hardly the center of life, so any strong convictions folks exhibit here one way or the other do not touch the most important things. That may be heresy with some here, I dunno.

I'm not pretending Davis will be difficult to replace. I was one of his consistent critics. I also acknowledge Diggs was not good the second-half of the season, so nothing I am saying is obviated by those truths. I also liked the draft, apart from settling for Coleman as the sole WR taken, and have said as much several times on these boards. Nor am I unable to see that Beane could not have covered so many holes and acquired two WRs early. Further, I am not chagrined that Beane failed to select a day 3 WR. All that said, I can only restate that the dreadful nature of the WR room at the end of 2023 does not mean taking Coleman and the free agent additions to date are somehow a tangible improvement to the WR room. The inadequacy at the end of last season ought not to justify the kind of investment shown by Beane. I think more was needed. You are free to disagree, of course, and you are generally a bright and witty poster. Nonetheless, I have a hard time seeing the current WR room contributing to significant offensive prowess, though Brady may have an offensive strategy involving RBs, TEs, and burly WRs to mitigate those fears.

You're just not talking to the right people. I still hear it now and again. There's a kind of reactive impulse on these boards. Folks with radically different takes feel compelled to object, but no one persuades. It's a kind of Sisyphean exercise where individuals mutually accuse the other of obtuseness. I find it amusing in a darkly wry manner, even though often enough I indulge that wicked energy. Anyway, if the WR experiment fails, we can look forward to a recapitulation of the last draft, with folks urging the use of accumulated draft capital for a top tier WR, and you and your cohorts preaching DE, CB, and the like. Joy, isn't it?

Well, I generally like the takes of the fella you are arguing with, but this is correct on all points I think. What I will say is they could not have gone big or probably even less big without sacrificing filling all the holes. Clearly, that is and remains Beane's recipe. It gets you to the playoffs, but you don't have the elite playmakers that help you advance. Caveat: I was fine with Kincaid. He's an excellent selection. Still hoping Beane has a post 6/1 move to add a significant piece to the WR room.

This is a legitimately interesting argument, and I am not dismissing it. It could work. I think most folks who are apprehensive about the WR room are open to a conceptual change on offense. You can do that and still have a significantly better WR room than we currently have. As you and I just stated in one of these hydra-like threads, it would be excellent if acquiring Aiyuk post 6/1 is part of the plan. Then those of us who tend to be happy warriors could migrate back to our normal tribal temperaments.

That's great. Every time we think we're getting ahead of the fashion curve in Buffalo, we're always actually a season behind.

That fella sends the same report every year while sitting on a beach in Jamaica and sipping on a drink with a tiny umbrella in it.

Ah, I'll take Aiyuk from the SF WR room, please. I won't be so furious if Beane pulls that off.

I for one will never be "pissed off" if a Bills' player performs well. I'd be happier taking a chance on Claypool if the top of the WR room had another quality starter one could comfortably pencil in as a reliable asset, rather than acquiring numerous last chance tickets with a risky potential benefit. I know the investment is quite different, but if Beane is comfortable bringing in the likes of Claypool and Cephus, I sure wish he would have gone and grabbed Mitchell in the mid-second round (with a small trade-up from 60 obviously). I understand that means you don't get Bishop, who I like a lot. Maybe if you are a marginal player, they roll the dice, I dunno.

Well, I hadn't considered the reverse psychology angle on the WR room.

Well, I can't green checkmark and beer mug all your posts, but we are on the same page. Seems to me that folks want to argue that Diggs and Davis were such non-entities, especially the backend of the season and the playoffs, that they are basically a nullity, so adding anyone is then treated as an "improvement." A variation on that theme is that our offense was too dependent on Diggs, and finesse. Now we are going to be unpredictable and fierce! Okay, but one man's unpredictable is another's not sufficiently talented to scare the opponent enough to demand the defense attend to a special player. Certainly, it is an advantage to have weapons that a team can't afford to ignore. That is how you get winning match-ups for your role players. Possible Kincaid becomes that player. A key point that you are making that I think deserves attention is that the WR room last year was lacking. It was not good. You could argue it was middling, and that was when Diggs was not injured or acting out. Let's hypothetically grant what I don't think should be granted: pretend the accumulated talent and redistributed targets ends up the equivalent of last year's WR room at its best. If everyone hits their ceiling, that means you have an average at best overall WR room. That is unlikely to win you championships, but yes, you can make the playoffs with that. Now what is the likelihood that everyone is going to ascend, and that injuries won't derail plans? The redundancy in the WR room is all at the bottom end. The much more plausible result is you are going to take a step back from average, quite possibly a step back from the less than average you ended 2023 with, which should never happen with Josh Allen as your QB.

I guess he's worth a lottery ticket/reclamation project. The older I get, the more I think character is destiny. Reformation does occur, but it's relatively rare. Having strong role models can make a difference. I'm not sure whose going to show him the way, but someone needs to. I would be less upset about Beane bringing in this caliber of player if I did not believe there is a gaping hole in the WR room where the primadonna Diggs used to reside. Cap constraints/change in offensive philosophy, however you contextualize it, one has to guess Beane did not plan on trading Diggs and taking on a huge cap hit. What he's done since is reactive, and doesn't seem like a fully thought out plan. Maybe Beane brings someone in who is a more established, higher level player post 6/1, but I'm not confident that happens. I don't like banking on volume from any of the folks in our WR room right now, and I'm personally not comfortable with the "just spread the targets around" strategy. I still think a dominant WR makes room on the field for others, and who is going to do that with what we have now? We don't have elite route runners, and I don't see a boundary WR who can take the top off, though we have a few fast fellas. Of course, you may luck into someone playing above their past, and maybe Shakir is ascending and will take over that role, but that seems overly optimistic to me.

I was pushing for McConkey and an X frequently before the draft. The pushback from folks was we already have McConkey on the roster with Shakir and Samuel; we don't need another slot. It did no good to tell them McConkey lined up on the outside 80% of the time at UGA. He is a master route runner, runs smooth and then breaks violently. We don't have that. They have not replaced Diggs. It is a problem, even if many refuse to acknowledge it.

Yeah, what you say is plausible, but somehow before he brought them in, I was more confident in the plan to bring in a top WR happening. I just can't fathom the narrative that many here are satisfied with about changing the offense and building a bully, etc. Great, I've no real objections to that, but do it with a WR room that isn't bottom five in the league.