folz

Keon "he ain't no Deion" Coleman Keon is so slow...'How slow is he?'...he's so slow that they used an hour glass to time his 40. Keon is so slow that it takes him two hours to watch "60 Minutes". Keon is so slow, they won't let him use the express lane at Wegman's.

I'm a little late to this party, so I'm just going to throw in a couple of random thoughts/arguments I had reading the thread. First of all, for all of those posters sick of people using Reid as some sort of comparison, it is just as annoying for posters to keep saying we should have multiple Super Bowls or be in the Super Bowl every other year at least just because we have Josh Allen. And since we haven't been, it means McDermott sucks or can/will never get over the hump. HOF Dan Marino, HOF Jim Kelly, HOF Fran Tarkenton, HOF Warren Moon, HOF Dan Fouts, Donovan McNabb, Philip Rivers, Steve McNair, Matt Ryan = 0 Super Bowls (future HOF) Aaron Rodgers, (future HOF) Drew Brees, HOF Brett Favre = 1 Super Bowl each (You could actually kind of add HOF Peyton Manning to this list as he was dragged along to his 2nd Super Bowl) So, let's just look at the current or soon-to-be HOFers on those lists. That is 9 Hall of Fame quarterbacks (four of which, at least, you could argue as Top Five All-Time QBs). Combined, they played 154 seasons of NFL football and yet have just 4 Super Bowl rings between them. That's 150 seasons with no rings for these HOF QBs. Just having a great QB does not guarantee Super Bowls. Now you could counter by saying, yeah, well if they didn't have good coaches, it's the same thing as the Bills situation. But in case you forgot, here is a the list of their head coaches: HOF Don Shula, HOF Marv Levy, HOF Bud Grant, HOF Don Coryell, HOF Tony Dungy, Mike Holmgren, Sean Payton Winning a Super Bowl is not as easy as some of you guys think. Just because you have an elite QB, does not guarantee Super Bowls, even with a HOF coach. There are so many factors to a football team and how their season plays out, plus lady luck (in regards to injuries, lucky bounces of the ball, etc.). There is context to every situation. And second, as far as getting over the KC hump, yes, we lost to them three times, but I don't see beating them in the playoffs as some insurmountable task. This is the way I kind of look at the three playoff games vs. the Chiefs: 2020: Bills first real taste/test in playoffs, KC was just the better and more seasoned team (both players and coaches); Beasley on a broken foot, and a bad knee; Diggs with an oblique injury; and the refs allowed the KC DBs to hold and manhandle our receivers all game long (just rewatch how unbalanced it was officiating-wise, now some of that too could just be a little lack of playoff experience and knowing that the refs let more go in the playoffs---but it was pretty bad on the refs part, imo). Not saying we would have won otherwise, just another factor. But, the Bills just weren't ready yet for a playoff-seasoned KC team as an up-and-coming team. 2021: The infamous 13 seconds. One of the greatest playoff games ever played. Let's face it, whoever had the ball last was going to win that game...both defenses were gassed and had been gashed all game. Those two offenses that year were just perfection. Yes, you can blame coaching all you want, but it's on the players too. And what if we won the coin toss? What if he missed the 48-yard FG? Etc. Plus, you can question coaching decisions for every single team that lost a playoff game in the history of the NFL. Sometimes things just happen. How many playoff miracles are there, where the losing coach gets blamed? Lots. And how many NFL coaches post-1960 are perfect in the playoffs (have no losses that can be questioned)---Zero. Reid was blamed in Philly for bad game mangement and every one of his losses was questioned. Time to get over 13 seconds, it happened, and it's in the past. But this game was obviously a complete toss-up as far as the argument of us "getting over the KC hump" goes. 2024: Bills injuries: No Matt Milano, No Jordan Phillips, No Tre White, Taylor Rapp (out), Christian Benford (out), Terrell Bernard (out), Baylon Spector (out), Poona Ford (out), T. Johnson (playing after concussion the week before), Rasul Douglas playing through a knee injury, Gabe Davis (out), Sam Martin punting with a bum hamstring, it was only Micah Hyde's 2nd game back after being out all season, it was Daquan's 4th game back after being out 10 weeks, and whatever the heck was going on with Stefon (whether it was injury or he just quit on the team---21 yards and no TDs on 8 targets with a fumble). And we only lost by 3? That seems more like a plus for coaching rather than a minus, even though it still sure sucked to lose.

Of course, you can't always believe what a GM says at this time of year, but in the Beane interview for the Athletic last week, the interviewer asked him about the difference between how a player is seen by the media and fans vs. how they are viewed in the building. He brought up Spencer Brown and Terrell Bernard from last season. A lot of fans and media didn't think they could step up, but in the building they had confidence in those players. Regarding that, in relation to this year's team, he mentioned Connor McGovern moving to center. So, at least at the moment, I do think they are planning to have McGovern at center (unless Van Pran Granger can come in and steal the spot from him). As far as Clapp goes, in his first 5 years, he had 10 starts at center. Last year he had 11 starts at center for the Chargers (starting in game 4 due to their starting center having a season-ending health issue). He then got a knee injury in week 15 that ended his season. Not sure how well he played for the Chargers in those games. The guys that write these articles don't have time to dig into each team too deeply, he looked at the roster and saw Clapp was the only player with a center designation (besides the rookie) and went with that. But I do think it is McGovern vs VPG for center, with Clapp just being Beane hedging his bets.

To be fair, Crowder broke his leg in what game 3 or 4? Can't really pin that on Beane. We have no idea how Crowder would have worked out if he stayed healthy. And he was a good choice at the time to replace Beasley (Crowder was a very good slot player). Look, I understand and agree with the argument that outside of getting Diggs, Beasley, and Brown, Beane's track record with WRs has not been good over his tenure in Buffalo and there were times that he should have put more investment there. But there are also some reasons for it too. The first two years he was here, he was rebuilding an entire team and obviously focused on getting his QB first (which took a lot of resources). Do you know how many pre-McDermott starters were still on the roster in 2019? ZERO. He couldn't just focus on WRs. Plus, the team was in cap trouble after Whaley left (so they didn't have many resources) and no FA players wanted to come to Buffalo. There is context to everything and every move. It's easy to say just trade for Aiyuk or anyone else, but the reality of availability, compensation, how it affects the rest of the team-building, the cap, etc. all matters. I think where we go wrong is when either side of the argument goes to the extremes---like the Crowder example above, or acting like Gabe Davis and Dawson Knox were busts. No, they didn't elevate their games to where we hoped, but... Gabe Davis 3,204 yards and 33 TDs (over 4 years) Dawson Knox 3,241 yards and 28 TDs (over 5years). His yardage total for a TE is not top end, but he does have more TDs than all but 4 TEs over the last 5 years (Kelce, Kittle, Andrews, by a good bit, and TJ Hockenson has 1 more TD than Knox). It was obviously time to move on from Gabe, but that is a lot of production still for a 4th round WR, and Knox didn't become a top TE, but by no means a bust for a 3rd rounder. You guys may think that we are crazy for thinking we might be ok at WR, and not dinging Beane for making a bigger move (to be fair, when they traded Diggs, I thought a bigger move at WR was coming too---I was thinking he might sell out in the draft to go up and get one of the top guys, but kind of glad he didn't). But I think it is just as strange to think that getting a safety wasn't important, when we just lost two All-Pro safeties and that position is extremely important to McD's defense. And even the backup 3T DT and RB #2 will get way more playing time (probably like 35-40% snap count this season) than another 3rd to 5th round WR would have. You can't go all out at one position and ignore others, imo. I'm not saying Beane is perfect or never makes mistakes, or maybe even, doesn't have weaknesses at scouting particular positions, but I just come from a point of trying to understand why they made the decisions they did and trying to see how it could work, rather than assuming they got it wrong and it will fail. They know what offense Brady is installing, they know the direction they want to take the team, they understand all of the salaries and cap ramifications, etc., they've scouted all of the players. We all have our own opinions, of course, and I definitely don't agree with every move they make---but it's not unrealistic or Homerism to at least understand why they did what they did and want to see it play out first (yes, with some optimism). Believe me, I understand the concern about the wide receivers, there is still just a lot of projection right now and no true #1---obviously they want Kincaid to fill that role. None of us knows how Coleman will be yet. Can Kincaid and Shakir step into bigger roles? Can Samuel play well and be that solid #2 or #3 in targets/receptions? Can MVS avoid the drops? Can Claypool or Hamler revive their careers? I don't think you guys are crazy for having concerns---I don't know, I just have a gut feeling that this time it will work out (maybe because I am not down on the Coleman pick, I really like Samuel as a player, and I do think Kincaid and Shakir can step up, with how the end of last season played out---but I get it, we've been burned before by guys not taking it to the next level). But, as I keep saying, what we did at least do in the WR room was get bigger, faster, better hands, and better red zone players than we had last year, and that can't all be bad.

Nice post Logic. I'm on the more optimistic spectrum, but can also understand those who worry that we haven't done enough. Right now there is a lot of projection still. And, as you said, either side, we have to wait and see what happens. But, with the bolded statement above, and knowing that Diggs has been lackluster in the playoffs the last few years, I just thought I would look at a few playoff numbers to kind of see who might be able to step up in the playoffs (with what we have). Obviously Coleman as a rookie, and Samuel whose teams never made the playoffs, can't be weighed in to the conversation yet. Playoff stats Shakir 15 of 19 for 166 yards and 2 TDs (2 playoff years, 4 games) Kincaid 8 of 11 for 104 yards and 1 TD (1 playoff year, 2 games) MVS 15 of 24 for 250 yards and 3 TDs (last 2 playoff years, 7 games) Claypool 8 of 14 for 84 yards and 2 TDs (2 playoff years, 2 games) Diggs 27 of 46 for 289 yards and 0 TDs (last 3 playoff years, 6 games---yes, we all know Diggs had a great 2020 playoffs, but that was almost 4 years ago now). So, let's look at their playoff catch percentages, yards per reception, yards per game, and TDs per game for all of them for the playoffs games noted above: catch % yards/rec Yards/game TDs/game Shakir 78.9% 8.7 83 1 Kincaid 72.7% 9.5 52 0.5 MVS 62.5% 10.4 36 0.43 Diggs 58.7% 6.3 48 0 Claypool 57.1% 6.0 42 1 The one caveat, of course, is that Diggs probably commanded more defensive attention than the rest did in those games, but he was also a #1 WR and should still be able to get his numbers (other #1s do). And we know Gabe had 2 monster playoff games, but that was out of a possible 9 playoff games (two of which he was injured for). He had two other decent games (one with 85 yards and the second with 41 yards and a TD). But that still leaves 5 no-show playoff games for Gabe. So, imo, there is a very good possibility that the current cast will outperform the old cast in the playoffs (especially when you include Coleman and Samuel to the mix and project more targets to Kincaid and Shakir). And obviously, it is not even worth discussing guys like Harty, Sherfield, McKenzie, etc. when it comes to getting anything done in the playoffs.

The original discussion was a top 32 receiver. If you subtract TEs and go with just receivers, then Claypool was 29th in 2020 and 31st in 2021, and Samuel was 31st in 2020. But that's just nit-picking and granted, it was a while ago for both of them. But, it at least shows that they have the ability to do it. Over the last 5 years, the 32nd WR in yards in the NFL has averaged: 67 receptions for 848 yards and 5 TDs. Last year, Shakir had 39 receptions for 611 yards and 2 TDs. If you prorate his receptions up to the average of the 32nd WR (67 receptions), Shakir would have 67 receptions for 1,050 yards and 3.5 TDs. Now prorating stats is not a predictor, of course, but having a more focal point in the offense from the start of the season and all of the targets left by Diggs and Davis, might not Khalil be able to add 237 yards (that's 14 yards/game) and a couple of TDs over the season? For the first 7 games last year, he only averaged a 26% snap count---his snap count for the entire season ended up being 52%. He only saw 5 total targets in the first 6 games last year. He'll see a lot more playing time this year. And he had an 86.7% catch percentage last season (that's pretty impressive). And with Kincaid most likely being the #1 target this year (and again, from the start of the season, and all the free targets), do you not think that he can add 175 yards (that's 10 yards/game) and 3 TDs to his totals from last year? With those meager improvements in stats from Shakir and Kincaid, we would have two top 32 receiving yard players---without even discussing the opportunities for Coleman, Samuel, and Claypool. Now, I'm not saying you don't want better than say your top two targets at 31st and 32nd in yards, just pointing out that it wouldn't take much to at least be at that level. And, just FYI, over the last 10 games of last season: Diggs and Davis combined for 734 yards and 3 TDs on a 78.8% snap count (Diggs averaged 42 yards/game and had only 1 TD over the last 10 games-including playoffs---it's not like he was playing like a #1 receiver last year). Shakir and Kincaid combined for 900 yards and 5 TDs on a 61.5% snap count And just to see what it would take for Kincaid to not just take another step, but actually be a top TE (what he has to shoot for): Over the last 5 years, the top three TEs in the league averaged 91 receptions for 1,089 yards and 6 TDs. Dalton had 73 receptions for 673 yards and 2 TDs. Can we expect an extra 400 yards (that would be a jump from 40 yards/game to about 64 yards/game on average) and 4 more TDs from him? Hopefully, at least at some point---doesn't seem outrageous, but, yes, it still remains to be seen. Now, if he could just up his yards/reception from 9.2 last year to about 12 this year (and add 4 more TDs across the season), he would be in the elite TE range. And I think the low yards/reception was more about the Bills offense last year, rather than any flaw with Kincaid. I could be wrong again about the overall receiving corps (I did think we would be fine last year---at least Samuel, Claypool, MVS, Hollins are more proven in the league than Harty and Sherfield were). But I have a lot of confidence in Kincaid and Shakir after last season. I have always liked Samuel as a player and we'll finally see him with a top QB. I like the talk about Claypool at this point, but not "counting" on him by any means yet. And Knox is a pretty darn good TE #2. So, I think a lot is riding on Coleman. If he can come in and contribute solidly this year (not as a #1, but maybe #3 or #4 in targets/receptions), I think we'll be really solid actually. If he's not ready this season (there doesn't seem to be any indications of that, at least yet), and Claypool and MVS don't pan out either, then yes, we could be very thin. But, even though there is no apparent/proven elite playmaker in the receiving corps, we did get bigger, stronger, faster, better hands, better red zone targets...so it's not all bad. I wonder if a lot of this discussion really resides on how confident someone feels about Coleman as a player/pick at this point. People wanted a high draft pick WR---Keon was pick #33. The Bills obviously liked him more than 3 of the guys drafted above him (Worthy, Pearsall, Legette). The only other realistic option was to go up and get Brian Thompson Jr. If the Bills had done that would that have made a difference for people in any way? Or did it have to be a true #1 veteran WR? But then, those aren't easy to come by either. I mean, when Gabriel Davis got the second best WR FA contract... I'm just not sure how much else the Bills could have realistically done this year. I don't think you sell out that big in the draft for a top-3 WR, we didn't have a ton of cap space, and if you want to trade for someone, first you actually need a partner, and then you need the money and compensation. And with the way the end of last year played out (and his lack of production in the playoffs), I actually think Diggs was addition by subtraction at this stage. Basically, through trade or FA, the only actual proven #1 WRs that were available to this point were: Calvin Ridley, Keenan Allen, and Diontae Johnson. Not sure that Ridley and Johnson fit the Bills DNA for a start, and Allen is 32 years old and was carrying a 23.1 million cap hit for 2024. And with a lot of the other available guys (Jeudy, Mooney, Moore, etc.), you would be projecting just as much with them as you would be with Shakir or Samuel, imo. Or, basically, it wouldn't be a guarantee that they would be better than what we already have to put us over the top or whatever. Am I looking through rose-colored, homer glasses? Maybe, but I don't know, I have a good feeling about this group as it currently stands, especially in lieu of the limitations the team had putting the group together. Plus, it will be a different offense than we ran the last few years. I believe (just my opinion) they are going for a more ball-control offense, probably like a 54/46 run/pass ratio. Look, the way defenses have tried to stop Josh is with cover zero and to make him be patient marching the ball down the field on long drives (don't give up the big pass plays). The only way to open that up is with the run game and underneath passes. With a better run game and a more old-New England style pass game, we will force teams out of that defense, or we'll just march down the field on them in small chunks. The skill players we have now are much more suited to that style of play. And with a better run game, you aren't asking Josh to put everything on his back (either as a runner or in the pass game). We just lost two All-Pro safeties. Are you really saying adding another WR (after Coleman had already been picked) was more important than adding a safety that should be able to start early? With the way the Bills rotate the D-line, that 2nd 3T will probably see around a 45% snap count this year (basically a co-starter). Maybe you could say a RB wasn't needed, but hopefully Ray Davis will prove you wrong there. Again, if he is on the field like 30-40% this year, that's important snaps, and as I said I believe there will be a bigger focus on the running attack this year. Were you really sold with Ty Johnson as your #2 RB? All three of those players will see WAY more playing time than a 3rd or 4th round WR would (unless that pick was so good that as a rookie he could beat out all but one or two of Shakir, Samuel, Coleman, Claypool, MVS, Hollins). Honestly, what is the likelihood of that? Yes, it was a deep WR class, but we are talking about the 12th WR in the draft (instead of Cole Bishop), the 17th WR in the draft (for Carter), or the 22nd WR (instead of Ray Davis). How deep is deep? There is no guarantee that those players would help much this year. To put a face to it, the next WR picked after each of those Bills picked were Malachi Corley (western Kentucky), Luke Mcaffrey (Rice), and Jacob Cowing (Arizona). I know people hate long posts...sorry...and thanks if you actually read the whole thing.

Great Interview. The guy from the Athletic seemed very knowledgeable and asked great questions. And Brandon was excellent as always, open and honest (as he can be), personable, etc. Despite his miscues (which they discuss briefly), there is no question in my mind that he is a top GM in the league and that we are lucky to have him. In regards to Diggs, Brandon said "I'm not going to get into all of the reasons why..." (I assume meaning Stefon's play and/or disgruntlement) "So, I'll explain it from a cap perspective." So, he wasn't blaming the cap for getting rid of Stefon, he was just explaining why they decided to eat the money this year. Basically, they knew they wanted to make that decision and then he is explaining how they thought about the money aspect of it (can we pull it off and eat the money this year? How will it affect the rest of the roster this year and next, etc.). Loved the question about the difference between how the fans feel about particular players vs. how they are viewed in the building. He used Spencer Brown and Terrell Bernard as examples from last year. He brought up Connor McGovern moving to center this year I think he also kind of feels that about the WR room this year. He thinks Claypool can play outside. Thinks Shakir and Samuel are almost position-less, so Brady can create different packages (even splitting Cook outside, or Samuel in the backfield, etc.) that when the offense comes to the huddle, the defense doesn't know who is playing what position, and he thinks with that and their versatility, Brady can create a lot of mismatches. Plus, Kincaid and Knox will be a big part of the passing game---referencing KC and Kelce---sounds like he does expect the offense to revolve around Kincaid as the #1 target. Interesting that the only WRs he didn't mention (other than the UFAs) were Justin Shorter and Andy Isabella. After the top three guys (Shakir, Samuel, Coleman), sounds like he is high on Claypool and Hollins. Then MVS is in the mix. Hamler sounds like a long shot (and dependent on health)---but you can see his speed on the field. He just mentioned Shavers as another big body they have. I also found it interesting when talking about letting players go and can the guy behind him step up (both their play and leadership-wise), he said: "We think there are more guys in the wings, with the right opportunity, do they have to do it, do they have to prove it on the field like Terrell did a year ago? Yes. So, some of that can be a little uneasy for people, definitely for fans on the outside, but there can even be uneasiness in the building, like, maybe not everyone is sold on this player." Again, I just like the honesty and kind of knowing that, as a whole, the FO/staff are never complacent and at least some people may be raising the same concerns as we fans have to discuss (not that the higher-ups---Brandon and Sean---haven't probably already thought of those concerns). He wants to compete for a championship every year they have Josh. This is not a rebuild year and he never wants to have a rebuild year. It is a retooling and a youth movement and he still believes they can compete for the division and a championship this season. Lots of good stuff.

I hadn't really heard anyone talk about it as if they think it is actually a tactic used by Josh or the team. It just seems like the few times it happened last year (and maybe again when talking about Josh's candidacy for MVP), there were discussions about those picks not really affecting the outcome of those games (so not dinging Josh too much for it), because it was as good as a punt. Yes, it is a post-game rationalization, but it is also true. I think Josh, in that moment, is still hoping to make that connection (he's not just giving it away to the other team), but because of the situation they are in, etc., he may be ok to let that one fly deep, because if it is intercepted, it doesn't really hurt too much (as long as there isn't a long return). So, it's not saying erase those interceptions from Josh's stats, they don't count because he meant to do it, it is just that they don't add up to make me over worry that Josh has an interception problem. First of all, there were a number of weird tips/great defensive plays against Josh this year (plays that 90% of the time end with the ball harmlessly hitting the turf). Seemed like the opposing players had better hands than some of our receivers last year. Secondly, Josh didn't throw any 4th quarter interceptions last season. And in the 6 losses last year (over which Josh averaged 1.5 INTs/game), there was only one game---opening day vs. the Jets---that Josh (despite the INTs) didn't still have the team in position to win the game (the Bills were winning in the 4th quarter and the defense allowed a late score to the opponent). Plus there were other factors last year that might allow for improvement this year: Two OCs/changing OCs mid-season; Dorsey not doing a great job as OC over more than the first half of the season; Stefon being disgruntled/crack in their relationship; Pass catchers without great hands (Davis, Sherfield, and even Stefon down the stretch---Coleman and Samuel both have good hands, and Kincaid and Shakir had amazing catch percentages last year). To me, the discussion isn't about whether Josh does or should throw arm punts, it is about did those particular interceptions affect the outcome of those games. And since it worked out as good as a punt (not saying he meant it as a punt), I don't really care that Josh took that risk in that circumstance (unless he had a better option on the field to get a first down, of course---I haven't looked back to see if Josh had other options on those throws or not). And it doesn't matter to me if it makes his INT stats at the end of the year look bad, because ultimately it wasn't a bad decision at that time in that game---he's taking a chance knowing that the negative outcome wouldn't be that bad for the team. And as GoBills808 said, you also have to factor in the amount of TDs Josh scores when thinking about interceptions. For instance, he threw 18 INTs to Lamar Jackson's 7 INTs. But Josh also scored 44 TDs to Lamar's 29. With more reward comes more risk. Even if the opponents turned every INT into a TD (which they never do), and you subtracted those scores from their TD totals, Josh still would be up 30 points on Lamar. Look, ultimately, does Josh need to improve on his number of interceptions from last season? Yes. But, do I worry that he has an interception problem that he can't improve on this year? No.

I don't think anyone is overly optimistic about the wide receiver room. And I think every Bills fan would feel a lot more comfortable if we knew we had that #1 stud WR. What I think is happening (for those who think too many people are drinking the Kool-Aid on this WR room) is two-fold. It's a bit of off-season rationalization/hope, but it is also people seeing how it could actually work. Seeing how what we do have works and not worrying about what we don't have---having been "realistic" about our cap situation. But, believe me, I have no problem with posters who are not happy with how Beane has handled the WR spot, I understand their viewpoint too. I particularly liked Logic's point about drafting prospects, rather than special teamers with later picks. Not that I want to ignore special teams, but I get what he's saying. What the Bills did add/keep to the WR room though (as opposed to last year) is size, speed, and better hands (not counting MVS, of course). Catch percentages from last year: Kincaid (80.2%), Shakir (75.4%), Davis (55.6%), Sherfield (50.0%), Diggs (66.9%---which dropped to 60.0% over the last 10 games of the season, including the playoffs). Samuel and Coleman are both players with good hands. So, what did we really lose? Diggs. And down the stretch of last season (the last 10 games) Stefon was averaging 50 yards and 0.2 TDs per game. Definitely not #1 WR numbers. And yet the offense still played pretty well. I think with Brady installing a more ball control offense, and Josh spreading the ball around, some of us just see that with better size, speed, hands---even though none of the players are elite, this offense could actually be better this year than last, despite our WR room, on a whole, from the outside, looking really weak. Brady just needs to use each guy he keeps to his skillset specialty. And, obviously, you have to include the TEs in the thought process of the offense as a whole. Also, as far as the WRs go, the way I am looking at it is not #1 to #6, but rather by targets. I see target-share going something like this: Kincaid (1), Shakir (2/3)/ Samuel (2/3), Coleman (4), Cook/Davis (5), Knox (6) I do think that Samuel is going to be a very good player for us. I really like him and think he will become a fan favorite (NO, not #1 WR stats, but a consistent, solid contributor). But, anyone after that group is 7th in the pecking order for targets---or will be a package-specific, red-zone specific player. There are games where Josh hits 8 or 9 targets, so everyone can eat to an extent, but how much will we really be relying on the rest of those guys (barring injury)? I'm not necessarily counting on any of them being more than expected, but if we hit on one or two guys that really want to reclaim (or start) their career, then we are in even better shape. But, even as they are, used sparingly to their skillsets, I think they can still be assets. MVS may have the best shot. Despite his drops (which the Bills have tried to avoid). He has had the most recent success, has the speed they want, and they are always enamored with guys that torched them previously. Claypool had 9 TDs his rookie year. I know that was a long time ago, but the more red zone targets, the better, imo. And he's at least shown that he can get it done in the league---again, though it's been a while. Mack Hollins. Safe player...can keep you afloat for a couple of games if needed and play special teams. Can Hamler finally put things together...not really expecting it. Isabella is a practice squad guy for me. Emergency WR/returner. Shorter/Shavers/Johnson Calling them long-shots/practice squad players (mostly cause we don't really know enough about them). So, best-case scenario for me is MVS and Claypool staking their spots: Shakir Samuel Coleman MVS Claypool Hollins When you factor in how Diggs played down the stretch last year, or in the playoffs altogether (except for 2020), and Kincaid having a full year of experience now, I think that WR room could actually be a good bit better than last year's overall. The whole equaling more than the sum of its parts. A lot does hinge (in my mind) on Coleman coming in and being able to be productive early and often (as a #3-4 target guy, hopefully moving up to a #2/#3 target guy by the end of the year). So, a lot does ride on him (and counting on a rookie isn't always the safest bet, I get it). The only other problem I see with that six is there are really no permanent return guys. But isn't one of the corners we drafted a good return guy? Maybe we can find that elsewhere on the roster rather than having to keep say an Isabella or Johnson on the 53. Or you keep the returner, say Johnson if he shows he's really good at it, and move Hollins down to the practice squad for emergency use.

I agree with BillsFanForever19 Look, I loved having Stefon Diggs on the Bills and I supported Gabe here more than most... But, this idea that Diggs/Davis' production isn't replaceable (outside of nabbing a true, stud, #1 WR) is a fallacy. Here is what Diggs/Davis averaged over the last 10 games last year (including the two playoff games): Diggs: 4.7 receptions, 50.8 yards, and 0.2 TDs Davis: 1.4 receptions, 31.2 yards, and 0.2 TDs They only had 4 combined TDs over the last 10 games (down the stretch and in the playoffs---granted, Gabe missed the two playoff games---but the best ability is availability). That means 6 games with no TDs from either Diggs or Davis, in crunch time. Gabe had two games over 100 yards in that span, but also had 4 games with 0 receptions, and missed the two playoff games due to injury. Diggs had zero games over 100 yards in that span, he only had one game over 75 yards in that span. Diggs started off last season great, but then something happened. Who knows if Diggs fell off the cliff due to age, Brady taking over the offense, disgruntlement (lack of effort), or a combination of all three, but the decline was significant: In the first 9 games last year, Diggs had 734 yards and 7 TDs (or 82 yards and 0.78 TDs per game), with a catch percentage of 75%. In the last 10 games last year, Diggs had 508 yards and 2 TDs (or 50.8 yards and 0.20 TDs per game), with a catch percentage of 60%. [I mean, 50 yards/game and a TD every 5 games, you can get that production from any mediocre WR in the league] And just FYI: The Bills went 5-4 in the first 9 games (when Diggs was playing well). The Bills went 7-3 down the stretch (when Diggs' production had fallen off), including a 7-1 stretch. Obviously, so many other factors go into records, but just pointing out that the team didn't collapse, or do worse in the win column, when they weren't getting the same production from Stefon. So, are we really saying that the guys we have now can't match that production? 6 recs, 80 yards, and less than half a TD per game? Even if you take Kincaid, Shakir, and Cook out of the picture (because they were on the field too when Diggs and Davis got those numbers), are we really saying that the combination of Samuel, Knox, Coleman, MVS, Claypool/Hamler/Hollins (whoever gets the time on the field), can't average 80 yards/game and one TD every 2.5 games? Is it outrageous to think that say Samuel and Coleman have like 30 yards each and maybe 20 yards to Knox (if Kincaid and Shakir are the top two targets, say). And then one of the three of them scores a TD say every third game? It doesn't take that much to match that production. I actually think that the sum of the parts of this year's team will add up to more than the whole of last year's team (at least as far as pass catchers/offense goes). So, I don't think we are as bad off as some think. It really won't take much to at least maintain a status quo---matching the production of Diggs/Davis down the stretch of last year.

It would be great to get Josh as many high-end targets as possible, but there is a little thing called team building. First of all, safety was at least as important a position to fill as WR. As we have seen with Poyer and Hyde over the last seven years, it is a very important position in McD's defense, as far as quarterbacking the defense and disguising their defense. Also, we aren't a traditional strong and free safety position team. The safeties (much like the LBs) need to be interchangeable. So, not every safety will fit in the system. You need a specific type of player. And before the draft, Damar Hamlin was our #1 backup. Then, as others have said, trying to get three young guys up to speed and/or determine which of them is the best, who should get the most reps, playing time, etc. would be a logistical nightmare. Not to mention the possible frustration of the guys who aren't getting as many reps or playing time. And it would make it harder for them to build chemistry with Josh both on and off the field. Building relationships and rapport with three new guys at the same time, who will each be getting limited reps would be tougher. Then there is the best case scenario of, ok, what if they all become good. Maybe you can trade one early on in their career or something (and hope to get back that 2nd or 3rd round pick for a guy that you haven't really had the reps to showcase most likely), but if you hold on to them all, then you are having to decide on 5th year options and whether to give them a second contract or not all at the same time (and/or lose and replace some or all of them at the same time). And while you have them, how often will all three of them be on the field at the same time? Do you need to change the offense to accomodate? Or if one of the three isn't on the field much, then that is a high draft pick for a backup. Then there is the thought of, what if it takes all of them 2-3 years to acclimate and play well. Are you really holding 3 WR spots on the roster for developing players? Who are you putting on the field in the meantime if they are taking up three roster spots. And being guys with a lot of potential and having been drafted in rounds 1-4, good luck keeping them on the practice squad, you almost have to keep them on the 53. Can the guys you drafted at least play special teams until they are up-to-speed as a WR? Or did they not do that in college, are unwilling/reluctant to do that at the pro level. I feel like I could go on and on and I didn't even mention depth and money allocation. What position are you sacrificing depth at? It appears you were fine sacrificing depth at safety and DT, but do we really want another year of your Tim Settles, Poona Fords, and Damar Hamlins having to play significant time at those positions? We didn't have a lot of cap space to sign a lot of above-average free agents---having to fit in another safety and DT FA contract, for example, might have been tough ( if you want a good enough player). By mid-season, Carter could possibly be playing 30-40% of the snaps at DT and Bishop may be starting at safety. To find that production in free agency would have cost. There is just so much more that goes into the thinking behind team building than just get Josh as many weapons as possible. You have to ask at what cost and/or what are the odds and possible outcomes of each gamble. Now you mentioned Cincinnati. Sure, you could suggest that as an option for Beane...he should grab one WR in the first two rounds every year and churn through them. I'm not sure the long-term effects on the rest of the team with that philosophy to say whether it works or not over the long haul...but the Bills drafting three WRs with their first three picks this year would not be good team building, imo, regardless of the players drafted. I kind of agree with GunnerBill in that the best option would have been drafting and grooming a higher draft pick WR behind Diggs and Davis the last year or two (not 6th and 7th rounders). Granted, before the 2023 draft, maybe they didn't expect the level of Diggs' discontent and/or his slowing down and expected to still have him this season, with Coleman being drafted as the Davis replacement. So, maybe they thought they had another year to replace Diggs initially (so I can give them a bit of a pass there). But, ultimately, you would hope that you are drafting and grooming future starters behind your current starters at as many positions as possible...and that really hasn't been the case for Beane when it comes to WR. But, I'm not as down as some on the current make-up of the WR room (when including the TEs in that thought). I think the guys we got can get it done with Josh at the helm. No one may have Diggs-like numbers, but the sum of the parts may actually be better than how things played out last year. I guess we just have to wait and see.

Good topic/discussion... I agree with a lot of what Shaw posted (especially about the gap closing between the elite WRs and the very good WRs), but I wonder if the one caveat to the overall theory is having an elite QB. Most of the examples that I think of when I think of teams with non-elite WR corps still getting it done, I think of Brady and the Patriots; Rodgers and the Packers, Mahomes and KC. All three (and Josh) are elite QBs. Plus Brady had Gronk, Mahomes had Kelce, and Rodgers...well he didn't really have a stud after Adams left (but then he didn't win a Super Bowl either, they were good but not great). So, if you have an elite QB (who can raise the play of your WR corps) and one elite playmaker (could be a TE or maybe even a RB rather than a WR), then you can still have a top offense. Since the QB is elite, he can make any throw, spread the ball around, hit tighter windows, ball placement, etc. So, your receivers maybe don't need to be elite, as long as they fit a role and have good hands (which we have been lacking of late---Shakir, Kincaid, Coleman, and Samuel all have good hands---Davis, Mckenzie, Knox, and even Diggs of late had much lower catch percentages, etc.). Can Dalton be our elite playmaker? Conversely though, if your QB isn't elite (more middle of the pack), the top-end WR may become much more important. They are needed to help create more opportunities for the QB, because he can't create as many on his own...due to whatever he is lacking (arm strength, processing speed, elusiveness in the pocket, whatever). Or maybe if you have a rookie/young QB, you still want that top-end WR as a security blanket and to help teach the young guy, etc. So, it may just be a team-by-team basis based on the level of confidence in your QB. Teams with top-5 to top-10 QBs may feel they can plug and play WRs, while teams with middle- to low-end QBs want that elite, playmaking WR(s) to help get open quickly, have the size or speed advantage, etc. to help their QB. So, I'm thinking that yes, there is a trend of some sort, but also, maybe it's only at the top of the league? Just a thought.

I'm fine with the MVS signing (even though he frustrated me with drops when I had him in fantasy when he was still in Green Bay). The more competition this year, the better. And we are at least deeper than we were last year, even if the top isn't as strong. But, I also think we will be a different offense this year under Brady. A more ball-control offense, hence the bigger receivers. I think targets will go Kincaid, Shakir/Samuel, Coleman, RBs, Knox, then the best of the rest (whoever rises to the top of the remaining candidates). So, whoever that is will be fighting for like the 7th target-share position. And we at least have a lot of options there. If Brady can use each guy we keep to his skill set, in a committee-like approach, running the ball at like a 54/46 percentage, I think this offense can still be very potent with Kincaid as your #1/#2 target and Josh at the helm. It's just going to look different...maybe more of an old New England style offense (but one that takes some more risks/shots downfield, etc.). Just my guess/opinion at the moment. So, I'm not complaining about adding more competition. However, I really wanted to address the quotes above. On paper, losing Diggs and Davis looks pretty bad. But, neither were consistently clutch in the playoffs and they definitely weren't helping us get over that divisional round hump. [I still like both players and am happy they were Bills, but it probably was time for a change.] Diggs' playoff numbers: Over his total playoff career (14 games with Minnesota and Buffalo), Stefon has averaged 5 receptions for 65 yards and 0.29 TDs per playoff game. Over his Bills playoff career (9 games), Stefon averaged almost the same: 5 receptions for 67 yards and 0.22 TDs/playoff game Stefon did really well in the 2020 playoffs, averaging 7 receptions for 104 yards and 0.66 TDs per playoff game that season (3 games total). However, over the last three seasons (2021-2023; 6 playoff games), Stefon only averaged 4.5 receptions for 48 yards and 0 TDs/playoff game, with a 58.9% catch percentage and a 41.1% success percentage. Those numbers are not great...and that was our #1 WR over 3 years of playoffs. Gabe Davis had the really nice playoff game in Indy his rookie year, then had the monster game in KC in 2021, and an excellent game against Miami in 2022. But, in his other 4 playoff games, he averaged 1 reception for 18.7 yards and 0.25 TDs. And then, of course, he was unavailable for the two playoff games this year (due to injury). Obviously, you can't blame a guy for getting injured, but he only helped in 3 out of the 9 playoff games the Bills had while he was here. So, of the 18 combined possible playoff games played by Diggs and Davis as Bills (9 each), Stef had 4 good games and Davis had 3 good games (7 out of 18). And actually, three of the games overlap. So, we had 3 of 9 games where they both played well, and then in the other 6 playoff games, they both had bad stats for 5 of the 6, and in the other Diggs did good, but not Davis. We obviously need to do better in the post-season, however Brady and McD think that can be done.

Is this sarcasm? Or are you really that down on this pick? I'm honestly curious. I admit, I know almost nothing of his college career, other than the post-draft highlight vids, etc. But, after watching all of his interviews and stuff, I really like the kid. He is mature, a leader, has the Bills DNA, is smart, etc. It looks like most draft predictions had him as a 4th rounder. We grabbed him at the very end of the 3rd round---not that big a reach, and he probably wouldn't have been there by our 4th round pick. His strength seems to be interior pass rush, which he can achieve with quickness or bull rush. He's a little weaker standing up in the run game. Was projected to be a rotational DT. Sounds like the perfect guy to have behind Oliver. We won't be asking Carter to plug up the line, but rather to penetrate. And hopefully, he'll get stronger as well, with NFL nutrition, strength & conditioning, etc. We'll have to wait and see if his skill set/talent is consistently good enough for the NFL, but he certainly won't bust from a lack of effort, intelligence, maturity, drive, mentality, etc. So, I think you're off comparing his work ethic to Dareus. This kid loves ball.

Kenny-H? Well, as long as he doesn't play the alto sax, I'm fine with him making the team...

Yeah, I guess I wasn't thinking of it only as Dorsey vs. Brady, but that probably would have been a better delineation, as far as trying to see if there was a style change between the two OCs. I guess I just tried to cut it right down the middle---and because, as far as individual player stats were concerned (particularly for Kincaid and Shakir), that is right about where the change started to happen (mostly due to Knox's injury). But yes, using the division between the coordinators might be a better place as far as looking at the run/pass balance.

Great original post Shaw. I took up your challenge from your above post...it's not the most "in-depth" dive, and doesn't answer all of your questions, but it at least gives a good overview to try and draw some conclusions. Here are the snap counts, targets, and yards for the top pass catchers in 2023, divided into the first half of the season and the second half of the year: Player 1st 8 games (snaps/targets/yards) Last 9 games (snaps/targets/yards) Diggs 85%/90/748 78%/70/435 Davis 86%/47/434 81%/34/312 Kincaid 55%/34/258 64%/57/415 Shakir 31%/15/167 70%/30/444 Knox 68%/28/102 (7 games only/INJ) 49%/8/84 (5 games only (INJ) Sherfield 32%/8/44 36%/14/32 Harty 20%/16/113 7%/5/37 Cook X/22/192 X/32/253 Overall, looking at total passing targets, the Bills averaged 33 passing targets/game over the first half of the season, and 28 passing targets per game over the 2nd half of the season. So, there is a bit of a drop. Adding up all of the QB/RB rushing attempts, the Bills averaged 26 rush plays/game over the first half of the year, and 32 rush plays over the second half. So, the Bills had a 33/26 pass/rush split, or a 56%/44% pass/rush balance for the first half of the season, and a 28/32 pass/rush split, or a 47%/53% pass/rush balance over the back half. Obviously, end-of-the-year weather has something to do with rushing more in the second half, but it does seem offensive philosophy may have been involved as well. It was a closer balance in the 2nd half of the season, but leaned more to the run game than the pass. And interesting to note, though Cook's attempts did increase from 13 to 15 rushes per game in the 2nd half, the much larger increase in rushing was from Josh, who went from 4.75 rushes/game in the first half to 8.33 rushes /game in the 2nd half. Again, how much of that was philosophy and how much was end-of-the-year desperation, gotta get it done one way or the other, who knows? As to the individual receiving players, Shakir was the big change, going from a 31% snap count in the first half of the season to a 70% snap count in the 2nd half and doubling his targets. Kincaid saw a decent increase in snap count, but a significant jump in targets. Diggs and Davis didn't have much of a change in snap count throughout the year, so the extra snaps for Shakir and Kincaid were mostly poached from Knox and Harty. But, Shakir and Kincaid were apparently stealing targets from Diggs and Davis. D&D averaged 17 combined targets in the first half of the season, and 12 combined targets in the 2nd half. Whereas, Kincaid and Shakir averaged 6 combined targets at the start of the year, and 10 combined targets in the 2nd half of the year. Looking up the stats for all of this, the one that really jumped out at me though was catch rate for the 2023 season: Diggs 66% Davis 56% Kincaid 79% Shakir 86% Knox 62% Sherfield 48% Harty 74% We already knew that Davis and Knox weren't the most sure-handed receivers, but that was a big drop-off for Diggs last year. In his defense, he has a lot more targets, which means more opportunities for misses too---but I don't think that 66% seems great for your #1 receiver*, especially when his playoff production hasn't been stellar, and he is unhappy. Coleman is supposed to have very good hands. I think they are making a concerted effort for more reliability in that department. *For comparison to other top receivers: Lamb, Collins, Allen, D. Smith, St. Brown, Moore, Pittman are all in the 71-72% catch rate range; Hill, Chase, Robinson, Godwin have a 69% catch rate; Curtis Samuel, Jefferson, and Waddle are all around 68%. And granted it was only on 45 targets (about 28% the number of say Diggs' targets), but Khalil's 86% catch rate was best in the league last year; and Kincaid's 79% was the 5th best catch rate for a TE last season (and two of the TEs ahead of him only had like 40 targets, compared to Dalton's 91).

March Madness is by far the best sporting event every calendar year. To me, the Super Bowl has become almost unwatchable (NFL playoffs are still good---just not the SB). And for the first time in 48 years of watching the NFL, I didn't even watch the Super Bowl this year. I knew exactly how it was going to play out: SF would have a late lead and KC would come back and win. There was no way that they weren't going to have a Mahomes/Kelce/Taylor Swift threesome love-fest/celebration...and I didn't want to see it. Now if I had to choose between a March Madness game and even a regular season Bills game, I'm watching the Bills. And of course, if the Bills were in the Super Bowl, that would be the clear winner. But yes, March Madness (and/or the Final Four) is better than the Super Bowl at this point, imo.

Loved watching Stefon and I'm thankful for all he brought to the Bills. I wish him the best and will continue to root for him (except when playing the Bills). But, this was the right move (whether Stefon was trying to force it or not). The relationship between Josh and Stefon had obviously soured. And they had kind of been co-leaders of the offense for a few years. Tough if your co-leaders aren't seeing eye to eye. This empowers Josh to be THE leader of the offense and the team. He doesn't have to worry about stepping on anyone's toes, forcing balls, etc. It is his team now. And if someone truly is unhappy somewhere, you are better off letting them go before too much resentment builds up anyways. And as much as a lot of us didn't want to admit it at the time, there were obviously issues for Stefon dating back at least to the Cincy playoff game. We are in a transition period. I wish we could have won a Super Bowl while we still had all of the guys who helped dig us out of the drought and ushered in a new era of Bills football (Jordan, Micah, Tre, Stefon, Mitch, Beasley, etc.)...but we couldn't hold on any longer. The team would have continued getting older and each season the odds of us advancing to the big game would have just decreased. Beane is ripping off the band-aid. Besides, we all know Big Baller Beane has something up his sleeve. All of the maneuvering and the number of picks we have reminds me of the year he fought into the top 10 for Josh. So, I expect at least one very good WR to be added (wouldn't mind seeing two come in the draft). Very sad offseason (in the players we had to let go)...but also necessary. We are entering a new era of Bills football...kind of like the third chapter of Josh's career.

I usually agree with you on a lot of things Chandler, but I think you're being a bit too pessimistic when it comes to Kincaid. First of all, he was just a rookie. I think that we all hope and expect him to progress and get better from his rookie year. Most players take a big leap between year one and year two if they have enough talent to make it in the league...and I think Dalton proved he is a guy that will make it in the NFL. He also had Dorsey as an OC for half the year (where the offense struggled quite a bit) and then had to switch to a new coordinator mid-season. That could have hindered some of his growth/progress. As others have noted, I don't think drops seem to be an issue with him. No one is going to catch every ball. But according to stats, he had 4 drops (on 91 targets/73 receptions) on the year and an 80.2% catch rate. That's actually very good for a rookie and no where near the struggles that say Gabe and Knox have had.. I only noted maybe 3-4 contested balls in that video that maybe he could have caught. Don't really see this as a major issue either. Something he can work on, sure, but not a problem by any means at that rate. The TD total was definitely disappointing, but we'd really have to look at the whole season to see how he was used in the red zone, how many red zone targets did he get, etc. to determine if it is a Dalton-thing or a scheme-thing. Maybe Knox got more red zone plays when healthy due to size and previous high TD totals, etc. I do expect to see that TD total climb in the future, but I almost think that that is more on Joe Brady (scheme) and Josh Allen (trust) than it is on Dalton. BUT, the points I really wanted to make were these: 29 of Dalton's 73 receptions went for a first down. That is 40%. Forty percent of his catches went for first downs. That is huge for the team...keeping the chains moving, something we have missed since Beasley left. 311 of his 673 yards came AFTER contact. Yes, almost half of his yards were YAC. And that is with the fact, as others have pointed out, that many of his catches were either short over the middle, screens, or outlet passes---all of which are plays where the defenders (especially over the middle) are very close and ready to make an immediate tackle. They didn't design a lot of plays for Dalton to be streaking down the seam or sideline, where it is easier to run away from a defender and pick up a lot of RAC. And let's compare his rookie year to the rookie year's of some recent great Tight Ends: TE ROOKIE SEASON STATS Dalton 73 recs. 673 yards. 2 TDs. 80.2% catch rate. 9.2 yards/rec. 29 first downs. 1 fumble. Gronk 42 recs. 546 yards. 10 TDs. 71.2% catch rate. 13 yards/rec. 30 first downs. 1 fumble. Kelce 67 recs. 862 yards. 5 TDs. 77% catch rate. 12.9 yards/rec. 46 first downs. 4 fumbles. (Note this was year 2 for Kelce, he sat his entire rookie year. Kittle 43 recs. 515 yards. 2 TDs. 68.3% catch rate. 12 yards/rec. 24 first downs. 0 fumbles. Dalton had the most receptions. Only Kelce had more yards (in year two, of course). Dalton had the best catch percentage. Only Gronk, really, had more first downs. So, the only place where Dalton fell behind is yards/rec. and TDs (well, basically only to Gronk)---and I think both of those things are more dependent on scheme and opportunity than Dalton lacking anything. I think the only reason people may think that Dalton didn't live up to the billing enough (other than his TD totals) is because of the year that Sam LaPorta had. But LaPorta is the exception to the rule, having had one of the best rookie TE seasons in the history of the NFL. And again, that isn't just skill, but also circumstances, situation, and opportunity. LaPorta had 120 targets compared to Dalton's 91...and Sam played 83% of his team's snaps, while Dalton played 63% of his team's snaps. If you pro-rate Dalton's stats to 120 targets, it would look like this in compariosn. Dalton 96 recs. 887 yards. 3 TDs. LaPorta 86 recs. 889 yards. 10 TDs. So, again, it is only the TD totals that would separate them. Dalton had an excellent rookie season for a TE and I think we all know there is still a lot of room for growth and development (such as in the blocking department, etc.), but I see no reason why Kincaid can't or won't continue to improve and be a big part of the success of this team. Nothing from his rookie season makes me worry about his not reaching his potential and being an important player for this team for years to come.

Watching his short highlight clip, he looks to have some speed (to chase down QBs) and very good instincts (dissecting plays). Seems to be more of a power/bull rusher, didn't see much variance in his pass rush moves from those handful of clips, but his profile said he can bend the corner too. Of course the highlights don't show us plays where maybe he made a mistake or missed a tackle, etc. But, for a guy whose name I didn't even know until today, and who will be deep in the rotation, looks like a decent signing to me. Hopefully he's ready to take the next step in his career. 🤞 6'5" 254 lbs. 5th-year player. 27 years old. Drafted by Philly in the 7th round out of Stanford, picked up by Washington mid-rookie year after being waived. Spent 3-1/2 years with the Commanders. Only 14 starts in his career (but 57 games played)---his snaps counts in Washington over the last three years were 35%, 36%, and then 45% last season. 80 total tackles, 9 tackles for loss, 20 QB hits, 7 career sacks, 2 passes defended, 3 fumble recoveries (1 TD).

Seven year vet. originally a 4th rounder to Philly. 6' 4" and 221 lbs. Big kid. 30 years old. Has played for Philly, Miami, Las Vegas, and then Atlanta last year. Career: 131 receptions for 1,691 yards and 10 TDs. Best year was in Vegas two years ago when he had 690 yards and 4 TDs on 57 receptions. Special Teams Ace. Was a special teams captain for the Falcons last year

The average number of touchdowns for the last 10 MVPs is 44 TDs in their MVP season. Lamar had 29 total TDs this year. Josh had 44 TDs this year. I don't care about race (it's more the bias against Josh than race being a factor for Lamar), and I understand why people voted for Lamar. But, I can also disagree with their decision. Let's face it, there was no clear-cut MVP this season. Josh was doomed by his interceptions and the irrational media bias against him, even though the TDs sooooo outweigh the interceptions. And with only 29 TDs on the year, it shows that the Baltimore's defense was more of the MVP than Lamar was. The MVP is an individual award, not a team award. Josh had 628 yards more passing than Lamar, while Lamar had 287 more rushing yards than Josh. So, Josh still had 341 more yards from scrimmage than Lamar and 15 more touchdowns. Their team's were only 2 games apart in the final standings, and Josh had a slightly better record against playoff teams than Lamar. As far as total turnovers, Lamar had 13 and Josh had 22. But, there is always an element of luck to turnovers. For instance, Lamar fumbled 11 times...but only lost 6. Plus, how many near picks did he have this year that didn't get caught or whatever, where it seemed every freak batted-ball for Josh this year, some defender made an incredible play to make the INT. Still, we are talking about a 9-turnover difference between the two. Even if every one of Josh's turnovers turned into a TD for the other team (which they didn't, not by a long shot), that would equate to 63 points. The difference between their TD totals is 105 points. Plus, none of Josh's turnovers occurred in the 4th quarter. He wasn't losing games due to his INTs. In fact, most games that he had an INT, he also had his team in the lead in the 4th quarter (all but the Jets game). So, again, the INTs didn't hurt the team as much as they might appear to have. Lamar had three games with zero TDs and eight more games with only one TD. That's 11 games, or 69% of the season. So, for almost 70% of the season, Lamar had only one or zero TDs per game. Is that really an MVP? The Ravens only scored 32 points more than the Bills this season. Across 17 games that equates to 1.8 points more per game (not a huge difference---if you are trying to use point totals for games as a plus for Lamar). Lamar accounted for 42.9% of his team's points. Josh accounted for 68.3% of his team's points. As I said, there was no clear-cut MVP choice this year, but still, imo, Lamar was the wrong choice.

Pros: He still had 1,395 yards from scrimmage this year, with a 4.2/rush average, and 12 TDs. He has been an absolute beast over the last 6 years, averaging almost 1,576 yards from scrimmage and 14 TDs per season. He's been durable. Other than missing the back half of the 2021 season with a broken foot, he has only missed 3 games over the other seven years of his career. Cons: He's 30 years old. He has 2,030 rushes over his career. He has averaged 306 carries/year over the last 5 years. That's a lot of mileage on those tires. He may still cost a pretty penny.

Dude, you call this TRUTH? Once again, it is more of the same from Dunne. No intelligent discourse, just opinions and name-calling---supposedly backed by a few disgruntled, former employees. If this passes for truth in today's media, then we all need to turn off our computers and televisions. Geesh! I don't have a problem with people wanting to move on from McDermott and explaining their reasons why, but whatever you think of him as a coach, he is a good man, and this is not the way you go about criticizing the job he is doing. It is obviously personal for Dunne. I mean, "a simpleton"? Someone may not make a great NFL coach, but you aren't getting to that position in the first place if you are a simpleton. Come on.