folz

I appreciate you responding with actual examples. 👍 But, hard to compare other sports leagues. So, I'll stick to the NFL. So, ok, you gave me two NFL examples. Two coaches still doesn't make it standard to fire a winning coach, but let me counter further. Marty Shottenheimer was in his 21st year as a HC at 64 years old with no SB appearances (as opposed to MCD's 6 years at 49 years old). In 5 years in SD (where he was fired from), Marty made the playoffs 2 years and missed the playoffs 3 years (McD's made 5 of 6). Shottenheimer's career playoff record at that point was 5 and 13 (McD is 4-5). Marty also had a 4-12 and an 8-8 season during that stint. And his last two years in SD: missed the playoffs, lost in Wild Card round to the Jets. Marty was 0-2 in the playoffs in 5 years with SD. Sean has 4 playoff wins. Dungy is probably a better comp. Fired after his sixth season in TB. He made playoffs 4 of 6 years. But his playoff record was only 2-4. Win percentage including playoffs in their first 6 years is Dungy (.549) and McD (.622). And though he had some good records and playoff appearances, Dungy's last three seasons in Tampa were 11-5, 10-6, 9-7 with a 21-3 Wild Card loss to Philly (2000) followed by a 31-9 Wild Card loss to Philly (2001)---no playoff wins in last two seasons. I could see how an owner might see that as being on the decline. McD's last three years were 13-3, 11-6, 13-3 with two playoff wins and then a 42-36 Divisional round loss to KC and a 27-10 loss in the Divisional round to Cincy. Still kind of a different picture between the two. So, even granting these two examples, as I said, it is still few and far between (NFL coaches who are winning getting fired); but even looking at these two examples, both have a much better case for being fired than McDermott does at this point.

Ridiculous. How did he go from how he handled the Damar situation last year and all of his players, the media, and fans praising him for that, from every player talking about how great team chemistry is in Buffalo, and players wanting to return to the team (Cole, John Brown, Jordan P, Shaq, Poyer), etc. to a toxic culture? Because one, ONE, player, who I love, but has shown to be a bit of an out-spoken player in the past, had a bit of an issue about something? And Drama King? Please. Stefon and the media caused the drama, not McD. But he's a drama king because when a reporter specifically said, "how concerning is it?" He answered "very concerning." It's a loaded question. If he says he's not concerned then people are upset with him that he's not taking the Diggs situation seriously, if he answers that he's concerned, then he's creating drama. No doubt Stef had an issue that the team needed to address, but everything else was just media hype (because they want dramas to talk about). Or maybe it's because one former GM with a podcast is intimating that Frasier left because McD is some dictator. Sounds to me more like a, "I wasn't fired, I quit" kind of thing...if even true or coming from Frasier in the first place. Well, that's taking it to the extreme. If you are talking standards, then yes, coaches get fired all of the time without the replacement being set, but most of those coaches were fired for having losing seasons, missing playoffs, etc. I don't think that it is standard to fire a coach who just completed a three-year run of 13-3, 11-6, and 13-3 seasons. Would love to see an example of a coach who was fired immediately after a three-year run like that (my guess is that they are very few and far between). These are your opinions, not facts. If Terry fired Sean at the end of last season because he felt like some of you do, I guarantee that McDermott would have another HC gig either this year or next. A guy who turned around a team who was in a 17-year playoff funk to go to the playoffs 5 of 6 years, has a .639 win percentage, and headed the staff that drafted and developed Josh Allen. Easy hire for a number of teams. When you say "the bills," who do you mean. Are we talking Terry and Beane? If so, I doubt there are many coaches that they would dump McDermott for (if any) at this point. Well you and Ross Tucker agree on that, but again, not a fact...just two opinions. Many people would have Sean McDermott as a top 10 coach in the league right now. Over the last 5 years, the Bills have the third best record in the NFL (only 1 win behind second place New Orleans). In the last nine years, there were 114 playoff spots filled by teams. That means 114 chances for head coaches to "not come up short" and win a Super Bowl. But in those 9 years, only 6 Head Coaches have won a Super Bowl. That means 95% of head coaches who made the playoffs over the last nine years also came up short.

😆 Not too far wrong: Dolphins won 10 AFC East championships in 15 years (from 1971-1985) Buffalo won 6 AFC East titles in 8 years (from 1988-1995) New England won 19 AFC East titles in 24 years (from 1996-2019) Tough to be a Jets fan: Team # of AFC East titles* Pats 22 Phins 13 Bills 13 Colts 6 (Balt/Ind was only in the AFC East from 1970-2002) Oilers 4 (haven't played in the AFC East since 1969) Jets 4 (they do have their Broadway Joe, historic Super Bowl though) *From Wikipedia, counting from 1960 (starting as the AFL Eastern Conference). I actually like that the division got tougher and won't be a cakewalk. Should make for some good, old school football, where division games are heavyweight bouts. We haven't seen that in the AFC East since before the rise of Tommy and the Hoodie at the turn of the century. And in the long run, hopefully it will just make the Bills more battle-tested for the playoffs.

McNabb and Reid I think a lot of people are underestimating Donovan McNabb. I'm not saying he was better than Josh, but he was no slouch (or not worse enough to use that as some kind of argument). McNabb was selected #2 overall in the 1999 draft. Played 13 years, 6 Pro Bowls, was MVP and offensive player of the year in 2000; and is still currently 27th on the all-time QB passing yards list and 33rd on the all-time QB TD passes list. He also had almost 3,500 rushing yards (10th most for QBs) and 29 rushing TDs. I mean, he was good enough for a lot of people to at least debate if he deserves to be in the HOF. He won't make it in, but just saying, Reid wasn't working with some journeyman QB all those years in Philly. Reid had prime McNabb for 5 of his first 6 years. McDermott has had prime Josh for 3 of his first 6 seasons. Reid got his franchise QB year 1 rather than year 2, and McNabb was much more pro-ready than Josh was coming in. Sure, Reid made a Super Bowl appearance (not a win) and more conference championship appearances in his first 6 years than McDermott, but if you look at an overall snapshot, there are definitely some comparisons. First 6 years: Coach overall record win % Playoff record Reid 64-32 67% 7-5 McDermott 62-35 64% 4-5 13 seconds People just need to get over the 13 seconds already. The way that game was going, whoever had the ball last (in regulation or OT) was going to score. Neither defense was stopping either of those offenses all day long. Ok, so let's say we squib it. We take off what 2 seconds, but KC probably has the ball somewhere between the 20-40. So, could have been about the same or worse and not enough time elapsed to stop Mahomes from doing what he did. We could have tried to pin them deep, but KC had Tyreek back as a returner and he had already earlier gashed us with a big punt return. Say he takes it at the 10 and takes it out to the 40, only wasting a handful of seconds or brings it back all the way. Or who is to say if we did pin them on the 7 yard line, Mahomes doesn't still come up with 2-3 miraculous plays to get them in field goal range. It was as much fate/destiny as it was bad coaching. It was a heartbreaker, but y'all gotta get over it. Not to mention that coaches also learn from their mistakes and get better. Obviously, we can agree to disagree about the Cincinnati loss being understandable due to what the team had to endure last year. Sean Payton And to the other posters who taut Sean Payton, yes, he won a Super Bowl. But, he had 14 years with one of the greatest QBs of all time and only had the one Super Bowl appearance. His overall win percentage is 63% (lower than McD's). His team (with Drew Brees) missed the playoffs 6 of those 14 years. His playoffs record was 9-8 in those years, and 6 of those 8 losses were in the Wild Card or Divisional round. It's Not That Easy I don't point all of this out to put down Sean Payton or Andy Reid, they are both great coaches. Just trying to point out that winning a Super Bowl, even with an elite, or all-time QB isn't as easy as some of you posters make it out to be. Aaron Rodgers has one Super Bowl appearance (and win) in an 18-year career. Drew Brees has one Super Bowl appearance (and win) in a 20-year career. Two of the greatest of all-time, 38 years, 2 SB appearances. A ton of things need to go right to win a Super Bowl, beyond having a great QB, and if you don't win one, it doesn't mean you suck either. [I posted this in a thread a while back for those who think you can't win a SB as a HC after year 6.] "14 of 33 Super Bowl winning head coaches (42.42% of them) had not won a Super Bowl by the end of their 6th season as head coach, including: Bill Belichick, Tom Landry, Andy Reid, Tom Coughlin, Pete Carroll, Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Hank Stramm, Dick Vermeil, John Madden, Gary Kubiak, and Bruce Arians. 12 of those 14 took at least 8 seasons (on up to Reid's 20 years) before winning the big game." And finally, beyond talent, coaching, chemistry, etc., there is also the element of luck in football that so many don't seem to want to acknowledge for some reason (crazy circumstances, injuries, refs, bad bounces, etc.). Remember the Minnesota Miracle? The Diggs catch that probably kept New Orleans from going to and winning another Super Bowl. Is that on Sean Peyton, like so many put the 13 seconds on McD? What about all of Reid's so-called blunders in the NFC championship games early in his career? Was that Reid or luck? Maybe it was just bad luck for Reid and Peyton, but obviously bad coaching for McDermott. I don't know, there always seem to be excuses for other coaches that aren't allowed for McDermott. And according to some posters, everything McD has done is due to Josh Allen, but when it comes to Belichick, Reid, Peyton, etc. I never hear the only reason they have a good record is because they had an elite QB. You can't have it both ways. Only 3 other active coaches have a higher winning percentage than Sean (LaFleur, Belichick, and Reid). Sean (.639%) falls between Reid (.641%) and Tomlin (.638%). Sean McDermott has more than earned a couple more cracks at this thing (barring any sort of major collapse), imo. P.S. Sorry for the novel-like length, for any of you who actually read this. 😊

I don't know, the posters that call themselves realists seem to throw just as much speculation and opinion out there as any so-called homers do. But if you are negative and say you are a realist then apparently your opinions and speculation are more factual than others. I won't debate the emotional toll of last year (as it has been debated endlessly and nothing will seem to change opinions either way). But, there is a very real human element to sport that I think some are discounting too easily. But I'll agree to disagree there. But what forms your bolded "opinion" above? You make it sound like McD is so afraid of losing his team or job that he hires lesser quality coaches to protect himself (like some paranoid dictator). First of all, that is total speculation/opinion on your part. But just to counter a bit: McD has hired three former NFL head coaches, a former NFL assistant head coach, and a head coach from Alabama. Plus he hired Brian Daboll who left Buffalo to become a head coach. He's had many assistants (at lower positions) that have been former NFL coordinators. And Dorsey could be considered by some as an up-and-coming offensive coach. Maybe you don't like his coaching hires and think there are some young, hot-shot coaches out there that we should have hired...but I can see no evidence that McD is purposely choosing lesser assistant coaches to protect himself. We get it, you don't like McDermott as the head coach of the Bills, you don't like Dorsey, and you're luke-warm on Beane. Yet, we are enjoying a resurgence of Buffalo Bills football because of McD and Beane. We wouldn't have Josh Allen without McD and Beane. We wouldn't have the culture and family-atmosphere that includes the fans without Beane and McD, etc., etc. I know, you don't think McDermott can take us all the way...and at this point, that is a fair argument (I disagree, but that's ok). All I'm saying (to end with a couple of cliches) is be careful what you wish for because the grass isn't always greener. And besides, McDermott is not getting fired this year and probably not next year either (unless the Bills have a total collapse of some sort), so in a way, you just have to suck it up and enjoy the ride anyhow, regardless of how you feel about him.

No question they have had a hard time putting a solid 5 together on the O-line over the years. There always seems to be one or two weak links. But, Cowherd kind of intimates that they have ignored the offense (to any viewers who aren't paying attention), just because we didn't sign a big name like Hopkins. But when you compare the losses and gains on the offense, it is hard to push a narrative that they aren't trying to help Josh. Of course, we have to wait to see if it all works out, but they tried to improve the three major areas of weakness from last year (and each with multiple options): interior O-line, the run game, and the slot receiving position. Gabe Davis (WR #2) wasn't the problem with the offense last year, it was the three areas just mentioned. And the Bills addressed those without breaking the bank (as we were up against the cap). But, when you're looking in from the outside (but not really paying attention---like Cowherd), all you know are the big names and big deals that happen, but ignore all of the other signings and the context and reasons for those signings. Losses Gains Trubisky K. Allen McKenzie Kincaid Harty Sherfield Shorter Singletary Harris Murray Hines (added late last year) Saffold Torrence McGovern Edwards Broeker Shell Boettger (out all last year)

I'm not saying Gabe is as good as Moore (or deserves 20 mil/yr), I am only pointing out that their stats for 2022 were the most similar across the board. Of course, I also noted that Moore was the only WR I listed that didn't have a top QB throwing him the ball (which matters too). Was just trying to see where Gabe slotted in with other receivers stat-wise last year to get an idea of what his value might be or what his agent might argue for. But of course, stats are not the end all be all. But if you break last year's WRs down into tiers of similar production, then Gabe's stats place him in a tier of 11 players (who ranked 25-35 in rec yards last season): Now, this is just my gut opinion, but I think Gabe would be valued more highly than guys like Zay Jones (8mil), Jakobi Meyers (11 mil), and Donovan Peoples-Jones (870,000). But what about the rest of the group (are they all above Gabe?): Allen Lazard (11 mil), George Pickens (rookie deal), Courtland Sutton (15 mil), Drake London (rookie deal), Diontae Johnson (18.355 mil), D.J. Moore (20.628 mil), and Mike Williams (20 mil). That's quite a range of payments for similar production. So what do you think? Below the top three, but above the bottom 4? So, somewhere between 12 and 17 mil for Gabe? If so, what would people think of Gabe getting say 12-15 million/year. And if you expect him to be paid less, what's the reasoning (JuJu only getting 8.5 mil, or other ideas)?

I don't know about those comps. I think teams would have a higher value on Gabe than those two. But it's an interesting question...what is his comp/what is his value? 2022 stats recs/tgts yards yds/rec TDs Zay Jones: 63/93 823 10.0 5 Marquez V-S: 42/81 687 16.4 2 Gabe: 48/93 836 17.4 7 DJ Moore: 63/118 888 14.1 7 M. Williams: 63/93 895 14.2 4 JuJu: 78/101 933 12.0 3 Sutton: 64/109 829 13.0 2 Just based on last year's stats, D.J. Moore is actually Gabe's closest comp, and he and Wiliiams both have contracts that average $20,000,000; while Zay and Marquez average $8,000,000 and $10,000,000, respectively. JuJu just signed for $8,500,000 avg/year. Courtland Sutton, who compares well, is making $15,000,000. Hunter Renfrow is making 16 million and Corey Davis is making 12.5 mil. And before you call out Gabe's catch percentage, the only players listed above with a significantly better catch percentage were Juju, Mike Williams, and Zay (but Zay---and JuJu to an extent-- are obviously catching a lot of shorter, high-percentage passes, as seen by their yards per reception difference). And to counter catch percentage, Gabe has that higher yards/reception and TD total. And let's not also hear, well Gabe only has good numbers because of Josh Allen. As the names of the QBs for the other receivers listed above are: Mahomes, Herbert, Lawrence, Wilson, and...well, ok...Mayfield/Darnold/Walker (for Moore). So, can anyone make sense of the WR market and where Davis might unbiasedly (either way) be valued? imo, I would think teams value him in the upper half of #2 WRs money. But I have no idea what that means in dollars. It appears to be anywhere between 8.5 and 20 million.

If nothing else, it will be interesting to watch the players the Bills and their fans seem to disagree on. It seems the Bills have more faith in Spencer Brown, Gabe Davis, Dawson Knox, and Ed Oliver than many fans do...and, in a turn from the last few years, it seems the fans had more faith in Edmunds than the Bills did (while the Bills believe they have an answer at Mike, but many fans still think its a big hole). Will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. Also, as fans, we are often reacting to transactions in a vacuum (this one deal on its own). But so much goes into the decision: the cap, other players' contracts and when they are due, the market for that position, how much the cap will raise in the future, the possible availability or not of certain positions in the next draft or free agency period, player performance, did injuries or something else affect their play (weak play around them or whatever), etc., etc. Before the deal, I probably would have been fine letting Ed play out his contract and move on like Tremaine (unless he busted out this year, but then we probably couldn't afford him). But let's face it, though he might not be elite, he is certainly no liability. He provides above average play with room still to grow (hopefully). I don't think his production would be as easily replaced or upgraded (as some seem to think) drafting at the bottom of the draft as we do and being strapped for cap space next year as well. And if he does take another step this year, then we have him at a serious bargain, rather than watching him go to another team next year for top dollar. It's not really a big risk or a win/lose scenario because at worst, we still get very solid play (maybe just not elite)...but Ed at least has a high floor...he isn't a weakness on the team by any means (just hasn't lived up to his lofty draft status yet). These aren't easy or exact decisions. Sometimes you let a Teller go, sometimes you overpay a Star. But I do trust that Sean and Brandon at least take into account all of the variables and always try to make the best decision. And they aren't afraid to admit it and/or cut bait when they realize they were wrong. No one will be right (especially not us fans) with every decision that needs to be made. But this decision at least makes sense to me. The old, "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."

Here is a breakdown of the Bills rankings, according to that list, for easy reference: QB: 2nd RB: 21st WR: 20th TE: 11th OL: 23rd DL (interior): 9th Edge: 9th LB: 18th CB: 9th Saf: 1st Overall: 3rd Off: 9th Def: 2nd

He could make some plays in the slot against man coverage because of his speed, but he wasn't good against the zone, finding the spots and making himself available for his QB. He didn't have that knack/feel that most good slots like Beasley, Crowder, etc. have against zone coverage. If Crowder stayed healthy, they might have been a good tandem, but McKenzie couldn't do it on his own. Teams knew how to cover/eliminate him. And I think Josh lost some faith in him as the season wore on as well.

6'5" 324, 31 years old Drafted by the Jets in the 5th round (158th overall) in 2016 draft 83 career games, 72 games started 4 years with the Jets, 2 with Seattle, 1 with Miami Started one playoff game with Seattle When healthy, he has generally garnered 90+% of the RT snaps for his teams (over the last 6 years, he's been a starting RT) But it also looks like he has missed a lot of games due to injury over his career (16 games over the last 3 seasons) Perfect depth signing. You aren't asking him to play a full season, but when he comes in, he knows how to get the job done. I keep saying it, but Beane is trying to build an injury-proof roster (after how last season went). I love the depth the team has now...and it keeps coming.

Well, we can disagree on Harbaugh. I definitely would not want that guy coaching the Bills. But he's at least a rational suggestion to my question. I think definitely as long as we are a Super Bowl contending team, McD should stay put. Where would my patience run out? It depends on circumstances, of course. But, outside of a total collapse, yes, he would still get at least 2024 for me. If we missed the playoffs this year, without multiple crazy circumstances like last year, then I would at least be open to the discussion of moving on. But, I really don't see us falling that flat this year. If we lose in the playoffs (before the AFC Championship), it would depend on to who and how. A horrible game like the Cincy game, or a bad loss to an inferior opponent, I would be really disappointed and agree that he would be on the hot seat for 2024 (but probably wouldn't move on yet). If it's the same in 2024 (no playoffs or bad playoff loss) then I would probably think it's time for another voice. So, I guess I'm saying he has earned at least two years in my book. And conversely, if the team is making it to AFC Championship games, or at worst losing close, hard fought games to say a team like KC in the divisional round, then I would still think that we're close and would probably hang on to McD longer. I just don't think there is a coach out there that will magically come in and make everything better/win the SB right away. We all want a Super Bowl, but it's just not that easy (even with a great QB). There are a handful of great QBs in the league right now. They aren't all going to win the Super Bowl next year. I would just hate to restart everything, when we still feel so close.

Everything we currently are (perennial playoff team, destination for free agents, family atmosphere, class organization, etc.) is because of Sean McDermott. And you don't get to where we are just by lucking into a QB. For instance, Ross Tucker's article praises Daboll and puts him at #8 in his rankings because he was impressed that he got a talent-starved roster to the playoffs in his first year. What about McDermott in 2017 (first year, team lacking talent, a worse QB than Jones---no Allen)? Didn't he do the same thing? Only three active NFL head coaches have a higher winning percentage than McDermott (LaFleur, Belichick, and Reid). Sean is sandwiched between Reid (.641%) and Tomlin (.638%) with a .639 win percentage. And I always seem to hear, "if it weren't for Josh Allen," when it comes to McDermott. Well, what about the other guys listed above. Why isn't it, "without 'Rodgers' 'Brady' 'Mahomes/McNabb' 'Rothlisberger,' when it comes to them? You know where McDermott does rank close to 22nd? On the NFL Head Coaching All-time winning percentage list. McDermott currently sits in 21st place...all-time. Plus, Andy Reid is generally considered a genius, HOF coach now that he has a couple of Lombardis. But how long did it take him to get the trophies and how many playoff loses before finally winning the big game? I'll tell you, he coached 20 years before winning a Super Bowl and his playoff record was 11-14. I don't point that out to say Reid isn't every bit as good as people say, but to show that even as a great coach, you need a lot of things to go your way to win the big one. I'm also not saying we should wait on McDermott for 20 years. I'm just saying have some patience. Just because McDermott hasn't gotten to or won a Super Bowl in 6 years doesn't mean he can't/won't ever do so. In fact, 14 of 33* Super Bowl winning head coaches (42.42% of them) had not won a Super Bowl by the end of their 6th season as head coach, including: Bill Belichick, Tom Landry, Andy Reid, Tom Coughlin, Pete Carroll, Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Hank Stramm, Dick Vermeil, John Madden, Gary Kubiak, and Bruce Arians. 12 of those 14 took at least 8 seasons (on up to Reid's 20 years) before winning the big game. And of the other guys who did it sooner (first six years), there are a lot of cases like Mike Tomlin. Won a Super Bowl in his 2nd year, but has since coached 14 more seasons without another win. (He did make it to the SB and lost in year 4, but that is still 12 years since his last SB appearance). And I honestly don't think there are many other coaches who could have handled the tragedies and turmoil of last season as well or as classy as Sean did. He is a great leader with a great winning percentage. Why on Earth would he be on the hot seat or ranked so low on a HC list? It just doesn't add up. One bad playoff game and two bad plays in a great, classic playoff game erases everything else he has done? Ridiculous. And if the Bills were to move on, who are you bringing in that is going to guarantee you a Super Bowl? There are only 8 active head coaches who have won a Super Bowl, and 6 of those coaches are entrenched where they are (all 7-23 years with their teams). So they aren't going anywhere. That leaves McCarthy (4th year in Dallas) and Pederson (2nd year in JAX), if you could or would want to pry them loose (not likely). Anyone else hasn't won a Super Bowl either, just like McDermott. So, there is no guarantee that they will...and a more than equally good chance that they would actually make the team worse. So, what's the problem with McDermott again? [*There are actually 35 SB winning head coaches, but I didn't include the 2 whose careers came mostly during the pre-Super Bowl era, for obvious reasons.]

Do you have a link to #101. Curious how the 6-year old girl feels about Josh's turnovers. [And can she draw a Bills logo from memory with her crayons?]

I don't know if it will be the best Bills offense ever (love the enthusiasm though), but I have a hard time understanding anyone who doesn't think they have improved from last year. Sure, no big name FA...but that's not really what we needed (or could afford). We needed players to fit certain roles. While it's great to have MJ and Pippen, you still need your Cartwrights, Paxsons, Kerrs, Rodmans, etc. to win a championship. Just look at the net gains (for an offense that was already 3rd in points last season): Losses Gains Case Keenum Kyle Allen Motor Damien Harris Latavius Murray Hines (full offseason/year with team) McKenzie Kincaid Harty Sherfield Shorter Saffold McGovern Torrence Edwards Broeker Boettger (out all last year) Keenum and Allen are a push at worst, and you could argue that Saffold and McKenzie are addition by subtraction. So, our only big loss is Singletary, replaced by Harris, Murray, Hines, and 2nd year Cook. The only other losses were receivers (none of whom played more than 6 games or did much of anything for the team last year): Cole (2 games) JB (3 games) Crowder (4 games) Kumerow (6 games) Gentry (3 games) Hodgins (2 games) Plus Dorsey going into his second year, Kromer 2nd year, Cook 2nd year, Hines full off season/regular season, etc., etc. Of course, not every addition (FA/rookie) will hit, or bust out, or whatever, but just look at the options we have now. And we don't need them all to be superstars (except Kincaid, hopefully), we just need them to play solid ball in the role that they have been brought in for. I don't know about best Bills offense ever, but I do believe this is, by far, the deepest team that we have had since the Super Bowl years (on offense and defense)...Beane and McD are trying to make sure we don't have a repeat of last season...and I am all for it. What Beane did to fill out the team/fix issues from last season with a lack of funds this year is top notch, imo.

I mean, on the one hand, who cares what the "football world" thinks. There is always so much recency bias. And we know what we have in Josh. But, as to the turnovers, here are the numbers (and no, I'm not counting fumbles not lost...stats don't show almost interceptions, or almost tackles): Player Gms INTs FMB TOs/Gm Mahomes 80 49 10 .7375 Allen 77 60 20 1.038 Burrow 42 31 9 .952 To this point in their careers, you can definitely make a case that Mahomes (besides the 2 SBs of course) separates himself from Josh when it comes to turnovers. PM has 21 fewer turnovers than Josh, having played three more games. That is really impressive. As for Burrow, well, he's played a lot fewer games at this point. But if you pro-rate his percentages out to 77 games (to match Josh), Burrow would have 57 INTs and 17 fumbles lost (not that much different than Josh's 60 and 20). Plus, let's not forget that when you run as much as Josh does, there is more of a chance for fumbling...but those extra fumbles do not outweigh the positive yardage and points he gets. Burrow 517 rushing yards (pro-rated out to 77 games, he'd still only have 948 yards) 7 TDs Mahomes 1,547 rushing yards 6 TDs Josh 3,087 rushing yards 13 TDs And of course, Josh was a much more raw prospect than the other two (and walking into a talent-depleted team, unlike PM) and thrust into the starting role as a rookie (unlike PM). So, yes, Josh was more reckless with the ball his first couple of years, but he has gotten much better. He's not perfect and never will be with his style of play, but I don't think it discounts what he does do, or knocks him down the QB rankings in any significant way. Over the last two years: Total attempts Fumbles (pass/rush) INTs lost Mahomes: 1,433 25 4 Allen: 1,459 29 8 Burrow: 1,241 26 5 And obviously more attempts means more turnovers. If you pro-rate the other two to the same number of attempts as Josh, it looks like this: PM: 25.45 INTs 4.07 fumbles = 29.52 total turnovers JA: 29 INTs 8 fumbles = 37 total turnovers JB: 30.5 INTs 5.9 fumbles = 36.4 total turnovers So, again, you can use the turnover argument with Mahomes, but not so much with Burrow.

You do realize that they have only played each other once right? One game is hardly a reason to have one QB over another. Now if Burrow was 3-0 or 4-0 against Josh (and his stats were always better), maybe you'd have a case, but he's not. He's 1-0. And we all know that Josh had a bad game vs. Cincy in the playoffs (the whole team did), and yet here are their stats for that game: [combined yds and TDs] Burrow 273 yards 2 TDs 0 INTs Allen 290 yards 1 TD 1 INT Not a huge difference. And you can hardly use the Damar game as any type of decider (or count it as an automatic Burrow/Cincy win, as many seem to do). Josh had thrown a total of 6 passes and Burrow a total of 4 passes when the game was called.

In my opinion, Josh is still #2 behind Mahomes. With a healthy elbow and better weapons, I think that will become clear to most as the season wears on. Otherwise, can't really argue much with their top 8. A QB to watch is the Steelers' Kenny Pickett. I liked what I saw from him last year and wouldn't be surprised to see him make a decent move up that list this season.

I've been kind of thinking along the same lines as Shaw66 for this year. The only question I have is who calls the defense. Is there any reason that Milano can't call the defense from the Will? If not, then why not have Milano call the defense and platoon the middle LB spot? When we face the heavy pass teams, we'll see more of Williams and Bernard; and when we see a more run-heavy team, we see more of Dodson and Klein. There is still a good chance that Williams claims the spot and is the main MLB, but Beane just doesn't want to put too much pressure on the kid (or set expectations for the fans), if he isn't able to pick-up the defense well enough to be its QB by week one (or even a starter). Now, I have no doubt that Klein or Dodson could call the defense, with their experience in the system. Bernard has a year under his belt, so maybe. And obviously Williams needs to learn. But, if you do platoon them, it doesn't seem like the optimum choice to have a different voice calling the defense from play to play or game to game? Milano definitely won't move position, but can he call the D from the Will if needed this year? Anyone (especially those who've played or coached football) know of a reason that couldn't work? Ultimately, it looks like they want their backers to be interchangeable (in the Milano, Bernard, Williams mode) to combat this pass heavy league. On Chris Long's podcast, while giving Tremaine props as a player, Beane did mention that he was a mismatch (to the negative) for them in coverage often, because of his size. We are not a traditional 4-3 defense. I don't think they want a traditional MLB. We need to keep up across the middle of the field with the Miamis, Cincis, and KCs of the league. It was a problem in the "13seconds" game and was still an issue last year. So, I think the ultimate goal (at the moment) is Williams and Milano as starters, with Bernard as the first sub for either of them, but you still have guys like Dodson and Klein if a team decides to go heavy power against you. The key to Williams over Tremaine is speed in coverage, better natural instincts, and he's a tackling machine. What we lose in size is more than compensated by those skills, as long as Williams lives up to the bill. But if his learning curve is slow, then I think we see some sort of platooning of the spot.

You are incorrect about that. Davis saw a good bit of double-teaming and/or bracketing last season also. Many opposing teams were not afraid of us doing any damage in the slot or with the run game, so they tried to take away Diggs and Davis both, and would take their chances over the middle of the field. The prior year (2021), he saw very little double teaming, because teams focused on Diggs and Beasley. Gabe Davis wasn't the problem with the offense last year, nor was Devin Singletary...it was the lack of weapons in the slot once Crowder went down (well and O-line too, but that's another discussion)). McKenzie was fast, but not good vs. zone. That's also why Josh didn't take the short/easy throws enough last year and seemed to go back to hero ball (well, lack of slot and his elbow injury). It's not because he forgot or regressed, it's because he didn't have players he could trust from that position. That's why they brought Cole back last year. And its also why Josh had to run more than they liked last year. This team self scouted, saw their biggest area of need, and addressed it with Kincaid and Deonte Harty. A big-body Cole Beasley (just meaning he knows how to play vs. zone and run great routes, great feet, great hands), and a more versatile and more consistent speedster in Harty (plus Shakir with a year under his belt now). We now have 6 players that can work the middle of the field (Harty, Kincaid, Shakir, Knox, Sherfield and Diggs). They made sure they weren't going to have the same issue as last season. And by the way, attacking the middle of the field more should also help to open up the run game, not just the boundary receivers (regardless of O-line improvement). And Cover1 (and gobills404) posted a crazy stat that like 75% of Kincaid's production from the slot went for first downs or touchdowns. That was exactly our problem last year, we couldn't move the chains over the middle consistently enough, so Josh was going for the big plays to try and hit kill shots. I think Dalton Kincaid is just what the doctor ordered. Love this pick! Go Bills!

Went to school in Bahstan, Mass. First year there, was down at Faneuil Hall with some friends looking for a good bar to go to. Ask some dudes who were passing by and one of the guys said, "Oh ya, Clocks bah is great, right around the cornah." So, we are looking for a bar, maybe with a big clock over the entrance or something. Couldn't find it. Then we saw a bar, and realized, "Oh, he was saying Clark's Bar." btw, this was pre-Brady era and there were very few Patriots fans at that time. Would go to Foxborough whenever the Bills came to town and the stadium was always less than half full. Everyone was into the Sox, Celtics, and Bruins...and could have cared less about the Pats.

Great thread OP. I wonder if it's rawness rather than age specifically (but obviously, most of the guys who are raw will probably be on the younger side and vice versa...so basically the same thing). But I'm thinking maybe Beane's first round strategy has been to pick players who have elite qualities, but who are still raw---hoping to out draft the pick they have (especially when picking lower in the first round). Most drafts there seem to be say 3-7 players at the top that appear to be studs; then maybe a second tier somewhere into the teens; and then somewhere into the 20s are the other guys who have a 1st round grade. Does Beane try to pick a player that he thinks could be in the tier above (athletically or whatever) and with the right coaching/more experience get him there, to try and maximize the team's 1st round draft position? 2018 pick 7 Josh Allen (elite arm and competitiveness/definition of raw) 2018 pick 16 Tremaine Edmunds (elite size/so young) 2019 pick 9 Ed Oliver (elite explosion off the ball/needed to switch from NT/1-tech to 3-tech due to size) 2021 pick 30 Greg Rousseau (elite size, length/only 1 year college ball/sat out COVID year) 2022 pick 23 Kaiir Elam (high-end size-length-speed ratio, NFL lineage/needed to become more proficient in zone coverage) And if that's the case, will he stick with that philosophy, as Chaos asked? Allen was obviously a home run (flashed early and often, fully bloomed in third year), Tremaine (took too long to develop), Oliver (transitioned to new position fairly well in 1-2 years, has been solid and has flashed, but has not quite reached his draft position, let alone exceed it), Greg (has flashed a bit, hoping he starts to fully blossom in year 3), Elam (tough transition year as a rookie---will see if he starts putting it together in year two). If that is Beane's strategy, I'm not necessarily opposed to it, especially when drafting in the back of the round (swing for the fences), but as Chaos posted, there is the danger that we get lower quality of play as we groom players to eventually move on as they get good. But, otherwise, I guess it just comes down to do the hits/home runs outweigh the guys that develop too slowly (or never reach that potential). Not sure the sample size is big enough yet to make a true determination, but will be interesting to see if the FO thinking has changed at all going into the year.

I find this exciting! I'm glad the division will be a dogfight. Will make for some great, old-school football to watch. And I still have confidence that our boys will finish on top. We are a very-talented, veteran team with a great QB. A team that has seen it all/been through it all over the last few seasons. I think the Bills will come into this season not just as men on a mission, but as fully bonded and battle-tested warriors on the ultimate quest! That's the stuff you don't see on paper.

Good to see you Deep Voice. ✊ [One of my favorite all-time posters.]