JohnC

What was pompous about it?

Bill, What are you talking about? Haters? Are you serious? Anyone who makes a comment that you perceive as being critical to the Crimson Tide sets you off in a torrent of vitriol. I made the point that Stanford is dealing with a different academic standard, an immensely more rigorous standard, that schools such as Alabama, Mississippi, LSU, Clemson, USC etc don't have to contend with. That is a fact! If it bothers you then that is your problem. I didn't say that Bama runs a dirty program like some others. All I said and insinuated is that Stanford has challenges due to academics that many of the other major football programs don't have to worry about. If that isn't a true statement then tell me why it isn't so? What the heck is the matter with you? You act as if someone made an inappropriate comment about a family member. Cool down and respond to what is actually being said instead of going off like a rabid dog because of what you perceived to be said.

Did a person have to prove that he/she was a member of the crazy club before being allowed to post on BBMB? I'm not directing my comment toward you because you seem half sane and mature but there is a lot of lunatic postings from your former home. Sometimes getting rid of the fleas calls for burning down the house.

For the most part Stanford has been consistently good under Shaw since the departure of Harbaugh. This isn't Alabama where football takes a priority over literacy. If you review the Pac 12 where no program is guaranteed to dominate, including USC, Stanford has had more than a respectable record.

I agree with you that the Bills should consider drafting a qb in the first round. Getting an assessment on Peterman is still important because it will also be a factor on what Taylor's role, if any, will be with the team next year.

The owner wouldn't even allow the neutered GM to publicly speak on behalf of the organization. The wrestling coach was in command from the get go. Whaley wanted Taylor to be let go while the new HC wanted to keep him. The qb remained with the team. What you believe to be true is obviously true.

A rebuilding team is by definition an incomplete team. The team had glaring holes before the season even started because to state the obvious it didn't have enough talent to begin with. The Bills have accumulated picks instead of gratuitously given up picks because it wants to rebuild the roster primarily through the draft. Entering the season especially after jettisoning some talent (most notably Watkins) I doubt that McDermott and the owner believed that their roster was good enough to make the playoffs. The wrestling coach could have used the same patchwork strategy that Whaley used and make this year's team a little better than it is now. But that wasn't part of his plan to comprehensively rework the roster and restructure the cap distribution. I'm on board with what is going on. It's not so much about the now as it is about the future. It takes a lot of fortitude to absorb the punishment and indignities associated with rebuilding. There is no other way.

This is unusual. We are in accord.

Sometime during the season probably when the team is out of contention it is probable that the HC is going to give Peterman a look. It would be foolish not to give him an opportunity to play in order to get an assessment of him. At this point the staff knows exactly what they have in TT. So if there is nothing at stake from a playoff standpoint why wouldn't they give Peterman the ball?

Excellent analysis although I will quibble with some of your positions. Where I strongly agree with you is that this new regime is taking a big picture approach. That's why it purged some talent that in the short run would have clearly made a difference. Watkins is an obvious example of that. As far as the stalled running game the problem as I see it is mostly due to the lack of a credible/modern passing game that will open up more space. The defenses are stacking the line and there is too much congestion for McCoy to find a lane. Even working with such a handicap he is playing heroically. As I have said on other posts this staff has done a masterful job in reconstituting the defense. This was done in one offseason. This regime needs to be saluted for their smart and cost effective player acquisitions. Next offseason attention has to be focused on the offense. Until the qb position is upgraded so a modern passing game can be run this franchise will continue to be stuck in the muck of mediocrity. I have felt all along that this was a three to four year rebuilding project. If the Bills can get a qb such as Mayfield on its roster that time frame will be shortened. Tyrod Taylor is an earnest player who is simply a bridge qb. Anyone who thinks otherwise is not worth arguing with. Either the qb issue is addressed this offseason or the same status of irrelevance will be maintained. I want to make it clear I'm not feeling pessimistic with what has gone on with this new staff. Quite the opposite---I'm impressed with what has been done so far. Next offseason, the wrestling coach and his staff have to do what they could have done the previous offseason i.e. address the most influential position on the field.

When Harbaugh left the 49ers the operation collapsed. The franchise still has not fully recovered since he was fired. When he left Stanford and David Shaw was hired the program for the most part didn't skip a beat. The point I'm making here is that you have to build an infrastructure so if and when he leaves the operation has a foundation to sustain itself. See post #19.

I agree with your take that there is still plenty in the tank to draw from. Without a doubt in short order he revitalized a program that plateaued. What he is doing in Michigan is the same thing he did with the 49ers, Stanford and Univ. of San Diego. He quickly added a jolt of energy to struggling operations. Make no mistake what I'm saying in my prior post. He deserves a lot of credit for his turnarounds. Wherever he has gone in short order he has not only stabilized the operation but he has quickly elevated it. There is no doubt that he is going full throttle at Michigan. He is a whirlwind of activity in all aspects of the program. How long will it last? I'm not sure. Will he get antsy and look back to the pro game for his next venture and challenge? That's an interesting question.

He's a terrific coach but his eccentricities can exhaust those who have to deal with him. At Stanford the administration was appreciative of what he did for the program. He elevated a foundering program. However, the bosses in the athletic department were worn out by his constant high wattage approach. Behind the curtain when he left for the 49ers there was a sigh of relief. The administration was more than happy that David Shaw took over the reigns. And they are very happy that this more normal pers has been able to keep Stanford a relevant program at the national level. When Harbaugh took over the 49ers he quickly elevated a dormant program. Again, his intense style created friction within the organization. Harbaugh is brilliant in taking over damaged products and in relatively short order fixing them. The real issue for him and the organization that he works for is how long can the parties coexist. Any one who wants to hire him must realize that he is who he is. And when he is running the show he is doing it with total authority. When you are rich and crazy you are considered an eccentric. If you are poor and crazy you are simply nuts. With Harbaugh as long as he is winning at a high rate his eccentricities are tolerable. When the winning percentage goes down then you don't want to deal with this oddball.

There was a clip I saw of a season holder event (maybe it was a draft day event) where he was asked whom he would have taken if the deal he made to draft Watkins didn't work out? He said Hebron. I may be crazy but I'm not delusional.

The trading of Watkins is a deal that is going to benefit not only Watkins but also the team that dealt him. He's on a team where the qb is not only a better passer and will continue to improve but their offense is more likely to be more pass oriented at least compared to ours. Right now the Rams's HC is keeping it simple for Goff but the more he gets acclimated the more expansive the offense will get. The Bills got a starting CB and a second round pick for Watkins. In addition, in the near future this team is going to have more cap flexibility to bring in more talent. As far as I'm concerned it worked out well for everyone.

As 3 and 12 stated he did say that at an event for season ticket holders. He was asked if he couldn't have swung a deal who would he have selected at his drafting position? He stated Hebron.

With respect to the highlighted segment the Bills were not tanking as exhibited by their record and their willingness to give a veteran such as Wood a new beefy contract. Whether the Rams were going to be good or not was irrelevant to the Bills because they were without any hesitation going to get rid of him, no matter what. So they took the best deal they could. It's as simple as that. There's no need for a deep analysis when the issue was so obvious. What's the point of McDermott taking over the football team and with religious zeal talking about unity and team and then giving a talented diva receiver who was detached from his mates a rich long term contract. The message the wrestling coach gave to the locker room is that his message was backed up by action. One of the first things that McDermott did after getting a sense of the locker room was not signing his option. From day one he and his staff were looking to deal him. What's the surprise? In the short-term are the Bills a better team with Sammy? Obviously so. But McDermott/Beane are not making a player calculation from a one year perspective. They are looking at it from the perspective of rebuilding the roster with the type of players they want for the long haul. Clearly, he's not one of them. In fact, even the departed player acknowledges his attitude was wayward! Would Sammy have made a difference record-wise for this team if he was here? Absolutely not. The team has done fine without him. The bottom line is that your indispensable player has proved to be dispensable. From a talent standpoint Watkins is a given. Few argue otherwise. But when putting together a team from scratch the HC made it obvious that from a big picture perspective he didn't want him here.

Keep it simple. Get rid of the past posts if it makes it easier to manage. There are few posts worth depositing in storage. The longer you keep garbage the more it rots. Clean the slate and deal with the present.

The ideal situation is for a group of four or five qb prospects to materialize resulting in us being able to select one of them without dealing off quality picks. We speak a lot about qbs on this platform but what is as important is having a well-rounded roster that puts the qb in a good position to succeed. Goff for the Rams is taking a quantum leap forward. Beyond qb development with good coaching is the upgrading of the OL and adding good receivers to that unit that improved the chances for him to succeed. There are a variety of routes to take in the next draft. In the end what is going to be most important especially with our multiple first three round picks is to make them count. In the long run adding a burst of talent will be more sustaining in elevating this team.

Lamar Jackson is a qb I would trade up for. I wouldn't get carried away and throw away all my assets but I would consider him a worthy prospect to invest in. My feeling, as it was last year and the prior years, is when you have an opportunity to get a franchise opportunity you don't put it off---you just do it. KC is a good model to follow. They already have a good/credible starting qb but saw an opportunity to get a talented yet unfinished product on the roster. They can then work with him to prepare him to compete for the starting job.

Focusing on sports and staying within that realm how can the coverage be positive when the product has been dismal for so long? I see the tide turning with more positive optimistic stories as the successes materialize. No doubt that news outlets typically play to their readers' inclinations but what is so surprising that a segment of fans are generally pessimistic over a team that not only has failed but has been ineptly run for more than a generation? If you want the dirty slate to be cleaned off then win more games.

What's the surprise? When you do well you get praised; when you do poorly you get criticized. What has contributed to the newspaper's tendency toward constant criticism by the mainstays is the lengthy futility of its two primary teams. No one can deny the paltry record. And no one can deny the constant shuffling and reshuffling of coaches and staff make it difficult for the jaded eyes to believe that the changes will alter the course of franchises. A little early success by the new football regime that is not only preaching a new direction but is acting on it is a reason to be optimistic. I've never been a harsh critic of Sullivan like many others are because it has to be depressing covering the generationally lackluster pro franchises. After a while you understandably become cynical towards the respective organizations when witnessing the inevitable new shuffle and not really believing that there will be a different outcome. It seems to me that what is different with the new football operation is that there is a plan and a direction. You don't have to agree with all the decisions but at least you understand why it is being done. When you add some quick success then the positive energy is going to spread, including to the people who are covering the teams.

It's called revisionism. For some people the past is very malleable when brought up in the present.

My preference has been to pursue a qb. If that doesn't materialize, which I don't think it will, then my preference is to simply select good players and build up the talent level on the roster. What this organization did this past offseason is bring in a number of productive free agent players, such as Hyde and Poyer, who have significantly contributed. The OL needs talent and a playmaker receiver would certainly be an asset. In addition, this team needs an upgrade at the second back position. I wouldn't be adverse to using a high pick on a highly rated back. My sense is that McDermott is more inclined to bolster the defense and make this good unit into a very good unit to the point that the team's identity revolves around a tough defense.

Very sharp post. You pointed out exactly what TT is: a good game manager who protects the ball. All the OCs he has played under have basically designed an offense that falls in that manager category. That's not a knock on the qb as it is an accurate description of who he is as a qb. He's not a prolific passer, and never will be. He's not a qb that adeptly goes threw progressions and consistently throws well on seam routes. Would the team be better off with a qb who is capable of directing a more full repertoire offense? I would say so. But we got what we got and the staff is maximizing what they got. Is he the type of qb who can get your team on a serious playoff run. I say no and others are more inclined to say yes.