BillsVet

It's transactions like this that are going to make the next CBA talks after 2020 all the more confrontational.

These next 8 games will provide some illumination on McD, Allen, et al. I further suspect we'll be able to make some real conclusions about the Bills at the end of this season which we cannot today. I think it's time to watch and wait.

I'm thinking the game-plan has been to reduce visibility and, as you say, not throw picks. It's a poor development strategy for a guy they invested the so many draft picks to acquire. I'll applaud them for getting the QB, but the hard part continues to put him into positions to succeed. Or, perhaps McD and crew want him to be more of an offensive care-taker than offensive weapon. We're going to find out these next 8 weeks. BB is 5-0 versus McD. Just sayin'.

Will never forget it. And to think, Bills marketing then sent ST holders a picture of the scoreboard with their names out of it. As Moorman punted out of it. Those were dark days for being a Bills fan.

Always with the negative waves Moriarty...always with the negative waves. (Credit to Kelly's Heroes, 1970)

My first job was as a FDO.

13F, 13D, or 13B?

You forgot to mention that both the Patriots and 49ers have very good and above QB play. Their offenses are better than "more than capable." The problem with so called "elite defenses" are that they are almost impossible to keep together. Remember those Seahawks teams with the Legion of Boom? Most of those guys are on other teams or retired. Those guys eventually want to get paid (see Thomas, Earl). There aren't many teams with top defenses over 4 or more seasons for exactly this reason. The fastest way to being a great team is getting the QB, putting players around him, and having a good enough defense. You don't stack up the defense and have just a "more than capable" offense as your rebuilding strategy.

It's worked on one solid opponent this season - the Patriots. Really what we're talking about is a subject that people struggle to understand here - strategy. I contend that rebuilding the defense first and continuing to use resources there, particularly the secondary, is an exercise in futility. Modern NFL strategy is about having a good or better offense and a sufficient defense to get stops. And, the rules clearly favor the offense with RTP and PI calls. We're also starting to see teams attack Buffalo's weakness up the middle of that defense, which seems more suited for defending the pass and a lot less so on the run. There's a ceiling that defense first teams have in the NFL of 2019: 10-6. That may be good for long suffering Bills fans who haven't seen double digit wins since 1999, but it's only going to carry a team until they play against a dynamic offense.

Rebuilding the defense has been exposed as a flawed strategy, particularly these last 2 games. Buffalo puts on the field 3 1st round picks, multiple moderate to high priced UFAs, and some value type players and still gives up 52 points in the past 2 games. The best teams are focusing on offense while having a good enough defense, but McD bucked that trend. Not surprisingly, we're now hearing from the HC and fans this narrative how the offensive turnover is to blame for their lack of production. No one talks about how the same OC has been here for a 2nd season with the starting QB. Nor do they talk about why the offensive turnover was necessary...because last year's Bills offense flirted with being among the league's worst since passing rules were changed in 1978. Of course they had to improve the OL, WR, TE, and RB positions this off-season. The more I see him, the more McDermott comes off as a latter day Dick Jauron. No feel for offense, unable to hire a decent OC, and choosing to go with player who buy into his system than better talent that may not. I see McD as the guy who always is planning and trying to be in control. But then the proverbial bullets start going overhead and he's not adjusting. The guy works his tail off, but sweat doesn't count in this league without results.

The live in the moment fans who point to the team's record as evidence the future is bright remind me of some in 2008 who shouted down anyone who predicted a change coming. This even occurred as the Bills went from 5-1 to 5-5 in 4 weeks. The same people who celebrated the KC win by saying things were great as they went to 6-5. It's kinda like Kevin Bacon in Animal House saying all is well. They didn't pass the eye test then and they don't this year. Perhaps that's why McD was especially testy at the press conference the other day. The similarities to that 2008 team are numerous: third year of a new regime under a defensive minded HC, 5-1 start against a weak schedule, pedestrian offense built to run, not so much to pass, offensive skill position talent (Evans, Marshawn, Fred) good in defense against the pass, and faltered down the stretch against the run (surrendered 150 yards or more rushing 5 times).

Not sure how unused cap space became a key performance metric for some to indicate success. The Bills have 26.7M left in 2019 and 90M in 2020. They're also the second oldest team in the NFL next to New England. https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/cap/ Schopp is correct though about McBeane. Buffalo is 20-20 (including playoffs) the new regime took over in 2017, having been outscored by 157 points over that time. Not anything to hang your hat on.

Does this not include signing Star in 2018 to a 5 year 50M contract with 24.6M guaranteed? Or Mitch Morse to a 4 year 44.5M contract with 26M guaranteed?

"The process" has changed over so many times since McD (the real power at OBD) took over almost 3 years ago it's hard to make sense of this sentiment. Why does Beane go after Antonio Brown after Buffalo had made a practice of finding guys who'd buy in to McD's "process?" I'm beginning to see that McD's words at the combine 8 months ago were nothing more than rhetoric to appease though who saw a terrible offense in year 2 of "the process." He went so far as to say they needed to score 21 points per. Or, how they didn't want to be a team that grinded things out. After almost half of season 3, it sure seems like "the process" is really all about playing tough D, being a ball-control offense, and not taking risks. It's similar to what previous coaches have attempted. And who traded down with his first pick to draft a...DB!

Thanks for a reasonable response as it's hard to find that on the board these days about controversial topics. This discussion about coverage has deviated far from the original post topic, so I'll keep this brief and let the issue sit after responding. Coverage of the Bills especially has become less objective and more supportive in the past few years. The question still stands, especially in light of these comments from Sullivan about his meeting: “It was pretty upsetting, and I started to leave. Mike Connelly led into the big news with a three-pronged discussion about what we needed in the sports department to be better. The message at the end was that my voice had become tired, and he didn’t use the words ‘bad for business,’ but that was clearly the message.” Yet, later in the article, it states: "Gleason and Sullivan ranked among the best-read writers for the paper’s website each week, based on metrics that DiCesare could access." Someone's lying here. Why? Who would push out the guys getting the most clicks and what impact would that have on ad revenue on the digital platform is built on? My contention is that something else was going on and the BN leadership hid behind the financial picture as justification for the moves. Some of it may be to push out higher earners, but it's clear they were concerned about how they covered those teams. As for Sullivan, yes, he has press credentials AFAIK. But he doesn't have the medium like he used to.

Do you think the BN simultaneously moved on essentially from Gleason and Sullivan because they were “negative?” And leave the fan perspective at the door. Those guys were the biggest critics of the two pro teams in town. Put yourself in these outlets’ shoes. They know their ability to cover the team would be affected if coverage was determined as too negative. Is it difficult to believe pro and college teams want positive coverage? After all, there’s a lot of money on the line and negative coverage impacts that. If they possess the power to control the narrative, why wouldn’t these teams pursue that? And, that may be done in who is provided access to the team.

Bills coverage has subtly changed over the past few years into being more cheerleader and less objective analysis. We'll always realize John Murphy and Chris Brown will be quite pro-team no matter wha the situation, but it extends now to other outlets who aren't even official media partners. For that reason, I understand why Sal Capaccio will go constantly to the mat for OBD as he did today defending McBeane for not making a deadline deal. Perhaps the asking price for certain players was too steep, but there wasn't any counter to his point that McBeane made a sound decision standing firm on the roster even after they've been exposed on both sides of the ball. Now, Buscaglia's gone and done the same thing. A few weeks ago he went out of his way to talk up Trent Murphy the week after the DE had a game where he was repeatedly unable to get pressure. The question now is why? Well, I suspect the Pegula's have leaned on outlets by threatening their credentials unless coverage is at worst balanced. All of this amid some of the longest playoff droughts in Bills and Sabres history. And if you're depending on the team like WGR, the standard to provide favorable coverage is even higher. It's unfair to the viewers/listeners, but content is king and without access outlets will not succeed. Reporters/writers have reacted accordingly.

It's a whole lot more likely they fix the defense than they do the offense despite coming out of the bye and yielding 21 to Miami. The offense isn't capable of matching up with stronger offenses themselves. Buffalo is constructed to win the close games, regardless of what the HC said at the combine this year.

You can't avoid coming around to the dark side.

Can't believe someone hasn't quoted Dave Wannstedt and just said they need to "fit it up." So much investment in the defense over the course of 3 off-seasons and the run defense still needs help. Goodness.

Apparently Carolina didn't have any players available in trade this year.

I think we'd all do well to remember which "insiders" hyped up this trade deadline and couldn't back it up. Dianna Russini for one.

And the honeymoon for McBeane is pretty much over now.

ESPN and other sports outlets do the majority of it. Oh well.

Analytics! You didn't know these people are in Buffalo's Analytics department? This is their job...to predict whether or not a trade is going to happen. The only other time they're used is when McD needs to understand the most efficient clap rate and, when he's in the mood to determine the highest caffeinated coffee.