BillsVet

It can't possibly be a team having bad management who make bad decisions and only continue the mediocre type football. Nah, it's the league "fixing" things. Still can't understand why conspiracy theories are so popular.

I bet LaCanfora is still on speed dial if something goes wrong.

Yep. This off-season is setting up as similar of what happened during Buddy's GM tenure. A 4-12 in 2010 and then 6-10 the following year prompted the spending during the 2012 off-season on Mario Williams and Mark Anderson. Anyone who's failed to deliver in the first two years probably considers all assets at their disposal, and that would include cap room. It used to be some fans praised the late Wilson era teams for saving cap space, but that does nothing. Then again, using it poorly gets you saddled with bad contracts. I would hope Beane and his people identify some cost-effective but quality players who'll instantly improve this roster. That is, if they choose to use UFA and not fall back on the draft expecting that their young players. The purge they've made these past 2 off-seasons better lead to something.

I thought I'd seen everything on this board the past 10+ years, but the idea that this was the plan remains the most unbelievable narrative I've ever observed. It is amazing how some people can make the stretch that being a statistically top 5 worst offense in the past 40 years (likely worst when factoring in rules, style of play) is beyond the pale. My theory is many fans seek to justify even the lowest quality of team because they derive their identity from fan hood. To criticize the team is to criticize oneself, and that's out of the question for most. Therefore, the horrible level of play in year 2 of the latest rebuild is understandable. The gymnastic movement it requires to arrive at this conclusion is absolutely incredible. McCoach isn't going to get fired anytime soon, but there's no way he and Beane "planned" to be this bad and headed toward a 2-3 win season in year 2. Why? Because it only makes year 3 more do or die. If they went 7-9 this year perhaps I could understand setting up for year 3. Instead, they'll be even more under pressure to win. I doubt they anticipated that scenario.

Please do better criticizing.

No greater homer exists on all of TBD. None. Miss on potentially 2 franchise QBs in 2017? Nope, not Coach McD's fault.

The cap space they should have isn't a bad thing, but I think you're correct here in that it won't be the solution to most of the team's problems. And I'm not enamored with the offensive draft prospects in 2019, so it could very well be 2 years before they're playoff caliber. McCoach is saying the right things, specifically his comments yesterday on WGR about high scoring teams and their success. Whether he matches personnel decisions and organizational strategy to these comments is another thing. He's a Jim Johnson guy and has grown up in the defensive world, so expecting him over one off-season to embrace offense would be surprising to me. He's going to prioritize defense no matter what and that comes at the expense of developing a modern offense.

If Super Bowls were won based on moral victories, the Bills would be the New England Patriots of this century.

Celebrating street free agent signings. This is where we are now.

So basically, out-execute the opponent? Besides, I'm not clear what Daboll's system is or whether McCoach understands that side of the ball.

Even with all this cap room, McBeane are build through the draft types who focus on getting their guys. In UFA they're looking for certain types (former Panthers, or less heralded team first guys) and not big name types. At the same time, I could see them going full Buddy Nix circa 2012 when they realize their jobs are on the line if the team doesn't significantly improve. They certainly won't make the same mistake former NYJ GM John Idzik did saving all that cap room in a do or die season. If McBeane want the instant results it'll require wading into the dark waters of potentially bad UFA contracts and therefore going outside "the process." Yet, if they don't spend big, it'll mean being less than a playoff team and probably cost them their jobs. I still don't know how they'll spend these cap dollars, but I'm willing to bet most of it won't be on the defensive side.

I was high on McD for awhile, but over time it became clear (like his predecessors) that he was going to rebuild the old-fashioned way. Everyone here should know by now that having the best defense in the league with a mediocre offense gets you to maybe 7 wins per. What remains indefensible is McD is 10-15 years behind the curve and shows no sign of being flexible. I highly doubt he's going to internally decide that they're changing strategy to being a downfield passing team in the way Belichick did around 2006. I remember seeing the Patriots lose to Indianapolis that year with garbage receivers in the AFC Championship game, and from that point forward BB has prioritized offense. His defenses aren't all that special and IIRC, last year they finished in the bottom quarter of the league in most metrics. I don't get the sense McD ever will change his stripes the way NE did. He's going to keep trying to fit a square peg into a round hole with the results to follow.

Seattle Seahawks. Carroll was hired as HC and he essentially hired John Schneider to be GM. While it's collaborative, Carroll has the control over personnel.

I looked at 20 seasons' worth (1999-2018) of HC hires and there were more coaches than I thought who received 2nd HC jobs. It's an incomplete list, but I saw 37 guys hired in those years who at some point had 1 or more HC jobs. Of that group, I'd classify only a few (Andy Reid, Vermeil, Coughlin, Kubiak, and Carroll) having similar or more success in second or later gigs than their first. Roughly put, that's about 85% that didn't improve in their second jobs. Also found it noteworthy that during this time there were 137 HC hires made, so on average 7 teams are changing HCs every year. At this point, I'd expect to see significant improvement in year 3 or it's on to someone else. Turnover is not bad when something shows no sign of improving.

Levy was last HC in KC more than 35 years ago. Point is, the Bills are not trending, after 2 offseasons and 24 games toward being playoff caliber. Outside of Tom Coughlin I can't think of one. With NFL HCs, if they flame out in their first job it's not typical they'll figure things out in the second. That is, if they get a second chance because most don't.

The rule Belichick applies to players to let them go a year early and not a year late should apply to HCs and GMs. They have so much power that letting them continue a flawed plan only makes more work for the next leadership group.

You act like one.

Millennial right?

Imagine scoring less than 200 points and giving up 400. That's 84-85 Bills territory there for a 16 game season. Not even DJ or the Chan/Buddy years rivaled that.

How two guys can enter the season with a such a distinct lack of talent on offense is startling. Pot meet kettle.

This dumpster diving is all part of the process. Nothing to worry about. I think it's in the manual here somewhere.

We're talking about a rebuild where they are on track for one of the top 10 worst offensive scoring performances since the league went to a 16 game schedule in 1978. Here are the lowest scoring teams since 1978 and their season records: 1. 1992 SEA 140 points for (PF) 3-13 2. 1991 IND 143 PF 1-15 3. 2000 CLE 161 PF 3-13 1998 PHI 161 PF 3-13 5. 2006 OAK 168 PF 2-14 6. 2009 STL 175 PF 1-15 7. 1990 NE 181 PF 1-15 8. 2000 CIN 185 PF 4-12 9. 1993 CIN 187 PF 3-13 10. 2011 STL 193 PF 2-14 Buffalo is on track to score 174 points this season, or 6th worst in the last 41 seasons. This isn't a rebuild, it's managerial ineptitude and this ship isn't getting turned around in one off-season either.

Tell me historically what you think the hit rate for dependable NFL starters (not including K or P) is from the 5th round. In 2012 there were 34 5th round picks and of that, 5 have played in 80 games (out of 104 possible). In 2013 it was 6 out of 32 who've played more than 70 games (out of 88 possible). In 2014 it's 4 out of 36 who've played more than 60 games (out of 72 possible). In a random sample of 3 draft years, that's 15 out of 102 players who have some staying power in the league, not necessarily that they're very good players. Not what I'd call a good bet.

Don't underestimate the fake job this team accomplished convincing opponents they couldn't score during the first half of the season. At any point they might erupt for 14 maybe 17 points and adding the punter change we're talking 10-6.

For years I've seen people on TBD comparing other teams' draft mistakes and how that somehow absolves the Bills. As if the bad teams making questionable/bad personnel decisions somehow are the standard and if Buffalo is just like them it's all good. Sure, whatever.