Cash

That's a new one for me. Could you translate to American?

Wow, mid-season. Didn't see that coming. Agree, definitely a bad look for the team all around. I would include ownership in that mix.

To me, the replays made it look really close, but not definitive either way. I think it could’ve been overturned on review, but I think most likely the call on the field would’ve stood. Even in the moment, I wasn’t that bothered by the lack of a review. A little bothered but not a lot.

I DEEPLY hope we don’t have to give up another home game. In the history of the 17-game schedule, we have: -9 road games -8 home games, plus a “home” game against a Jaguars team that had spent the whole week in London and plays there every year -9 road games (this year) If I’m Pegula, I’m screaming at the league office that we need to actually benefit from the unbalanced schedule at some point.

Did he actually say that publicly? (Or anything to that effect.)

I agree (and said that in preseason), but keep in mind Hyde would need to be on board with this plan as well. I won't pretend to have an informed take on how much Hyde does or doesn't have left in the tank. I don't watch the all-22, I'm not a serious x's and o's guy, etc. But I will say that a lot of Hyde's value for us over the years has been in the plays that didn't get attempted. Joe B at The Athletic had an article a couple years ago about how it was basically impossible to complete a deep ball against our defense, and teams that year had basically stopped trying. He attributed most of that success to Hyde. It's kind of like an elite rim protector in basketball - you can look at blocks per game or opposing shooting % at the rim, but neither one accounts for the times when a guy could've drove to the rim but didn't (because he knew he'd get rejected). Agree with you on the young guys, especially with us being so far ahead in the division. There's obviously a balance - young guys improve by learning from their mistakes, but that means bad things happened while they were on the field - and I'd like to see us shift the balance a little bit towards player development, even if it costs us a game or two in the regular season. Realistically, the road to the Super Bowl is going to go through KC, Baltimore, or both, so I'm not particularly concerned about seeding.

You kinda-sorta answered your own question via the bolded. The case for Hyde coming back *and it being a good thing* goes something like this: Hyde is old, but (hopefully) not fully done physically. Theoretically, with a few extra months of rest, he can produce at a high level for just the stretch run and playoffs. And his football IQ, ability to read an offense pre-snap and get everyone lined up right, and ability to read & react post-snap are all super high, and only the last one is impacted by slowing down physically. If Hyde wants to come back, I'm all for it and will hope for the best. If he comes back and it turns out he should've just retired, I won't be shocked, but I think it's worth a go IF Hyde feels like he's still got it.

So if I’m right about Jefferson being the Smoot replacement, Phillips is the Carter replacement. Which is fine I guess. I don’t mind the vibes Phillips brings (most of the time), but his days of being a plus player are probably over. Side note: DL overcommit much? 1. Rousseau 2. Epenesa 3. Miller 4. Solomon 5. Toohill 6. Oliver 7. Jones 8. Johnson 9. That rookie we signed from Atlanta’s practice squad 10. Jefferson (eventually back to Smoot) 11. Phillips (eventually back to Carter) With Ankou and K. Johnathan also on the practice squad. I get that they like to rotate, but this is a lot. Seems to me like they need to either start getting something out of the guy whose name I don’t remember, or just cut him outright and use that roster spot for someone who can contribute. It’s bizarre to have him as a healthy scratch while also calling up and giving significant snaps to Ankou. Also, not saying I could do better, but are we ever going to find a backup 1-tech who can play?

IIRC the articles when we signed him the first time, seems like he might be looked at as a Smoot replacement? My recollection is that the plan back then was for him to play edge-setting DE in run situations and 3-tech DT in pass situations - which is the role Smoot has had this year. My recollection is also that injuries resulted in Jefferson playing a mix of 3-tech and 1-tech DT and never playing at DE.

I mostly agree with your sentiment here, but our MLB who is the green dot player and team captain is a premium position. We've seen a major difference between him and Spector so far this year, particularly when it comes to defensive alignments/pre-snap recognition, as well as post-snap recognition/falling for misdirection. I like what I've seen of Carter so far, but our backup 3-tech is hardly at the same level.

I think the max we could get is a 5th rounder, due to Cooper being a 10 year vested vet. Going from memory and didn't look up the specifics, but it's been reported by pretty reliable sources so I'm going with it unless/until proven wrong. Tim Graham had a good article in The Athletic this week that talked about the possibility of re-signing Cooper. My initial impression is that it's somewhat of a long shot but not unrealistic. Cooper is openly a warm-weather guy, which doesn't help our potential case. And I doubt we'll have the salary cap-ability to outbid anyone for him, and maybe not even match any offer. A lot of that depends on how he does this year, obviously, and can get a little paradoxical. The better he does, the higher the price tag, obviously. But the lower the price tag, the less likely that we actually want him back. My best case hope is that he finds that playing with Allen and for a contender is worth enough to overcome both the weather and the money, and signs a 1-2 year deal for an amount we can afford. In summary, I'm glad that Beane announced that there will be no contract talk until the season is over. Let's see how it plays out, see what the market for Cooper's services looks like, and see if there's mutual interest from both sides.

Idle thought: Would Pittsburgh take Hamlin + a pick in exchange for a safety upgrade? (Do they even have anyone that would be an upgrade and they’d need willing to part with?)

Exactly. The price would’ve been higher for the Bills than it was for the Chiefs, because: 1. (Major) We would’ve needed TEN to eat more salary, and they’re not going to do that for free 2. (Minor) The conditions to make it a 4th are both making the Super Bowl and Hopkins playing 60% of snaps. In TEN’s mind, the 6-0 defending champs are probably a better bet to make the SB than the 5-2 team that’s never beaten Mahomes in the playoffs. On #1 alone, I think it would’ve cost the Bills about as much for Hopkins as they paid for Cooper. For the record, I’m HOPING that Hopkins is washed. I’m EXPECTING that he’ll show his age and be nowhere near the destructive force we saw in Houston, but still be pretty effective at times. It’s hard for me to envision him failing on a crucial 50/50 ball in the playoffs. But I also don’t think it would’ve been worth it for us to trade for him. IMO, if we’re gonna spend more picks, let’s get someone who’ll help this year AND in the future.

Thanks for posting this - nice to see some realistic targets floated about. With the exception of Honey Badger, I basically have no idea who any of these guys are, but that doesn't mean much. My days of following non-fantasy players on other teams are long gone and I'm not wistful about them. As for Mathieu himself, I don't think the Saints would consider trading him. He's an LSU legend and immensely popular with the fanbase. Even when the team stinks, they still need to sell tickets and merch, and he's probably the #2 draw on the team right now after Kamara. I don't think they'd part with him for anything short of a massive overpay. (If I'm wrong, then by all means, Beane should go get him.)

Who would you put above him? I’m looking for names whose offenses were notably better than the QB and weapons they had.