finn

The trouble is, you don't really want a starting guard who's only slightly above average, not at that price, and especially if the rest of the line is mostly just adequate to good. Dawkins is the only player who is excellent. After throwing two first-round picks, three second-round picks and a third-round pick at the D-line--and even then spending huge to get it right--it's time to finally invest in the O-line. Zion Johnson, ready to compete with Bates in 2022 and replace Saffold in 2023. Not sexy, but smart.

What would the Bills be paying him if they had offered him a second-round tender? Just wondering if that was just a flat-out mistake not to.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic, but the Bills are a pick away from having arguably the best secondary in the league, especially if they had a Haden-type veteran also.

Maybe pissed off. But he seemed in control of his emotions, something he's evidently been working on. I saw nothing of the frantic Allen we saw in his first few years, such as the playoff game against Houston or even the first playoff game against KC. He was playing all out in NE and KC last year, but he wasn't frazzled or desperate or berserk. What did Bruce Lee call it? "Emotional content."

Well, it's not like the coaches didn't know what Bates was capable of. They might have been surprised how well he gelled with Morse and Dawkins, but I trust their judgment on his monetary value. Based on that, they appear to see him as a marginal starter and excellent backup. I'm hoping they're willing to let him go for the same reason they let Levi Wallace go at cornerback: They finally (finally!) want to upgrade the position. We haven't had an excellent set of guards since, what? Jim Ritcher and Glenn Parker in 1992? Imagine having excellent guards AND excellent corners. Didn't have that in 1992. Or maybe ever.

That was an extraordinary play by Hyde, not at all a bad throw by Jones. He looks like he'll be a very good QB, more than competent, less than elite. Certainly enough to win with, as long as he has a very good team around him, which he does. The trouble is, he's in a conference with the Bills, Chiefs, Bengals, Raiders, and maybe now Denver. I'd say they're also below or the same level as the Ravens, Titans, and now Miami. With the Pats, the question is, "Is the QB good enough to not hold the team back?" With the Bills, it's "Is the team (and coaches!) good enough not to hold the QB back?"

You might not have heard the breathless raves of media figures across the board. They don't stop at Mahomes is excellent. He has reached divine status and has never, ever, done anything wrong, and anyone who even hints that another player might be at his level is sneered at. THAT is how he can be considered overrated. Having lived in Brady country for 25 years, I'm sensitive to hagiography, but it must be nauseating to others, too.

Really? I've been thinking lately that Mahomes is overrated, which isn't hard since all NFL commentators (no exceptions) thinks he's God level. Even now, it's always Mahomes first, Allen second. The chief argument, so to speak, is that he has Hill and Kelce, who make plays for him. The Bills receivers, by contrast, tend to catch the ball and get tackled, as our lowest RAC stats show. Not saying Mahomes isn't terrific, but I don't think he's any better than Burrows or Herbert. And I really don't think he is at Allen's level. My point: Replace Hill with Ju Ju, and you'll see all Mahomes' performance metrics dropping significantly.

Of course it's a waste of time. But it's fun, which is why we do it. Kenyon Green at 25.

Tea leaves point to an OG at 25. Beane said his priority is to "protect Josh," Saffold appears to be no more than stopgap, and he didn't put a 2nd round tender on Bates. That seems to add up to drafting a guard early. I'm looking for Haden or another vet on a one-year deal at CB, sign a few backup types at guard (one signed today), go OG in the first round, CB in the second, and WR in the third.

Agreed, too political. I withdraw.

That's an understatement. If we lose Ricky Bates, we're down to Cody Ford and the assistant coaches, with an aging Stafford on the other side ready to pull up lame at any point.

No objection. Except, is Hunter a sexual predator? How about Bill Cosby? Woody Allen is also a creepy liberal. But then I think of Clarence Thomas, and I'm back listing creepy Republicans, sorry.

Especially after he offered not a word of complaint, that we know of. He took the loss as graciously as a person could. Not sure if that made them feel better or worse, but I bet it made them even more motivated to make it up to him. He played his guts out and teed it up for them.

The entire country was deprived when the Bills didn't advance. Josh Allen was playing at god level, and he may have ascended to an even higher plane. Even that dweeb critic, who said "Ok, he played great against the Pats, but no way does he repeat that" had to admit he not only continued but played even better. Mahomes, well, we know how that turned out. He was exhausted trying to play at Allen's level and couldn't sustain it.

I do think most people would agree that Watson should be able to play football, at least somewhere (I suggest Canada). But I wouldn't let him work in my daughter's school, even though I probably couldn't stop him legally. "Rules" work both ways.

Ok. But when do expressions of the public's moral outrage start rising to the level of the "societal sanctions" you deplore? For example, is a boycott of Browns games a societal sanction, or merely a decision of how people spend their money? If it's wrong for the NFL to ban Watson from playing, is it wrong for the Lady's Library Club to disinvite him from a speaking engagement? Both are societal sanctions, aren't they? My point is that it's not easy to locate what defines a morally just response to this sort of behavior (or "alleged behavior"). There are no rules. Our society just mooches along, figuring it out en masse in an imperfect, inconsistent, contradictory, messy devil's brew of reason, bias, and emotion. Much like our legal system, unfortunately.

Not sure I understand your meaning. You "believe there is something to the allegations" and remind us a court of law "decides on guilt or innocence." Of course it's up to a court of law to make a legal determination; who is saying otherwise? That's not the point. The legal system is deeply flawed and very often--maybe usually--it gets it wrong, especially in sexual assault cases. Brock Turner, Woody Allen, Brett Kavanaugh... the list is endless. Are you saying Browns fans shouldn't "believe" the 22 credible allegations from unrelated women--while giving yourself that option? Or that they shouldn't, what, buy tickets? Object? Arrest and charge him in the streets? What are you saying here?

Entirely guaranteed.

Seems like he would be a natural kick returner, but I don't see any stats on him after college. We certainly need a returner.

I for one am glad they didn't break mortgage the future to pay Watt last year. A real leader sitting on injured reserve vowing fiercely to be back for the playoffs, maybe.

Who said anything about drama? If the players resent McDermott, they might not express it beyond a raised eyebrow or a significant silence. That doesn't mean it's not damage that McDermott should attend to.

Yeah, but a botch of this magnitude can do a lot of damage, even to a coach who has done things right for five years. His "execution" comment throws the players under the bus, when it's obvious they did what he and Frazier asked them to do. The two of them blew it, not the players, and he really screwed up by exculpating himself at their expense. And, no, his "...and that's on me" bromide does not undo the damage. I wouldn't be surprised if this is festering to a degree among the players. I suspect it will clear up, but McDermott may have used up a lot of goodwill. He can't blow it again, or blow it and blame the players.

Didn't realize/notice that. Thanks.

I don't see how he's an upgrade over Obata. Why not re-sign him instead?