Why are you so sure we aren't a playoff team?

[rodneykm]

I think we are going to be a lot better than people are thinking we will be.

[Dorkington]

Doesn't matter what our talent or coaching staffs are... we're the Bills. It's a pretty sure thing we miss the playoffs at this point.

[oldmanfan]

MG and Gilmore come to mind. Should've at least kept one of them. No reason not to.

 

Watkins is the biggest one. Matthews isn't in the same class as Watkins(YES WHEN HEALTHY) and the chances of that 2nd round pick being as talented as Watkins are slim to none.

 

You can scream all you want that Darby and Gilmore don't fit the "zone scheme" McDermott runs, but when your playing QBs like Tom Brady, Rivers, Carr, Newton, etc you can't only run a zone. They will pick it apart.

Well, again let's look at the actual evidence. You say there was no reason to not keep either Gilmore or Gillislee. Well, yes there were. One is $$. To keep Gillislee would have been a lot of $$ for a backup RB. A lot. And in a league where it is relatively easy to find backup RBs that is certainly a consideration. As for Gilmore, they were trying to renegotiate all last season, and ultimately he did not want to resign and wanted to test the FA market. And got a huge offer from the Pats. So we lost a guy to free agency. Look around the league, it happens to every single team. and no matter, because we have a young guy taking his place. And this does not even take into account scheme.

 

Let's stop here and remind everyone what your thesis was: that the Bills dumped young guys for old guys. Well, with Gilmore it was exactly the opposite: a rookie for a vet.

 

Now as for Watkins, again your thesis is dumping young guys for old guys. That is what you said. Not my words, yours. And ultimately they made two trades in which they gave up a WR and CB for a WR and CB that have been in the league for the exact same amount of time if I am not mistaken.

 

But when this is pointed out, all of a sudden the argument changes and it is about talent and not age.

 

Just admit when you make these blanket statements about subbing out age for young talent, you're wrong. As I said above, you can make that argument accurately about J Will. Others, no.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I'm sorry, I'm just a little amazed at all of this talk about how horrible we're going to be. I actually can't believe anyone thinks this team is going to be a 4-12 or worse with such confidence.

Amazing!

So, I ask, how have we regressed so much? Shall we take it position by position?

(....)

Coaching: It's everything. If it's good, I think we win a lot. If not we lose. I know that sounds simple, but we saw gross incompetence at that spot in the last couple years in particular. I think we see better.

 

 

I don't really make predictions, but I can't believe all the folks calling us a 4-12 team. Point to the schedule if you want I guess, but even that seems a little simple minded given the consistent inconsistency of teams in the NFL.

 

The night is darkest before the dawn, folks. Dawn comes in less than a week

 

First off, I am a Bills fan. GO BILLS! I would love to watch the sun rise over my beloved Bills. I would love to be "Hopeful" and not "Hapless" again.

 

My $0.02 on why many people think this isn't a playoff team is a factor you don't mention: overall level of talent. Bottom line at the NFL level, a team has to have enough talent to win. Coaching can help, scheme can help, but if they don't have the overall talent, players will be outmatched by the opposition. From a high level, there's really no two ways around it: the Bills have let higher talent level and talented young players go, and replaced them with lesser players. Gillislee, Gilmore, Watkins, Woods, and Darby all come to mind. I don't buy the "not a fit" thing. Winning coaches make their scheme fit the talent they have. They have to! if you can only use the subset of talent that "fits your scheme", you are at a perpetual disadvantage vs. GMs and coaches that can just pick the best available talent and make it work for them.

 

That said, where position by position assessments miss the boat is that a team wins as a team. Coaching is important, scheme is important, players putting out 100% effort in the scheme because they don't want to let their team down is ultimately important. Remember when the Bills signed Mario Williams and we had the best DL in the league on paper with Wannstache coaching? How'd that work out? We turned out to be a trifecta lose in the coaching, scheme, and buy-in (effort) departments. Then coaching and scheme changed, buy-in changed, and we were a #4 D with the same core guys.

 

Which is why my personal attitude is "wait and see". McWrestler and Dennison are both 'dark horses'. The question with Dennison is how much of his success is as Kubiak's mouthpiece and how much is his own ability. The question with McWrestler is what happened to the Panthers last year - did he have a fluky success, or is he the deal? When the Panthers lost the Superbowl against a QB who could barely get onto the field without one of those wheeled walker things, it didn't look too good on him. OTOH, if Dennison is more than Kubiak's mouthpiece, it did look good on him. The guy it looked best on - Wade Phillips - is not on this team. Are Dennison and McWrestler able to scheme successfully against top coaches and get it done? Over the long haul, will they be "player must fit my scheme" guys or will they be able to use top talent that falls to them?

 

I don't understand Bean and McWrestler's vision for the team. Clearly they needed to change the culture. Sometimes the fastest way to change the culture is to change the people. If you've got talented guys there who are not willing to buy in and give it 100%, up to a point you are better off with "lesser men with shovels" who are willing to give their all for the team. On the other hand, the best leader is the one who can get the talented people to buy in and give it 100%. That may be a chore in today's NFL where guys have big guaranteed contracts or are playing to preserve their bodies and land that big contract. The Pats** are famous for letting talented guys who are actually losing it, walk before paying them big money and replacing them with players who prove able to grow into their shoes.

 

I don't understand the rush to praise or the rush to blame.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan

[oldmanfan]

 

They dumped young talent.

 

They dumped young talent in favor of worse, average talent. Matthews is an average JAG. Watkins is a top 10 WR when healthy.

 

And they could've easily kept MG had they tendered him a 2nd round pick FOR AN EXTRA MILLION. They weren't that cap strapped and considering the teams bread and butter is the run game, it would've been smart to keep a guy who averaged the most YPC, tops in TDs, and GREAT in short yardage situations around for chump change.

 

Just a few very head scratching moves.[/quot

 

You can't keep your arguments straight, can you? When proven wrong you just change what you want to talk about.

 

Are you a politician by any chance?

[oldmanfan]

ame="oldmanfan" post="4514180" timestamp="1504622915"]

 

 

 

What did I say that was wrong bud?

 

They got worse. For reasons I'm not sure of nor do I agree with and I'd be surprised if they work out in their favor.

Your original thesis was they traded or got rid of young players for old players. I listed what happened to show that other thanJ Will that wasn't true. Then you changed your argument to talent which, other than Sammy, was shown to be questionable at best. Now you're saying they're worse which, with no games played yet, is simply unknown.

 

ShallI go on? Maybe we should discuss Josh Rosen.

[Billsmovinup]

Last year the defense was running the wrong scheme for the players they had and the offense was running the right scheme for the players they had. This year its the opposite and with a tougher schedule it will result in a 5-11 season. Why they couldnt just leave the offense alone and just fix the defense is beyond me.

[row_33]

I'm sure i'm not putting $1,000 on the Bills to make the playoffs.

[oldmanfan]

My thesis? I'm not writing a paper here guy.

 

The roster IS worse from last year. And Self inflicted.

 

My thesis? I'm not writing a paper here guy.

 

The roster IS worse from last year. And Self inflicted.

Your opinion with no data.

[SoTier]

MG and Gilmore come to mind. Should've at least kept one of them. No reason not to.

 

Watkins is the biggest one. Matthews isn't in the same class as Watkins(YES WHEN HEALTHY) and the chances of that 2nd round pick being as talented as Watkins are slim to none.

 

You can scream all you want that Darby and Gilmore don't fit the "zone scheme" McDermott runs, but when your playing QBs like Tom Brady, Rivers, Carr, Newton, etc you can't only run a zone. They will pick it apart.

^^^

Well, again let's look at the actual evidence. You say there was no reason to not keep either Gilmore or Gillislee. Well, yes there were. One is $$. To keep Gillislee would have been a lot of $$ for a backup RB. A lot. And in a league where it is relatively easy to find backup RBs that is certainly a consideration. As for Gilmore, they were trying to renegotiate all last season, and ultimately he did not want to resign and wanted to test the FA market. And got a huge offer from the Pats. So we lost a guy to free agency. Look around the league, it happens to every single team. and no matter, because we have a young guy taking his place. And this does not even take into account scheme.

 

Let's stop here and remind everyone what your thesis was: that the Bills dumped young guys for old guys. Well, with Gilmore it was exactly the opposite: a rookie for a vet.

 

Now as for Watkins, again your thesis is dumping young guys for old guys. That is what you said. Not my words, yours. And ultimately they made two trades in which they gave up a WR and CB for a WR and CB that have been in the league for the exact same amount of time if I am not mistaken.

 

But when this is pointed out, all of a sudden the argument changes and it is about talent and not age.

 

Just admit when you make these blanket statements about subbing out age for young talent, you're wrong. As I said above, you can make that argument accurately about J Will. Others, no.

 

How many DBs have the Bills drafted in the first or second round in the last 20 years who were allowed to walk away in free agency after their rookie contracts despite the fact that they were clearly excellent players, several with Pro Bowl appearances on their resumes? How many times did the Bills then turn around and draft a replacement for said DB in the first or second round of the next draft? Allowing Gilmore to walk and then drafting White to replace him is simply the latest iteration of one of the Bills' favorite moves over the length of the playoff drought. It doesn't make the team better; it simply saves real $$$ for the organization. A first round rookie gets paid a whole lot less than a proven vet with Pro Bowl honors. Meanwhile, that first rounder could have been used to draft another OLer or DLer to groom to replace the aging vets on both lines!!! Guys like Kyle Williams and Richie Incognito will both be on the wrong side of 35 by next season. Several other members of both lines are on the wrong side of 30, too. Then there's the possibility of Vlad Ducasse pretending to play RG ...

 

The Bills have similarly used first/second round picks on rent-a-RB for 20 years, too, beginning with Antoine Smith drafted in 1997, Travis Henry in 2001, Willis McGahee in 2003, Marshawn Lynch in 2007, and CJ Spiller in 2010. All of them had some success after they were traded/allowed to walk in FA, and Smith and Lynch have Super Bowl rings.

 

Fans who have paid attention to the Bills over the years see the current regime doing the very same things that the failed regimes of the past have done. We recognize it for what it is: the way the Bills organization has operated for nearly two decades and we don't expect any more success from the new regime than any of the previous ones had.

[oldmanfan]

^^^

 

How many DBs have the Bills drafted in the first or second round in the last 20 years who were allowed to walk away in free agency after their rookie contracts despite the fact that they were clearly excellent players, several with Pro Bowl appearances on their resumes? How many times did the Bills then turn around and draft a replacement for said DB in the first or second round of the next draft? Allowing Gilmore to walk and then drafting White to replace him is simply the latest iteration of one of the Bills' favorite moves over the length of the playoff drought. It doesn't make the team better; it simply saves real $$$ for the organization. A first round rookie gets paid a whole lot less than a proven vet with Pro Bowl honors. Meanwhile, that first rounder could have been used to draft another OLer or DLer to groom to replace the aging vets on both lines!!! Guys like Kyle Williams and Richie Incognito will both be on the wrong side of 35 by next season. Several other members of both lines are on the wrong side of 30, too. Then there's the possibility of Vlad Ducasse pretending to play RG ...

 

The Bills have similarly used first/second round picks on rent-a-RB for 20 years, too, beginning with Antoine Smith drafted in 1997, Travis Henry in 2001, Willis McGahee in 2003, Marshawn Lynch in 2007, and CJ Spiller in 2010. All of them had some success after they were traded/allowed to walk in FA, and Smith and Lynch have Super Bowl rings.

 

Fans who have paid attention to the Bills over the years see the current regime doing the very same things that the failed regimes of the past have done. We recognize it for what it is: the way the Bills organization has operated for nearly two decades and we don't expect any more success from the new regime than any of the previous ones had.

I don't care what regimes did in the past. I don't suspect many folks in New England compare Belichick to Billy Sullivan. I care what the new HC and GM do. And you can give up on your stuff about how it's all a conspiracy for the Pegulas to save money. Any cursory look at the decisions they've made, from spending 1.4 billion to buy the team to upgrading facilities to being willing to eat coaches and GM contracts when they make a wrong decision show that is absurd.

 

There is a thing called free agency. Players get to test their value in free agency. They negotiated with Gilmore all year, but he chose to go the FA route. and the Pats gave him a boatload of money, more than we thought he was worth. Woods got a boatload, more than a 2nd WR guy s worth. Teams and GMs decide what priorities to put on certain positions with respect to value and so on. I will be interested in where Beane and McD want to spend their money as time goes on.

[GunnerBill]

I will be interested in where Beane and McD want to spend their money as time goes on.

 

QB (when they find one);

Front 7 on defense;

Center;

TE;

RB;

 

That is my guess based on some actual research into where Carolina's money has been going. Expect a cheap secondary, cheap line around a vet center and cheap receivers.

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

Tougher schedule, offense that doesn't fit the players we have, weak receivers with no one to draw safeties away from playing near the line of scrimmage, and a ton of roster turnover as well as new coaches and scheme on defense with a suspect secondary/linebacking corps.

I have this team between 5-7 wins.

 

I agree 100% with this, everything in this post is what I was about to type. I would say there is a very slim chance at a playoff push that would involve Peterman playing good as a rookie, the O-Line staying healthy, the defense getting progressively better every week and Shady having a monster season. Other than that I'm guessing we win 3-5 games this year.

[bisonbrigade]

The answer is talent.

[cba fan]

I'm sorry, I'm just a little amazed at all of this talk about how horrible we're going to be. I actually can't believe anyone thinks this team is going to be a 4-12 or worse with such confidence.

 

Amazing!

 

So, I ask, how have we regressed so much? Shall we take it position by position?

 

QB: I am aware this is the big controversial position. But are we worse with a 3rd year Tyrod Taylor, hope promising young Rookie, and a vet who at least has knowledge in the system than a 2nd year Taylor, EJ Manuel and Cardale Jones? I guess the offensive system is the answer to this question so we're going to see soon enough

 

RB: McCoy is a year older but it doesn't seem like he's lost a step. Who knows about our backups but these zone blocking schemes are designed for RBs to thrive, aren't they? Tolbert's better than Felton. Doesn't seem much worse, if worse.

 

WR: Obvious question mark. But let's be honest about our WRs last year: Sammy and Woods missed 11 combined games last year. That's tied with a few teams and the only fewer than San Diego in terms of number one and number two wide receiver's missing games. We had street wide receivers. Right now our WR core seems worse on paper, but if Matthews can stay healthy and Jones can keep looking like he has in the preseason I don't know how much of a step down our WR core will really be. Like the QB I think it's another wait and see. Powell might be a welcome addition after week 4.

 

TEs: Better, no? Seems there will be a focus on getting them the ball and O'Leary has another year and looks good and Thomas looks like a promising prospect.

 

OL: Worse to begin the season with questions surrounding Glenn and RG and RT, but I suspect both will be solidified relatively quickly. Just gotta hope Glenn stays healthy.

 

K: BETTER!!!

 

Punter: Same

 

Coverage: I honestly have no clue

 

DL: Sure did operate a lot better under a 4-3 than a 3-4, didn't it? Yeah there are questions but Kyle doesn't seem to be slowing down and it sounds like Hughes and Lawson will be really good in this D. Marcel is so freaking talented let's just hope he "buys in." Yarborough looks like a promising backup among others.

 

LBs: Not a clue honestly but sounds like Brown will be a lot better. Lorax was a gem last year and if he's nearly as good it just means good things.

 

CB: Brand new defense so can we maybe wait to freak out? White looks great. Gaines is a strong zone CB and that's what we're running. Same with Wright. Josh Norman thrived in this system that ultimately made him a star... not nearly as good now in a new system in Washington, is he?

 

S: Top heavy and not deep but I think Hyde and Poyer are better than what we had last year.

 

 

Coaching: It's everything. If it's good, I think we win a lot. If not we lose. I know that sounds simple, but we saw gross incompetence at that spot in the last couple years in particular. I think we see better.

 

 

I don't really make predictions, but I can't believe all the folks calling us a 4-12 team. Point to the schedule if you want I guess, but even that seems a little simple minded given the consistent inconsistency of teams in the NFL.

 

The night is darkest before the dawn, folks. Dawn comes in less than a week

​Why? You ask Why?

 

Because no team who replaced 41 players from the previous year (53 and 10 practice squad) many being less talented then the ones they replaced, has ever sniffed the playoffs.

 

Toss in new coach and FO and those teams seldom make playoffs either.

[GunnerBill]

Pretty similar to what we have now.

 

Much rather pay a WR then a RB. Without question. And LT then a center(of Eric Woods caliber)

So would I. I'd also much rather pay a top corner than a top MLB.

[transplantbillsfan]

​Why? You ask Why?

 

Because no team who replaced 41 players from the previous year (53 and 10 practice squad) many being less talented then the ones they replaced, has ever sniffed the playoffs.

 

Toss in new coach and FO and those teams seldom make playoffs either.

Did you actually research this or are you pulling this out of your butt?

[SoTier]

Did you actually research this or are you pulling this out of your butt?

 

Since you're so interested, prove him wrong by providing an example of a team that did swap out 41 of 63 players as well as hiring on a new coaching staff and FO. I can think of one that might fit that criteria but I'm not going to waste my time figuring out how much the roster changed. I'll give you a hint: it was an AFC team and happened within the last decade.

Edited September 5, 2017 by SoTier

[transplantbillsfan]

 

Since you're so interested, prove him wrong by providing an example of a team that did swap out 41 of 63 players as well as hiring on a new coaching staff and FO. I can think of one that might fit that criteria but I'm not going to waste my time figuring out how much the roster changed. I'll give you a hint: it was an AFC team and happened within the last decade.

He made the claim. Why would I have to research the claim he made? How does that make any sense in the context of an argument?

[reddogblitz]

You just largely described Bill Bellicheck.

Persona in a coach might not be a good thing, ya know. Remember the last guy?

And Marv. Read MarV's book. Why do you think he signed Steve Tasker off of the waiver wire? Because he was a good WR?