John Wawrow on the QB situation

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 minute ago, john wawrow said:

keep in mind, the Pegulas have now gone through that with the Sabres, staying the course after watching a team thoroughly under-achieve last year and seeing encouraging returns this year.

now, this Bills team this year isn't exactly under-achieving entirely, because this was always going to be a transitional year, and we're seeing the lumps result from it. that said, a case can be made that the offense is not playing up to even modest expectations.

 

this leads to the upcoming offseason and seeing what happens now that the BIlls are fully in a position to start adding talent.

can't judge Beane and/or McDermott entirely until that happens.

 

jw

I think the production is understandable, to an extent, since they're on QB#3 and have signed QBs #4 & #5 (:lol:) in Barkley and Pryor. The biggest issue for me is that QB#3 is the guy they thought could be QB#1 for 4-6 games. That's some seriously terrible evaluation skills.

[Delete This Account]

Just now, BigBuff423 said:

 

To the bold statement, I completely agree. IMO, their fortunes with the Bills rise and fall based on 2019. 

 

Tim Murray failed in his rebuild and it cost him.

Botterill is making far more headway, and so is Housley, who has gone from being on the hotseat to showing he is capable of learning from last season, and deserving a longer leash.

 

jw

 

[K-Apps]

25 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

 

Mr. Wawrow, I will explain in my opinion why they mishandled the situation. I get Tyrod’s contract was a big reason why he was traded away, but if the plan was to let Allen and learn this season than they needed to go after a better option than AJ McCarron. I know Teddy Bridgewater’s reps did not release his medicals, but I felt he was the best option available besides McCown and perhaps Bradford. I watched McCarron in 2015 with a talented Bengals roster and largely unimpressed especially in that playoff game vs Pittsburgh. His very average performance overshadowed by Burfict being Burfict, but I felt he cost them that game more than Burfict. To me the McCarron singled they hoped he would be a solid stopgap this season without any proof he would legitimately do it. Hopefully, this off-season they take having a good back-up QB with more importance. 

[dave mcbride]

34 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

John:

I appreciate the good info (esp re Bridgewater); thanks. That said, they are on the road to having the worst offense in the history of DVOA measurements, which begins in 1986 (32 years ago). How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad, and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. Teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

Edited November 5, 2018 by dave mcbride

[Reed83HOF]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

John:

They are on the road to having the worst offense in the past 32 years measured by DVOA. How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad. and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

 

This in a year where they drafted a rookie QB in round 1 who was the rawest of all and needed time to learn. Couple this with the choice for a QB coach who hasn't coached QBs (in college none the less) since Bruce was the #1 pick of the draft. 

[Delete This Account]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

John:

They are on the road to having the worst offense in the past 32 years measured by DVOA. How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad. and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

 

this is my only time I'll respond to this:

Tyrod was not interested in redoing his deal. his entire salary was on the books for this year. it was immovable.

they gained a valuable draft pick.

and, in the end, exactly how much better of a record would the Bills have with Taylor running this offense?

 

let's be real. they weren't making the playoffs with Aaron Rodgers behind center.

 

jw

I'm leaving this discussion, as I've said my piece.

 

jw

[K-9]

13 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

Question regarding Darby fitting the defense:

 

Isn't it fairly easy for a man to man cover corner to transition to a zone than the other way around?

Not necessarily, there isn’t a hard and fast rule. Zone coverage ability does require a stronger conceptual understanding of passing schemes and how OCs utilize various personnel to attack a defense. Discipline in drop angles and depths is important. Also, taller, longer players are preferable to many coaches who use zone coverages predominantly. Ideally, a CB would be great at both man and zone coverage, but that’s more rare than we might think.

[dave mcbride]

3 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

this is my only time I'll respond to this:

Tyrod was not interested in redoing his deal. his entire salary was on the books for this year. it was immovable.

they gained a valuable draft pick.

and, in the end, exactly how much better of a record would the Bills have with Taylor running this offense?

 

let's be real. they weren't making the playoffs with Aaron Rodgers behind center.

 

jw

I'm leaving this discussion, as I've said my piece.

 

jw

That's fine, and I get that. But there's a big difference between "not making the playoffs" and worst offense in league history. The scenario I presented assumed that he wouldn't restructure his one-year-and-one-year-only $16 million cap hit.

Edited November 5, 2018 by dave mcbride

[jkirchofer]

McDermott and Beane mishandled the quarterback situation by not keeping a veteran quarterback on the roster. They mishandled it by not having an actual QB coach on the staff. Most of all, McDermott mishandled the quarterback situation by valuing culture over talent.

[Peter]

21 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

me, too, but it appears some were confused by it.

perhaps, i should have typed slower.

 

?

 

jw

 

Did it make sense to you to trade AJ (for a 5th round pick) when he was the only other guy who knew the offense?

 

Did it make sense to surround the QB (any of them) with inferior talent?

 

Did it make sense to have someone other than an experienced QB coach be the QB coach for our very raw rookie QB?

 

Wouldn't have been wise to make sure that our very, very raw rookie QB had a good offensive line. 

 

Instead, McBeane made it worse by, for example, trading Cordy.

 

While I agree that some in the Buffalo media can be lazy, it would be tough to argue that the QB situation was managed like a well oiled machine.

 

P.S. The above is without even mentioning (until now) that McCoach outsmarted himself by trading the pick that could have been used to select Mahomes (which also would have saved us from giving up all of the assets we gave up to select a guy who was not even selected for first team Mountain West.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Peter

[GG]

22 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

me, too, but it appears some were confused by it.

perhaps, i should have typed slower.

 

?

 

jw

A few caps also help once in a while

2 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

Did it make sense to you to trade AJ (for a 5th round pick) when he was the only other guy who knew the offense?

 

Did it make sense to surround the QB (any of them) with inferior talent?

 

Did it make sense to have someone other than an experienced QB coach be the QB coach for our very raw rookie QB?

 

Wouldn't have been wise to make sure that our very, very raw rookie QB had a good offensive line. 

 

Instead, McBeane made it worse by, for example, trading Cordy.

 

While I agree that some in the Buffalo media can be lazy, it would be tough to argue that the QB situation was managed like a well oiled machine.

 

P.S. The above is without even mentioning (until now) that McCoach outsmarted himself by trading the pick that could have been used to select Mahomes (which also would have saved us from giving up all of the assets we gave up to select a guy who was not even selected for first team Mountain West.

Again, missing the point of the tweetstorm.  

 

jw wasn't defending the process. 

[Peter]

1 minute ago, GG said:

A few caps also help once in a while

Again, missing the point of the tweetstorm.  

 

jw wasn't defending the process. 

 

Then I missed the point because I thought that he was based on what others have said.

 

Nevertheless, my thoughts on the "process" remain the same.  I am glad that JW is not defending it.

[GG]

Just now, Peter said:

 

Then I missed the point because I thought that he was based on what others have said.

 

Nevertheless, my thoughts on the "process" remain the same.  I am glad that JW is not defending it.

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

[Peter]

Just now, GG said:

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

 

Thanks for letting me know.

[Mr. WEO]

40 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

 

Hardly need to  overthink this one.

 

It's really disingenuous to criticize your colleagues for not offering McD prompts in a news conference as to why he didn't go after this guy or that.  All they should have to ask, as I said, is how he, McD, came to the decisions that led to a backup roster of Peterman (was his Week 1 starter!), Anderson, and now Barkley.  "Hey, what else was I supposed to do"...is not a strong reply.

 

Everyone and his mother, on this site and likely others similar, has authored thousands of suggestions, whynots and howabouts regarding the QBs they didn't go for or get.  What else is there to ask of the posters here?  McD knows all of the options.  Does the press really have to help him explain his decisions? 

 

You seem to be answering the questions for him, such as Keenum, TT, etc.  It's an odd position for an objective reporter to take, let alone chastise colleagues over. 

[LSHMEAB]

43 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

McDermott's philosophy is CBs, for the most part, are interchangeable. That was proven out last year when two guys, including Gaines, filled in for Darby's loss.

There was also a belief, from what I remember, that Darby didn't exactly fit the defense.

 

jw

 

 

If his overarching philosophy is that CB's are interchangeable, why in the world would his first draft pick be a CB?

 

That makes no sense.

[dave mcbride]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

[JohnC]

16 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

 

keep in mind, the Pegulas have now gone through that with the Sabres, staying the course after watching a team thoroughly under-achieve last year and seeing encouraging returns this year.

now, this Bills team this year isn't exactly under-achieving entirely, because this was always going to be a transitional year, and we're seeing the lumps result from it. that said, a case can be made that the offense is not playing up to even modest expectations.

 

this leads to the upcoming offseason and seeing what happens now that the BIlls are fully in a position to start adding talent.

can't judge Beane and/or McDermott entirely until that happens.

 

jw

This regime made the decision (starting with the McDermott hire) to rebuild the roster and restructure the cap. They shed some of their best players such as Watkins and a laggard Dareus knowing that in the short run that it was going to set the team back. They deliberately were eschewing the Whaley incremental approach toward adding players and contracts. The NFL analysts certainly weren't surprised that this team was going to slide back because there was almost a unanimity in their prognostications that the Bills were going to be bad. That opinion was predictable when the organization decided to absorbed the cap hits in one year instead of stretching it out over the next few years. 

 

Beane has acknowledged a mistake in not securing Derek Anderson sooner after the McCarron trade. But in the grand scheme of things does it really matter who was going to start with those caliber of qbs and with the already depleted roster. The Bills were going to struggle no matter what. The upside is that although Josh Allen was forced to start sooner than what the staff really wanted it probably will work out better in accelerating his development. 

 

I'm very confident that the Pegulas' were not only aware of McDermott's rebuild strategy when they hired him. In fact that was why he was hired. So although the play on the field has been excruciatingly ugly it shouldn't come as a surprise to them. As you noted what happens this offseason with respect to the utilization of the cap and how well they work the draft will determine the standing of McDermontt and Beane. 

 

Again, as you noted Terry Pegula has witnessed that a smartly run offseason in hockey can result in a major improvement in the team. So I'm sure that he is counting on the same leap forward after this offseason. When one decides to take on a major rebuild there is going to be some unavoidable tough times. The owner wasn't satisfied with the Whaley incremental approach so he hired someone who had a more comprehensive plan to follow. This year is about Josh Allen and getting ready for the offseason. 

 

 

[GG]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

 

You are addressing the latter portion of the tweets, after jw got sucked into the discussion of what options were available.  Even on that, he threw a bone out.

 

The main crux of the point, and counter to the polite Canadian nature, was jw taking a rightful shot at the whiny reporters who don't have the courage to ask the hard questions when they are in the prime position to ask the hard questions.  

 

If you have a pen or a microphone and you slam the organization for their management of the team, you should have enough of a backbone to ask those questions directly. 

[nedboy7]

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

This regime made the decision (starting with the McDermott hire) to rebuild the roster and restructure the cap. They shed some of their best players such as Watkins and a laggard Dareus knowing that in the short run that it was going to set the team back. They deliberately were eschewing the Whaley incremental approach toward adding players and contracts. The NFL analysts certainly weren't surprised that this team was going to slide back because there was almost a unanimity in their prognostications that the Bills were going to be bad. That opinion was predictable when the organization decided to absorbed the cap hits in one year instead of stretching it out over the next few years. 

 

Beane has acknowledged a mistake in not securing Derek Anderson sooner after the McCarron trade. But in the grand scheme of things does it really matter who was going to start with those caliber of qbs and with the already depleted roster. The Bills were going to struggle no matter what. The upside is that although Josh Allen was forced to start sooner than what the staff really wanted it probably will work out better in accelerating his development. 

 

I'm very confident that the Pegulas' were not only aware of McDermott's rebuild strategy when they hired him. In fact that was why he was hired. So although the play on the field has been excruciatingly ugly it shouldn't come as a surprise to them. As you noted what happens this offseason with respect to the utilization of the cap and how well they work the draft will determine the standing of McDermontt and Beane. 

 

Again, as you noted Terry Pegula has witnessed that a smartly run offseason in hockey can result in a major improvement in the team. So I'm sure that he is counting on the same leap forward after this offseason. When one decides to take on a major rebuild there is going to be some unavoidable tough times. The owner wasn't satisfied with the Whaley incremental approach so he hired someone who had a more comprehensive plan to follow. This year is about Josh Allen and getting ready for the offseason. 

 

 

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros