Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

For all the complainers that want McBeane gone, have you thought about where we would be if we still had our two Pro-Bowl Olineman.  

 

Maybe Im wrong but I think with those two Allen doesnt get injured in the Texans game.  So at the least he would have won that game I believe and would have gotten more on field experience.

 

I also believe our run game would have been much better.

 

Best case senerio we may have actually had a shot at the division title.

 

The only down side may have been we may not have gotten Anderson and Barkley.  There is no way to tell how much hes learned from them.  Also I believe we have a long term viable backup in Barkley.

 

They had no way of knowing they would lose those two Oline and to ask them to replace those guys in a single off season is obserd.  Its amazing that there are some that cant put this season in perspective.  

 

We have had coach after coach that had their players underachieving and now we have one that I believe gets his team to overachieve and people want to get rid of him.  Im very excited about this teams potential goin forward as they seem to actually develope talent and motivate players.  I do believe it would have been easier to see it with Cogs and Wood still on the line.

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted (edited)

I think the running game and Allen would have been better and of course Allen would have been protected a little better,but not better enough to win no more than maybe 3 more games IMO. I think they still would have had problems with the WRs. We will never know.

Edited by Patrick_Duffy
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
5 minutes ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

I think the running game and Allen would have been better and of course Allen would have been protected a little better,but not better enough to win no more than maybe 3 more games IMO. I think they still would have had problems with the WRs. We will never know.

True. We will never know. Also true the haters would still be hating.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Well..if this theory is true then there’s no reason to focus on anything other than the OLine in 2019. The rest of the many, many offensive problems (WR, TE, RB, and QB) were all self inflicted wounds by this Front Office and Coaching staff.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Therefore were obvious salary cap ramifications to Wood and Incognito retiring, but,Bills had time to find replacements. Could Beane have done a better job filling those two spots?How much worse was the Bodine/Groy combo at center? Ducasse/Teller at LG?

 

Edited by Pablocruise
Posted
7 minutes ago, Moonzoo said:

 

It is impossible to know, but the wide receiver position could have been substantially affected by the loss of these two players.  Someone out there is smart enough to figure out who might be on thus team if they were not gone.

I agree. The line affects the QB play. If the QB isnt protected the WR cant get to his spot. That said, he has to catch the ball. I would guess 30-45 catches missed this year. Am I wrong?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

You bring up a good point.  Losing Wood and Cogs after last season derailed the process somewhat.  

 

They stuck with their plan to draft a qb and scrapped together an oline that is brutal.  

 

10 picks and 90 MM  in cap space this offseason hopefully addresses this oline. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Moonzoo said:

 

The question is: what player resources were expended to replace these two which could have been used elsewhere, including wide receiver?  We know at the very least that two extra players would have been available to the Bills, but we do not know how the loss of Cogs and Wood affected decisions regarding player personnel, including wide receiver personnel.  The loss of two effective starting linemen could very well have scrambled the priorities and evaluation of personnel/units, including the acquisition of personnel, including wide receivers.  

Yes. Also, they had 12 OL men in camp.  The two lines, like it or not are hard to replace.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

If we kept Robert Woods at least Allen would have one WR to throw to.

It has been said here 100Xs Woods did not want to be here

Posted
18 minutes ago, Moonzoo said:

I agree. Every criticism of McBeane totally omits the significant loss of these two.

 

I have yet to see any analysis which says: here is why the loss of these two is irrelevant to the conclusion that McBeane are bad.

 

From on the field to personnel, the unexpected absence of these two may have affected things substantially.

 

I realize Peterman (or other examples) will be cited as having nothing to do with these two.  But how different would the team have looked with these two?  

 

Actually one of my big criticisms of them this season was that they didn’t seem to alter their plan at all when they lost those two.  I hate seeing the OL largely ignored.  It would’ve been bad enough in a typical season, but it was inexcusable in a season where they were going to trot out a raw rookie to run a vertical passing game.  A solid OL that could give him time and take pressure off of him by opening up the running game was the most important thing they could’ve done for Allen.  But they had a plan to get their QB, their cornerstone LB and and fix the defense and they executed it despite the changing conditions of the offense. The lack of talent at WR didn’t help either. They’ve got to fix it this offseason. 

Posted

Yikes! There are a ton of sob stories on here. The Bills has virtually ZERO injuries on either side of the line of scrimmage throughout the entire season. There are teams around the league having to make personnel decisions on a weekly basis. Whereas the Bills saw a starting CB RETIRE during a game, then traded away their #1 WR, and cut their opening day QB. Yea....I’m sure this mess was due to an old Offensive Guard retiring!  Sheeesh

Posted

The departure of Incognito has me miffed. Why was the GM so determined to cut his salary when he could have easily fit it in this year? Cog's level of play was starting to slide a little but he was still arguably our best blocker. Was Cog's behavior and mental condition noticeably deteriorating? I don't know. What we do know is that offseason his behavior did show signs of trouble. My question is if they were willing to keep him on a scaled-down salary why didn't they just keep him at his current salary? We surely  could have used him this year. 

Posted
7 minutes ago, JohnC said:

The departure of Incognito has me miffed. Why was the GM so determined to cut his salary when he could have easily fit it in this year? Cog's level of play was starting to slide a little but he was still arguably our best blocker. Was Cog's behavior and mental condition noticeably deteriorating? I don't know. What we do know is that offseason his behavior did show signs of trouble. My question is if they were willing to keep him on a scaled-down salary why didn't they just keep him at his current salary? We surely  could have used him this year. 

We had no idea he would lose his mind after taking a pay cut. You are operating with the benefit of hindsight.

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted

I think with Cog and Wood we would be at least .500. Probably have the #1 rushing offense although our passing offense probably wouldn't change, it's a bare cupboard in that regard. I don't know? 8 wins?

Posted

I was hoping a healthy Cordy Glenn LT , with Dawkins at RT .  Richie was a key loss.  Beane should not have messed with his salary.

 

So much for a top running game. It will be hard to rebuild a OL especially with a lot of other teams bidding for the same free agents.

×
×
  • Create New...