Shaw66 Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 6 minutes ago, SoTier said: At minimum, I think the delay in finding a competent backup QB suggests that either or both didn't think that having a competent backup QB was particularly important, despite Allen's struggles and his propensity to run too often. How would today's Buffalo Bills, on June 20, 2019, look different if Beane had hired backup QB more quickly and McDermott had cut Peterman more quickly? What is the practical consequence today if McBeane had acted differently last September? I'd suggest that THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER. The Bills' roster would be exactly the same as it is today. So we're talking about two isolated decisions that have no practical consequence today out of tens of thousands decisions McBeane made in 2018 . 1
oldmanfan Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 (edited) 12 minutes ago, SoTier said: They must not have been looking very hard because they could have found somebody considerably better than Peterman without sinking to bringing in a first round bust or a retiree given that they found Barkley within a couple of days of Anderson getting hurt. Instead, they waited a month and signed Anderson who promptly got hurt. I can think of numerous reasons for the Bills to wait a month to replace Peterman, none of them very complimentary to McDermott and/or Beane. At minimum, I think the delay in finding a competent backup QB suggests that either or both didn't think that having a competent backup QB was particularly important, despite Allen's struggles and his propensity to run too often. 50 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: Responding to this discussion generally, and only partly to what WEO says. What he says is implicit in what others are saying here. Plain and simple, it is almost an absolute certainty that McDermott and Beane know more about football and make more informed judgments about the game and personnel than anyone posting here. Anyone. The NFL is closer to being a pure meritocracy than almost any large organization, university, government that we have. It functions beautifully as a meritocracy. The notion that it's populated by a bunch of noobs who are lucky they can tie their shoes is just wrong. Success in the NFL is measured by wins, not by who you know. If Rex Ryan got the Bills job because of who he knew, how'd that work out for him? Less than two seasons of crappy performance, and he was out. There's turnover in the front offices of NFL teams not because the people getting fired are incompetent; it's because they aren't making the playoffs. Most teams don't make the playoffs, so most teams have front office turnover. Simple as that. Who you know may get you in the door at the bottom of the heap. Belichick knew people in the Colts organization; that's how he got himself a volunteer job at the beginning. But knowing people didn't get him promoted and promoted and promoted. Parcells didn't take Belichick with him every place he went because Bill's father was a coach. Making positive contributions that his bosses saw got him promoted. If he hadn't made positive contributions, he would have been teaching junior high school social studies somewhere. The guys at the top of the pyramid, the GMS, the HCs and the coordinators, the directors of scouting, got to those positions by being good at all the jobs below that that they did. They got promoted and promoted because they were good at those jobs and someone gave them a chance to step up to the next level to see if they could succeed there. It's exactly the same as players - JV in high school, then varsity, then recruiting and college, then training camp, then practice squad or worse for many of them. All along the way, the least capable are being left behind and the successful move on. It's a quintessential meritocracy, and it's the same off the field as it is on the field. McDermott's oline coach, his wideout coach, his special teams coach didn't produce. What happened? Gone. Only one thing matters - doing your job, winning at your job. Some of the coaches come up strictly through the pro game, many others come up through some combination of the pros and college, like Daboll, some strictly through college. But whichever way they've come up, they've demonstrated talent and drive and success. If my job depends on winning, if winning depends in part on the quality of people working for me, I'm not making my college roommate's son my offensive coordinator just for old time's sake. So when someone here makes himself out to be a smart guy who would certainly be in the front office somewhere but he just didn't want to make the sacrifice, financial or otherwise, I just laugh. I mean, it COULD be true, maybe he could. But when someone tells you that he could have won multiple Grammy awards if he'd only chosen to spend several years playing in a band in bars throughout the midwest, do you believe him? When someone tells you he could have been a brain surgeon except that he decided to move to Toledo to be with his girlfriend the physical therapist, do you believe him? Brain surgeons got to be brain surgeons for a reason. But somehow people here seem to think that GMs got be GMs by kissing someone's behind. The fact is that, just like on the playing fields, the NFL weeds out the weak, the less determined, the less able jlong before those people are getting hired into senior front office positions. The front offices are left with, by and large, the most qualified people in the country doing those jobs. We don't like to admit it, because, after all, any fool could see that Peterman wasn't the answer. But the truth is that McDermott is as smart as any of us, is as determined as the most determined of us. McDermott has spent over 20 years working 60-80 hours a week doing this: William & Mary (1998) Graduate assistant Philadelphia Eagles (1999–2000) Scouting administrative coordinator Philadelphia Eagles (2001) Assistant to head coach Philadelphia Eagles (2002–2003) Defensive assistant & quality control Philadelphia Eagles (2004–2006) Assistant defensive backs coach Philadelphia Eagles (2007) Secondary coach Philadelphia Eagles (2008) Linebackers coach Philadelphia Eagles (2009–2010) Defensive coordinator & secondary coach Carolina Panthers (2011–2016) Defensive coordinator Buffalo Bills (2017–present) Head coach It's foolhardy for any of us to think we understand what needs to be done better than McDermott. People will argue with me about that, but it's true. McDermott understands the significance of thousands of details about the game that we don't. We can't, because we haven't spent the time studying the game the way he has. Yes, there's the occasional Rex Ryan who gets hired for a second time as a head coach, but they're relatively few and far between. Winning is too important for an owner or a GM to hire less than the most competent people he can find. Pretty much everybody with a big job in the NFL has a resume like McDermott's, and just like McDermott they've succeeded at every level. I've got lots of opinions about the Bills, but I have only a thimbleful of the knowledge and wisdom about the game that McDermott and Beane have. I can argue about it and write about it, but I know this: If I'm in a conversation with Sean McDermott telling him who his starting wideouts should be, he's going to be laughing at me. Not to my face, because he's too much a gentleman to do that, but inside. Thank you Edited June 20, 2019 by oldmanfan
Rock-A-Bye Beasley Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Beane acknowledged after the season they messed up on that. They now have Allen as starter and Barkeley as backup. Mistakes get made, the key thing now is to correct them and learn from it. What else should be done now - should we take them out back and shoot them? 1 minute ago, Shaw66 said: How would today's Buffalo Bills, on June 20, 2019, look different if Beane had hired backup QB more quickly and McDermott had cut Peterman more quickly? What is the practical consequence today if McBeane had acted differently last September? I'd suggest that THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER. The Bills' roster would be exactly the same as it is today. So we're talking about two isolated decisions that have no practical consequence today out of tens of thousands decisions McBeane made in 2018 . No one is suggesting we do anything TO THEM. We are simply stating our displeasure with many moves made by this regime. This thread was about high praise for the coach and GM. Some fans strongly disagree that they are doing a good job, that's all. Not sure why I have to explain what is happening, but here we are. 1
oldmanfan Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 4 minutes ago, Chemical said: No one is suggesting we do anything TO THEM. We are simply stating our displeasure with many moves made by this regime. This thread was about high praise for the coach and GM. Some fans strongly disagree that they are doing a good job, that's all. Not sure why I have to explain what is happening, but here we are. Would you rather they acknowledge they made the mistake or not?
Shaw66 Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Chemical said: No one is suggesting we do anything TO THEM. We are simply stating our displeasure with many moves made by this regime. This thread was about high praise for the coach and GM. Some fans strongly disagree that they are doing a good job, that's all. Not sure why I have to explain what is happening, but here we are. I get it Chem. As I've said before, I don't agree with the points people make about whether and how to rebuild, and whether particular player personnel decisions related to talented guys were the best decisions, but at least there's a real discussion to be had about those decisions. Whether Watkins and Dareus should have been on the team in 2018 and should still be on the team is at least worth talking about. My point was that it's virtually impossible to build an argument against McBeane based on their handling of the backup QB situation in 2018, because there was no material consequence, positive or negative, that can be ascribed to those decisions. No consequence in 2018, and no consequence in 2019.
Rock-A-Bye Beasley Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Would you rather they acknowledge they made the mistake or not? I don't really care.
oldmanfan Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 Just now, Chemical said: I don't really care. That's fairly obvious. You focus on the decisions you thought were bad. What decisions did you like?
Mr. WEO Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, Shaw66 said: Responding to this discussion generally, and only partly to what WEO says. What he says is implicit in what others are saying here. Plain and simple, it is almost an absolute certainty that McDermott and Beane know more about football and make more informed judgments about the game and personnel than anyone posting here. Anyone. The NFL is closer to being a pure meritocracy than almost any large organization, university, government that we have. It functions beautifully as a meritocracy. The notion that it's populated by a bunch of noobs who are lucky they can tie their shoes is just wrong. Success in the NFL is measured by wins, not by who you know. If Rex Ryan got the Bills job because of who he knew, how'd that work out for him? Less than two seasons of crappy performance, and he was out. There's turnover in the front offices of NFL teams not because the people getting fired are incompetent; it's because they aren't making the playoffs. Most teams don't make the playoffs, so most teams have front office turnover. Simple as that. Who you know may get you in the door at the bottom of the heap. Belichick knew people in the Colts organization; that's how he got himself a volunteer job at the beginning. But knowing people didn't get him promoted and promoted and promoted. Parcells didn't take Belichick with him every place he went because Bill's father was a coach. Making positive contributions that his bosses saw got him promoted. If he hadn't made positive contributions, he would have been teaching junior high school social studies somewhere. The guys at the top of the pyramid, the GMS, the HCs and the coordinators, the directors of scouting, got to those positions by being good at all the jobs below that that they did. They got promoted and promoted because they were good at those jobs and someone gave them a chance to step up to the next level to see if they could succeed there. It's exactly the same as players - JV in high school, then varsity, then recruiting and college, then training camp, then practice squad or worse for many of them. All along the way, the least capable are being left behind and the successful move on. It's a quintessential meritocracy, and it's the same off the field as it is on the field. McDermott's oline coach, his wideout coach, his special teams coach didn't produce. What happened? Gone. Only one thing matters - doing your job, winning at your job. Some of the coaches come up strictly through the pro game, many others come up through some combination of the pros and college, like Daboll, some strictly through college. But whichever way they've come up, they've demonstrated talent and drive and success. If my job depends on winning, if winning depends in part on the quality of people working for me, I'm not making my college roommate's son my offensive coordinator just for old time's sake. So when someone here makes himself out to be a smart guy who would certainly be in the front office somewhere but he just didn't want to make the sacrifice, financial or otherwise, I just laugh. I mean, it COULD be true, maybe he could. But when someone tells you that he could have won multiple Grammy awards if he'd only chosen to spend several years playing in a band in bars throughout the midwest, do you believe him? When someone tells you he could have been a brain surgeon except that he decided to move to Toledo to be with his girlfriend the physical therapist, do you believe him? Brain surgeons got to be brain surgeons for a reason. But somehow people here seem to think that GMs got be GMs by kissing someone's behind. The fact is that, just like on the playing fields, the NFL weeds out the weak, the less determined, the less able jlong before those people are getting hired into senior front office positions. The front offices are left with, by and large, the most qualified people in the country doing those jobs. We don't like to admit it, because, after all, any fool could see that Peterman wasn't the answer. But the truth is that McDermott is as smart as any of us, is as determined as the most determined of us. McDermott has spent over 20 years working 60-80 hours a week doing this: William & Mary (1998) Graduate assistant Philadelphia Eagles (1999–2000) Scouting administrative coordinator Philadelphia Eagles (2001) Assistant to head coach Philadelphia Eagles (2002–2003) Defensive assistant & quality control Philadelphia Eagles (2004–2006) Assistant defensive backs coach Philadelphia Eagles (2007) Secondary coach Philadelphia Eagles (2008) Linebackers coach Philadelphia Eagles (2009–2010) Defensive coordinator & secondary coach Carolina Panthers (2011–2016) Defensive coordinator Buffalo Bills (2017–present) Head coach It's foolhardy for any of us to think we understand what needs to be done better than McDermott. People will argue with me about that, but it's true. McDermott understands the significance of thousands of details about the game that we don't. We can't, because we haven't spent the time studying the game the way he has. Yes, there's the occasional Rex Ryan who gets hired for a second time as a head coach, but they're relatively few and far between. Winning is too important for an owner or a GM to hire less than the most competent people he can find. Pretty much everybody with a big job in the NFL has a resume like McDermott's, and just like McDermott they've succeeded at every level. I've got lots of opinions about the Bills, but I have only a thimbleful of the knowledge and wisdom about the game that McDermott and Beane have. I can argue about it and write about it, but I know this: If I'm in a conversation with Sean McDermott telling him who his starting wideouts should be, he's going to be laughing at me. Not to my face, because he's too much a gentleman to do that, but inside. Rex Ryan, after coaching the jets from AFCC games to oblivion was hired by this organization. The disastrous result was predictable---and predicted by many on this board. Fired HC's routinely get 2nd, even 3rd chances. That's not meritocracy, that's a too small talent pool. At the beginning of the 2017 season, 10 of the 32 HC's were on their 2nd or 3rd HC job. That's the opposite of "few and far between". (Rob Ryan was just hired again into the NFL). Your devotion to Beane/McD is noted and notable (although if you asked him if he was really going to start Nate Peterman as his opening day QB last year he wouldn't have laughed like many us were laughing at the notion at the time). But I wasn't necessarily talking about them (although their plan still has much to prove). But your own argument (bad hires get fired) supports the point that there have been a lot of bad GM hires over the recent past (you hardly have to go all the way back to Matt Millen). Look at the disasters in the Redskins FO in recent years. The Bengals ("owner GM"). The Jets. The Browns! Sashi Brown was their lawyer before their GM. Gettleman was axed by the Panthers and is now ruining the Giants. Every owner thinks he is hiring "the most competent people he can find". But a lot of times, they aren't competent. And that doesn't require mystic skills to see from outside a FO, you know. Some brain surgeons are incompetent, you know. Edited June 20, 2019 by Mr. WEO 1
Shaw66 Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 10 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Rex Ryan, after coaching the jets from AFCC games to oblivion was hired by this organization. The disastrous result was predictable---and predicted by many on this board. Fired HC's routinely get 2nd, even 3rd chances. That's not meritocracy, that's a too small talent pool. At the beginning of the 2017 season, 10 of the 32 HC's were on their 2nd or 3rd HC job. That's the opposite of "few and far between". (Rob Ryan was just hired again into the NFL). Your devotion to Beane/McD is noted and notable (although if you asked him if he was really going to start Nate Peterman as his opening day QB last year he wouldn't have laughed like many us were laughing at the notion at the time). But I wasn't necessarily talking about them (although their plan still has much to prove). But your own argument (bad hires get fired) supports the point that there have been a lot of bad GM hires over the recent past (you hardly have to go all the way back to Matt Millen). Look at the disasters in the Redskins FO in recent years. The Bengals ("owner GM"). The Jets. The Browns! Sashi Brown was their lawyer before their GM. Gettleman was axed by the Panthers and is now ruining the Giants. Every owner thinks he is hiring "the most competent people he can find". But a lot of times, they aren't competent. And that doesn't require mystic skills to see from outside a FO, you know. Some brain surgeons are incompetent, you know. Bad hires get fired, true, but people get fired, true./ But most people at the higher levels of the NFL get fired because their teams didn't win. Each season, three quarters of the teams in the league are unsuccessful, and upwards of half of their head coaches get fired. Most of those teams had inadequate quarterbacking, but the coach still gets fired. There are very few guys hired as head coaches who are not qualified, who haven't had a lot of success for many years in the NFL or college. They get fired because almost all coaches get fired, not because they aren't competent.
oldmanfan Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 19 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Rex Ryan, after coaching the jets from AFCC games to oblivion was hired by this organization. The disastrous result was predictable---and predicted by many on this board. Fired HC's routinely get 2nd, even 3rd chances. That's not meritocracy, that's a too small talent pool. At the beginning of the 2017 season, 10 of the 32 HC's were on their 2nd or 3rd HC job. That's the opposite of "few and far between". (Rob Ryan was just hired again into the NFL). Your devotion to Beane/McD is noted and notable (although if you asked him if he was really going to start Nate Peterman as his opening day QB last year he wouldn't have laughed like many us were laughing at the notion at the time). But I wasn't necessarily talking about them (although their plan still has much to prove). But your own argument (bad hires get fired) supports the point that there have been a lot of bad GM hires over the recent past (you hardly have to go all the way back to Matt Millen). Look at the disasters in the Redskins FO in recent years. The Bengals ("owner GM"). The Jets. The Browns! Sashi Brown was their lawyer before their GM. Gettleman was axed by the Panthers and is now ruining the Giants. Every owner thinks he is hiring "the most competent people he can find". But a lot of times, they aren't competent. And that doesn't require mystic skills to see from outside a FO, you know. Some brain surgeons are incompetent, you know. Some brain surgeons are, but very very very few. Because they get weeded out earlier in training. Same with the top tier of most any profession including coaching. Turnover is higher with coaches because expectations grow more unreasonable with time.
Rock-A-Bye Beasley Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 1 minute ago, Shaw66 said: I get it Chem. As I've said before, I don't agree with the points people make about whether and how to rebuild, and whether particular player personnel decisions related to talented guys were the best decisions, but at least there's a real discussion to be had about those decisions. Whether Watkins and Dareus should have been on the team in 2018 and should still be on the team is at least worth talking about. My point was that it's virtually impossible to build an argument against McBeane based on their handling of the backup QB situation in 2018, because there was no material consequence, positive or negative, that can be ascribed to those decisions. No consequence in 2018, and no consequence in 2019. How can you say there's no consequence when Allen had to go in early OR, depending on your philosophy on QB development, missed the first team reps he should have been getting all preseason? It was a disaster all around. If you're trying to say now its over with and no harm done, then I'm saying the decision making could just be faulty overall 12 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: That's fairly obvious. You focus on the decisions you thought were bad. What decisions did you like? Morse, Edmunds, The attempt to trade for Antonio Brown, the defense aside from the Dareus for Star swap, Allen might end up being their saving grace if he develops, but they really didn't make that easy for him. Tyrod trade was good value but negated by KB trade trying to think of more 1
Mr. WEO Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 35 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: Bad hires get fired, true, but people get fired, true./ But most people at the higher levels of the NFL get fired because their teams didn't win. Each season, three quarters of the teams in the league are unsuccessful, and upwards of half of their head coaches get fired. Most of those teams had inadequate quarterbacking, but the coach still gets fired. There are very few guys hired as head coaches who are not qualified, who haven't had a lot of success for many years in the NFL or college. They get fired because almost all coaches get fired, not because they aren't competent. The Browns have had 7 HC's in the past 11 seasons. At least 2 were incompetent--demonstrably. The GM's job, essentially, is to pick the right coach and QB.
Mr. WEO Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 31 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Some brain surgeons are, but very very very few. Because they get weeded out earlier in training. Same with the top tier of most any profession including coaching. Turnover is higher with coaches because expectations grow more unreasonable with time. There's no reason to believe that it's as rare as you think. Do you know what it takes to become a neurosurgeon (or any medical subspecialist for that matter)? It takes good grades in medical school and a med student who simply says "I want to be a neurosurgeon". No future surgeon is even made to or even asked to show any proficiency in his or her chosen field before they start to train in their chosen field (i.e. residency training). Mediocre or worse residents (trainees) are pushed along with the rest (maybe with a little remediation here and there). It's only when they enter practice does their talent (sheer lack of) in their chosen field become obvious to others. Expectations for coaches (win games) haven't changed in a generation. But many will have the opportunity to fail again. And again even....because they are familiar to owners/FO's and know people in the league. 1
K-9 Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 23 minutes ago, Chemical said: How can you say there's no consequence when Allen had to go in early OR, depending on your philosophy on QB development, missed the first team reps he should have been getting all preseason? It was a disaster all around. If you're trying to say now its over with and no harm done, then I'm saying the decision making could just be faulty overall Morse, Edmunds, The attempt to trade for Antonio Brown, the defense aside from the Dareus for Star swap, Allen might end up being their saving grace if he develops, but they really didn't make that easy for him. Tyrod trade was good value but negated by KB trade trying to think of more The Tyrod trade netted us Edmunds so does that increase the value enough to outweigh the KB trade?
Augie Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 (edited) On 4/27/2019 at 6:38 AM, BillyWhiteShows said: Take this for what you will. Probably one of the most reliable, informed, and well-connected Bills reporters has great things to say about what Beane and McDermott have done over the past 3 years. Tell the truth.....did you know what your were starting here??? ? I went back and read this all again. I think it was made into something other than what JW wrote. The OP (I believe?) is the only one who called it “high praise”. JW was not making unqualified statements of perfection. He cites the QB issue as a problem/unknown. I mean, read at the bottom, “There’s a reasonable sense to believe the needle is pointing up. We’ll see.” That’s hardly earth shattering “high praise”, and I think it’s accurate. But the people who want to point out the (VERY REAL) mistakes and miscues jump all over it without balancing with any positives. That can also be part of being “objective”. There have been obvious errors, some of which they have admitted to and hopefully corrected. But if I look at the WHOLE PICTURE, I too am encouraged. . Edited June 20, 2019 by Augie 2
Shaw66 Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 42 minutes ago, Chemical said: How can you say there's no consequence when Allen had to go in early OR, depending on your philosophy on QB development, missed the first team reps he should have been getting all preseason? It was a disaster all around. There was no consequence. If your philosophy is to have your rookie QB ride the pine, it's because he isn't ready to play in the league and needs seasoning. Allen showed from day one he was ready. If your philosophy is to start your rookie, by all means you want him to get first team reps in training camp. But by the end of Allen's rookie, the fact that he didn't get a lot of first team reps in training camp was largely irrelevant. Where he is today in his professional development has not been affected materially by his not getting those training camp reps. To call that outcome a disaster is absolutely ridiculous. A disaster is something that requires an extraordinary recovery effort. The Bills have had to do absolutely nothing to recover from how the QBs were handled. What you mean is it was a theoretical disaster. It was not textbook, by any measure. But it absolutely was not a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where JP Losman was their starter, that was a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where EJ Manuel was the starter, that was a disaster. The Bills lost games because of those decisions. Nothing about the 2018 QB situation was a disaster. Now, if you want to call the 2018 handling of the offensive line a disaster, okay, be my guest. Quarterback was in no way a disaster.
Rock-A-Bye Beasley Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 5 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: There was no consequence. If your philosophy is to have your rookie QB ride the pine, it's because he isn't ready to play in the league and needs seasoning. Allen showed from day one he was ready. If your philosophy is to start your rookie, by all means you want him to get first team reps in training camp. But by the end of Allen's rookie, the fact that he didn't get a lot of first team reps in training camp was largely irrelevant. Where he is today in his professional development has not been affected materially by his not getting those training camp reps. To call that outcome a disaster is absolutely ridiculous. A disaster is something that requires an extraordinary recovery effort. The Bills have had to do absolutely nothing to recover from how the QBs were handled. What you mean is it was a theoretical disaster. It was not textbook, by any measure. But it absolutely was not a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where JP Losman was their starter, that was a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where EJ Manuel was the starter, that was a disaster. The Bills lost games because of those decisions. Nothing about the 2018 QB situation was a disaster. Now, if you want to call the 2018 handling of the offensive line a disaster, okay, be my guest. Quarterback was in no way a disaster. So you already forgot about the Texans game I see 1
oldmanfan Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 1 hour ago, Chemical said: How can you say there's no consequence when Allen had to go in early OR, depending on your philosophy on QB development, missed the first team reps he should have been getting all preseason? It was a disaster all around. If you're trying to say now its over with and no harm done, then I'm saying the decision making could just be faulty overall Morse, Edmunds, The attempt to trade for Antonio Brown, the defense aside from the Dareus for Star swap, Allen might end up being their saving grace if he develops, but they really didn't make that easy for him. Tyrod trade was good value but negated by KB trade trying to think of more Glad to hear these. I don't think they've been flawless; the QB thing is one and I agree with many that the blowouts they've had are concerning right now. 1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said: There's no reason to believe that it's as rare as you think. Do you know what it takes to become a neurosurgeon (or any medical subspecialist for that matter)? It takes good grades in medical school and a med student who simply says "I want to be a neurosurgeon". No future surgeon is even made to or even asked to show any proficiency in his or her chosen field before they start to train in their chosen field (i.e. residency training). Mediocre or worse residents (trainees) are pushed along with the rest (maybe with a little remediation here and there). It's only when they enter practice does their talent (sheer lack of) in their chosen field become obvious to others. Expectations for coaches (win games) haven't changed in a generation. But many will have the opportunity to fail again. And again even....because they are familiar to owners/FO's and know people in the league. Yes, because I teach medical students including future neurosurgeons. And I work in a subspecialty medical field. The process winnows out the vast majority of those who can't cut it. I'm one of those who deals with that at the student level.
GunnerBill Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 1 hour ago, K-9 said: The Tyrod trade netted us Edmunds so does that increase the value enough to outweigh the KB trade? Not until Edmunds proves himself as a 1st rounder (and he was the 9th ranked player on my board in 2018 so I liked the pick). 59 minutes ago, Shaw66 said: There was no consequence. If your philosophy is to have your rookie QB ride the pine, it's because he isn't ready to play in the league and needs seasoning. Allen showed from day one he was ready. If your philosophy is to start your rookie, by all means you want him to get first team reps in training camp. But by the end of Allen's rookie, the fact that he didn't get a lot of first team reps in training camp was largely irrelevant. Where he is today in his professional development has not been affected materially by his not getting those training camp reps. To call that outcome a disaster is absolutely ridiculous. A disaster is something that requires an extraordinary recovery effort. The Bills have had to do absolutely nothing to recover from how the QBs were handled. What you mean is it was a theoretical disaster. It was not textbook, by any measure. But it absolutely was not a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where JP Losman was their starter, that was a disaster. The Bills putting themselves in the position where EJ Manuel was the starter, that was a disaster. The Bills lost games because of those decisions. Nothing about the 2018 QB situation was a disaster. Now, if you want to call the 2018 handling of the offensive line a disaster, okay, be my guest. Quarterback was in no way a disaster. I am sorry Shaw but I consider putting the worst Quarterback I have seen in 16 years of watching this league out there to start on 3 separate occasions was - to my mind at least - a disaster. Doesn't mean I have to think it damaged the 2019 Bills or beyond. But it basically threw games in 2017 and 2018 and it was entirely predictable to anyone who watched, and I mean really watched, his college tape. 1
Mr. WEO Posted June 20, 2019 Posted June 20, 2019 31 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Glad to hear these. I don't think they've been flawless; the QB thing is one and I agree with many that the blowouts they've had are concerning right now. Yes, because I teach medical students including future neurosurgeons. And I work in a subspecialty medical field. The process winnows out the vast majority of those who can't cut it. I'm one of those who deals with that at the student level. I deal with it at the resident and Fellow level. At the student level, students are free to choose their future career, for the most part. Once matched, it's difficult to get rid of the poorly functioning resident trainee. The path of least resistance is to promote and finish them, unfortunately.
Recommended Posts