THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - Let the Games Begin

[Heitz]

4 minutes ago, mead107 said:

Really do like all your post.  ??????

keep up the great work. 

 

Thank you 

 

Yeah, what he said!

 

 

[Shaw66]

Thanks.  I appreciate the kind words.

 

Very few of my friends are serious football fans.   They think I'm crazy.  

[stuvian]

I am not so much excited by our roster as I am about the change in organizational culture. We've had a lot of talent pass through the red, white and blue (except at QB) through the decade of fail. This regime is very quick to send anyone packing who plays into a culture of mediocrity whether it's a coordinator, player, coach or strength and conditioning trainer. There is an urgency to this regime that I like. 

 

We were a country club for soon to be retired vets for way too long. That won't cut it with this front office. I really believe that McDermott knows how to instill a winning culture. 

 

I don't fully know whether Josh Allen is the second coming of Matt Ryan or Ryan Leaf but I do know that I trust the process that led to our selecting him. I don't think we'll win any games easily and I like it that way. This team needs to learn how to win by methods other than turtle ball. We need to earn our confidence and our victories by grinding out character wins. 

 

I think we'll see evidence of it this year. 

[LSHMEAB]

11 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Say hello to Bill Belichick.   He wins with an elite quarterback and a shutdown corner, period.  The rest is window dressing.  It's average talent, because he never is drafting in a position to bet elite talent.   

Belichick won a SB in his second season in NE with a first year QB. I don't see the analogy there my friend.

 

I think what BillsVet is driving at is that the playoffs are generally the expectation for a regime in year 3. I get it. Part of the model is long term success and more incremental results. But it's still year 3 and they do have a solid defense and a QB going into his second season with same coordinator. I don't quite understand how you can expect/accept mediocre results and still be brimming with confidence. You've done well explaining that position. I just don't happen to agree with it. Win games and I'm good.

[Shaw66]

4 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

Belichick won a SB in his second :season in NE with a first year QB. I don't see the analogy there my friend.

 

I think what BillsVet is driving at is that the playoffs are generally the expectation for a regime in year 3. I get it. Part of the model is long term success and more incremental results. But it's still year 3 and they do have a solid defense and a QB going into his second season with same coordinator. I don't quite understand how you can expect/accept mediocre results and still be brimming with confidence. You've done well explaining that position. I just don't happen to agree with it. Win games and I'm good.

Yes, we do disagree.    

 

I missed where I said that Belichick took many years to build the Patriots.   What McBeane have said all along is that they're trying to build a team that will have sustained, long-term success.  What I've said, not McBeane, is that what sustained long-term success looks like is what the Patriots have - winning over a long period of time, despite poor draft position and repeated roster turnover.  That's the objective.   No one said that it was going to be done in two years, and it doesn't make sense to say that it has to be done on the same schedule that Belichick followed.   

 

In fact, McBeane have been very clear: they were surprised to make the playoffs in year one, they told us the team would be worse in year two, the team would begin showing the results of their efforts in year three.  They've said that.  They also said the year three could be but probably wouldn't be the year where they first start having the kind of success they want to have. 

 

Three years ago the Bills could have hired a head coach who said "in three years I'll give you what the Packers have, what the Saints have, what the Chiefs have."  Instead, they hired a head coach who said "in five or six years I'll give you what the Patriots have."  If it had been my choice, I would have said give me what the Patriots have, and that's the choice the Pegulas made.  

 

One reason I'm so excited about the team is that I've seen McBeane do exactly what they said.   I didn't understand fully at first what that would like, but I do now.   I see now what they meant about getting guys with a certain set of personal behavioral characteristics and then building from there.   McDermott began teaching his system and his values, spending the first two seasons weeding out all the guys who did fit the system and bringing in new guys who looked like they WOULD fit the system.  One aspect of the system is that McDermott wants guys who develop what he believes are the right habits, and that leads to the conclusion that you get your talent from the draft not free agency, because free agents already have developed their professional habits.  It's tougher to find the right fit in those guys.   If you're building through the draft, you can train them be how you want them to be, but it takes longer.   

 

Now, I can see, we all can see if we look, that he's doing exactly what he said he was going to do, and we can see how it works.  We can see the team coming together, Poyer and Hyde to jump start the defensive philosophy and then White and MIlano, then Edmunds and Allen and Ford and Dawkins and Singletary and Jones and Foster and all these Johnson guys and Joseph.   It's easy to see what they're doing.   It's driven by finding good football players who will learn their jobs and commit to doing it well, which is exactly what Belichick has and has had for nearly 20 years.   

 

You say I'm accepting mediocrity.  I'm not, and neither is McDermott.  What McDermott expects, and what I understand and accept, is that he starts with men with the right mental makeup and he teaches them, year after year, to be a team that wins.   Along the way he finds men with the right mental makeup who are physically more gifted than some whom he already has, and so he improves the talent.  McDermott believes that when everyone in the organization is totally committed to his core concepts - competition, continuous improvement, reduction of mistakes and when the talent gets to the level it needs to be, the team will win.  His coaching technique is driven by those concepts.   He won't accept mediocrity in those categories - in those categories he expects excellence.  His belief is that when that culture is fully implemented, the wins will follow.   

 

I now understand what he is doing, and I have seen how it works over two seasons and a third preseason.  I believe it makes sense, because I've watched the team get younger AND get better.   I can see that the team isn't done getting better.   And because everything McBeane have been saying about how they were going to do this has turned out to be accurate, I'm now inclined to trust them when they said, as they've said from the beginning, that this process was not going to be quick.   I'm okay with that because I now can see what's happening.  I'm looking at a team that is going to lose Lorenzo Alexander next year and (if the previous two years is any example) add one or two stud rookies and some sleeper rookie free agents.   I'm looking at a team whose QB and whose middle linebacker, the two linchpins, are still climbing the NFL learning curve.   I can see now that this IS a long process, but one that makes sense. 

 

Yes, Belichick did it in two years.  He did it with a second year QB, and he did it by adding eight or nine cast off free agents that year, guys who were marginal starters elsewhere.  The rest of the league hardly noticed.   Well, McDermott has his second year QB, and he has a rebuilt offense, rebuilt largely with castoffs (several linemen, Brown, Gore, Yeldon), so maybe McDermott will win the Super Bowl in two years.  McBeane have always said that success will come and probably will come over time but may come more quickly.  Everyone will be pleasantly surprised if it comes more quickly.  But they've always thought, because they've regularly said in so many words, that 2020, 2021, 2022 more likely would be the years when truly great expectations would first be justified.   

 

When you say playoffs is generally the expectation in three years, I get what you're saying.   What I'm saying is that it's foolish to apply that standard (which may or may not be true) to a situation when the coach and and GM have told us from the very beginning that it would take longer than three years.   They TOLD us they would build a very good team and that it would take longer than three years.   Now they're two and a half years into the process, it's completely clear that this team has gotten better at its very core, in all of the fundamental things it does, that it's poised to have success and that the building process will continue for another year or two.  Why should anyone apply an arbitrary three-year standard under those circumstances?

 

I'm completely prepared to accept what you call mediocrity (which is mediocrity in the win-loss column) for another year, because long-term success in the win-loss column comes only after first developing exceptional (and not mediocre) behaviors across the entire organization.  McBeane told me to expect it would take more than three years, and McBeane have so far been very good at delivering what they say they're going to deliver.  

 

 

[Shaw66]

10 hours ago, stuvian said:

I am not so much excited by our roster as I am about the change in organizational culture. We've had a lot of talent pass through the red, white and blue (except at QB) through the decade of fail. This regime is very quick to send anyone packing who plays into a culture of mediocrity whether it's a coordinator, player, coach or strength and conditioning trainer. There is an urgency to this regime that I like. 

 

We were a country club for soon to be retired vets for way too long. That won't cut it with this front office. I really believe that McDermott knows how to instill a winning culture. 

 

I don't fully know whether Josh Allen is the second coming of Matt Ryan or Ryan Leaf but I do know that I trust the process that led to our selecting him. I don't think we'll win any games easily and I like it that way. This team needs to learn how to win by methods other than turtle ball. We need to earn our confidence and our victories by grinding out character wins. 

 

I think we'll see evidence of it this year. 

And I think this is exactly correct.   I actually think Josh Allen will be much better than Matt Ryan, but beside that, I think what you've said fits nicely with what I just said.  These things you describe are happening, they've been happening for two and a half years, and we can see them working.  

 

There IS a sense of urgency, but the urgency is to do the right thing today.   There's a maniacal focus on getting better today; McBeane operate with the supreme confidence that if they do the right thing today and every day, the wins will come in time.  

 

And you're right, the team is being designed not be a blow-out winner, not to have the greatest show on turf, but to win soundly week after week.   They aren't going to play turtle ball.  They are going to relentlessly grind opponents into the ground with sustained excellence.   Just like, umm, New England.  

 

And I agree, we'll see evidence of all of this this year.   Will that translate into 10 wins?  Maybe.   But if it doesn't, I won't mind so long there is good evidence that this team is improving and the process is continuing to drive the improvement.  

 

 

By the way, people shouldn't lose sight of the fact that this process applies equally to coaches as to players.   McBeane have said that the coaches, including McDermott, are evaluated and driven to improve, just like players.  I expect Daboll to get better, I expect McD's game management, including clock management and in-game decision making to get better.   He won't tell us publicly, but I am certain that they've developed techniques and McD has learned things to be better in those areas.  

 

I'm excited. 

[BillsVet]

41 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I missed where I said that Belichick took many years to build the Patriots.   What McBeane have said all along is that they're trying to build a team that will have sustained, long-term success.  What I've said, not McBeane, is that what sustained long-term success looks like is what the Patriots have - winning over a long period of time, despite poor draft position and repeated roster turnover.  That's the objective.   No one said that it was going to be done in two years, and it doesn't make sense to say that it has to be done on the same schedule that Belichick followed.   

 

In fact, McBeane have been very clear: they were surprised to make the playoffs in year one, they told us the team would be worse in year two, the team would begin showing the results of their efforts in year three.  They've said that.  They also said the year three could be but probably wouldn't be the year where they first start having the kind of success they want to have. 

 

Three years ago the Bills could have hired a head coach who said "in three years I'll give you what the Packers have, what the Saints have, what the Chiefs have."  Instead, they hired a head coach who said "in five or six years I'll give you what the Patriots have."  If it had been my choice, I would have said give me what the Patriots have, and that's the choice the Pegulas made.  

 

One reason I'm so excited about the team is that I've seen McBeane do exactly what they said.   I didn't understand fully at first what that would like, but I do now.   I see now what they meant about getting guys with a certain set of personal behavioral characteristics and then building from there.   McDermott began teaching his system and his values, spending the first two seasons weeding out all the guys who did fit the system and bringing in new guys who looked like they WOULD fit the system.  One aspect of the system is that McDermott wants guys who develop what he believes are the right habits, and that leads to the conclusion that you get your talent from the draft not free agency, because free agents already have developed their professional habits.  It's tougher to find the right fit in those guys.   If you're building through the draft, you can train them be how you want them to be, but it takes longer.   

 

Now, I can see, we all can see if we look, that he's doing exactly what he said he was going to do, and we can see how it works.  We can see the team coming together, Poyer and Hyde to jump start the defensive philosophy and then White and MIlano, then Edmunds and Allen and Ford and Dawkins and Singletary and Jones and Foster and all these Johnson guys and Joseph.   It's easy to see what they're doing.   It's driven by finding good football players who will learn their jobs and commit to doing it well, which is exactly what Belichick has and has had for nearly 20 years.   

 

You say I'm accepting mediocrity.  I'm not, and neither is McDermott.  What McDermott expects, and what I understand and accept, is that he starts with men with the right mental makeup and he teaches them, year after year, to be a team that wins.   Along the way he finds men with the right mental makeup who are physically more gifted than some whom he already has, and so he improves the talent.  McDermott believes that when everyone in the organization is totally committed to his core concepts - competition, continuous improvement, reduction of mistakes and when the talent gets to the level it needs to be, the team will win.  His coaching technique is driven by those concepts.   He won't accept mediocrity in those categories - in those categories he expects excellence.  His belief is that when that culture is fully implemented, the wins will follow.   

 

I now understand what he is doing, and I have seen how it works over two seasons and a third preseason.  I believe it makes sense, because I've watched the team get younger AND get better.   I can see that the team isn't done getting better.   And because everything McBeane have been saying about how they were going to do this has turned out to be accurate, I'm now inclined to trust them when they said, as they've said from the beginning, that this process was not going to be quick.   I'm okay with that because I now can see what's happening.  I'm looking at a team that is going to lose Lorenzo Alexander next year and (if the previous two years is any example) add one or two stud rookies and some sleeper rookie free agents.   I'm looking at a team whose QB and whose middle linebacker, the two linchpins, are still climbing the NFL learning curve.   I can see now that this IS a long process, but one that makes sense. 

 

Yes, Belichick did it in two years.  He did it with a second year QB, and he did it by adding eight or nine cast off free agents that year, guys who were marginal starters elsewhere.  The rest of the league hardly noticed.   Well, McDermott has his second year QB, and he has a rebuilt offense, rebuilt largely with castoffs (several linemen, Brown, Gore, Yeldon), so maybe McDermott will win the Super Bowl in two years.  McBeane have always said that success will come and probably will come over time but may come more quickly.  Everyone will be pleasantly surprised if it comes more quickly.  But they've always thought, because they've regularly said in so many words, that 2020, 2021, 2022 more likely would be the years when truly great expectations would first be justified.   

 

When you say playoffs is generally the expectation in three years, I get what you're saying.   What I'm saying is that it's foolish to apply that standard (which may or may not be true) to a situation when the coach and and GM have told us from the very beginning that it would take longer than three years.   They TOLD us they would build a very good team and that it would take longer than three years.   Now they're two and a half years into the process, it's completely clear that this team has gotten better at its very core, in all of the fundamental things it does, that it's poised to have success and that the building process will continue for another year or two.  Why should anyone apply an arbitrary three-year standard under those circumstances?

 

I'm completely prepared to accept what you call mediocrity (which is mediocrity in the win-loss column) for another year, because long-term success in the win-loss column comes only after first developing exceptional (and not mediocre) behaviors across the entire organization.  McBeane told me to expect it would take more than three years, and McBeane have so far been very good at delivering what they say they're going to deliver. 

 

Please provide a source for the above bolded and italicized statement.  Because I can't find one example that McD or Beane ever said this.     

 

[Shaw66]

31 minutes ago, BillsVet said:

 

Please provide a source for the above bolded and italicized statement.  Because I can't find one example that McD or Beane ever said this.     

 

What they've said is that they're building for sustained long-term success.  They said it would take more than three years.  Both things are paraphrases of what they've said, repeatedly.  

 

As I wrote, there is only NFL example of modern sustained long-term success - the Patriots.   I said that, not McBeane.  But if you put together what they have said and what is the obvious goal - Patriots-type success, you get to the conclusion that what McDermott meant when he came to Buffalo was that he intended to build an organization that succeeds like the Patriots and that it would take 5 or 6 years.  

 

They HAVE repeatedly said that to get to where they want to be it would take more than three years.   Repeatedly.  It's often been debated around here whether the Pegulas would give them more than three years.   So the notion that this would be a process that takes more than three years is not new or novel.   If you've listened to McBeane for the past two years, they've been completely clear about the timetable.  

[Bob in STL]

@Shaw66

 

Great post!   I have not have this kind of anticipation for a football season in 20 years. 

 

I hope we have a few superstars in the making on this roster because that is what it takes to consistently win in the NFL.  Maybe we do. 

[muppy]

17 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Thanks.  I appreciate the kind words.

 

Very few of my friends are serious football fans.   They think I'm crazy.  

LOL That's awesome makes me even more grateful to read you here it has great value even if your friends can't relate WE CAN ^5

[LSHMEAB]

20 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

The Rams have had the same GM since 2012. Last year was year 6 of his rebuild. Since his splurge in free agency they now have a 1-2 year window before the seams fall apart. Not sure how effective that strategy will be.

 

Andy Reid has been with the Chiefs since 2013. Last year was year 6 of his rebuild. If Mahomes keeps it up they'll be set for the long haul no matter what happens outside of him. Only took 6 years to get there.

 

Eagles have had the same GM since 2010. Took him 8 years to win the Super Bowl. That's quite a long rebuild and there were plenty of missteps along the way.

 

Pete Carroll was hired in 2010. He went 7-9 his first 2 years before Russell Wilson exploded onto the scene. Made it to the playoffs in year 3 and won the Super Bowl year 4.

 

So not really sure where you got the idea that good rebuilds take 2-3 years. They normally take longer than that to find real success. Personally I will be disappointed if the Bills end up less than 9-7 but if you're expecting them to complete for a Super Bowl this year they're a year or two off from that stage of the rebuild.

Great examples of GM's that took awhile to get it right. There are a few examples of coach's who took awhile to get it right as well.

 

My counterpoint would be that there are VERY few modern examples of GM/HC/QB combo's taking a while to get it right. When you have the right people at those 3 positions, it generally happens rather quickly. I'm not even talking  Superbowl. Where I'm at is this; if we have the right pieces in place, we should be strongly contending for a playoff spot. If we fall a little short, meh. I'll be irritated, but it wouldn't warrant any major changes. Anything less than 8 wins would be a bigtime fail. 10 wins or more and they've almost certainly gotten it right.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, LSHMEAB said:

Great examples of GM's that took awhile to get it right. There are a few examples of coach's who took awhile to get it right as well.

 

My counterpoint would be that there are VERY few modern examples of GM/HC/QB combo's taking a while to get it right. When you have the right people at those 3 positions, it generally happens rather quickly. I'm not even talking  Superbowl. Where I'm at is this; if we have the right pieces in place, we should be strongly contending for a playoff spot. If we fall a little short, meh. I'll be irritated, but it wouldn't warrant any major changes. Anything less than 8 wins would be a bigtime fail. 10 wins or more and they've almost certainly gotten it right.

This I pretty much agree with, except it doesn't apply to what this GM and head coach are doing.   What most teams have done when they have the top three in place is add some big-time veteran talent, and go all out.   So you KC signing Shady, for example.  You see a Watkins getting big contracts, despite his underproduction.   You see Seattle go after that tight end from New Orleans a few years ago and after Clowney this year.  That's the way to get good fast.

 

McBeane have been very clear that that is NOT their way.  Their way is to acquire young talent through the draft, not veteran talent.   Beane has said repeatedly that he gets talent in the draft, he fills holes in free agency.  

 

So although you are correct that there are very few examples of a Head Coach and GM with a QB continuing to proceed slowly, that doesn't that what McBeane are doing is a bad technique or won't work.   There are very few examples of teams with a successful HC, GM actually trying what McBeane are doing.   In fact, the sample size of teams that have a good GM and HC is so small that there's pretty much nothing we can conclude about what will work and what won't work.  That leads me to the conclusion that although what you say may be true, it is irrelevant. 

 

I also agree about your targets win totals.  Ten wins means they're doing it right.  I'd say six wins is a bigtime fail, seven it depends.   Eight is the minimum number of wins necessary with which it could be reasonable to conclude that the process is working.   That is, if the process is working, the Bills should get at least two more wins than last year.   Nine is solid improvement.  

[LSHMEAB]

19 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

 

 

I also agree about your targets win totals.  Ten wins means they're doing it right.  I'd say six wins is a bigtime fail, seven it depends.   Eight is the minimum number of wins necessary with which it could be reasonable to conclude that the process is working.   That is, if the process is working, the Bills should get at least two more wins than last year.   Nine is solid improvement.  

Agreed.

[Figster]

8 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

Agreed.

I'll 2nd the win /loss assesment

 

Although the homer side of me is optimistic and hopeful for 10.  Being realistic on where Allen stands in his development along with all the new faces in the starting lineup I think an 8 - 8 record is very possible.

 

Anything less in all likelihood would probably involve injury to two or more key players IMO.

 

 

[HappyDays]

2 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

Great examples of GM's that took awhile to get it right. There are a few examples of coach's who took awhile to get it right as well.

 

My counterpoint would be that there are VERY few modern examples of GM/HC/QB combo's taking a while to get it right. When you have the right people at those 3 positions, it generally happens rather quickly. I'm not even talking  Superbowl. Where I'm at is this; if we have the right pieces in place, we should be strongly contending for a playoff spot. If we fall a little short, meh. I'll be irritated, but it wouldn't warrant any major changes. Anything less than 8 wins would be a bigtime fail. 10 wins or more and they've almost certainly gotten it right.

 

I agree 100%. 9-7 this year tells me we're on the right track. 8-8 I would feel pretty meh about but I wouldn't be calling for drastic changes. Anything below that and 2020 is a hot seat year.

[Shaw66]

30 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I agree 100%. 9-7 this year tells me we're on the right track. 8-8 I would feel pretty meh about but I wouldn't be calling for drastic changes. Anything below that and 2020 is a hot seat year.

That's about right.  Unless there's a total disaster, like 5 wins, they will get another year, which is what I've said all along in response to those who used to post that this year is win or you lose your job.  

[RevWarRifleman]

Welcome NFL season, we've been waiting for you.                                     Go Bills!