What Did McDermott Mean By Saying “We Let Too Many Leaders Out of The Building” in Carolina

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

2 minutes ago, Bob in STL said:

Probably more than a few.  Leadership should never be underestimated.   It would be great if the leadership came from the core starting players but the Bills team development is just 3 years and not there yet.  Think back to Kelly, Hull, Talley, Smith - it took years for them to fully take the reins as leaders.    
 

Allen, Edmunds and other in the young core are still very young to take that role on.   They learn it from guys like Lorenzo, DiMarco, Gore, etc.  

 

..good points......respect/leadership MUST be earned and not commanded...Management 101.........

[jkeerie]

1 hour ago, ScottLaw said:

It’s also a coaching staff that forced Nathan Peterman into the lineup numerous times. 

You are correct.  No one will argue that Peterman was bad.   However, we all saw that Peterman looked great in the preseason.  You would think the Peterman we saw the previous season in San Diego had matured.  Josh wasn't ready.  We traded McCarron.

 

Peterman was given the opportunity to shine and it was a disaster.  McD knew.  He just wasn't going to throw the guy under the bus in front of the press.  So Josh played and learned on the job.

 

I trust McD and I trust Beane.  They are learning from mistakes and have put together a solid team.  I have no doubt they will find the right blend of players.

[Happy]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Look, Smith wouldn't be on the field for 30% of the offensive snaps if Daboll didn't believe he contributed value in games - at least, more value than anyone else on the team right now, he wouldn't be on the field.  It's that simple.  His value does not lie in his catch percentage (80%, 4 of 5) his TD (1) or his 1st downs (2).  He's also on the field for ~1 of 5 ST snaps.

 

Dimarco's snap counts have fallen on ST (>50% last year, 37% in 2019) but that's principally why he's on the team.  He played 17% of the offensive snaps.  Again,  if the coaches didn't think he brought value to the field, he wouldn't be on it.

 

If lining DiMarco up as a wide out and sending him on routes 20 or 30 yards down field to act as a WR is value...I'm at a loss as to what value is.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

7 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

If lining DiMarco up as a wide out and sending him on routes 20 or 30 yards down field to act as a WR is value...I'm at a loss as to what value is.

 

Excuse me.  You are responding to a post pointing out that DiMarco's value in the team is ST.  Don't you think it's a little disingenous to mention WR then say "I'm at a loss as to what value is"?  It was just explained: 50% of the snaps on ST last year, ST captain.  37% this year. 

 

You're sticking your fingers in your ears going "LALALAL" and fixating on one or two plays which are fine examples of Daboll being too cute IMO and trying to make a play happen by trying to fake out the defense, using a player in an unexpected way.  Sometimes it works (Brown pass to Allen, Brown pass to Singletary, TD to Dawkins, TD to Smith), but Crennel and Houston clearly weren't fooled and then the poor outcome is having a lesser skilled player positioned to make a play that our best skill players might have managed.

 

But those aren't DiMarco's value to the team and that was just explained, so why you're "at a loss" is a mystery.

[Mr. WEO]

55 minutes ago, Bob in STL said:

Probably more than a few.  Leadership should never be underestimated.   It would be great if the leadership came from the core starting players but the Bills team development is just 3 years and not there yet.  Think back to Kelly, Hull, Talley, Smith - it took years for them to fully take the reins as leaders.    
 

Allen, Edmunds and other in the young core are still very young to take that role on.   They learn it from guys like Lorenzo, DiMarco, Gore, etc.  

 

no one is underestimating leadership.  The opposite is happening.  

[Happy]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Excuse me.  You are responding to a post pointing out that DiMarco's value in the team is ST.  Don't you think it's a little disingenous to mention WR then say "I'm at a loss as to what value is"?  It was just explained: 50% of the snaps on ST last year, ST captain.  37% this year. 

 

You're sticking your fingers in your ears going "LALALAL" and fixating on one or two plays which are fine examples of Daboll being too cute IMO and trying to make a play happen by trying to fake out the defense, using a player in an unexpected way.  Sometimes it works (Brown pass to Allen, Brown pass to Singletary, TD to Dawkins, TD to Smith), but Crennel and Houston clearly weren't fooled and then the poor outcome is having a lesser skilled player positioned to make a play that our best skill players might have managed.

 

But those aren't DiMarco's value to the team and that was just explained, so why you're "at a loss" is a mystery.

 

I was separating DiMarco on offense and DiMarco on SpT.  DiMarco may be fine on SpT, but he shouldn't even get the one or two chances for Daboll to get too cute, that is my point; though you rephrased it.  I don't think I am being disingenuous at all when implying that DiMarco shouldn't be on offense, hence the WR comment.

[Bob in STL]

13 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Excuse me.  You are responding to a post pointing out that DiMarco's value in the team is ST.  Don't you think it's a little disingenous to mention WR then say "I'm at a loss as to what value is"?  It was just explained: 50% of the snaps on ST last year, ST captain.  37% this year. 

 

You're sticking your fingers in your ears going "LALALAL" and fixating on one or two plays which are fine examples of Daboll being too cute IMO and trying to make a play happen by trying to fake out the defense, using a player in an unexpected way.  Sometimes it works (Brown pass to Allen, Brown pass to Singletary, TD to Dawkins, TD to Smith), but Crennel and Houston clearly weren't fooled and then the poor outcome is having a lesser skilled player positioned to make a play that our best skill players might have managed.

 

But those aren't DiMarco's value to the team and that was just explained, so why you're "at a loss" is a mystery.

Right on.  Most Bills fans know that Dimarco’s value was ST play,  locker room leadership,  and professional manner in which he prepares himself.   
 

You can’t blame the player for the decision to throw a bomb to the fullback.  
 

I trust McD to decide if DiMarco can still contribute enough to earn a spot on the roster.  
 

Edited January 18, 2020 by Bob in STL

[Billl]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

It's obvious McD thinks that these guys bring value.  The discussion is whether that thinking is useful anymore, given the results.  This is a coaching staff that didn't think their most dynamic player not named Josh Allen only deserved 13 touches in a playoff game.

Who is that?  Singletary had 19 touches when you include his season high 6 receptions.  He averaged just under 14 per game on the season.

[Ga boy]

3 hours ago, Niagara Dude said:

The problem with that comment is that team went to the Super Bowl and his team has not even won a playoff game so we don't have the talent at this point.  You need to gas loser players like Kroft/Muphy/Dimarco/Lee Smith.  These are Sean type of players,  good guys with zero talent and not going to help you win against good teams.

 

Sign a couple of high end free agents and win some playoff games,  right the Bills are a team that had very easy schedule and still needs show they can beat playoff good teams.  

 

Yes i agree,  Sean needs to look at the teams they beat this season and the teams they lost to.  He needs better talent to beat the better teams.  

Very simple fix to beat Ravens, Texans, Chiefs, and Pats:  keep everyone (except Gore), add edge rusher, right tackle, and more of Singletary.  Also, add a #1 WR if we want to get to the Super Bowl.  Drop the mic.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

Leaders do bring value when they are in the prime of their careers.  
 

It’s a Captain obvious moment 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:

 

I was separating DiMarco on offense and DiMarco on SpT.  DiMarco may be fine on SpT, but he shouldn't even get the one or two chances for Daboll to get too cute, that is my point; though you rephrased it.  I don't think I am being disingenuous at all when implying that DiMarco shouldn't be on offense, hence the WR comment.

 

Fair enough, though you didn't state that or mention "value on offense" just "value".  DiMarco's value on offense would be blocking, though he has had a couple good plays.

 

It's not on DiMarco if Daboll does Dumb Things in his playcalling at times.   If he didn't have DiMarco, he'd have just found another player to do Dumb Things with.  The thing is, his gadgets have worked for us in some key situations and games.

 

It's my hope that Daboll is using gadgets to compensate for a lack of depth in skill position talent, and that if he gets more of the latter he'll do less of the former.  I only hope that Beane will successfully Make it So.

[Lurker]

4 hours ago, eball said:

I think in order to interpret McD's remark about Carolina one would need to look specifically at the roster changes from the Super Bowl year to the next and then see what conclusions might be drawn.  I'm not willing to do that but it seems like the logical place to start.

 

 

 

Doing a quick eyeball, the 2016 Pathers starting defense lost DE Jared Allen (33 yrs old, 187 NFL games), LB Charles Tilman (34 yrs old, 168 NFL games), SS Roman Harper (33 yrs old, 156 NFL games) and, as somebody else mentioned, CB Josh Norman (28 yrs old, 111 NFL Games).   That's a lot of veteran leadership...

[Saxum]

2 hours ago, Dave Allen said:

Veteran leaders/ process guys have a value that extends past what we see them do on the field. If they're in the locker room teaching the young'uns how to be process guys also, then they are worth the extra money. There were several other teams that had more talent (on paper) and couldn't/wouldn't step up because they had no culture, no leadership (coughcoughdallascough). That's what leadership is worth. 

 

I agree about leadership (coughcoughbrownscough).

[Happy]

3 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Fair enough, though you didn't state that or mention "value on offense" just "value".  DiMarco's value on offense would be blocking, though he has had a couple good plays.

 

It's not on DiMarco if Daboll does Dumb Things in his playcalling at times.   If he didn't have DiMarco, he'd have just found another player to do Dumb Things with.  The thing is, his gadgets have worked for us in some key situations and games.

 

It's my hope that Daboll is using gadgets to compensate for a lack of depth in skill position talent, and that if he gets more of the latter he'll do less of the former.  I only hope that Beane will successfully Make it So.

 

My post wasn't clearly worded, something I need to keep in mind.

 

Second paragraph is very true.

 

We should ALL hope that better skill position talent leads to fewer DiMarco (and whoever else) cute/gimmick plays.  I really believe these cute/gimmick (to the point of being dumb) are all Daboll.  McD doesn't seem like the type of coach that would come up with that himself, even if he knew offense.  For example, I honestly believe John Harbaugh reigned in Greg Roman and told him how the offense should look like and what he wants to see regarding Lamar Jackson.  As a HC, McD needs to get to that point so he can tell Daboll what the offense should look like (i.e. identity); McD is no where close to being able to do this.  So it is going to come down to Josh Allen's development in conjunction with better talent to make the offense more viable.  Maybe that's the plan, though the stupid cutesie plays need to go away...McD can at least do that. 

[snafu]

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

How many process (only) guys are on the 49ers?  Chiefs?  Titans?

 

 

Conversely, there are teams with talent that could probably use process (only) guys.  Cleveland and Dallas are two examples I can think of. 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

What other coaching staff would have looked at Smith ans DiMarco and thought they were still capable of producing?

 

Swap these guys out of their spotless game day unis and put them in Underarmour polo shirts and khakis and call them Offensive Efficiency Assistant Coaches.

 

Go get some playmakers.

 

 

 

If you’re a young kid or a fresh FA, are you going to listen more to the guy wearing khakis and a polo shirt, or more to the guys who are practicing alongside you and traveling with you to road games, etc.?  These process guys don’t need to be playmakers.  There’s enough room on the roster for both.  Eventually, if you have playmakers at every position, you’ve got to leave many of them on the sideline.

 

I agree that it would be better to have process guys who have more talent, but that’s a luxury. You’d have to pay them more money and then be left with less to spend on more talented playmakers.

 

 

[Mr. WEO]

17 minutes ago, Billl said:

Who is that?  Singletary had 19 touches when you include his season high 6 receptions.  He averaged just under 14 per game on the season.

Sorry.  Meant carries.  In a game where the D was pitching a shutout more than halfway through the 3rd, the coaching staff decided they would shut Singletary down. For the rest of the 3rd, 4th and OT, Singletary touched the ball 3 times 

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, snafu said:

 

 

Conversely, there are teams with talent that could probably use process (only) guys.  Cleveland and Dallas are two examples I can think of. 

 

 

 

 

If you’re a young kid or a fresh FA, are you going to listen more to the guy wearing khakis and a polo shirt, or more to the guys who are practicing alongside you and traveling with you to road games, etc.?  These process guys don’t need to be playmakers.  There’s enough room on the roster for both.  Eventually, if you have playmakers at every position, you’ve got to leave many of them on the sideline.

 

I agree that it would be better to have process guys who have more talent, but that’s a luxury. You’d have to pay them more money and then be left with less to spend on more talented playmakers.

 

 

Dallas has lots of leaders/vets.  They didn’t have adequate coaching. Most teams probably do.  Few of any others import them just for that. Hire is the exception.  He’s a HOFer.  Smith and DiMarco are JAGs.  Better vets could lead as well I bet.

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

It’s also a coaching staff that forced Nathan Peterman into the lineup numerous times. 

I was having mercy on them not to bring up that legendary head scratcher.

[snafu]

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Better vets could lead as well I bet.

 

That presumes that any vet is a leader. 

 

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, snafu said:

 

That presumes that any vet is a leader. 

 

it also presumed Smith and DiMarco are

[snafu]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

it also presumed Smith and DiMarco are

 

I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone say they’re not. Im presuming that they’re leaders if their talent level is lower than most replacements. Otherwise they have zero value, yet have been retained on this team.  I agree that each guy could be upgraded, talent-wise.  It will be a lot easier to upgrade them once the young players become young veterans and can take over whatever leadership roles that Smith and DiMarco bring.  It’s a process.