Josh Allen "Prove it" Season In Year 3

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

33 minutes ago, DuckyBoys said:

I don't think his background or his story is going to help him succeed.  He'll succeed because he has superior talent, intelligence , drive and work ethic to get where he needs to be.  The organization is now fully commited to his success.    2018 they threw him to the wolves plain and simple.  I really throw that year out. To me he began his run as the Bills qb last year.  In  2019 they surrounded him with middle of the road play makers on offense.  2020 he'll finally have a difference maker in Stefon Diggs and hopefully another talented rb to pair with Devin.  I fully expect with no improvement his stat lines to be better just from Diggs being there.

 

He gets that deep ball down and they teach him to cover the damned football when he's in traffic and I see a big year for him in 2020.  I still don't think we'll have seen his peak for 2-3 more years. 

 

You don't think is background and character has anything to do with this?  What drives you, where did it come from?  Your parents, upbringing, experiences?  

[Billl]

2 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

 

FFS the kid said this as a junior in college- “The NFL will be there,” Allen says a day later. “I don’t want to be the guy that gets drafted in the first round, plays four years and then is out of the league. I want to be a guy that plays 15 years with the same organization and be one of the best quarterbacks to ever play the game.’’

WTF is this supposed to mean to people today?  Seriously.  Show me the QB who said he’d prefer to burn out in 4 years to being a 15 year great.  There’s no rule that says you have to leave the NFL after 4 seasons if you play well on your rookie contract.

[GoBills808]

[Mango]

17 minutes ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

 

You don't think is background and character has anything to do with this?  What drives you, where did it come from?  Your parents, upbringing, experiences?  

This is weird to me. There is nothing more dangerous than a guy who is playing for his and his families livelihood. Where if this doesn’t work out, others will fail. Allen has no more edge than any kid who busts his a$$ in grade school because the only way he sees to get him and his family out of poverty and danger is making it to the NFL. 
 

Josh grew up blue collar. He’s tough as nails. He’s built like and ox, and his family worked him like one. But let’s not make his story to be some wild rags to riches. He’s tough, he’s driven, and he’s competitive, just like thousands of other players who’ve come and gone in the NFL. 
 

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

34 minutes ago, Mango said:

This is weird to me. There is nothing more dangerous than a guy who is playing for his and his families livelihood. Where if this doesn’t work out, others will fail. Allen has no more edge than any kid who busts his a$$ in grade school because the only way he sees to get him and his family out of poverty and danger is making it to the NFL. 
 

Josh grew up blue collar. He’s tough as nails. He’s built like and ox, and his family worked him like one. But let’s not make his story to be some wild rags to riches. He’s tough, he’s driven, and he’s competitive, just like thousands of other players who’ve come and gone in the NFL. 
 

Freaking forget it.  I’m not making it a rags to to riches, just simply pointing out he had been told he doesn’t belong at every level, yet here he is.   I’m not saying he’s anymore special than anyone else, just that his motivation to be great comes from that experience.  

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, jrober38 said:

 

As I said earlier today, there's not much recent history of guys making big jumps in their calibre of play after their 3rd year starting. 

 

You can go back about 20 years looking at 1st round QBs and aside from Aaron Rodgers who sat on the bench, they all more or less peaked by the end of their third season. 

I would suggest that you may be seeing your theory blown out of the water by Ryan Tannehill.  

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

58 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I hear ya, it’s mind numbing 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

3 hours ago, jrober38 said:

Eventually the hits take a toll, they aren't as quick as they once were and they're no longer as willing to get blown up trying to get first downs with their legs. As some point all QBs need to make almost all of their plays from the pocket or they lose their jobs. That's the history of running QBs in the NFL in a nutshell. 

He escaped his first concussion without being hurt terribly.   

[Straight Hucklebuck]

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:Their goals don't change depending on whether they have a good QB or a bad one, or whether they have a good defense or bad one.  So their goal is NOT to build a winning offense in a hurry, just because they happen to have a good defense this season.    They EXPECT to have a good defense every season, so they aren't in a hurry.   They EXPECT to have a good offense every season, so this season isn't going to make them make short-term decision.

Shaw66, how do you know that they think like this though? You’ve said this all so

definitively. 
 

7 hours ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

 

Of course no will say that now, but let me ask you this?  If he were to flounder, how many of you would be "I told you so, he sucks", "I have been saying it for three years".  That's called rejoicing when he flounders, and there are plenty in here who would be doing that, and perhaps deservedly so.  I guess I'm more invested in the kid because I want to see him succeed and because many of us see the potential in what he could become.  

 

Really? Like it was hard to predict a Mountain West Honorable Mention with low production in college and questionable Scouting Reports was going to struggle at the NFL.

 

Like anyone fan on here that said “I told you so” was a clairvoyant, when Greg Cosell and other analysts laid out his flaws on the radio everyday, when his Scouting Reports predicted his rookie year to a T.

 

[Lieutenant Aldo Raine]

36 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Shaw66, how do you know that they think like this though? You’ve said this all so

definitively. 
 

Really? Like it was hard to predict a Mountain West Honorable Mention with low production in college and questionable Scouting Reports was going to struggle at the NFL.

 

Like anyone fan on here that said “I told you so” was a clairvoyant, when Greg Cosell and other analysts laid out his flaws on the radio everyday, when his Scouting Reports predicted his rookie year to a T.

 

 

Well, after this year you can gloat since you are so sure of yourself.

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Shaw66, how do you know that they think like this though? You’ve said this all so

definitively. 
 

 

Well, Straight, I try to be clear that I don't have any inside information, so I don't know anything as a matter of absolute fact. 

 

However, I think a lot about what the Bills are doing, and I listen to what McBeane say.   I also tend to believe that people are honest and don't knowingly lie when they answer questions.   And McBeane seem to be particularly honorable men.   They aren't liars.   You can tell when they don't want to answer a question - they either tell you they won't answer it or they gently talk around it.  

 

Some things they have been completely clear about from day one.  One is that they are building for sustained long-term success.  They've said repeatedly that they won't make short-term decisions that aren't consistent with their long-term goals.  They've also said that they want to build the right way, which they've said is different from the quick way.   Diggs, for example, is great for the short-term, but they wouldn't have done it if Diggs weren't relatively young and under contract.   

 

Beane also has said on multiple occasions that he hopes Allen makes the Bills write big checks.  That, too, is consistent with the long-term message.   They obviously want a true franchise quarterback.   When Cousins and all those other guys were free agents, they didn't chase after any of them, because they weren't fits with the long-term plan.  

 

McDermott has explained quite clearly his process.  It's about competition, commitment to team and continuous improvement.   He said at the end of this year that he would be happy if he just could have everyone back for next season, so changes.  He said that, I think, because he genuinely believes in the process, that he has guys, including Allen, who are committed to getting better and have the potential to get better.   It wasn't the comment of a guy who had any doubts about his quarterback.  

 

Most of the rest of what I've said is just logic.   It's obvious that quarterbacks are much more valuable than any other position.   It's obvious that the only way to have sustained long-term success is to have an excellent quarterback you can build on.   You can't have sustained long-term success by just running through a new guy every three years, because there will be plenty of times in that process where you won't have success.   It's also obvious that the big time successful quarterbacks hit their true prime six, seven years out.  Sometime around then they seem to master what's going on on the field - they understand it all and they know how to adjust to what they see.   After they reach that level, they still have ten years left, more or less.   So you put that reality together with what McBeane say about sustained long-term success, and what Beane has said about wanting to write big checks to Allen, and it's clear that they very much want Allen to succeed.   He, or someone like him who has the ability to play AB at a high level, is the key to long-term success.  

 

From there it's obvious.   If you have a guy who's coming off his rookie deal, who hasn't demonstrated yet that he's a true franchise guy but who hasn't failed, and if you want long-term success, you have to invest in him.   You have to write the checks even though he isn't Drew Brees yet, because your whole system is premised on getting the right QB.   That's why I agree with Gunner or whoever who has been saying he'd sign Dak.   It's a no-brainer.   Dak has all the tools, and he hasn't failed.   That is, he hasn't shown that he has flaws that will keep him from succeeding.  Maybe Garrett was the problem, but whatever the problem, you're better off trying to figure it out with Dak than starting over.   The reward is still great if you succeed.   Frankly, I might have bit the bullet on Winston too, simply because it's hard to give up on all the talent the guy has.   My hesitance with Winston is that unlike Dak, he hasn't shown any continued success.   Dak (and Allen) have had games or quarters where you think you're looking at a superstar.   Their problem is that they can't do it consistently enough yet.   Winston looks spectacular sometimes, but his bad streaks are simply too much to take.  

 

So, no, I don't know for sure what Beane thinks about all this, but I think what I'm saying is a pretty good guess.   I think it's fan-talk when people say this is a make-or-break year for Allen, because fans like to think that way.  They want success, and whenever they see something that isn't success, they want to get rid of it.   In particular, they don't recognize that players at most positions learn and improve for multiple years.   They see a Mahomes and they say "see, Allen hasn't done that, time to move on."   That feels good, it's a way to get the frustration of losing out of the system.   But it's inconsistent with what I've heard McBeane say.  It it ignores the supreme importance of QBs - of course it's foolish to pay an average quarterback $25 million or $30 million a year, but when they agreed to the contract it was a bet.  The GM was betting that the guy would continue to get better.   If he does get better, like Brees did, people say "well, of course, they paid him, look how good he is."  But at the time it was a bet.   When the GM makes the bet and the guy doesn't get better, some fans criticize it as a dumb move.  

 

It's no different than the bet you make on draft day.   The Jets spent a ton of draft capital to bet on Darnold.   The Bills spent a ton to bet on Allen.  Maybe both bets were stupid, maybe one was, maybe neither was.   We'll find out over the next few years.  

 

The point is, if you want a franchise QB, you have to put your money on the table.   The Chiefs will pay Mahomes (or did they already?).   No one will think that's a bet, but it is the same bet.   The only difference is that the gap between where he is when he gets his new contract and where he needs to be to be a true franchise quarterback is not as big as Allen's gap currently is.   It's an easier bet to make, just like it was an easier bet for the Ravens to make on Flacco when they paid him.   How'd that turn out?    The fact is, the second contract comes up sooner than GMs would like, so they have to put their money on the table if they want to play.  

Edited April 16, 2020 by Shaw66

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I would suggest that you may be seeing your theory blown out of the water by Ryan Tannehill.  

 

Yea. He's not. Lightening in a bottle. 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

Well, Straight, I try to be clear that I don't have any inside information, so I don't know anything as a matter of absolute fact. 

 

However, I think a lot about what the Bills are doing, and I listen to what McBeane say.   I also tend to believe that people are honest and don't knowingly lie when they answer questions.   And McBeane seem to be particularly honorable men.   They aren't liars.   You can tell when they don't want to answer a question - they either tell you they won't answer it or they gently talk around it.  

 

Some things they have been completely clear about from day one.  One is that they are building for sustained long-term success.  They've said repeatedly that they won't make short-term decisions that aren't consistent with their long-term goals.  They've also said that they want to build the right way, which they've said is different from the quick way.   Diggs, for example, is great for the short-term, but they wouldn't have done it if Diggs weren't relatively young and under contract.   

 

Beane also has said on multiple occasions that he hopes Allen makes the Bills write big checks.  That, too, is consistent with the long-term message.   They obviously want a true franchise quarterback.   When Cousins and all those other guys were free agents, they didn't chase after any of them, because they weren't fits with the long-term plan.  

 

McDermott has explained quite clearly his process.  It's about competition, commitment to team and continuous improvement.   He said at the end of this year that he would be happy if he just could have everyone back for next season, so changes.  He said that, I think, because he genuinely believes in the process, that he has guys, including Allen, who are committed to getting better and have the potential to get better.   It wasn't the comment of a guy who had any doubts about his quarterback.  

 

Most of the rest of what I've said is just logic.   It's obvious that quarterbacks are much more valuable than any other position.   It's obvious that the only way to have sustained long-term success is to have an excellent quarterback you can build on.   You can't have sustained long-term success by just running through a new guy every three years, because there will be plenty of times in that process where you won't have success.   It's also obvious that the big time successful quarterbacks hit their true prime six, seven years out.  Sometime around then they seem to master what's going on on the field - they understand it all and they know how to adjust to what they see.   After they reach that level, they still have ten years left, more or less.   So you put that reality together with what McBeane say about sustained long-term success, and what Beane has said about wanting to write big checks to Allen, and it's clear that they very much want Allen to succeed.   He, or someone like him who has the ability to play AB at a high level, is the key to long-term success.  

 

From there it's obvious.   If you have a guy who's coming off his rookie deal, who hasn't demonstrated yet that he's a true franchise guy but who hasn't failed, and if you want long-term success, you have to invest in him.   You have to write the checks even though he isn't Drew Brees yet, because your whole system is premised on getting the right QB.   That's why I agree with Gunner or whoever who has been saying he'd sign Dak.   It's a no-brainer.   Dak has all the tools, and he hasn't failed.   That is, he hasn't shown that he has flaws that will keep him from succeeding.  Maybe Garrett was the problem, but whatever the problem, you're better off trying to figure it out with Dak than starting over.   The reward is still great if you succeed.   Frankly, I might have bit the bullet on Winston too, simply because it's hard to give up on all the talent the guy has.   My hesitance with Winston is that unlike Dak, he hasn't shown any continued success.   Dak (and Allen) have had games or quarters where you think you're looking at a superstar.   Their problem is that they can't do it consistently enough yet.   Winston looks spectacular sometimes, but his bad streaks are simply too much to take.  

 

So, no, I don't know for sure what Beane thinks about all this, but I think what I'm saying is a pretty good guess.   I think it's fan-talk when people say this is a make-or-break year for Allen, because fans like to think that way.  They want success, and whenever they see something that isn't success, they want to get rid of it.   In particular, they don't recognize that players at most positions learn and improve for multiple years.   They see a Mahomes and they say "see, Allen hasn't done that, time to move on."   That feels good, it's a way to get the frustration of losing out of the system.   But it's inconsistent with what I've heard McBeane say.  It it ignores the supreme importance of QBs - of course it's foolish to pay an average quarterback $25 million or $30 million a year, but when they agreed to the contract it was a bet.  The GM was betting that the guy would continue to get better.   If he does get better, like Brees did, people say "well, of course, they paid him, look how good he is."  But at the time it was a bet.   When the GM makes the bet and the guy doesn't get better, some fans criticize it as a dumb move.  

 

It's no different than the bet you make on draft day.   The Jets spent a ton of draft capital to bet on Darnold.   The Bills spent a ton to bet on Allen.  Maybe both bets were stupid, maybe one was, maybe neither was.   We'll find out over the next few years.  

 

The point is, if you want a franchise QB, you have to put your money on the table.   The Chiefs will pay Mahomes (or did they already?).   No one will think that's a bet, but it is the same bet.   The only difference is that the gap between where he is when he gets his new contract and where he needs to be to be a true franchise quarterback is not as big as Allen's gap currently is.   It's an easier bet to make, just like it was an easier bet for the Ravens to make on Flacco when they paid him.   How'd that turn out?    The fact is, the second contract comes up sooner than GMs would like, so they have to put their money on the table if they want to play.  

 

I don't disagree with almost any of this. The only place you and I disagree on is what Allen has to show McDermott and Beane in the next two seasons for them to feel comfortable making that bet. You think more of the same will be enough. I don't. And not I don't because he wouldn't have convinced me (although that is true) I don't because I don't think he'd have convinced Brandon Beane. I don't think Allen has to be Patrick Mahomes in year 3. Or even in year 4. But I think he has to still be on the upswing for the Bills brain trust to go all in on paying him. If he spends two years plateaued at his 2019 level I suspect he will go into his option year without a new contract and those situations never seem to end well.  Winston being the latest example. The way we will judge whether he has plateaued is not pure numerical indicators.... but if the eye test demonstrates the necessary improvement his numbers will be better.   

 

Again I say all this as someone who thinks it is pretty likely Josh keeps improving and very likely as a result that the Bills are paying him at some point in the next two years and very likely that contract is a top 3 or 4 QB contract. 

[jrober38]

11 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I would suggest that you may be seeing your theory blown out of the water by Ryan Tannehill.  

 

Possibly.

 

One guy in 20 years doesn't amount to much evidence though that the theory is wrong.

 

It applies to roughly 95% of the other cases. 

[Shaw66]

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't disagree with almost any of this. The only place you and I disagree on is what Allen has to show McDermott and Beane in the next two seasons for them to feel comfortable making that bet. You think more of the same will be enough. I don't. And not I don't because he wouldn't have convinced me (although that is true) I don't because I don't think he'd have convinced Brandon Beane. I don't think Allen has to be Patrick Mahomes in year 3. Or even in year 4. But I think he has to still be on the upswing for the Bills brain trust to go all in on paying him. If he spends two years plateaued at his 2019 level I suspect he will go into his option year without a new contract and those situations never seem to end well.  Winston being the latest example. The way we will judge whether he has plateaued is not pure numerical indicators.... but if the eye test demonstrates the necessary improvement his numbers will be better.   

 

Again I say all this as someone who thinks it is pretty likely Josh keeps improving and very likely as a result that the Bills are paying him at some point in the next two years and very likely that contract is a top 3 or 4 QB contract. 

Thanks.  I know we agree, or we disagree only on some fine points that really don't matter all that much.  

 

It's not that I think more of the same will be enough.   I think the indicia that will tell McBeane that Allen is making the progress are not solely, or even primarily, the stats we all love to study.   In other words, more of the same is not enough for McBeane; it's just that McBeane aren't looking at the metrics you and I look at.  

 

The Bills players are graded on everything, and not just how they play.  They are graded on practice.  They are graded on timeliness, on weight room habits, on diet, on stuff we never see.  I've heard McDermott talk about it but never understood it until Kyle Williams retired.   The Bills posted a video of Kyle announcing to the team that he was retiring, and it hit me long a lightning bolt.   The announcement was in a meeting room, really a small auditorium.   Rows of seats, each with those armrests that serve as writing tables.  The room had 60-70 seats for the "audience," just big enough for the team.  The floor sloped down to the front, where the "stage" was, mostly open space with a podium in the middle.   Like a small movie theater.  The camera from which the video was shot was mounted high on the wall behind the speaker, so you could see the back of the speaker and the team in the seats.   

 

The place was packed - the entire roster, plus I assume the special teams guys.  

 

It was a little bit out of the Stepford Wives.   Every guy was sitting straight in his seat, hand ready to take notes.   No one slouching, obviously no one wearing headphones.   Every guy looking straight at Kyle, listening.   And then it dawned on me - these guys are getting graded at how they sit in the meeting room.  You could see it.   They all were sitting straight, eyes forward, hand ready to write.   What was happening in that room was supposed to be the most important thing in their lives at that moment, and their body language was an indication of whether they were living that reality.  

 

I took the season ticket holder tour of the Stadium a couple years ago.  The cafeteria has a scale in it.   Players get on the scale at meals, punch in their uniform number, and the screen fills with data.  The guy's picture, his current weight, historic weights, all kinds of other measurements.   What they eat is tracked.   Their diets are managed.   Their weight programs are managed.   Their locker room behavior is evaluated, including the neatness of their lockers.    

 

My point is that they are evaluated on things I can only imagine.   In his book GM, Ernie Accorsi (Giants GM) and his ghost writer go to Penn State to scout players, including Posluzny.   In the middle of the game, Accorsi said "watch the linebacker.  Watch how his first step is always the correct step, left, right, in, out."  When I read that I learned for all time that I don't know anything about football.   I mean, who bothers to look at the feet of 22 players, let alone know what those feet are supposed to be doing?   

 

So, yes, Allen has to be improving to get a fat new contract.  What I'm saying is that I, and I'd guess no one else here, has any idea what kind of improvement is necessary to convince McBeane.  My measure is passer rating, but on passer rating the Broncos would have cut John Elway years before he began playing like a Hall of Famer.  Tannehill's passer rating has been consistently better than Allen's, the Dolphins let him go, and now they're probably wondering why.   

 

What McBeane are going to do is evaluate Allen and make a judgment.   The judgment will not be about how his stats have improved or not.   The stats are just history.   They are going to make the same kind of judgment they must make on draft night.   They're going to try to project Allen into the future.  They're going to ask themselves how much better can he get?, and how likely is it that he will get better?  What he might become and the likelihood of getting there is all that matters.   They want to make an accurate prediction of what the next ten years of his football life will look like.   His stats, his history, may be useful in making that judgment, but not in the sense that people are talking about here.  They won't be saying yes or no based on the trend in his completion percentage or his TD-INT ratio or whatever your favorite stat is.   Those trends will be a small part of all of the data they consider in making the judgment. 

 

Here's one example.   They will be looking at whether Allen's understanding of Daboll's offense is getting broader and deeper, whether he's making better reads, more quickly and more accurately.   He could be doing all of that but still not setting up correctly, so he's still inconsistent in his throws.    In that case, even though he's improving in important skills, it hasn't translated into a substantial improvement in completion percentage, because even though he's making the reads better, he isn't executing better.   McBeane have to make a judgment about whether Allen can take that next step in his development.   Some people here will say "if he hasn't done it yet, he won't do it, because you can't improve accuracy," or "he's had four years, and if he hasn't done it yet, he won't - look at Mahomes - he didn't need four years."   McBeane will simply ask "now that he understands the offense, can we get him to make the throws?"   Not "did he make the throws," not "Did he improve at making the throws."  That's history.   Their question is "can we teach him to make the throws?"

 

Now, I agree with something I believe you said earlier, which is that the chances are that if Allen is showing the right kind of improvement in all of the metrics that are important to the Bills, that improvement also will show up in the metrics that you and I look at.   It's probably the case that if Allen is improving regularly in McBeane's Stepford Wives world, it will show up in his passer rating, but it isn't necessarily the case.  It just isn't.  How do I know?  Just look at draft night two years ago.   McBeane obviously were using a different kind of metrics than the rest of us when they traded up to get Allen.   Easily 80% of the people here were flabbergasted.   How could they trade up to take the wrong Josh?   Two years later it's pretty obvious that McBeane were looking at better metrics than the 80% were.  

 

So I know only two things:   (1) The QB position is so important to team success in the NFL that GMs write bigger checks than would be seem to be warranted by the on-field performance of the QB to date, that is, they bet on the guy's future, and (2) the information they use to make that judgment goes way beyond the data the fans study.   

 

If I'm making predictions, I say the Bills exercise the option on Allen, and the following year they give him a big, big extension, one of those nine-figure, six-year deals.   Why do I think that?   (1) He has the potential.  (2)  He's done a lot of good things on the field.   (3)  He's smart.   (4)  He's a leader.   (5)   By all reports, he is intensely committed to improving.  Those are the characteristics McDermott looks for in making predictions about the future.   Those are the characteristics he wants to bet on.   The only way I think that doesn't happen is if (1) Allen crashes over the next year or two or (2) the Pegulas get cold feet with the process and tell Beane he can't write a big deal for Josh.   If (2) happens, McBeane are on a short leash, there'll be a new coach and GM within a year or two, and I'll probably die before the Bills win a Super Bowl.  

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Shaw66 said:

  

 

If I'm making predictions, I say the Bills exercise the option on Allen, and the following year they give him a big, big extension, one of those nine-figure, six-year deals.   Why do I think that?   (1) He has the potential.  (2)  He's done a lot of good things on the field.   (3)  He's smart.   (4)  He's a leader.   (5)   By all reports, he is intensely committed to improving.  Those are the characteristics McDermott looks for in making predictions about the future.   Those are the characteristics he wants to bet on.   The only way I think that doesn't happen is if (1) Allen crashes over the next year or two or (2) the Pegulas get cold feet with the process and tell Beane he can't write a big deal for Josh.   If (2) happens, McBeane are on a short leash, there'll be a new coach and GM within a year or two, and I'll probably die before the Bills win a Super Bowl.  

 

Again - agree on pretty much your whole post and I do think the para quoted above is the most likely outcome. But I still think it will be performances on the football field between now and spring 2022 (ie after year 4 and before year 5) that will be the single determinate factor. Them loving him - and I agree they do - and the way he goes about his business won't be enough. And while it won't just come down to numbers.... if his performances improve the numbers will follow.

[Shaw66]

22 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Possibly.

 

One guy in 20 years doesn't amount to much evidence though that the theory is wrong.

 

It applies to roughly 95% of the other cases. 

One thing I've learned from years on these fan forums, learned from people smarter than I am, is that the number of successful, truly successful quarterbacks is so small compared to the number of guys who have played quarterback over the years that the past isn't a statistically significant sample for making predictions.   If it were, there wouldn't be so many first round quarterback busts.   If it were possible to predict the success of QBs based on past performance and simple metrics, teams would draft all those guys who don't make it, and they wouldn't sign the Goffs and the Wentzes to those big extensions.   

 

You're making judgments on data that isn't statistically significant.  Picking quarterbacks is like picking stocks: there's a lot of historic data, but the data isn't necessarily indicative of future performance.   

 

The fact that someone hasn't done it to your statistical satisfaction doesn't mean much.   

 

And you can call it one if you like, but if you look at the data, you can see that it's more than one.   Steve Young wasn't always the dominant player he turned out to be.   Elway, as I've said, wasn't.   The Chargers should have seen that Brees was better than Rivers, and a lot of teams, including the Bills should have been chasing him aggressively, injury or not.   Every guy has a story, and not every story fits your view of the world.    And by the way, as you can see just from those names, and from Montana and Brady and Bradshaw and Roethlisberger, coaching and team culture also have a lot to do with it.   

 

Football is just another modern-day black box.   There's a lot more going on inside the box than we see, and although it's fun and I do it all the time, it's foolish of fans to think they actually understand what's going on inside the box.   We don't.   

[Shaw66]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Again - agree on pretty much your whole post and I do think the para quoted above is the most likely outcome. But I still think it will be performances on the football field between now and spring 2022 (ie after year 4 and before year 5) that will be the single determinate factor. Them loving him - and I agree they do - and the way he goes about his business won't be enough. And while it won't just come down to numbers.... if his performances improve the numbers will follow.

I hear you.   

 

Put a different way, if Allen really blossoms in the next two seasons, no one will be surprised when he gets his big deal.   What I'm saying is that so long as he doesn't crash and burn, if he just treads water on the stats we like to quote, I still won't be surprised if he gets his big deal from the Bills.   It will just mean that the Bills are using their superior information about the guy to make a prediction about his future that seems odd to many fans who are disappointed with his statistical performance.  

 

Put another way, I think McBeane will think more strategically about the future than Jerry Jones.  

[jrober38]

54 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Thanks.  I know we agIf I'm making predictions, I say the Bills exercise the option on Allen, and the following year they give him a big, big extension, one of those nine-figure, six-year deals.   Why do I think that?   (1) He has the potential.  (2)  He's done a lot of good things on the field.   (3)  He's smart.   (4)  He's a leader.   (5)   By all reports, he is intensely committed to improving.  Those are the characteristics McDermott looks for in making predictions about the future.   Those are the characteristics he wants to bet on.   The only way I think that doesn't happen is if (1) Allen crashes over the next year or two or (2) the Pegulas get cold feet with the process and tell Beane he can't write a big deal for Josh.   If (2) happens, McBeane are on a short leash, there'll be a new coach and GM within a year or two, and I'll probably die before the Bills win a Super Bowl.  

 

I think this is also most likely, however I think it's clearly the wrong decision unless he begins consistently performing as a top 10 passer given that eventually his legs won't be as effective.

 

I think they definitely pick up his option, but unless there's rapid progress this year with him as a passer, I don't think it makes any sense whatsoever to commit $40 mil/year to a guy who is in the bottom half of the league throwing the ball from the pocket. 

 

The Bills have one of the most talents rosters in the NFL. If Allen is "the guy", he should easily finish in the top 10-12 in the league for QB rating and yards per game.

[Mango]

13 hours ago, Lieutenant Aldo Raine said:

Freaking forget it.  I’m not making it a rags to to riches, just simply pointing out he had been told he doesn’t belong at every level, yet here he is.   I’m not saying he’s anymore special than anyone else, just that his motivation to be great comes from that experience.  

 

I don't think anybody told him he "doesn't belong". He has a ton of physiological gifts, comes from a well adjusted middle class family, with a blue collar work ethic. I think the consensus is that he wasn't refined enough. I am sure every coach from his days in HS all the way to the NFL and Jordan Palmer have told him that. This is not some new premonition where he is like "woah, my mechanics can be messy and it is really effing with my ability to be consistent". 

 

Chances are he has been doing what he thought was enough vs. what was actually enough to make those changes. He has sort of been the classic case of being a gifted athlete in a pool of mediocre athletes and relied on his physiology. It doesn't mean these things can't or won't change. They can and hopefully will, but will probably be a windy road to get there. Inversely, look at a guy like Lamar Jackson, who went to Petrino with the sole purpose of learning to be a better passer. Who thought  "if I want to be the player I think I can be, I have to be better in the pocket and under center." Which is a bit different than "so you don't think I am good enough"