Josh Allen "Prove it" Season In Year 3

[Straight Hucklebuck]

I’ve read the back and forth opinions in this thread and have concluded this is a make or break year for Allen.

 

We are past the “raw coming out of college” disclaimers now. He has started 28 games.
 

We are past the perceived performance e bonuses of taking all the OTA reps as the starter, not looking over shoulders anymore, the Jump from Year One to Year Two, another year “in the system”, time to “gel” with offensive lineman, continuity with the OC and QB Coaches and lockeroom culture. All of those things have already happened. 

 

The Bills don’t have the highest skill position talent in the league, but all their starters have defined roles at the NFL level.

 

2019 was the last year where the bar of improvement was a comparison to his rookie self. He now needs to improve relative to his peers now.

 

Brady is gone, Diggs has been traded for, the 2019 rookies are here. 
 

As much as the natural learned reaction as a Bills fan is don’t expect too much, “enjoy the ride”, next year is the real year, three years to judge a draft, the reality is once again we as fans are left to feel good about a close loss in Houston. 
 

Once again feel good about the Rudy Ruetigger story, the almost story, be happy with the growth of a 10 win year. Bottom line is we lost another game that we should have won.
 

Maybe this is a belief in the Coaches/GM and Allen, but I can’t accept morale victories anymore. We need points, we need wins, we need to break a 25 year Playoff win drought, this year, not in 2021.

Edited April 14, 2020 by Straight Hucklebuck

[jrober38]

21 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Let me say a couple of things.  First, and I really mean it, thanks for responding.   I really enjoy these discussions because they help me see things about football more clearly.   And even though I write as though what I say is absolutely true, I actually do understand that I could be dead wrong about what I think.

 

I'm not quoting the whole post to save muddying the overall post.

 

A few thoughts. 

 

1. I think the age of the "franchise QB" is coming to an end. 

 

How many elite QBs have come into the NFL over the past 10 years? I'd honestly say Patrick Mahomes is the only one. Andrew Luck was heading that direction where he could single handedly carry the Colts, but he retired early due to a string of bad injuries. Deshaun Watson may also be heading that direction, although I think he still needs to prove he doesn't have durability issues. 

 

I get finding an elite QB is hard, but for the most part the NFL's elite QBs from roughly 2005 to 2015 were essentially the same 5-6 guys (Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger). Some other guys might have had single great seasons, but those guys were consistently at the top of the league every year. 

 

Now, it's some of those same names, plus Mahomes and Watson. Beyond them I think there's a massive drop off in talent, which isn't worth paying the market rate for. 

 

2. Cam Newton is a better version of Josh Allen. 

 

Cam was an elite player early in his career because he was an elite runner. He was better at everything when compared to Allen. 

Cam's problems set in when the injuries inevitably took their toll. Because he never evolved as a pocket passer, when he could no longer run effectively he was no longer an effective QB. This is where I worry Josh will inevitably wind up.

 

Right now he's a weapon playing QB. A big part of him being dangerous is his mobility and willingness to get tough yards, particularly in the red zone. 

 

Eventually that will disappear. He won't be 28 years old and trying to run over linebackers and run away from Defensive Ends. 

 

Ben Roethlisberger was never the same runner, but he was mobile. He evolved into an elite passer which offset the decline of his mobility over the course of his career. Eventually he didn't need to run around the pocket making guys miss. He could just read the defense and make the right reads and throw with accuracy. 

 

As a passer Josh needs to improve by leaps and bounds to offset the inevitable decline in his ability to scramble. He needs to go from having a QB rating in the 80s to having one in the mid to high 90s, otherwise he'll never achieve being a "franchise QB". 

 

3. I think it's wrong to sign a non top 10 QB to a top 10 QB's contract.

 

My approach would be simple. Draft a QB in the 1st or 2nd round every 3-4 years. Keep a guy on your roster with at least one year of experience on a rookie contract and surround them with an elite defense and elite offensive skill players. If you truly find an elite guy like Mahomes, Rodgers or Luck, go "all in" on what is truly an ELITE player and pay them elite money.

 

Don't settle for a 10-20 passer and pay them top 5 money because you're scared of the alternative. 

19 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The problem is how do you ensure you go from Dak to the next Dak and not Dak to the third QB in that class - Paxton Lynch. The reason the middle tier QBs get that money is because finding someone that good is not as easy as it looks. 

 

You draft a QB every 4-5 years.

 

Always have two 1st/2nd round QBs on your roster at the same time, constantly having a plan B who you can get some info on.

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

You draft a QB every 4-5 years.

 

Always have two 1st/2nd round QBs on your roster at the same time, constantly having a plan B who you can get some info on.

 

But it isn't as easy as that. Say you miss? The other positions have limited peaks that if you have a Dak level top 10 / top 12 guy and you have built a good team around him while he is a rookie contract then you let him walk.... you miss on the guy you draft.... by the time you draft another one the team you built around him is broken down. The great thing about a franchise Quarterback is that if you have him 15 years you can cycle through 3 versions of your team with him and not have to worry about the most important position.

 

I think your idea is great in theory. I am very sceptical it would work in practice and it is not the route I would go.

[Billl]

14 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

His passer rating was in the top 10 once.  

 

Same as Tyrod Taylor.  

 

Nobody whose passer rating is consistently in the top 20 or 30, which is where he consistently was, is a top10 QB. 

Guess you just throw out 5,000 rushing yards and 58 TDs when that guy doesn’t have a bison on his helmet.

 

Let’s not ignore the fact that he has only 55 career fumbles in 125 games, either.

12 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

And maybe he had a bad game (with 400 yards). 

508, but who’s counting?

[Dr. Who]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But it isn't as easy as that. Say you miss? The other positions have limited peaks that if you have a Dak level top 10 / top 12 guy and you have built a good team around him while he is a rookie contract then you let him walk.... you miss on the guy you draft.... by the time you draft another one the team you built around him is broken down. The great thing about a franchise Quarterback is that if you have him 15 years you can cycle through 3 versions of your team with him and not have to worry about the most important position.

 

I think your idea is great in theory. I am very sceptical it would work in practice and it is not the route I would go.

Cycling the way Jrober proposes seems to me simply a veiled way of saying what he's plainly said numerous times before. He doesn't think Allen will develop into a franchise qb. And really, if your guy isn' t showing real promise and some significant achievement after year 3, you're probably drafting a young guy anyway, so I'm not sure there is that much of a point there.

[jrober38]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

But it isn't as easy as that. Say you miss? The other positions have limited peaks that if you have a Dak level top 10 / top 12 guy and you have built a good team around him while he is a rookie contract then you let him walk.... you miss on the guy you draft.... by the time you draft another one the team you built around him is broken down. The great thing about a franchise Quarterback is that if you have him 15 years you can cycle through 3 versions of your team with him and not have to worry about the most important position.

 

I think your idea is great in theory. I am very sceptical it would work in practice and it is not the route I would go.

 

Then you use the franchise tag and keep Allen for an extra year. 

 

The Bills should be drafting a QB next year, either in round 1 or 2. 

 

Then they'd have two years to evaluate that guy on the bench in practice during Josh's 4th and 5th seasons. Josh may miss time and he may even get on the field.

 

At the end of Josh's 5th year, the rookie will have 2-3 years left on their contract and you'll have a really good idea if they're as good as Josh.

 

If they are close to as good, install them as the starting QB and begin plans to draft another QB.

 

Again, this isn't about necessarily finding someone much better. It's much more about not paying a mediocre starting QB $35-40 million a season, and using that money on other parts of the roster. 

[Billl]

11 hours ago, njbuff said:

 

That's my point. Who cares if you move the ball up and down the field when you don't score points and that is on Jackson just as much as everyone else on the Ravens.

 

The Ravens are chokers until proven otherwise and Jackson is their QB.

 

It seems like only you care about the yards.

You clearly didn’t watch that game.  Jackson was incredible, and his receivers dropped everything including one that bounced to a DB for an INT.  

[Dr. Who]

6 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

Again, this isn't about necessarily finding someone much better. It's much more about not paying a mediocre starting QB $35-40 million a season, and using that money on other parts of the roster. 

And there you go. I don't at all grant that mediocre starting Qb is Allen's ceiling.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

35 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I'm not quoting the whole post to save muddying the overall post.

 

A few thoughts. 

 

1. I think the age of the "franchise QB" is coming to an end. 

 

2. Cam Newton is a better version of Josh Allen. 

 

3. I think it's wrong to sign a non top 10 QB to a top 10 QB's contract.

 

 

 

1. While reality may prove this true as seasons go by, I think GM's are slow to come around to new ways of thinking (Dave Gettleman is still an NFL GM in 2020). The chase has been on since Marino, Elway, Favre, Manning, watching Brady win 6-Super Bowls, for teams to not operate out of fear of trying to find the guy. And you can see that once a team finds a starter, they hang onto that starter forever - the Lions are not willing to move off Stafford, the Bengals were not willing to move off Dalton until their team imploded, the Chargers kept trying with Rivers year after year, the Vikings are going again with Kirk Cousins, the Cowboys feel they have no choice but to pay for Dak Prescott. Matt Ryan and the Falcons peaked for one year, but they will not move off him until he's 40. 

 

2. Agree. I think its almost certain that is what McDermott and Beane wanted a Cam clone. Josh is 6'5" 230 with an arm. Buddy Nix wanted the textbook Quarterback as well, that's the reason he gave for not drafting 6'0" Russell Wilson. After the 2018 Draft, Beane was telling the radio stations (WGR) that Allen's athleticism allowed RPO like Cam, and Newton's name would pop up in Bills conferences.

 

And we've seen a constant stream of ex-Panthers coming to Buffalo. Difference is, Cam won a National Championship, went #1 overall, and has won an NFL MVP, and since Michael Vick, the holy grail of QB has been find the guy who can pass and run. This was the crux of the argument to draft Allen in the first place. His scouting reports indicated middling production in lower level D1 and accuracy issues, so it was the classic "tools" verses a "raw" prospect.  If Allen could fix the accuracy and develop a feel for the game. But he would be a statistical outlier to overcome these things. 

 

3. Yes, it has become the new version of how the NFL Draft used to be. Where the incoming class would have to break all the guaranteed money that the previous class negotiated for. And teams have largely bent to the will of the players. From reports Dak is incredulous, as to why he is not the highest paid QB right now. Even though several rookies in the last few years have come right in and become middle of the road starters immediately.  

 

Edited April 14, 2020 by Straight Hucklebuck

[GunnerBill]

23 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Then you use the franchise tag and keep Allen for an extra year. 

 

The Bills should be drafting a QB next year, either in round 1 or 2. 

 

Then they'd have two years to evaluate that guy on the bench in practice during Josh's 4th and 5th seasons. Josh may miss time and he may even get on the field.

 

At the end of Josh's 5th year, the rookie will have 2-3 years left on their contract and you'll have a really good idea if they're as good as Josh.

 

If they are close to as good, install them as the starting QB and begin plans to draft another QB.

 

Again, this isn't about necessarily finding someone much better. It's much more about not paying a mediocre starting QB $35-40 million a season, and using that money on other parts of the roster. 

 

Whoa.... my posts were nothing to do with Josh Allen. This isn't about a specific team or specific situation for me. This is about the theory and whether, even in principle, it is a good idea. I'm unconvinced that it would ever work in practice. I think when a team doesn't find a top 15 QB they should keep drafting them. But when they do? I think you pay that guy and build around - I still believe that is the most effective route.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Whoa.... my posts were nothing to do with Josh Allen. This isn't about a specific team or specific situation for me. This is about the theory and whether, even in principle, it is a good idea. I'm unconvinced that it would ever work in practice. I think when a team doesn't find a top 15 QB they should keep drafting them. But when they do? I think you pay that guy and build around - I still believe that is the most effective route.

 

When teams like the Colts are convinced Rivers will win a Playoff game or take their franchise anywhere, I don't see the NFL adopting a progressive view on this for awhile. 

 

The Titans, as far as they went last year, cling to Tannehill and Henry to try and recapture the magic of 2019.

 

Would the Panthers be better trying to get a rookie QB or paying Bridgewater a ton of money? 

 

NFL teams seem to take known commodities, even if they are average at the QB position, and don't move off them in practice.  

 

 

 

 

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

When teams like the Colts are convinced Rivers will win a Playoff game or take their franchise anywhere, I don't see the NFL adopting a progressive view on this for awhile. 

 

The Titans, as far as they went last year, cling to Tannehill and Henry to try and recapture the magic of 2019.

 

Would the Panthers be better trying to get a rookie QB or paying Bridgewater a ton of money? 

 

NFL teams seem to take known commodities, even if they are average at the QB position, and don't move off them in practice.  

 

Agreed and actually the likes of Brissett (who Rivers replaced), Bridgewater and Tannehill are guys I completely agree shouldn't be paid and I have always taken that view. You give them middle of the road "bridge QB contracts" that are easy to get out of. I am talking about the guys who are the level above that. The Stafford and Prescott and Wentz and Goff types.

[Straight Hucklebuck]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agreed and actually the likes of Brissett (who Rivers replaced), Bridgewater and Tannehill are guys I completely agree shouldn't be paid and I have always taken that view. You give them middle of the road "bridge QB contracts" that are easy to get out of. I am talking about the guys who are the level above that. The Stafford and Prescott and Wentz and Goff types.

Well those guys put up numbers, so teams feel they either pay, or it becomes an ugly standoff. 

 

So they buckle and pay them. But Dak, Wentz and Goff are young enough that you can't totally know their peak yet so you are forced to pay. Especially the Rams, they have no draft picks. So there is no drafting competition for Goff. 

 

And the Eagles are depleted from the their Super Bowl run at WR, and their defensive line is getting older. 

 

Out of the three, the Cowboys could stand their ground with Dak and say win more than one Playoff game. 

[GunnerBill]

6 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Well those guys put up numbers, so teams feel they either pay, or it becomes an ugly standoff. 

 

So they buckle and pay them. But Dak, Wentz and Goff are young enough that you can't totally know their peak yet so you are forced to pay. Especially the Rams, they have no draft picks. So there is no drafting competition for Goff. 

 

And the Eagles are depleted from the their Super Bowl run at WR, and their defensive line is getting older. 

 

Out of the three, the Cowboys could stand their ground with Dak and say win more than one Playoff game. 

 

Of the three Dak is the guy I'd pay first actually. I'd pay all three to be honest but I think Dak is the best combination of consistent play and durability. 

[Straight Hucklebuck]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Of the three Dak is the guy I'd pay first actually. I'd pay all three to be honest but I think Dak is the best combination of consistent play and durability. 

 

I just think in practice, it's ingrained in NFL culture, that once you find a guy who is competent, you stick with that QB until the end of the line. 

 

Also, this isn't the 1980's and 1990's where there were just 5 guys. Now you have an expansive group in the middle that are competent, with teams that are all in various stages of team building. 

 

Kyler Murray, Prescott, Mayfield, Goff, Carr, Wentz, Cousins, Darnold, Mayfield, Watson, Stafford, Ryan, that have all shown the ability to start and win games. 

 

Should the Ravens be concerned about whether teams will catch up to Lamar Jackson? Or should they just go all-in to get a better team around him. 

 

Rodgers hasn't been to a Super Bowl since 2011, but is Green Bay going to make a move to find his replacement?

 

The places with starting slots open is few in the NFL right now. Even the Jaguars, are they going to move off Minshew for a higher rated rookie? Is that Doug Marrone's style? No, his style is to stick with a safe known and try to build the team around that player. 

 

 

 

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Dr. Who said:

Cycling the way Jrober proposes seems to me simply a veiled way of saying what he's plainly said numerous times before. He doesn't think Allen will develop into a franchise qb. And really, if your guy isn' t showing real promise and some significant achievement after year 3, you're probably drafting a young guy anyway, so I'm not sure there is that much of a point there.

 

I see very few "franchise" QBs across the NFL who can carry a franchise while making $35-40 million a season.

 

If we could give Josh an extension at say... $20 mil/season, I'd do that, but I don't see how it makes any sense to pay a guy top money when they're not a top player.

 

I feel the same way about the contracts given to Wentz, Prescott, Goff, Cousins, etc. I think those mega contracts for guys who aren't truly "elite" are more detrimental to their teams than just trying their luck on a different rookie QB. 

[jrober38]

1 hour ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

 

1. While reality may prove this true as seasons go by, I think GM's are slow to come around to new ways of thinking (Dave Gettleman is still an NFL GM in 2020). The chase has been on since Marino, Elway, Favre, Manning, watching Brady win 6-Super Bowls, for teams to not operate out of fear of trying to find the guy. And you can see that once a team finds a starter, they hang onto that starter forever - the Lions are not willing to move off Stafford, the Bengals were not willing to move off Dalton until their team imploded, the Chargers kept trying with Rivers year after year, the Vikings are going again with Kirk Cousins, the Cowboys feel they have no choice but to pay for Dak Prescott. Matt Ryan and the Falcons peaked for one year, but they will not move off him until he's 40. 

 

2. Agree. I think its almost certain that is what McDermott and Beane wanted a Cam clone. Josh is 6'5" 230 with an arm. Buddy Nix wanted the textbook Quarterback as well, that's the reason he gave for not drafting 6'0" Russell Wilson. After the 2018 Draft, Beane was telling the radio stations (WGR) that Allen's athleticism allowed RPO like Cam, and Newton's name would pop up in Bills conferences.

 

And we've seen a constant stream of ex-Panthers coming to Buffalo. Difference is, Cam won a National Championship, went #1 overall, and has won an NFL MVP, and since Michael Vick, the holy grail of QB has been find the guy who can pass and run. This was the crux of the argument to draft Allen in the first place. His scouting reports indicated middling production in lower level D1 and accuracy issues, so it was the classic "tools" verses a "raw" prospect.  If Allen could fix the accuracy and develop a feel for the game. But he would be a statistical outlier to overcome these things. 

 

3. Yes, it has become the new version of how the NFL Draft used to be. Where the incoming class would have to break all the guaranteed money that the previous class negotiated for. And teams have largely bent to the will of the players. From reports Dak is incredulous, as to why he is not the highest paid QB right now. Even though several rookies in the last few years have come right in and become middle of the road starters immediately.  

 

 

Excellent post.

 

I agree with all points. 

 

I think what people are failing to realize is that every single "franchise QB" who has lasted in this league for more than 10 years has done so because they are an elite pocket passer. 

 

The guys who run all break down because the NFL is such a violent sport. Concussions, knee injuries, you name it, being 6'5, 240 might help but eventually mobile QBs who make a lot of their plays with their feet will get hurt. 

 

Cam was amazing early in his career despite having a QB rating consistently in the mid 80s. As a passer he was never very good, but his legs and his ability to put points on the board in the red zone made him a top QB.

 

However, in time the hits took their toll and with reduced mobility and a reduced willingness to lay his body on the line, he wasn't good enough as a passer, which is why he's currently still on the free agent market looking for a job. 

 

This is my concern with Josh. If he's remains a bottom 10 passer in most or all NFL passing categories, do you re sign him? I don't think you do. 

[jrober38]

1 hour ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:

Well those guys put up numbers, so teams feel they either pay, or it becomes an ugly standoff. 

 

So they buckle and pay them. But Dak, Wentz and Goff are young enough that you can't totally know their peak yet so you are forced to pay. Especially the Rams, they have no draft picks. So there is no drafting competition for Goff. 

 

And the Eagles are depleted from the their Super Bowl run at WR, and their defensive line is getting older. 

 

Out of the three, the Cowboys could stand their ground with Dak and say win more than one Playoff game. 

 

I think the issue is that these guys look good when those players are on a rookie deal making $4-8 mil year with elite teams surrounding them.

 

The last few years has pretty clearly shown that when you pay these guys $35 mil/year and have to start sacrificing other parts of your roster to make the numbers work, most of these teams take a step backwards because ultimately the QB that they gave the huge contract to didn't actually deserve it.

 

6 of the 10 highest paid QBs in the NFL last year didn't make the playoffs. That's crazy to me. 

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I feel the same way about the contracts given to Wentz, Prescott, Goff, Cousins, etc. I think those mega contracts for guys who aren't truly "elite" are more detrimental to their teams than just trying their luck on a different rookie QB. 

 

There just are not enough good rookies in a 4 or 5 year period for me to advise a GM who has one of those four guys that it would be a good idea. 

[JaCrispy]

25 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I see very few "franchise" QBs across the NFL who can carry a franchise while making $35-40 million a season.

 

If we could give Josh an extension at say... $20 mil/season, I'd do that, but I don't see how it makes any sense to pay a guy top money when they're not a top player.

 

I feel the same way about the contracts given to Wentz, Prescott, Goff, Cousins, etc. I think those mega contracts for guys who aren't truly "elite" are more detrimental to their teams than just trying their luck on a different rookie QB. 

People may agree or disagree with your opinion on Josh....however, one thing that is undeniable is that your post makes logical sense.