Beane anticipates Cole Beasley being back next season

[Doc]

Beasley's going to be 33 in a few months.  It's better to move on too early than too late.  It sucks but that's the business.

 

Again I'd look to a guy like Russell Gage from Atlanta.  6' 184# and 4.42 speed.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

20 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

He talked about his production still being on par with previous seasons even though there were a lot of mouths to feed so to speak. Doesn’t mean anything definitive obviously but interesting nonetheless 

 

OK now that some articles have come out such as this one from new TBN writer Katharine Fitzgerald, actual quotes of what Beane said:

Quote

“Cole, he’s still under contract so we didn’t, I didn’t sit down with Cole at the end and see where he was at or things like that. But I would anticipate Cole being back,” Beane said.

 

I think by "where he was at", Beane is talking about does Cole wish to retire or keep playing?

 

Quote

“Cole can still play, and he’ll continue to play in this league,” Beane said. “His diminished snaps was just more where our offense was at the time. We had a lot of pieces.”

 

The thing is, factually, Cole's snaps barely diminished between last year and this year.  As an absolute number, in fact, they went up and as a percentage decreased only ~5%:  691 snaps this season (62%) vs 680 last season (66%).   He had slightly more targets this year, as well - 112 this season vs 107 last season.

 

His catch % fell a bit, from 77% to 73%, which amounts to 4-5 catches.

 

The big change is in his yards per target (from 9 to 6.2) and his yards per reception (from 11.8 to 8.5), and that was mostly in his YBC. 

 

Fitzgerald's article is overall a good read with quotes from what Beane said about Hughes, Sanders, etc

 

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

Beasley's going to be 33 in a few months.  It's better to move on too early than too late.  It sucks but that's the business.

 

Again I'd look to a guy like Russell Gage from Atlanta.  6' 184# and 4.42 speed.

 

Is Gage a slot guy? My knowledge comes only from the stat sheet - but his stats put him squarely into the category of the NFL's squeezed out "middle class", a guy who  has finished his rookie contract but hasn't put up strong enough numbers overall to break into the top tier of WR.

 

I think you bring up a valid point in that sometimes Beane is hanging on too long to the same aging guys.  In the Fitzgerald article I reference above, Beane actually referenced bringing back Jerry Hughes and Emmanuel Sanders.  I do NOT think we got $6M of production from Sanders, and I think he took away snaps from younger more productive guys like Davis.  Ditto Hughes, who got paid $9.4M

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think you're critiquing the strong side not the weak side of that post.  I could be wrong, but this year, I don't think McKenzie is going to get $3-4M AAV.  That would slot him in as ~ a #40 paid WR in the league, but more importantly, put him in with the 1st round rookies.   Last year I actually thought he might get that kind of offer, and with all the salary cap goings on, I was wrong. 

 

It's the hard reality of the NFL salary cap that it's whittled away at the veteran "middle class" and left the top WR who are paid $6M and up (like Beasley and Sanders), the rookies, and the lower rent guys.   I don't think McKenzie has shown enough to get out of the "middle class".

 

"for something else" is the weak side becaues would clearly include using the money to beef up someone else's contract offer, but You Do You.

 

 

 

Now this is a poor take on the other side.  McKenzie legitimately has that property no one can coach - speed.  Our defensive players know it.  And he's developed into a competent NFL WR who can run routes and block, surprisingly well for his size and weight.  He's tough.  Unlike a lot of fast guys, he can actually play football.

 

He's not just a "product of Allen" at this point. 

 

That said, if he'd developed into a reliable KR/PR he might be worth that if the salary cap wasn't still recovering.  But he didn't and it is.

 

 

 

I was quoting the poster.  He said McK should be offered 3-4 mil and the other 2-3 for (literally) "something else" (not added to the 3-4 he already proposed they offer McK).

 

He wasn't saying what you are saying.  I was just pointing that out. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I was quoting the poster.  He said McK should be offered 3-4 mil and the other 2-3 for (literally) "something else" (not added to the 3-4 he already proposed they offer McK).

 

He wasn't saying what you are saying.  I was just pointing that out. 

 

I don't know why reading comprehension is an issue here

 

Literally no one has suggested that we add it to the $3-4M he suggested McKenzie be offered, and "something else" literally means just that - "something else". 

 

It's your interpretation that he was suggesting a $2-3M signing be made, vs just having the money available to use as part of an offer.

[BarleyNY]

5 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

They can sign someone or at least have a deal in the pipeline by 3/20 if they are moving on from him…. 
 

Im sure they knew Sanders was coming last preseason when they cut Brown …

 

That’s if they are definitely moving on from him of course… I’m not totally convinced as yet…

It seems like a younger, more cost effective player on a longer term deal will be available.  Beane can have feelers out on better options, but you never know what’ll happen in FA.  The decision on Beasley will probably have to stand on his merits.

 

I have been thinking more about @Hapless Bills Fan’s point - that Beasley looses reps against teams with stickier coverage (or when that’s allowed by refs).  If that’s the case, then we should move on and find someone who’s better against that because that’s what you get in the playoffs and prime time games.  Refs let a lot go in those games.

 

Beane will have some options in FA and the draft.  The other option would be to keep Beasley for the last year of his contract and draft his replacement.  Then bring the rookie along behind him and have him earn his playing time.  Either option would be fine by me. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

9 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

It seems like a younger, more cost effective player on a longer term deal will be available.  Beane can have feelers out on better options, but you never know what’ll happen in FA.  The decision on Beasley will probably have to stand on his merits.

 

I have been thinking more about @Hapless Bills Fan’s point - that Beasley looses reps against teams with stickier coverage (or when that’s allowed by refs).  If that’s the case, then we should move on and find someone who’s better against that because that’s what you get in the playoffs and prime time games.  Refs let a lot go in those games.

 

Beane will have some options in FA and the draft.  The other option would be to keep Beasley for the last year of his contract and draft his replacement.  Then bring the rookie along behind him and have him earn his playing time.  Either option would be fine by me. 

 

I don't know if it would work or who would be interested, but the way Beane repeated "he's under contract" combined with him saying "Cole can still play, and he’ll continue to play in this league" vs "he'll continue to play for us" or "we look forward to having him back" made me wonder if Beane might try to package him as part of a trade to fill some of our gaps in other areas?

 

That's just a stray thought though, I don't have any team in mind who would benefit from having a WR like Beasley.  But perhaps if Daboll does get a HC gig and would like Beasley there to help teach his offensive system and work with young WR, that would be a possibility.  Beasley would have value beyond his on-field contributions in that instance.

[Doc]

45 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Is Gage a slot guy? My knowledge comes only from the stat sheet - but his stats put him squarely into the category of the NFL's squeezed out "middle class", a guy who  has finished his rookie contract but hasn't put up strong enough numbers overall to break into the top tier of WR.

 

I think you bring up a valid point in that sometimes Beane is hanging on too long to the same aging guys.  In the Fitzgerald article I reference above, Beane actually referenced bringing back Jerry Hughes and Emmanuel Sanders.  I do NOT think we got $6M of production from Sanders, and I think he took away snaps from younger more productive guys like Davis.  Ditto Hughes, who got paid $9.4M

 

Yes.  He started-off in the slot when/because Atlanta had Jones and Ridley.  He was elevated to WR1 this past season by default and isn't a true one.

[ThurmanThomasEnglishMuffin]

things to consider:

 

Sanders is a FA (void year)

McKenzie is a FA

Kumerow is a FA

 

Beasley is under contract for one more year for a decent $ and is a contributor in this offense. He is clearly in decline, so no need to extend him, but no reason to make another hole in the WR room. Could do a lot worse than Diggs/ Davis/ Bease and Knox as your base.

[Matt_In_NH]

Not holding my breath.  

[Mr. WEO]

21 hours ago, Big Turk said:

I can't see him being back under the current contract...he saves $6 million on the cap if cut and I would much rather see MacKenzie be signed for $3-4 million and have an extra $2-3 million for something else.

 

21 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I don't know why reading comprehension is an issue here

 

Literally no one has suggested that we add it to the $3-4M he suggested McKenzie be offered, and "something else" literally means just that - "something else". 

 

It's your interpretation that he was suggesting a $2-3M signing be made, vs just having the money available to use as part of an offer.

 

 

 

A 1 year savings of 2-3 million isn't going to sweeten the pot for a significant FA signing, nor would it go far in re-signing a current roster player for multi-years.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 minutes ago, ThurmanThomasEnglishMuffin said:

things to consider:

 

Sanders is a FA (void year)

McKenzie is a FA

Kumerow is a FA

 

Beasley is under contract for one more year for a decent $ and is a contributor in this offense. He is clearly in decline, so no need to extend him, but no reason to make another hole in the WR room. Could do a lot worse than Diggs/ Davis/ Bease and Knox as your base.

 

Sanders, Beane indicated he thought he wanted to retire.  He also sounded open to bringing him back.  IMHO that would be a mistake.  I thought he took snaps from Davis and from McKenzie that his production didn't always justify, and I never felt he had that trust from Allen that they were on the same page, perhaps because a "foot injury" kept Sanders out of the entirety of training camp.  (And when he was targeted a lot in the first 2 games, IMHO that affected us)

 

Beane never said in so many words they wanted McKenzie back, but when talking about Cole Beasley, he went on at some length about all the things McKenzie brings to the table that Beasley doesn't.  "Isaiah really helped the running game", listed off a bunch of different plays and said "we don't use Cole in those roles".

 

Kumerow has been a key ST player, and he's also a strong blocker downfield and even in the backfield (although not in-line like a TE).

 

So when you look at those "decent $$" which are $7.5M next year, with $6M cash and $1.5M dead, the question becomes "does Beasley contribute more than McKenzie plus Kumerow plus perhaps a younger guy we could sign?"

 

 

 

 

[Big Turk]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

 

 

A 1 year savings of 2-3 million isn't going to sweeten the pot for a significant FA signing, nor would it go far in re-signing a current roster player for multi-years.

 

 

 

They aren't going to have any significant FA signings. It will be enough for a depth player or potential love end starter

[QCity]

5 hours ago, K-9 said:

There’s an old saying in the league, “you bring your team to camp.” I suspect if they bring Cole Beasley to camp then the intent is to keep him. If not, he will be gone before camp starts. 

 

His cap savings ($6.1M) are the same both pre and post June release, so there's no reason not to keep him around as a hedge against injuries at the position. I'll counter with another old saying, "Every day in the NFL can be cut day."

[K-9]

1 hour ago, QCity said:

 

His cap savings ($6.1M) are the same both pre and post June release, so there's no reason not to keep him around as a hedge against injuries at the position. I'll counter with another old saying, "Every day in the NFL can be cut day."

Fair enough. But I think that if he’s not in their plans, they will release him sooner rather than later just to give him a better chance to latch on somewhere else. That is if he’s still interested in playing at all. 

[bmur66]

Beas is a dog that can hunt. I want him here.

Edited January 27, 2022 by bmur66

[Billl]

7 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I don't know if it would work or who would be interested, but the way Beane repeated "he's under contract" combined with him saying "Cole can still play, and he’ll continue to play in this league" vs "he'll continue to play for us" or "we look forward to having him back" made me wonder if Beane might try to package him as part of a trade to fill some of our gaps in other areas?

He’s old, slow, expensive, unproductive, and a distraction.  I can’t imagine keeping him let alone finding someone who wants him bad enough to give up an asset for him.  Josh Allen threw him the ball 112 times, and he didn’t score a single TD.  How is that even possible?  692 yards on that many targets is terrible.  
 

If a guy can’t put up numbers when an MVP caliber QB is feeding him targets, why would anyone pay him nearly $8,000,000?  He’s going to be 33 in a few months, so he’s only going to get slower and less athletic.  If Beane can’t find someone who can do better than 6.2 yards per target and 0 TDs for what Beasley is owed then something is big wrong.  The free agent market is littered with guys who are younger, cheaper, and more productive.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Billl

[John from Riverside]

2 minutes ago, Billl said:

He’s old, slow, expensive, unproductive, and a distraction.  I can’t imagine keeping him let alone finding someone who wants him bad enough to give up an asset for him.  Josh Allen threw him the ball 112 times, and he didn’t score a single TD.  How is that even possible?  692 yards on that many targets is terrible.  
 

If a guy can’t put up numbers when an MVP caliber QB is feeding him targets, why would anyone pay him nearly $8,000,000?  He’s going to be 33 in a few months, so he’s only going to get slower and less athletic.  If Beane can’t find someone who can do better than 6.2 yards per target and 0 TDs for what Beasley is owed then something is big wrong.  The free agent market is littered with guys who are younger, cheaper, and more productive.

I dont really care about the distraction stuff....the fact is he provides NO YAC

 

If we want to beat the chiefs....we need to learn from what they do well....Mahommes.....who is great....but gets a TON of YAC YARDS from his receivers.

 

Allen does not.....every seldom do you see a receiver break away for huge yardage AFTER catching the ball.....it mostly comes from Josh Allen's arm

 

Get a YAC monster on this team.....someone who can catch a ball....make someone miss...and take it to the house

[Billl]

20 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I dont really care about the distraction stuff....the fact is he provides NO YAC

 

If we want to beat the chiefs....we need to learn from what they do well....Mahommes.....who is great....but gets a TON of YAC YARDS from his receivers.

 

Allen does not.....every seldom do you see a receiver break away for huge yardage AFTER catching the ball.....it mostly comes from Josh Allen's arm

 

Get a YAC monster on this team.....someone who can catch a ball....make someone miss...and take it to the house

You might not care, but other GMs will have to answer the questions that come with him.  It’s immaterial though because nobody’s trading for him.  I totally agree about the YAC part.  When he caught the pass around midfield on either the final drive or the one before, it looked like it was going to be a huge gain.  He was coming across the middle with space, and Josh hit him in full stride.  Then…nothing.  The DB caught him like he was standing still.  It was a nice gain,  it he left a lot of yards on the field.  
 

I respect his career, but I think he’s just about washed.  If he were making $2,000,000, I could see keeping him around as a 50 targets per year type of role player.  Here’s your replacement:
 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HumpAd00.htm

 

Same guy only younger and cheaper.  Also, he’s a FA.

Edited January 27, 2022 by Billl

[HOUSE]

I really don't want this guy twittering all over my locker room

[davspo]

As far as I’m concerned all offensive personnel decisions should be up to Josh Allen.