Colin Cowherd's Take

[Franco_92]

3 hours ago, krf139 said:

He’s not wrong. Every year of McDermott is a wasted year of Allen’s prime. We’ll all be looking back on this decades from now saying “how did we not win a Super Bowl with Josh?”

There better be a master list of these guys tracked by some mod so we can have a mass-banning event when the Bills win the SB

[Mat68]

Mind you Purdy has a similar injury…. Allen played through a mildly severe injury for half the season. 

[Dr.Sack]

So the idea from Cowherd is Josh Allen needs to do more in the playoffs, then he currently is doing 47% of his teams rushing yards and 17 TDs to 4 picks in 8 games, 2 rush TDs and a receiving TD. 

Edited June 8, 2023 by Dr.Sack

[Chicken Boo]

Cowherd is absolutely correct.  

 

Show of hands - Who here would rather have Ed Oliver than Mike McGlinchey?  

[GoBills808]

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree.

 

And I want to add something to discussion that has been nagging at me when I first saw it a few weeks ago.  I don't recall the thread where this discussion took place, but someone dug out passer rating and other performance data splits on Burrow and Allen in 2022.  I think Mahomes' data was there, too.  Among other things, the data showed that Burrow's passer rating rose incrementally from the first quarter to the fourth quarter.   Allen's dropped off in the fourth quarter fairly significantly.  Mahomes was better than Allen, too.

 

There are multiple things of significance in that information.  First, of course, is that there could be a lot of different reasons why Allen's performance tailed off in the fourth quarter - it's a team game, and any number of things could contribute to Allen's decline.  

 

Second, whatever the reason for Allen's decline, there simply is no question that you'd rather have a QB with a passer rating of 105 in the fourth quarter than 89, which is in the ballpark of what the difference was.   There's simply no question that your team is likely to have greater success if your team has a quarterback who's very efficient in the fourth quarter.  

 

Third, this kind of information really undermines the argument that you've properly challenged here - that is, if the team has an elite quarterback, the coaches should be winning Super Bowls.  Who's to say that the problem isn't simply with #17.  Maybe the coaches are doing it all right, and #17 just isn't getting the job done?   Now, I know there are all kinds of rebuttals to that, some of which I agree with, particularly it's Dorsey, it's clock management, it's the offensive line, but none of that is the point.  The point is that there's elite and there's elite, and to blindly lay the problem at the feet of the GM and coaches isn't looking nearly closely enough at what might be causing the team to fall short. 

 

Maybe the only reason the Chiefs are winning Super Bowls and the Bills aren't is that Mahomes is simply better than Allen.   I suppose that thought will cause some people to say, "Well, then that's reason enough to put McDermott on the hot seat, because he's the one who decided he didn't want Mahomes."  Those people will flame away.   They're the people who, when the Bills win the Super Bowl, will complain that they didn't beat the spread.  

You think Allen is causing the team to fail? That's a wild take

 

 

35 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:

So the idea from Cowherd is Josh Allen needs to do more in the playoffs, then he currently is doing 47% of his teams rushing yards and 17 TDs to 4 picks in 8 games, 2 rush TDs and a receiving TD. 

Yeah Allen is very clearly not the problem

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

Cowherd is absolutely correct.  

 

Show of hands - Who here would rather have Ed Oliver than Mike McGlinchey?  

 

Me. Mike McGlinchey is an average right tackle. Ed Oliver is a better football player. I am sure you can find an offensive player who would be the answer to that question but it isn't Mike McGlinchey.

[GETTOTHE50]

Yea but we didn’t retain saffold so shove that up your ass cowterd 

[Doc Brown]

4 hours ago, Chicken Boo said:

Cowherd is absolutely correct.  

 

Show of hands - Who here would rather have Ed Oliver than Mike McGlinchey?  

I would.  I think Oliver has been the better player to this point in both of their careers.  McGlinchey is an average starting tackle, a better run blocker than pass blocker, and got overpaid.  There weren't a lot of good RT options available this offseason.  Juwaan Taylor would've been my preferred target but not at 20 million a year like he got in KC.

[GunnerBill]

16 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

No, not too high.  And I agree with what you say.   

 

Acknowledging it's difficult doesn't automatically translate into an excuse.  There's a difference between an explanation as to why something happened and making an excuse.   

 

For any team, the answer to the question "why didn't you win the Super Bowl" is "we weren't good enough."   There are a lot of explanations for why one team or another wasn't good enough.  There are explanations for the Bills, too.  

 

What people mean when they say that an explanation is an excuse is that they think the team is using the explanation to make it okay that they didn't win.  One thing we know for sure is that the Bills - the owner, the GM, the coaches, and the players, do not think it's okay.  They aren't making excuses for themselves.   They're trying to do something that is very difficult, and they're going to keep trying.  

 

Fans can complain if they want, but I'm not complaining.  Yes, the Rams won a Super Bowl, and almost immediately they weren't competitive.  The Bills are competitive every season, and they intend to stay there.  I can support that. 

 

I agree with almost all of this... although as I have argued elsewhere on the Rams - the take that they "sold out for a Superbowl and then immediately sucked" is unfair. They were still a .500 football team when they lost Kupp and then 3-4 when Stafford first got hurt (3-6 by the time they eventually shut him down for the year). That despite losing their starting left tackle week 1, both starting guards for most of the year and at some points both starting safeties (we saw how the Bills D looked vs the Vikings when both Hyde and Poyer were down). And Donald missed time and they had other little injuries here and there too. Sure, their depth has suffered as a result of their Superbowl or bust mentality, both trading away picks for veterans and kicking the can down the road on the cap, but the idea it was some sort of inevitability that they would fall off is a stretch IMO. Take the starting QB, best offensive weapon, and 3/5ths of the starting oline off any team in the NFL and there is going to be a drop off. Not saying the Rams were likely to repeat without it, I don't think anyone ever expected that, but I think they would still at worst have competed for a playoff spot without their roster being injury ravaged. 

[newcam2012]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree with almost all of this... although as I have argued elsewhere on the Rams - the take that they "sold out for a Superbowl and then immediately sucked" is unfair. They were still a .500 football team when they lost Kupp and then 3-4 when Stafford first got hurt (3-6 by the time they eventually shut him down for the year). That despite losing their starting left tackle week 1, both starting guards for most of the year and at some points both starting safeties (we saw how the Bills D looked vs the Vikings when both Hyde and Poyer were down). And Donald missed time and they had other little injuries here and there too. Sure, their depth has suffered as a result of their Superbowl or bust mentality, both trading away picks for veterans and kicking the can down the road on the cap, but the idea it was some sort of inevitability that they would fall off is a stretch IMO. Take the starting QB, best offensive weapon, and 3/5ths of the starting oline off any team in the NFL and there is going to be a drop off. Not saying the Rams were likely to repeat without it, I don't think anyone ever expected that, but I think they would still at worst have competed for a playoff spot without their roster being injury ravaged. 

Injuries are part of the game. KC won the SB with Mahomes playing on one leg. Cinci whipped the Bills with a shell of an oline. Miami almost beat the Bills with a nobody 3rd string QB. 

 

Buffalo's offense was clearly healthy going into the Cinci game. Everyone wants to use the use injury excuse for Buffalo. Sure it has some validity. However, the Bills offense looked good vs Miami. Yet, they only managed 10 measly points vs Cinci. Yet, another excuse. They had nothing left...

 

Come on now! If anything they should have been even more motivated to win. Hamlin was going to be fine. Made a likely inspirational appearence and playing at home with rabid fans cheering them on. 

 

Stop with the excuses! The Bills were outplayed and outcoached. Men playing against boys. The Bills game plan was perplexing. To this day, I'm not sure what they tried to do. 

 

Funny how fans are so easily ready to dismiss this game as a one off. Yet, previous years Beane is on the record as saying you are as good as your last game. A theme that suddenly doesn't apply out of convenience. 

 

At least Beane has move some moves to address the Bills weaknesses. Who knows if it's enough? At least Fraizer is gone and McD should be an upgrade. Dorsey might the scape goat if the Bills fall short once again. 

Edited June 8, 2023 by newcam2012

[Chicken Boo]

4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Me. Mike McGlinchey is an average right tackle. Ed Oliver is a better football player. I am sure you can find an offensive player who would be the answer to that question but it isn't Mike McGlinchey.

 

I'd argue Ed Oliver borders on average himself.  McGlinchey excels somewhere at least.  Ed...

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

I'd argue Ed Oliver borders on average himself.  McGlinchey excels somewhere at least.  Ed...

 

Wrong.

[Chicken Boo]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Wrong.

 

Ok.

[GunnerBill]

28 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

Injuries are part of the game. KC won the SB with Mahomes playing on one leg. Cinci whipped the Bills with a shell of an oline. Miami almost beat the Bills with a nobody 3rd string QB. 

 

Buffalo's offense was clearly healthy going into the Cinci game. Everyone wants to use the use injury excuse for Buffalo. Sure it has some validity. However, the Bills offense looked good vs Miami. Yet, they only managed 10 measly points vs Cinci. Yet, another excuse. They had nothing left...

 

Come on now! If anything they should have been even more motivated to win. Hamlin was going to be fine. Made a likely inspirational appearence and playing at home with rabid fans cheering them on. 

 

Stop with the excuses! The Bills were outplayed and outcoached. Men playing against boys. The Bills game plan was perplexing. To this day, I'm not sure what they tried to do. 

 

Funny how fans are so easily ready to dismiss this game as a one off. Yet, previous years Beane is on the record as saying you are as good as your last game. A theme that suddenly doesn't apply out of convenience. 

 

At least Beane has move some moves to address the Bills weaknesses. Who knows if it's enough? At least Fraizer is gone and McD should be an upgrade. Dorsey might the scape goat if the Bills fall short once again. 

 

I think you might want to read my post again.

[PBF81]

22 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

Just not true. In 7 drafts this regime has picked two defensive tackles - total. A 1st rounder and a 3rd rounder. DBs they have drafted lots on day 3, but the fewest in the first two days of the draft of ANY team in the league in that timeframe (since 2017). They have drafted fewer linebackers in the first two days of the draft (3) than they have offensive linemen (4). 

 

They haven't been great judges of oline talent. From their FA acquisitions to their draft picks. I agree they could have done more, but that is at LEAST as much about talent evaluation as it has about teambuilding strategy. 

 

I think you have to expand that analysis.  

 

Of the past five drafts, prior to this one, Beane's drafted 9 players.  Of those 9 players in rounds 1 & 2.  Of those 9 players 4 were DL, 5 were Front-7, and 6 were D overall.  

 

The offensive players taken were Allen of course, Ford, and Cook.  

 

This is the first year that his Draft was focused on offense.  As Cowherd said, and which otherwise is know, rookie TEs rarely make an impact.  We'll see how this Draft plays out this year, but at least it was offensively focused.  

 

 

On 6/6/2023 at 7:23 PM, newcam2012 said:

Pretty blunt take from Colin. Wondering how others feel about what he says. 

 

Colin saying the quiet part out loud.  LOL  

 

I see that it threw a Baby Ruth into the forum pool.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

8 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

I think you have to expand that analysis.  

 

Of the past five drafts, prior to this one, Beane's drafted 9 players.  Of those 9 players in rounds 1 & 2.  Of those 9 players 4 were DL, 5 were Front-7, and 6 were D overall.  

 

The offensive players taken were Allen of course, Ford, and Cook.  

 

This is the first year that his Draft was focused on offense.  As Cowherd said, and which otherwise is know, rookie TEs rarely make an impact.  We'll see how this Draft plays out this year, but at least it was offensively focused.  

 

 

I wasn't doing a full breakdown of their drafting (although doing that and a true comparison against the league is on my to do list). I was simply demonstrating that the statement Bill made is simply not true. When I am making a general point you will know I am making a general point. This was not a general point it was a very specific dismissal of a factual inaccuracy. 

Edited June 8, 2023 by GunnerBill

[newcam2012]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I wasn't doing a full breakdown of their drafting (although doing that and a true comparison against the league is on my to do list). I was simply demonstrating that the statement Bill made is simply not true. 

Looking forward to seeing it. 

[Real McClappy]

Colin is in a shell and not looking at the full offseason and draft I guess. 

 

Current O line with draft position regardless of whom drafted them. It's not all doom and gloom, RT is really my only "concern".

 

LT Dawkins = 2nd         Doyle = 5th

LG McGovern = 3rd      Edwards = 5th

C Morse = 2nd              Mancz = UFA

RG Bates = UFA            Torrence = 2nd

RT Brown = 3rd            Quessenberry = 6th

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, Real McNasty said:

Colin is in a shell and not looking at the full offseason and draft I guess. 

 

Current O line with draft position regardless of whom drafted them. It's not all doom and gloom, RT is really my only "concern".

 

LT Dawkins = 2nd         Doyle = 5th

LG McGovern = 3rd      Edwards = 5th

C Morse = 2nd              Mancz = UFA

RG Bates = UFA            Torrence = 2nd

RT Brown = 3rd            Quessenberry = 6th

 

If they end up missing on Brown (jury still out) then I think picking the wrong tackle twice is the problem rather than not drafting enough tackles. It's always more nuanced than just chuck resources at it in the draft. You have to get that right. 

[DCofNC]

12 hours ago, Aussie Joe said:

Ok…

 

The reason I ask that question is I note that a lot of people here tend to be pessimistic in their outlook… I’m not sure why about this current team that is like  the third favourite to win the Championship..I’ve been following this team for 40 years and this is rarified air to have a team this highly rated …

 

it’s tough improving on a 13-3 team….

 

I think the OL and RB are improved though… not that the OL is elite by any means…but simply not having  Saffold there is an improvement for me…I would have liked to see an upgrade on Brown..  at least there are other solid options this year to turn to if he is not getting it done … I like the addition of Brown and Murray… they have running options in the red zone now not named Josh Allen

 

WR I’m not so sure about… let’s see if Beane is done there though come Week 1… I wouldn’t be surprised if something else happens …TE is improved through Kincaid…

 

The D should not be any worse than last year if they can get a better deal with injuries …it’s hard to imagine that situation not improving …

 

I brought up the coaching doubts earlier… we won’t know until the season is underway and even through the end of the season…what has happened last year isn’t relevant for next season … Leslie is gone and Dorsey isn’t a rookie anymore…

 

it’s possible they are a better team this year even if their record is worse in 2023… success to me means progressing further …

Let’s wait and see

 

Well .. he got roasted for Teller right?

 

I note he moved on from Moss and Ford last year…

“It’s possible they are a better team this year even if their record is worse in 2023… success to me means progressing further …”

 

This is my definition of success as well.  There’s potential for things to be better this year, I’m hopeful they will.  I am not 100% sold on the changes made on D, but McD gets to show us what he’s got.