Bernard, Torrence and Benford all officially starters

[Shaw66]

27 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I didn’t read your previous post, but I think we’re looking at this from different angles. 
 

My post was based on this quote

 “The key point here is we don't know anything until Bernard's snap count is large enough to make a rational evaluation.  Too many here seem to have prejudged Bernard before he's had any significant playing time.”

 

So what does this mean?  We can’t express our current thoughts on the player because we don’t have a large enough sample size?  It’s a message board in 2023.  People have opinions and like to share them.  To date….what I’VE seen from Bernard, has been underwhelming and doesn’t lead me to believe that he’s going to be a satisfactory starting Mike.
 

I didn’t mean to dismiss your opinion or anyone else’s.  All I can discuss is what I’ve seen to date.  If I haven’t seen it, I don’t know about it, so I can’t discuss it.   Maybe you’re interpreting what I’m saying in a different light or maybe I didn’t word it correctly?  🤷🏻‍♂️  but I definitely don’t feel that what I said is wrong.  I’m allowed to have an opinion of a player before he’s played enough snaps to make a rational evaluation.  I’m sure everyone here has been guilty of that. As if it’s a terrible thing. Sheeesh

 

its not as if I’m making a declaration that Terrel Bernard is 💯 too small

and weak to play the Mike.  From what I’ve seen….I fear that may be the case.  Just like I feared Matt Barkleys arm was too weak and would prevent him from being a good starter.  
 

 

 

We understand that you don't have confidence in Bernard because, as you've made clear in this post, all YOU can discuss is what you've seen to date.   That's obvious from your opinion.

 

But in the post I responded to you said, "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."  Emphasis added by me.   That's completely different.  That's dismissive of the fact that many people here think there's more that's worth discussing.  In my case, I think it's relevant that McDermott and Beane seem to have a view of Bernard that's based on more than the plays you saw on television last season.   Your response suggests that is irrelevant.  Max Fischer says that it's important to note that we have a very small sample of actual live game plays to analyze, and we have no way to form a good judgment until his has put more plays on film (and by the way, until we see how much a year's experience, working out, and coaching may have improved his play).   Your response was "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."   

 

And yet you argue self-righteously, as though everyone else's opinion is somehow incorrect because you don't want to consider any possibility other than the guy is as bad as you think he his based solely on plays you watched last season on television.   When you do that, it's not a discussion.  And it's disrespectful to suggest that others somehow aren't discussing this in good faith.  

 

Please.

 

 

[newcam2012]

2 hours ago, NewEra said:

No, the key point here is that this is a message board and this is what we do here prior to the actual game.  Discuss bills football.  All we can discuss is what we’ve seen to date. What I’VE seen to date is less than what I consider a viable Mike starter in the nfl.  
 

until that changes, that’s how I see it.  I am actively hoping to be wrong.  

Very well stated. I concur unequivocally. 

[hondo in seattle]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

As I've often said, what I do a lot of time is observe McBeane and try to figure out why they do the things they do.   I, like a lot of people, was puzzled why Beane didn't use assets (either draft picks or money) to get someone who looked like a quality replacement for Edmunds.  I concluded that two things were likely:  1.  That McBeane believe that the position doesn't require top-end talent, and 2. that they already had the guy or guys on the roster that they needed.   That would explain why they waited until the third round to take a linebacker....  

 

Either we're right or McBeane are right.   McBeane are pretty smart guys, and they know a lot more about football than I do, so I think there's actually a good chance that they're right and that Bernard can do what he needs to do in the middle.  

 

 

I respect your opinion, but I have to suggest another possibility.  We're right in our concern about MLB and Beane settled for the affordable solution. 

 

I want a nicer car but it's just not in the budget.  Life is like that sometimes.  We don't always get what we want.  

[Buffalo_Stampede]

8 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

Bernard > Lawrence Taylor 

Ray Nitschke Was a 3rd round pick and so was Bernard. Just saying.

[Coach Tuesday]

5 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

We understand that you don't have confidence in Bernard because, as you've made clear in this post, all YOU can discuss is what you've seen to date.   That's obvious from your opinion.

 

But in the post I responded to you said, "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."  Emphasis added by me.   That's completely different.  That's dismissive of the fact that many people here think there's more that's worth discussing.  In my case, I think it's relevant that McDermott and Beane seem to have a view of Bernard that's based on more than the plays you saw on television last season.   Your response suggests that is irrelevant.  Max Fischer says that it's important to note that we have a very small sample of actual live game plays to analyze, and we have no way to form a good judgment until his has put more plays on film (and by the way, until we see how much a year's experience, working out, and coaching may have improved his play).   Your response was "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."   

 

And yet you argue self-righteously, as though everyone else's opinion is somehow incorrect because you don't want to consider any possibility other than the guy is as bad as you think he his based solely on plays you watched last season on television.   When you do that, it's not a discussion.  And it's disrespectful to suggest that others somehow aren't discussing this in good faith.  

 

Please.

 

 

But OTOH you keep basically preaching to us a football version of the Divine Plan: the roster is this way because it has been willed so by One Bills Drive.  “Beane and McDermott know what they are doing and who are we fans to question them.”  Talk about self-righteous…

[newcam2012]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

As I've often said, what I do a lot of time is observe McBeane and try to figure out why they do the things they do.   I, like a lot of people, was puzzled why Beane didn't use assets (either draft picks or money) to get someone who looked like a quality replacement for Edmunds.  I concluded that two things were likely:  1.  That McBeane believe that the position doesn't require top-end talent, and 2. that they already had the guy or guys on the roster that they needed.   That would explain why they waited until the third round to take a linebacker.   

 

So, even though I, like a lot of people, didn't see anything last season that made me have confidence in Bernard or Dodson, I think it's likely that McBeane did see things that gave them that confidence.   

 

Either we're right or McBeane are right.   McBeane are pretty smart guys, and they know a lot more about football than I do, so I think there's actually a good chance that they're right and that Bernard can do what he needs to do in the middle.  

 

And as a lot of people have been saying, Kirksey's been good but never great, he's had injury problems and he's getting older.   So, maybe all that's happened is Dodson lost the competition with Bernard so badly that McBeane decided they needed a better backup than Dodson.  That would mean that Beane didn't sign Kirksey to start; he just wanted a vet backup who is better than Klein, and Kirksey would certainly seem to be that. 

 

What I meant by post was that for these reasons, it's quite possible that Bernard is and will be the starter for the entire season, and not be a liability.  And, as I think about it, Williams may over time be the guy to back up both Milano and Bernard.  

 

Bottom line is that there's a good chance that a lot of people here, including me, have been worrying about what to do at linebacker because we just don't understand football as well as McBeane.

So your answer to the question is basically trust McD and Beane? 

 

Certainly, your opinion could be correct but there are also differing viable explanations. 

 

Firstly, Beane and McD chose to prioritize the offense and something had to give. 

 

Secondly, I think Beane and McD were surprised that Edmunds was offered such a big contract. I think they planned on signing him all along. The Bears overpaid so it forced their hands. 

 

Thirdly, I think Beane and McD felt l one of the MLB guys on the roster would step up. Whether it was Klein, Dodson, Bernard, or Spector. I believe they optimistically thought the competition would bring out the best in one of them. By all accounts that just didn't happen.

 

Fourthly, the Kirksey signing is a good one considering the roster. It can't hurt whatsoever. His experience despite his short comings probably makes him the starter soon. I believe both Kirksey and the Bills organization thinks Kirksey can be an effective stop gap. 

 

For now, it's Bernard starting on Monday night. The spot light is certainly on him. 

15 minutes ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Ray Nitschke Was a 3rd round pick and so was Bernard. Just saying.

Bernard with his quickness reminds me of Lawrence Taylor and or Cornelius Bennett. 

 

Bernard might just be a slow learner. 

Edited September 6, 2023 by newcam2012

[newcam2012]

24 minutes ago, BillsShredder83 said:

Lolzzzzzzz you've got to believe kidding!

 

You saw enough of his play at Oregon to know? 😆😆😆🤡🤡🤡🤡

Looked at some of his tape. Saw a few Oregon games too. 

[NewEra]

5 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

We understand that you don't have confidence in Bernard because, as you've made clear in this post, all YOU can discuss is what you've seen to date.   That's obvious from your opinion.

 

But in the post I responded to you said, "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."  Emphasis added by me.   That's completely different.  That's dismissive of the fact that many people here think there's more that's worth discussing.  In my case, I think it's relevant that McDermott and Beane seem to have a view of Bernard that's based on more than the plays you saw on television last season.   Your response suggests that is irrelevant.  Max Fischer says that it's important to note that we have a very small sample of actual live game plays to analyze, and we have no way to form a good judgment until his has put more plays on film (and by the way, until we see how much a year's experience, working out, and coaching may have improved his play).   Your response was "All WE can discuss is what we’ve seen to date."   

 

And yet you argue self-righteously, as though everyone else's opinion is somehow incorrect because you don't want to consider any possibility other than the guy is as bad as you think he his based solely on plays you watched last season on television.   When you do that, it's not a discussion.  And it's disrespectful to suggest that others somehow aren't discussing this in good faith.  

 

Please.

 

 

Sorry, when I say “we” I mean each individual person can only discuss what they have seen to date. Whether it be play on the field, in scouting reports, analysis from others etc.  

I’m not saying anyone’s opinion is incorrect.  Where did I say that?  If you disagree, please point out where I’ve said that.  I’m just giving my opinion and stating that the only thing we can discuss is what we’ve seen to date….  The guy I quoted is dismissing everyone that disagrees with him as “amusing”……  I’m telling him that they are just expressing what they’ve seen to date…..and are entitled to that opinion.  
 

either your misunderstanding my point or you’ve gone off the deep end 🤷🏻‍♂️ I think you’re simply misunderstanding.   While we

may disagree about the player, we are actually on the same side of this.  Neither of us think others opinions should be dismissed.  

 

I repeat-  Bernard could be adequate.  I’m not saying he ISN’T.  I’m saying from what I’ve seen…..I don’t think he’ll be adequate.  And I’m saying that YOU (and everyone else) SHOULD BE DISCUSSING WHAT YOU’VE SEEN TO DATE too.  I’m dismissing NOTHING.  If the what you’ve seen to date leads you to believe he’s the answer, you SHOULD DISCUSS IT.   
 

Not sure how else to explain this but I’m done with it.  If you don’t understand my point yet, 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

[newcam2012]

3 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Sorry, when I say “we” I mean each individual person can only discuss what they have seen to date. Whether it be play on the field, in scouting reports, analysis from others etc.  

I’m not saying anyone’s opinion is incorrect.  Where did I say that?  If you disagree, please point out where I’ve said that.  I’m just giving my opinion and stating that the only thing we can discuss is what we’ve seen to date….  The guy I quoted is dismissing everyone that disagrees with him as “amusing”……  I’m telling him that they are just expressing what they’ve seen to date…..and are entitled to that opinion.  
 

either your misunderstanding my point or you’ve gone off the deep end 🤷🏻‍♂️ I think you’re simply misunderstanding.   While we

may disagree about the player, we are actually on the same side of this.  Neither of us think others opinions should be dismissed.  

 

I repeat-  Bernard could be adequate.  I’m not saying he ISN’T.  I’m saying from what I’ve seen…..I don’t think he’ll be adequate.  And I’m saying that YOU (and everyone else) SHOULD BE DISCUSSING WHAT YOU’VE SEEN TO DATE too.  I’m dismissing NOTHING.  If the what you’ve seen to date leads you to believe he’s the answer, you SHOULD DISCUSS IT.   
 

Not sure how else to explain this but I’m done with it.  If you don’t understand my point yet, 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

I'm wondering if any Bills fans can say they are happy with what they've seen in Bernard. If so, I'd like to hear it. 

 

All I hear is Bernard is young, not enough of a sample size and playing time, and trust Beane and McD. All has some validity but none of that eludes optimism in this fans eyes. 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

Each guy gets his shot.  How about we just watch them and see how they do?

Edited September 6, 2023 by oldmanfan

[NewEra]

7 minutes ago, newcam2012 said:

I'm wondering if any Bills fans can say they are happy with what they've seen in Bernard. If so, I'd like to hear it. 

 

All I hear is Bernard is young, not enough of a sample size and playing time, and trust Beane and McD. All has some validity but none of that eludes optimism in this fans eyes. 

 

 

And that’s fine….they can feel however they want. 

 

Just as people can disagree with the thought that Bernard is not “slightly smaller” than Roquon Smith and not be dismissed as amusing.  In MIKE size, 14 LBs is not slightly smaller.  

[Shaw66]

32 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

But OTOH you keep basically preaching to us a football version of the Divine Plan: the roster is this way because it has been willed so by One Bills Drive.  “Beane and McDermott know what they are doing and who are we fans to question them.”  Talk about self-righteous…

I'm not saying I'm right.   I've never said I know I'm right.   But NewEra's argument is that there is NOTHING worth talking about except Bernard's historical NFL performance.  He keeps saying that's all there is to talk about.  That's simply not true.  There are other things to talk about.   It's like he's trying to win an argument by simply refusing to consider the points other people make.   

 

Max Fischer said something different than I've been saying.   He said, in direct response to NewEra, that the data set that NewEra is too small, and all came from the first half of the season.  Legitimate argument.  NewEra's response:  The only thing that is relevant is what Bernard put on tape last fall.  

 

As I pointed out, there is plenty of evidence that McBeane simply don't agree with NewEra.   NewEra never explains why, if McBeane actually think that Bernard is good enough to play the position, McBeane are wrong.   He doesn't argue the point.  He just says his opinion is that Bernard is not the guy based on blah, blah, blah.  

[Dr. Who]

Bernard may crush it. I hope he does. I agreed with giving preference to a playmaker and Oline early in the draft. Then the question is was Dorian Williams the plan? Unlikely. Maybe they wanted someone who could back up Milano. At best, they might see him as someone who could grow into the position next year. McBeane had plenty of time to bring in a FA. There's a fella on this board, he likes to argue, who thinks it was just a colossal screw up. Beane should have planned ahead better. Personally, I believe they thought they had an answer already on the roster. Who was it?  Dodson is "very concerning" and rightly so. Spector appears to have faded from consideration early. Either there is a scheme change and a lot of three safeties on the field, or Bernard was the guy. Obviously, there's nothing from his play on the field to justify that assessment. Either they slow played his development and saw enough signs during practices last season and whatever you can glean from an off-season to justify the gamble or they guessed wrong, thinking they had fellas with potential that have all fallen flat.

 

All the arguing back-and-forth at this point is truly academic. We'll find out soon enough from the play on the field who was right.

 

 

[NewEra]

17 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I'm not saying I'm right.   I've never said I know I'm right.   But NewEra's argument is that there is NOTHING worth talking about except Bernard's historical NFL performance.  He keeps saying that's all there is to talk about.  That's simply not true.  There are other things to talk about.   It's like he's trying to win an argument by simply refusing to consider the points other people make.   

 

Max Fischer said something different than I've been saying.   He said, in direct response to NewEra, that the data set that NewEra is too small, and all came from the first half of the season.  Legitimate argument.  NewEra's response:  The only thing that is relevant is what Bernard put on tape last fall.  

 

As I pointed out, there is plenty of evidence that McBeane simply don't agree with NewEra.   NewEra never explains why, if McBeane actually think that Bernard is good enough to play the position, McBeane are wrong.   He doesn't argue the point.  He just says his opinion is that Bernard is not the guy based on blah, blah, blah.  

No, that’s not my argument at all.  You put words into my mouth.  I never said NFL PERFORMANCE.  There is where you misinterpreted me.  Or that is where I should have been more specific.  Either way…. That is NOT my point

 

No offense. I have nothing but respect for you, but I feel that you’re seeing red in this case and it’s distorting your vision 

Edited September 6, 2023 by NewEra

[newcam2012]

11 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I'm not saying I'm right.   I've never said I know I'm right.   But NewEra's argument is that there is NOTHING worth talking about except Bernard's historical NFL performance.  He keeps saying that's all there is to talk about.  That's simply not true.  There are other things to talk about.   It's like he's trying to win an argument by simply refusing to consider the points other people make.   

 

Max Fischer said something different than I've been saying.   He said, in direct response to NewEra, that the data set that NewEra is too small, and all came from the first half of the season.  Legitimate argument.  NewEra's response:  The only thing that is relevant is what Bernard put on tape last fall.  

 

As I pointed out, there is plenty of evidence that McBeane simply don't agree with NewEra.   NewEra never explains why, if McBeane actually think that Bernard is good enough to play the position, McBeane are wrong.   He doesn't argue the point.  He just says his opinion is that Bernard is not the guy based on blah, blah, blah.  

I hear you Shaw. I always value your posts and thoughtful opinions. 

 

However, the fact does remain that Bernard has really done next to nothing on the field. Granted, it's a small sample size of 7 games and 45 plays. I know he's young and learning. Nevertheless, it's something and it shouldn't be dismissed either. Not saying you are doing this. 

 

Just trying to point of there's little empheracal evidence that suggest Bernard is a serviceable starting MLB. Yes, that can happen and I hope it does. However, the opposite seems more likely based on his play, scouting report short comings which appear to be true, his size, etc...

 

Personally, I just can't get behind the Beane and McD theory that they know more than us. Sure, that's true but their knowledge isn't an indicator that they are correct here. There's plenty of instances where they've been wrong. No need to elaborate.

 

Just my two sense with respect. 

[JaCrispy]

6 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a Bills fan base hate a draft pick more than Bernard? Holy smokes.

 

EJ? 
 

Once they drafted him, I immediately started the countdown to when we were going to draft our next QB…

 

It was that disappointing of a pick…😉

[Success]

What's wrong w/ trusting McD and Beane when it comes to Bernard?

 

What should we put more stock in - some youtube videos, and scouting assessments from when he was coming out of college?  The limited time we saw him last year?

 

I'll never get that POV.  Why not wait & see what we've got here - instead of basically writing him off w/ the limited info we have?  He's a 3rd rounder, and I'm glad he's getting a shot to prove he belongs here.

 

[Matt_In_NH]

With all the talk about how availability is important and players need to earn it feom McDermott make me suspicious of the MLB position.  But we will soon see how it works out.   

[BillsFan130]

5 minutes ago, Success said:

What's wrong w/ trusting McD and Beane when it comes to Bernard?

 

What should we put more stock in - some youtube videos, and scouting assessments from when he was coming out of college?  The limited time we saw him last year?

 

I'll never get that POV.  Why not wait & see what we've got here - instead of basically writing him off w/ the limited info we have?  He's a 3rd rounder, and I'm glad he's getting a shot to prove he belongs here.

 

He may be good, who knows.

 

But to this point from what we have seen and heard (I know little sample size) , what makes you optimistic about him at this point?

[SCBills]

The one thing Bernard did at an elite level at Baylor was blitz…

 

Have to wonder how they’ll use him to minimize his weaknesses and accentuate his speed and ability to shoot gaps.