I'm really starting to love this WR room. We quietly got better

[Coach Tuesday]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree with your view of the resource allocation issue. I just think it is who Beane is. And unless you give a Head Coach basically overall personnel power and tell Beane he is a glorified Head Scout and personnel advisor to the Head Coach they are the results you will get with him. He has said him self countless times "I will always prioritise the defensive line and I will never apologise for doing so."

 

That's something he learned from Gettleman.

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, eball said:

 

I'm still living rent-free in that over-inflated melon of yours, I see...

 

 

 

I wouldn't call it rent free.  

 

It's not like @Royale with Cheese ex-wife living rent free in the house he bought (and then getting a cut of his pay check every Friday to boot).

 

It's not THAT funny. 

 

But I am always delighted to see you show up and promptly step in every pile of sh!t possible.

 

I don't know how you do it but keep doing it.     

 

 

[eball]

These threads are so fun.  Somebody posts an opinion, a bunch of know it alls shout him down, and then it's a pissing contest about who "knows football better."

 

All when we have no freakin' clue how this offense will perform this season since there are so many new WR pieces.

 

Good times.

 

[Eastport bills]

18 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Sorry @Eastport bills but you are wrong again.

 

The Seminoles had the second lowest amount of rushes per game in the 14 team ACC with 33.1.

 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/conferences/acc/2023-team-offense.html

 

Only Pitt had fewer(29.7).

 

The point you either miss or are selectively ignoring?

 

Teams run the ball A LOT in college football.

 

Having more rush attempts than pass attempts is not an indicator that you are conservative.

 

The attempts are correct for both rushing and passing. The Fla.St. season was 14 games instead of 12 because they played the conference championship as well as a bowl game. It still averages 33 rush attempts vs 30 pass attempts. That translates to a rush heavy offense.

[GunnerBill]

17 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:

 

That's something he learned from Gettleman.

 

Yea he is a product of his apprenticeship under Hurney and Gettleman. That's normal. I hope he will adapt. His first pick the last two years being a pass catcher is at least encouraging. 

[boyst]

30 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

I wouldn't call it rent free.  

 

It's not like @Royale with Cheese ex-wife living rent free in the house he bought (and then getting a cut of his pay check every Friday to boot).

 

It's not THAT funny. 

 

But I am always delighted to see you show up and promptly step in every pile of sh!t possible.

 

I don't know how you do it but keep doing it.     

 

 

on that note, you know... we should have a celebration at chick filet.

 

as long as i can go down the slide first.

[Eastport bills]

36 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Sorry @Eastport bills but you are wrong again.

 

The Seminoles had the second lowest amount of rushes per game in the 14 team ACC with 33.1.

 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/conferences/acc/2023-team-offense.html

 

Only Pitt had fewer(29.7).

 

The point you either miss or are selectively ignoring?

 

Teams run the ball A LOT in college football.

 

Having more rush attempts than pass attempts is not an indicator that you are conservative.

 

Who cares about your rambling interpretation of what kind of offense they ran. Now it’s the percentage in the conference and rushing attempts vs passing attempts don’t really matter. Resolve your issues with someone else. 

[oldmanfan]

Let's look at this systematically.  A few questions:

 

1.  Would you agree that getting Samuel and losing Davis is, at the very least, an even swap?

 

2.  Would you be as worried about the WR spot if they had kept Diggs, even though Diggs' production fell off over the latter part of last season?

 

3.  Would you agree depth is better this coming year than last year?

 

As near as I can tell, this whole thread boils down to losing one guy:  Diggs.  if your view is that Diggs is going to be the Diggs of several years ago, fine.  But if not, then what else should the Bills have done to change things?  It does not seem they the cap space to go after some big name guy, and they used the first pick they had to get a big WR in Coleman whom the star QB advocated for.

Edited July 2 by oldmanfan

[Royale with Cheese]

44 minutes ago, eball said:

These threads are so fun.  Somebody posts an opinion, a bunch of know it alls shout him down, and then it's a pissing contest about who "knows football better.

 

 

Then someone becomes ultra sensitive and takes personal shots lol.  

[TheFunPolice]

I remember when DK Metcalf was too slow, had no agility, etc. 

 

Not saying that means Coleman will be the same, but it's who I think about when the measurables are mentioned. 

 

 

[Royale with Cheese]

14 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

I remember when DK Metcalf was too slow, had no agility, etc. 

 

Not saying that means Coleman will be the same, but it's who I think about when the measurables are mentioned. 

 

 

 

Metcalf was more his short yardage burst as the reason why he dropped.  He was always top end speed fast.

 

This is where I kinda see Coleman.  I don't really see him being a high volume guy.  More of a downfield, chunk play guy.  I think our volume of targets to the shorter routes are going to be Kincaid, Shakir and Samuel.  
I think Metcalf is a roughly 80 catch a year WR on average in his career.

[Bill from NYC]

12 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

Yeah it's obvious to me that an offensive head coach would change the investment priorities of the organization. The idea that Beane is pushing forward with a defense first philosophy with little to no input from McDermott doesn't make any sense at all. Beane scouts the talent and picks the players but McDermott sets the broad goals of the organization. That's how all NFL regimes are run these days.

 

So despite Beane's faults I'd be interested to see him build the team with different organizational directives guiding him. He's a great executive and front man for the organization, but he needs a strong voice in the room telling him, for example, you don't publicly congratulate yourself for landing a safety in the 2nd round after foolishly attempting to trade up for him. As opposed to McDermott who surely told him he needed his Hyde/Poyer replacement at all costs.

 

GREAT post but you are beating your head against the wall. Soon you will be shouted down and told that Beane (and NOT McDermott) is calling the shots. As every poster on this board knows, McDermott traded away the Mahomes pick to draft a cornerback before Beane was even working for the Buffalo Bills. In fact, it was almost certainly McDermott who got Beane hired, and probably could fire him at will.

 

Since then McDermott has focused primarily on defense wrt top draft choices and expensive free agents. Beane is a smart man but I'm not really sure if he has a scouting background. McDermott calls the shots and in doing so has deprived our FANTASTIC superstar QB of the weapons he needs and fully deserves.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

14 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

GREAT post but you are beating your head against the wall. Soon you will be shouted down and told that Beane (and NOT McDermott) is calling the shots. As every poster on this board knows, McDermott traded away the Mahomes pick to draft a cornerback before Beane was even working for the Buffalo Bills. In fact, it was almost certainly McDermott who got Beane hired, and probably could fire him at will.

 

Since then McDermott has focused primarily on defense wrt top draft choices and expensive free agents. Beane is a smart man but I'm not really sure if he has a scouting background. McDermott calls the shots and in doing so has deprived our FANTASTIC superstar QB of the weapons he needs and fully deserves.

Yes. McDermott came first and then hired his boy, he's obviously in charge. They're both clowns anyhow because Beane isn't smart enough to disagree. They're both responsible for wasting Josh Allen and both need to go IMO.

[FireChans]

20 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

GREAT post but you are beating your head against the wall. Soon you will be shouted down and told that Beane (and NOT McDermott) is calling the shots. As every poster on this board knows, McDermott traded away the Mahomes pick to draft a cornerback before Beane was even working for the Buffalo Bills. In fact, it was almost certainly McDermott who got Beane hired, and probably could fire him at will.

 

Since then McDermott has focused primarily on defense wrt top draft choices and expensive free agents. Beane is a smart man but I'm not really sure if he has a scouting background. McDermott calls the shots and in doing so has deprived our FANTASTIC superstar QB of the weapons he needs and fully deserves.

Fire them both then?

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

Josh Allen isn't even really all that good when you think enough about it

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, boyst said:

on that note, you know... we should have a celebration at chick filet.

 

as long as i can go down the slide first.

 

 

Can @eball bring his flask into the play area?

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

1. Would you agree that getting Samuel and losing Davis is, at the very least, an even swap?

 

I personally like Samuel better than Davis. Less downfield production but less mistake prone and more consistent on a down to down basis. But I don't know how to compare how even of a swap it is because they effectively play different positions. Davis could be planted outside, Samuel can't. So I don't really see him as a swap for Davis, he is just a new addition to the offense.

 

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

2. Would you be as worried about the WR spot if they had kept Diggs, even though Diggs' production fell off over the latter part of last season?

 

No I wouldn't be as worried but I would certainly still have my concerns. I had concerns about the WR room at this time last offseason when Diggs was thought to still be in his prime. I was proven right to have those concerns. So of course I am still concerned this year when the WR room inarguably looks worse than it did at this time last year.

 

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

3. Would you agree depth is better this coming year than last year?

 

No. Hollins is a nothing signing for me. Claypool needs to prove he can weather NFL intensity, both mentally and physically. MVS is merely a baseline fill in as a field stretcher, he offers nothing special.

 

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

As near as I can tell, this whole thread boils down to losing one guy:  Diggs.  if your view is that Diggs is going to be the Diggs of several years ago, fine.  But if not, then what else should the Bills have done to change things?  It does not seem they the cap space to go after some big name guy, and they used the first pick they had to get a big WR in Coleman whom the start QB advocated for.

 

For me it doesn't boil down to Diggs. I fully advocated moving on from him because the issues were just too annoying and he fell off a cliff down the stretch last year. For me it boils down to investment strategy. This offseason they once again tried to make DL the biggest investment on the team. You can't say they didn't have the cap space to try and pay an outside WR when it is an open secret that they made a push for Arik Armstead, and only got rebuffed at the last second because he decided he'd rather go to Florida.

 

I also would have been totally fine if they hadn't made a big investment at outside WR in free agency but had made two substantial draft picks at the position. If it's a planned rebuild year, fine, at least get the new young core of WRs built around Allen now. Instead they drafted exactly one WR in a WR-rich draft, after failing to sign a single outside WR in free agency, and were stuck scrambling having to sign cast offs in Claypool and MVS just to have even minimum competency at the position.

 

I'm just sick of signing cast offs at WR but constantly making big investments at defensive positions.

[Putin]

14 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Yep.

 

And even though he likes going out there and being violent.........when he breaks his collar bone struggling for extra yards on a critical 4th and something play because his weapons aren't good enough to keep the chains moving..........and ends up watching half the season from the sideline.........those pending QB vacancies for QB-friendly HC's in his home state of California may start looking a lot more interesting.

 

People don't realize it........but the reason that Aaron Rodgers didn't finish his career as a Packer is that the Packers played this same game with him for a decade.   Don't think that Allen's buddies Brady and Rodgers haven't told him not to trust that the organization has his best interest in mind and will eventually give him the weapons he needs.   They both got boned for their loyalty.  Brady got left hanging with no weapons and was pushed out the door by Belichick and Rodgers got his replacement drafted in round 1 after 13 straight years of defensive first round picks.  

 

I'm sure their advice is don't wait until you are 36 to be where you aren't taken for granted.

At the age of 45 and after 6 SB if Josh Allen decides to leave I will root for him no matter where he goes !!! 

[BarleyNY]

10 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Let's look at this systematically.  A few questions:

 

1.  Would you agree that getting Samuel and losing Davis is, at the very least, an even swap?

 

2.  Would you be as worried about the WR spot if they had kept Diggs, even though Diggs' production fell off over the latter part of last season?

 

3.  Would you agree depth is better this coming year than last year?

 

As near as I can tell, this whole thread boils down to losing one guy:  Diggs.  if your view is that Diggs is going to be the Diggs of several years ago, fine.  But if not, then what else should the Bills have done to change things?  It does not seem they the cap space to go after some big name guy, and they used the first pick they had to get a big WR in Coleman whom the star QB advocated for.

 

1. Samuel is at least as good of a player as Davis IMO. Davis just got paid more than Samuel so (some) NFL GM’s apparently think differently. Also I always saw Samuel as more of a Diggs replacement (and posted that when we signed him). He’s obviously not been on Diggs’ level. 

 

2. I’d be a lot happier with Diggs here one more season - especially if he was still “on board”. But alas, that wasn’t an option. He’s no longer a top 4 or 8 WR as he was in his prime. But even if he’s in the 16-24 range this season he’d be our best WR. 

 

3. Depth quality is TBD. It very well may be better than last season (when it was pretty poor), but every season people get excited about new additions and they don’t always work out. The WRs just shown the door were thought by many to be quality players just a year or two ago. 

 

Agree that filling the void left by Diggs is what all the discussion boils down to. Let’s face it, sometimes navigating a difficult situation is, well, difficult. Sometimes a step back is necessary. That doesn’t always equate to a failure or mistake. 

 

As for Diggs, the guy who was a problem here and got traded away is the same guy we acquired via trade. Same movie. And I knew that was a possibility, but I was fully on board with acquiring him because of the upside. But this was the risk. If there was a real mistake made in the process it was the extension. I was against that. The rumblings were there already and we knew his history. Handing someone like that more money at that point is never the answer. 

Edited July 3 by BarleyNY

[boyst]

34 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Can @eball bring his flask into the play area?

only if he shares!!!!!!