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

[FireChans]

18 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

Yes, indirect correlation...I get it, and I even agree. His presence keeps teams honest and lets Shakir operate against more zone coverage. That was likely Samuel's role and why most of Amari's snaps correlate to CS and not Keon, Mack or Khalil.

 

The reason I find it amusing isn't because I think you are wrong...it's because that was the same argument for why guys like Mack Hollins are more valuable than their stats. The key is balance. 

I have discovered the disconnect.

 

You think with a healthy Samuel, we wouldn't have needed Cooper. Most of the folks disagreed with you in the summer on that point, and disagree with you today on the same point.

 

To this point, I think we have gotten about as good as could be expected with Coleman/Shakir and even Mack. The issue that we had in the summer and still have today was the idea that if we got best case scenario out of Coleman/Shakir/Mack and Samuel, we would be okay. Not only was that unlikely, as was argued back then, the far more likely alternative to the ideal best case scenario was exactly what happened, the group as a whole being torn apart by a well-coached team like the Ravens, who don't even have a good defense because they wouldn't be good enough.

 

The reason why its not the same argument for Mack is that Mack does not dictate coverage the way that Cooper does. To my eye, Shakir has not seen #1 CB coverage again this WHOLE SEASON to the extent he saw Humphrey vs the Ravens.  Mack was playing the boundary and he was an afterthought in the passing game and rightfully so.

 

Amari changed that. You think Samuel would have too potentially and maybe you're right but I also thought you were far too high on him this summer.

 

[Mikey152]

13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

It certainly works that everyone can make plays. That’s what they want. I’m suggesting 3rd and 8, down 5, late to KC, Amari is the first look. That’s because he is most likely to “win” his rep. For years he’s been an elite route runner. Shakir finds space as does Kincaid. They will be the next looks if Allen doesn’t take off. 

Meh, depends on the look. Against man, probably. Against zone? Unlikely.

 

Again, what you are describing is an important player...but I can tell you that I think they play better if Cooper is out than if Shakir is. I also think I'd take 2024 Hollins and Coleman over 2023 Davis and Diggs.

5 minutes ago, FireChans said:

I have discovered the disconnect.

 

You think with a healthy Samuel, we wouldn't have needed Cooper. Most of the folks disagreed with you in the summer on that point, and disagree with you today on the same point.

 

To this point, I think we have gotten about as good as could be expected with Coleman/Shakir and even Mack. The issue that we had in the summer and still have today was the idea that if we got best case scenario out of Coleman/Shakir/Mack and Samuel, we would be okay. Not only was that unlikely, as was argued back then, the far more likely alternative to the ideal best case scenario was exactly what happened, the group as a whole being torn apart by a well-coached team like the Ravens, who don't even have a good defense because they wouldn't be good enough.

 

The reason why its not the same argument for Mack is that Mack does not dictate coverage the way that Cooper does. To my eye, Shakir has not seen #1 CB coverage again this WHOLE SEASON to the extent he saw Humphrey vs the Ravens.  Mack was playing the boundary and he was an afterthought in the passing game and rightfully so.

 

Amari changed that. You think Samuel would have too potentially and maybe you're right but I also thought you were far too high on him this summer.

 

Really, it was some combination of Samuel/MVS/Claypool et al, but yes. I think I (and the Bills) thought they could burn an aggressive defense with Samuel and MVS. Clearly that was wrong.

 

But by the same token, we WERE right about something that seems to get lost in making that point. The idea was a good one, they just signed the wrong guy. Clearly this everybody eats philosophy has merit, and it really isn't made for a "true" #1 that commands 100+ targets either. I don't think Diggs would help like Cooper does, for example. Same threat, different attitude breaks the offense in a different way.

 

And yes, Mack doesn't dictate coverage. But he does improve the run game and the RAC game significantly.  It is not a coincidence that we have more long YAC and rushing plays this season.  Downfield blocking is a big part of that.

Edited Friday at 09:32 PM by Mikey152

[GoBills808]

5 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

Meh, depends on the look. Against man, probably. Against zone? Unlikely.

 

Again, what you are describing is an important player...but I can tell you that I think they play better if Cooper is out than if Shakir is. I also think I'd take 2024 Hollins and Coleman over 2023 Davis and Diggs.

Really, it was some combination of Samuel/MVS/Claypool et al, but yes.

 

And yes, Mack doesn't dictate coverage. But he does improve the run game and the RAC game significantly.  It is not a coincidence that we have more long YAC and rushing plays this season.  Downfield blocking is a big part of that.

^^refuses to acknowledge Cooper's role in improving the passing game but wants to credit Mack Hollins for the run game lol

 

can this just die already

[FireChans]

4 minutes ago, Mikey152 said:

Meh, depends on the look. Against man, probably. Against zone? Unlikely.

 

Again, what you are describing is an important player...but I can tell you that I think they play better if Cooper is out than if Shakir is. I also think I'd take 2024 Hollins and Coleman over 2023 Davis and Diggs.

Really, it was some combination of Samuel/MVS/Claypool et al, but yes.

 

And yes, Mack doesn't dictate coverage. But he does improve the run game and the RAC game significantly.  It is not a coincidence that we have more long YAC and rushing plays this season.  Downfield blocking is a big part of that.

But that's the thing. Guys that dictate coverage don't grow on trees. Expecting them to come out of a washed MVS, a flameout in Claypool, or a glorified gadget guy in Samuel with 1 good year was a mistake.

 

And while its great that Mack is a good blocker (really he has to be), imo, he's still not more important than Cooper, Coleman, Shakir or even Kincaid I think. Like not even close.

[Mikey152]

12 minutes ago, FireChans said:

But that's the thing. Guys that dictate coverage don't grow on trees. Expecting them to come out of a washed MVS, a flameout in Claypool, or a glorified gadget guy in Samuel with 1 good year was a mistake.

 

And while its great that Mack is a good blocker (really he has to be), imo, he's still not more important than Cooper, Coleman, Shakir or even Kincaid I think. Like not even close.

Important is relative...

 

Hollins, Knox, Anderson and Coleman dictates coverage just as much as a package with Cooper does, just in a different way. Put Cooper in for Hollins and it doesn't work as well.

 

This was the whole point. All the receivers play a role on this team. Cooper didn't change that, he just majorly upgraded their weakest role player.

 

 

Let me put it another way. Having a guy that can punish man coverage is a a weapon that helps the offense. Forcing the ball to said player to keep him happy or not having other options when he is covered/hurt holds a team back. That's really it. I didn't think Samuel could be 2020 Diggs, but I thought he could be second half of last year Diggs and the other guys got better. 

 

So now Cooper is second half of last year Diggs (without the crazy) and the rest of the guys are better and the offense is great.

 

 

Edited Friday at 09:45 PM by Mikey152

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

25 minutes ago, K D said:

Diontae Johnson anyone? Dude seems hungry to make an impact on a contender. Flyer on OBJ? I hate how KC ends up grabbing all of these guys for cheap.

 

What about him makes you think he's hungry to even play the game of football?

[GunnerBill]

41 minutes ago, FireChans said:

But that's the thing. Guys that dictate coverage don't grow on trees. Expecting them to come out of a washed MVS, a flameout in Claypool, or a glorified gadget guy in Samuel with 1 good year was a mistake.

 

 

And guys that win outside. The guys who play outside get paid more in the NFL. 

 

Wide Receivers make more than backs and tight ends

Boundary corners make more than nickels and safeties

Tackles make more than guards

Edge players make more than defensive tackles

 

Why? Because when you are outside it is much harder to win with or protect with scheme. It comes down at some point just to talent. Mano v mano. Thats why having scrubs, career backups and out of position slot receivers as your outside options was never a viable plan. 

[HOUSE]

Tell me more....

[Warriorspikes51]

Well 

Cooper
Shakir
Coleman

Hollins

ALL DAY!!!  TAKE ME TO 2026 with this group.  (Can't believe I'm saying this)

 Grab a rookie in the draft and let this group fly 

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

So you're on the record, bad trade?

Nope, but it’s cute you’re trying to put words in my mouth per uge.

 

I supported the trade before it happened, when it happened, and after it happened.  Doesn’t change his factual production though.

[DCofNC]

5 hours ago, Einstein's Dog said:

I don't know if you follow the Bills but they had a unique situation with one of their WRs - Diggs.  He was a locker room cancer and a decision needed to be made on how to deal with his future.  The FO decided to trade him.  Trading him put the team into difficult cap constraints.

 

So no, this was not business as usual.   Any plan at that point was going to have drawbacks.  What was yours?

Obviously it was an audible, but also done too late in the game.  Even WITH Diggs they needed 2 more outside guys and did nothing.  This was a case of either gross incompetence or relying on hope as a strategy, it blew up and cost them a 3rd round pick for a half year player.  It’s piss more asset management, no matter how you want to shape it.

[GoBills808]

39 minutes ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

Well 

Cooper
Shakir
Coleman

Hollins

ALL DAY!!!  TAKE ME TO 2026 with this group.  (Can't believe I'm saying this)

 Grab a rookie in the draft and let this group fly 

Hard hard disagree

 

We need to get better here. I don't understand why we never treat this position group w the importance it deserves

 

 

[Warriorspikes51]

3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Hard hard disagree

 

We need to get better here. I don't understand why we never treat this position group w the importance it deserves

 

 

okay maybe on paper that's fun....but what more can you ask of this offense right now?

the top 4 WR's, 2 TE's and all 3 RB's are performing in a strong way when called upon

[BADOLBILZ]

6 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Why would that be true?  He has 40 catches all year--12 games--481 yards....fewer in Buffalo than when he was Cleveland (where he was in on 89% of the snaps).  The Browns passing game took a large bump since he left--an anemic 142 ypg to 273 ypg.

 

It's hyperbole to say his 47% snaps and rare targets transformed the Offense.  Also, him being mainly a decoy would not put the Bills in the #1 seed were he here all season. 

 

 

 

Because having a true WR1 changes how a defense has to deploy its players.

 

Think of the defense the Bills used to stymie Lamar Jackson from 2020-2022.   A key component of that was challenging Lamar to throw outside the numbers and downfield and cheating personnel to the middle of the field to take away his favorite throws.   That was because it was presumed Jackson wouldn't make many of those throws outside and deep.  

 

When Hollins and MVS were the boundary options that's exactly what defense's learned was the vulnerability with Josh Allen in 2024.   When Cooper came the windows opened up for the guys who run the majority of their route yardage over the middle of the field.   And despite the windows getting tighter outside.......now the plays outside the numbers are being made when they are attempted instead of falling incomplete to Hollins or MVS and people debating whose fault it was.   

 

As for Cooper only playing 47% of the snaps.........he doesn't need to play a set % of the snaps to make the offense good enough to stay on the field and keep moving the ball.   If you are better on 1 play every 3 or 4 downs that can be the difference between a long TD drive or a 3 and out punt.    That's why they call players like Cooper "difference makers".   

[NewEra]

4 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I guess that the question to that is were they as bad as some of us thought? The backs and TEs were always okay. The WRs were not good though. The passing game was shut down and they traded for a number 1. The numbers in the games that he’s played have been substantially better. Now the WRs are an average unit and the backs & tes are above average as receivers. The OL is top 5. The QB is otherworldly. The OC has been sensational. The offense has been excellent. That doesn’t mean that the wide receivers are/or have been good. They’ve been fine.

Yes, some of you were saying that. say it all day every day.  
 

what I did say all day every day is that the WR weren’t nearly as bad as SOME people were saying.  I knew we needed a boundary guy if we wanted to compete for a SB.  When the season started I predicted we’d win 9- 10 games.  
 

People were saying that our WR was historically bad.  They were wrong.  They will never admit it

3 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

^^refuses to acknowledge Cooper's role in improving the passing game but wants to credit Mack Hollins for the run game lol

 

can this just die already

He’s wrong and he’s right.  He’s wrong about cooper and he’s right about Mack.  He deserves some credit for our run game 

3 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

^^refuses to acknowledge Cooper's role in improving the passing game but wants to credit Mack Hollins for the run game lol

 

can this just die already

He’s wrong and he’s right.  He’s wrong about cooper and he’s right about Mack.  He deserves some credit for our run game 

[Kirby Jackson]

3 hours ago, Mikey152 said:

I also think I'd take 2024 Hollins and Coleman over 2023 Davis and Diggs.

2023 Diggs & Davis combined per game: 14 targets 9 receptions 113.5 yards per game & .88 Tds

 

2024 Hollins & Coleman combined per game: 6.7 targets 4 receptions 69 yards per game & .66 TDs 

 

If you prefer 2024 Hollins/Coleman to 2023 Diggs/Davis I can no longer engage in this conversation as if you were objective on the subject. Diggs and Davis regressed in 2023. They are light years ahead of those 2 in 2024. 

[Kirby Jackson]

24 minutes ago, NewEra said:

Yes, some of you were saying that. say it all day every day.  
 

what I did say all day every day is that the WR weren’t nearly as bad as SOME people were saying.  I knew we needed a boundary guy if we wanted to compete for a SB.  When the season started I predicted we’d win 9- 10 games.  
 

People were saying that our WR was historically bad.  They were wrong.  They will never admit it

I said that the WRs were bottom 3 in the NFl. I don’t necessarily believe that was wrong pre-Amari. In fact, the numbers would probably support it from those 8 games. The numbers in the 6 games with him vs. the 8 games without him are way different. Allen may throw for 4,000 yards without a receiver over 1,000 yards. Shakir is their top producer and he’s 29th in yards. Keon is next and he’s 76th. Keep in mind that is the production with the MVP at QB, arguably the top OC in football, a really good running game and a top 5 OL. 

Edited yesterday at 01:00 AM by Kirby Jackson

[NewEra]

6 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I said that the WRs were bottom 3 in the NFl. I don’t necessarily believe that was wrong pre-Amari. In fact, the numbers would probably support it from those 8 games. The numbers in the 6 games with him vs. the 8 games without him are way different. Allen may throw for 4,000 yards without a receiver over 1,000 yards. Shakir is their top producer and he’s 29th in yards. Keon is next and he’s 76th. Keep in mind that is the production with the MVP at QB, arguably the top OC in football, a really good running game and a top 5 OL. 

Idk- I’m not really talking about your takes-  I don’t remember much tbh- said my peace and then left the thread way before page 100
 

One thing I never see anyone talking about is that it takes time for Josh (and Brady) to develop chemistry with a completely new we unit.  keon has also missed 4 games after coming on strong and into his own.  Samuel’s injury clearly hampered his production and chemistry with Josh. Shakir’s injury clearly hampered our offense for 3 games.  Josh has clearly missed a wide open Mack Hollins on huge plays that, if he would’ve connected, we would be sitting at 1 loss.  
 

as it stands, our offense is top 4 in the last 24 years according to points per drive.  The other 3 teams had Brady and Moss, Mahomes, kelce, tyreek and Rodgers and Adams.  Our WR unit couldn’t be as bad as some suggest.  Maybe not you…

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

okay maybe on paper that's fun....but what more can you ask of this offense right now?

the top 4 WR's, 2 TE's and all 3 RB's are performing in a strong way when called upon

I don't want to be right on this fwiw

 

but I still can't help but see how much of the offense relies on Allen doing things off schedule and it's a ton. Everybody can see it at this point. It's going to probably get him the MVP and it's fun to watch the rest of the league get treated like junior varsity but deep down I don't believe it enough to win championships. and again I truly hope I am wrong on this. I really do. But w/out a concerted effort to get Cooper and Samuel more involved I can see us getting clamped in the playoffs when you need guys w talent to play above scheme and I am not convinced we have enough of that except at QB.

[Success]

I wanted Johnson before we got Cooper.

 

He was good in Carolina.  It's weird that he didn't pan out w/ the Ravens.