Should the starters play some vs the Bears

[JP51]

10 hours ago, RiotAct said:

Shakir?  Did they decide move him to boundary WR?

Not sure what you are asking here. With Shakir, I think its really more he is going to be new at a starting position, getting him a few reps would in my opinion be good. 

[RiotAct]

4 minutes ago, JP51 said:

Not sure what you are asking here. With Shakir, I think its really more he is going to be new at a starting position, getting him a few reps would in my opinion be good. 

he played a ton last year, didn’t he? Or am I imagining that?

 

If you’re splitting hairs over the “starter” designation,  I don’t really think that makes a difference 

[SoCal Deek]

58 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsGospel2014 said:

 

Meaningless to alot of fans but not to those low draft picks or undrafted rookie free agents trying to make a name for themselves either here or on another teams practice squad. It's also a chance to knock the rust off for the starters and immediate backups even for a few series imo.

You must’ve missed the sentence where I said they’re meaningless if the actual team doesn’t play. Yes, I’m sure a couple of back row players will get a shot at making the special teams unit here or elsewhere….but it’s definitely morphed over the decades into an exercise that the teams tolerate more than one that they either enjoy or actually need. 

[JP51]

1 minute ago, RiotAct said:

he played a ton last year, didn’t he? Or am I imagining that?

 

If you’re splitting hairs over the “starter” designation,  I don’t really think that makes a difference 

 and who knows maybe it makes zero difference...  I just think a few reps for a guy poised to take on a much larger role in the offense and be a focal point of DB coverage would provide some benefit... in the end I guess McD will make the determination if it will help or not. I guess we find out Sat at 1pm lol

[JP51]

7 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You must’ve missed the sentence where I said they’re meaningless if the actual team doesn’t play. Yes, I’m sure a couple of back row players will get a shot at making the special teams unit here or elsewhere….but it’s definitely morphed over the decades into an exercise that the teams tolerate more than one that they either enjoy or actually need. 

I agree with this... back in the day the players would "play themselves" into shape, now is a year round quest... lot of difference between a 14 and 17 game schedule as well on the body... I do think that getting folks out there in between the lines for a few reps just to get their heads in a game with the noise another team etc can provide some mild benefit (as long as no one gets hurt). But the days of the starters playing Q1 then Q1 and 2 then Q 1,2,3 and then sitting the 4th game (when they had 4) are gone and probably for the better... 

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

 

[SoCal Deek]

22 minutes ago, JP51 said:

I agree with this... back in the day the players would "play themselves" into shape, now is a year round quest... lot of difference between a 14 and 17 game schedule as well on the body... I do think that getting folks out there in between the lines for a few reps just to get their heads in a game with the noise another team etc can provide some mild benefit (as long as no one gets hurt). But the days of the starters playing Q1 then Q1 and 2 then Q 1,2,3 and then sitting the 4th game (when they had 4) are gone and probably for the better... 

All true….so just like everything that’s changed in the NFL over the years, why are they clinging to the charade that we know as preseason? There are any number of ways to morph it and keep up with everything you pointed out above. 

[JP51]

20 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

All true….so just like everything that’s changed in the NFL over the years, why are they clinging to the charade that we know as preseason? There are any number of ways to morph it and keep up with everything you pointed out above. 

I think that is a good point... quite honest. I think especially if they go to 18... pre season goes to 2 it is not a far leap to do an elimination or even down to 1 

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, JP51 said:

I think that is a good point... quite honest. I think especially if they go to 18... pre season goes to 2 it is not a far leap to do an elimination or even down to 1 

Exactly! As many have indicated, they don’t have any of this in college. Just hold a couple of glorified scrimmages against geographically close by opponents. The starters play a few series with little to no contact, and then the subs do their usual. Everyone needs to face it. Preseason has become pretty much unwatchable. 

[billsfan89]

On 8/5/2024 at 10:54 AM, SoCal Deek said:

Preseason has become totally meaningless. If the actual team isn’t going to play then why do they even have these games? 

 

The coaches and the league will say it is to evaluate depth players and to adjust the rosters as needed on the margins. But the real reason is to make money because it adds something of a value added to TV packages and owners soak season ticket holders into having to buy the pre-season games. I am sure the coaches don't mind the chance to see the backups but it has become worthless to fans. 

 

I liked the old 4 game format of the pre-season and how coaches utilized the pre-season (I don't mind a 16 game regular season I think 16 games plus 3-4 possible playoff games is enough of a slog to get through for these players).

 

Game 1- Starters played one maybe two series. This is more of an exhibition for camp battles and the first round of cuts. Fans get their first glimpse of the starters but it is not much.

 

Game 2- Starters play the first quarter and maybe a series in the second quarter gives fans a real "taste" of in season action. 

 

Game 3- Dress rehearsal for the regular season. Starters play the first half and then about 2 series in the second half. 

 

Game 4- Starters don't play, last chance for second and third string players to make the roster. 

 

I felt like when teams did that type of pre-season there was less sloppy play early in the season and fans got to see starters for 3 pre-season games. 

[GunnerBill]

19 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Exactly! As many have indicated, they don’t have any of this in college. Just hold a couple of glorified scrimmages against geographically close by opponents. The starters play a few series with little to no contact, and then the subs do their usual. Everyone needs to face it. Preseason has become pretty much unwatchable. 

 

Ideally I'd have one exhibition game, two weeks before the season begins. The reason I wouldn't completely do away with it is the covid year of no pre-season the number of UDFAs making rosters dropped significantly (from a 10 year rolling average of 2.79 per team to 1.28). That to me isn't desirable long terms so I'd try and find a way of restricting rosters for that game so that is just an evaluation game for bottom of the roster battles / rookies and UDFAs. 

[HappyDays]

 

[GunnerBill]

33 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

 

Surprising. Don't love Josh playing. Unless this is his one appearance and they wanna do it at home?

[Low Positive]

12 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Surprising. Don't love Josh playing. Unless this is his one appearance and they wanna do it at home?

They want to do it at home. I think they also want to not play anyone against Pittsburgh, who are known to ball out in preseason. This also leaves the final preseason game if the first team looks rusty. 

[Gregg]

3 minutes ago, Low Positive said:

They want to do it at home. I think they also want to not play anyone against Pittsburgh, who are known to ball out in preseason. This also leaves the final preseason game if the first team looks rusty. 

 

The last preseason game is usually the most meaningless. Teams don't play their starters with week 1 up next. My guess is after the Bears game we won't see Allen until the Cardinals game.

[Low Positive]

7 minutes ago, Gregg said:

 

The last preseason game is usually the most meaningless. Teams don't play their starters with week 1 up next. My guess is after the Bears game we won't see Allen until the Cardinals game.

Unless they look terrible. This at least leaves them the option to get the starters more reps not against the Steelers. Tomlin blitzes in preseason. 

[Virgil]

I think we will see a lot of audibles.  Josh playing, to me, is more about him and the team getting used to new play calls in the moment, cadence, etc.  

 

I don’t expect to see anything flashy or much beyond some basic routes, just practice running the new office as a unit. 

[Gregg]

3 minutes ago, Virgil said:

I think we will see a lot of audibles.  Josh playing, to me, is more about him and the team getting used to new play calls in the moment, cadence, etc.  

 

I don’t expect to see anything flashy or much beyond some basic routes, just practice running the new office as a unit. 

 

I just hope they told Allen not to run at all. If he gets pressure, then throw it away rather than try to extend the play by taking a hit.

[Dillenger4]

I love it! Josh and the new WR's and RB need to get on the same page in a "game" situation. Playing for one quarter means potentially two, maybe three series. This is a good thing! GO BILLS.