RyanC883 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 16 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: The Bills have a bottom 3 WR room. There is no reason to believe a team in that state is playing scrubs like Hollins. Yes, he’s a scrub. Him playing isn’t something that we should be celebrating. He’s been in the league for a while and never been any good. That speaks to the quality of the WR room. Other teams are laughing at that. The Bills aren’t the Bears or the Dolphins or the Texans where they can have good guys sitting behind studs. The Bills WRs are not good compared to their peers. They cannot have their 1st pick behind Mack Hollins. If that was ever their intent, everyone should be fired. That’s what they said on their own depth chart, not whatever ESPN is guessing. The Bills didn’t value the position. They traded down twice and took the 8th or 9th WR (I don’t remember which). He was up and down all offseason. Everything on his scouting report, good and bad, has held true through camp. The Bills didn’t have the luxury of a project that will open behind Hollins. They needed an immediate contributor. Let’s just hope that they don’t waste a season in the middle of Josh’s prime… at this point, I'd be happy if the Bills don't waste the entirety of JAs prime. Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 (edited) 38 minutes ago, FireChans said: huh? Well if you had said this below originally, then we could have had a real convo. But originally, you just did the normal snarky thing of which I was referring to. 38 minutes ago, FireChans said: You said Hollins is gonna play more than a standard WR4. I'm assuming your WR's 1-3 are Samuel, Shakir and Coleman. If we are predominantly in 11 or 12 personnel like most NFL teams, any snap that Hollins sees is going to take away from one or two of the guys above them. If they aren't on the field, they can't get a target. What I said was that Hollins seems set to be more involved than a typical WR4 has been here in the past. Of course we don't know for sure what his role is, but it is based on what they have been saying. And I said that because they have talked up him as a blocker and being someone who can do a lot of the dirty work they lost with Davis departure. So they have at least spoken about Hollins as if they have real plans for him to be involved more than a WR4 has been in the past. But, I do not think he is higher on the "receivers" list by any means than Keon when it comes to real targets in real games. Sure, is it possible in a single game Hollins could get more targets...sure, he could be getting overlooked and getting easy looks we take advantage of. I mean McKenzie had 11 catches one game and he sucks. End of season, unless injuries come into play, I do not think Hollins is going to finish any higher than 5th in targets (Kincaid, Shakir, Samuel, Keon) and may even finish behind one of the RB's too and end up 6th 38 minutes ago, FireChans said: Who do you expect to see more snaps this season. Hollins or Coleman? To answer your question, Coleman. This is still an offense helmed by Josh Allen, we are not turning into a ground and pound team where blocking is going to take precedence over a players ability as a pass catcher. And Beane made it a point to mention they felt Keon was the best blocker of all the WR's in the draft as well, so as Keon gets more comfortable out there and proves he can carry that over into the NFL, it will mean there is less need to take him off the field for Hollins blocking unless they want to get him some rest of something. 38 minutes ago, FireChans said: Personally, I could see Coleman getting a few more targets and Hollins playing more snaps over the course of the year. But what I think some would prefer is Coleman (and Shakir/Samuel) to keep a known quantity like Hollins on the bench, which is @Kirby Jackson's point. I will ask you the same question I just asked Kirby. What WR was available at 28, 32, or 33 that had a better camp than Keon to the point it would have changed the coaches stance on Hollins and eliminated any possibility that Hollins will have a role on this team? His point has been entirely based on the fact that Hollins is even in the mix it makes Keon a "failure of a pick" when the reality is it likely wouldn't be any different right now no matter which WR we drafted at 33...or 28/32 either. Edited September 4 by Alphadawg7 Quote
FireChans Posted September 4 Posted September 4 5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: What WR was available at 28, 32, or 33 that had a better camp than Keon to the point it would have changed the coaches stance on Hollins and eliminated any possibility that Hollins will have a role on this team? This is a difficult question to answer. Every camp has different levels of talent. Does the fact that Legette couldn't beat out Thielen or Diontae Johnson mean he couldn't beat out Mack Hollins? I don't think so. The big question is, "Is Mack Hollins role on the team a reflection on their opinion of their rookie WR?" I actually agree with you that it may not be. There's two trains of thought. #1 Coleman isn't ready to beat out a mediocre NFL vet today, but the Bills think he will eclipse him long-term. I get this, and IMO, have no problem with the strategy if the vision for Coleman is Davante Adams-lite. In this instance, Mack Hollins' role on the team is a necessary evil while Coleman gets up to speed and refines his game. #2 Independent of Coleman's performance, the Bills had/have a vision of Mack Hollins being a key contributor on the 2024 Bills at the WR position. This is an indefensible position that frankly, along with a previous poor series of WR management, would really call into question the acumen of any and all of their WR decisions, including the decision to trade back and take Coleman. We will never know how they truly feel. So you're right. Maybe Mack was in their plans all along. To me, that's even worse than Coleman not being able to leave him in the dust in camp. Quote
oldmanfan Posted September 4 Posted September 4 8 minutes ago, FireChans said: This is a difficult question to answer. Every camp has different levels of talent. Does the fact that Legette couldn't beat out Thielen or Diontae Johnson mean he couldn't beat out Mack Hollins? I don't think so. The big question is, "Is Mack Hollins role on the team a reflection on their opinion of their rookie WR?" I actually agree with you that it may not be. There's two trains of thought. #1 Coleman isn't ready to beat out a mediocre NFL vet today, but the Bills think he will eclipse him long-term. I get this, and IMO, have no problem with the strategy if the vision for Coleman is Davante Adams-lite. In this instance, Mack Hollins' role on the team is a necessary evil while Coleman gets up to speed and refines his game. #2 Independent of Coleman's performance, the Bills had/have a vision of Mack Hollins being a key contributor on the 2024 Bills at the WR position. This is an indefensible position that frankly, along with a previous poor series of WR management, would really call into question the acumen of any and all of their WR decisions, including the decision to trade back and take Coleman. We will never know how they truly feel. So you're right. Maybe Mack was in their plans all along. To me, that's even worse than Coleman not being able to leave him in the dust in camp. I don't think Hollins is a star by any means, but he is a guy that can contribute. And importantly he's a guy who is an excellent blocker, which seems important given how much Brady emphasized the run game last year. I think of him as the replacement for Davis. Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 2 minutes ago, FireChans said: This is a difficult question to answer. Every camp has different levels of talent. Does the fact that Legette couldn't beat out Thielen or Diontae Johnson mean he couldn't beat out Mack Hollins? I don't think so. I don't disagree that camps are different, but specifically on Leggette, he didn't have a good camp, at least no where to the degree Keon did.. He himself said publicly he wished he studied the playbook harder. While there is no way to no for sure, I think its highly improbable he would be further ahead in Buffalo than Keon currently is and likely would be actually be further behind. 2 minutes ago, FireChans said: The big question is, "Is Mack Hollins role on the team a reflection on their opinion of their rookie WR?" I actually agree with you that it may not be. There's two trains of thought. #1 Coleman isn't ready to beat out a mediocre NFL vet today, but the Bills think he will eclipse him long-term. I get this, and IMO, have no problem with the strategy if the vision for Coleman is Davante Adams-lite. In this instance, Mack Hollins' role on the team is a necessary evil while Coleman gets up to speed and refines his game. #2 Independent of Coleman's performance, the Bills had/have a vision of Mack Hollins being a key contributor on the 2024 Bills at the WR position. This is an indefensible position that frankly, along with a previous poor series of WR management, would really call into question the acumen of any and all of their WR decisions, including the decision to trade back and take Coleman. We will never know how they truly feel. So you're right. Maybe Mack was in their plans all along. To me, that's even worse than Coleman not being able to leave him in the dust in camp. But "key contributor" doesn't mean a primary offensive weapon. You are talking about a guy who will be the 5th or 6th option on this offense at best unless a slew of injuries ahead of him force the issue. How many 5th or 6th option on other teams are good starters? They arent...but Hollins is being magnified, and even exaggerated, as if he is a primary receiving weapons for us this year. And if Hollins was being setup to be a primary receiving option, I would agree with you that its a failure. But I know you don't think he will out target Kincaid, Shakir, Keon, or Samuel unless one of them misses a lot of time due to injury. And he may not even get more than the 50 targets Cook got as a RB last year. Hollins role has more to do with dirty work than a key offensive weapon for Allen to throw the ball to. And as Keon shows he can handle more and more of that dirty work I suspect Hollins snap counts will start to decline as the season goes on as well. Quote
mjt328 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 17 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said: The Bills have a bottom 3 WR room. There is no reason to believe a team in that state is playing scrubs like Hollins. Yes, he’s a scrub. Him playing isn’t something that we should be celebrating. He’s been in the league for a while and never been any good. That speaks to the quality of the WR room. Other teams are laughing at that. The Bills aren’t the Bears or the Dolphins or the Texans where they can have good guys sitting behind studs. The Bills WRs are not good compared to their peers. They cannot have their 1st pick behind Mack Hollins. If that was ever their intent, everyone should be fired. That’s what they said on their own depth chart, not whatever ESPN is guessing. The Bills didn’t value the position. They traded down twice and took the 8th or 9th WR (I don’t remember which). He was up and down all offseason. Everything on his scouting report, good and bad, has held true through camp. The Bills didn’t have the luxury of a project that will open behind Hollins. They needed an immediate contributor. Let’s just hope that they don’t waste a season in the middle of Josh’s prime… As many have consistently pointed out, the Chiefs won the Super Bowl the last two years and are favored to repeat again in 2024. That is AFTER they traded away Tyreek Hill, and knocked their receiver group down to one of the worst in the NFL. There are 9 different major position groups in the NFL. It's impossible to prioritize all of them with 1st Round Picks and high dollar contracts. I don't really know what people expect? If we use all our resources on WR, then it's going to take a toll on our O-Line, Pass Rush, Secondary, etc. etc. How can anyone say Brandon Beane doesn't value receiving weapons? In reality, he has used 3 of his last 5 top draft picks on that exact thing. He traded a 1st Round Pick for Stefon Diggs in 2020. He targeted a WR in the 1st Round of the 2023 draft, and ended up going with Dalton Kincaid when the other viable options were gone. They targeted a WR in the 1st Round again in 2024, and clearly explained that trading down (a whopping 5 spots over two trades) was due to several players being ranked about the same. Does drafting Coleman hold less value because he was picked at #33 instead of #28? I know everything isn't sunshine and flowers around this team right now. But let's at least make sure our criticism makes some sense. Quote
GoBills808 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 11 minutes ago, FireChans said: This is a difficult question to answer. Every camp has different levels of talent. Does the fact that Legette couldn't beat out Thielen or Diontae Johnson mean he couldn't beat out Mack Hollins? I don't think so. The big question is, "Is Mack Hollins role on the team a reflection on their opinion of their rookie WR?" I actually agree with you that it may not be. There's two trains of thought. #1 Coleman isn't ready to beat out a mediocre NFL vet today, but the Bills think he will eclipse him long-term. I get this, and IMO, have no problem with the strategy if the vision for Coleman is Davante Adams-lite. In this instance, Mack Hollins' role on the team is a necessary evil while Coleman gets up to speed and refines his game. #2 Independent of Coleman's performance, the Bills had/have a vision of Mack Hollins being a key contributor on the 2024 Bills at the WR position. This is an indefensible position that frankly, along with a previous poor series of WR management, would really call into question the acumen of any and all of their WR decisions, including the decision to trade back and take Coleman. We will never know how they truly feel. So you're right. Maybe Mack was in their plans all along. To me, that's even worse than Coleman not being able to leave him in the dust in camp. I think it's very likely the plan for Hollins to do more than Coleman initially, especially if the rookie isn't quite up to NFL speed yet I don't have a problem w that approach personally. I have a problem w folks pretending Mack Hollins isn't a mediocre at best player 1 minute ago, mjt328 said: As many have consistently pointed out, the Chiefs won the Super Bowl the last two years and are favored to repeat again in 2024. That is AFTER they traded away Tyreek Hill, and knocked their receiver group down to one of the worst in the NFL. There are 9 different major position groups in the NFL. It's impossible to prioritize all of them with 1st Round Picks and high dollar contracts. I don't really know what people expect? If we use all our resources on WR, then it's going to take a toll on our O-Line, Pass Rush, Secondary, etc. etc. How can anyone say Brandon Beane doesn't value receiving weapons? In reality, he has used 3 of his last 5 top draft picks on that exact thing. He traded a 1st Round Pick for Stefon Diggs in 2020. He targeted a WR in the 1st Round of the 2023 draft, and ended up going with Dalton Kincaid when the other viable options were gone. They targeted a WR in the 1st Round again in 2024, and clearly explained that trading down (a whopping 5 spots over two trades) was due to several players being ranked about the same. Does drafting Coleman hold less value because he was picked at #33 instead of #28? I know everything isn't sunshine and flowers around this team right now. But let's at least make sure our criticism makes some sense. I mean in a word yes Quote
Warriorspikes51 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 15 hours ago, HappyDays said: Sort of off topic, but why in the world is Ray Davis listed BEHIND Ty Johnson? It is almost pathological this regime's need to "make the rookies earn it" even if it means casting aside what everyone can see plainly with their own eyes. There is no universe where Hollins and Johnson should be getting more touches than Coleman and Davis. Not even in game one. Get the rookies on the field and let them learn. What exactly do we have to gain in a rebuild season by putting them behind washed up vets? I really hope this depth chart is just McDermott trying to humble the rookies and that it isn't the reality on Sunday. Ray Davis might already be a better overall player than Cook, so yes this is concerning Quote
FireChans Posted September 4 Posted September 4 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: But "key contributor" doesn't mean a primary offensive weapon. You are talking about a guy who will be the 5th or 6th option on this offense at best unless a slew of injuries ahead of him force the issue. How many 5th or 6th option on other teams are good starters? They arent...but Hollins is being magnified, and even exaggerated, as if he is a primary receiving weapons for us this year. This is true, but how many teams are going in calling their 5th or 6th options "key contributors?" You yourself said that you think Hollins is going to have a bigger role than a normal WR4. I think that's a mistake. Under no circumstances should Hollins be considered anything more than a backup/ST guy. I don't care if he is a better blocker than Curtis Samuel or Khalil Shakir. IMO, Samuel and Shakir are both better than Hollins already. Hollins should take exactly 0% of their snaps outside of injury/rest or the odd run package. I think Coleman has more of an NFL future than Mack Hollins, and ideally should easily clear Hollins on snaps because we are going to hopefully be counting on Coleman's contributions for years in the future. So really, I don't think Hollins should have a real offensive role at all, outside of ST. In Atlanta, Hollins was seeing 60-70% of snaps last year through the first 4 games. That dropped to 20-30%, then a couple inactives, then back to 20%. Obviously, he was terrible from a statistical standpoint (even though he was their 2nd WR in targets and their 5th player overall in targets). He is just not a good player. He is Trent Sherfield 2.0, who also was a guy who did not deserve the 40% of snaps he was getting. Edited September 4 by FireChans Quote
BillsVet Posted September 4 Posted September 4 1 hour ago, RyanC883 said: at this point, I'd be happy if the Bills don't waste the entirety of JAs prime. Don't make assumptions. 34 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: I don't think Hollins is a star by any means, but he is a guy that can contribute. And importantly he's a guy who is an excellent blocker, which seems important given how much Brady emphasized the run game last year. I think of him as the replacement for Davis. Do you quantify that based on the 105 catches he has for 1,340 yards and 9 TDs...over his last 63 games (4 seasons) played or on a different measurement scale? Because Davis had 163 catches for 2,730 yards and 27 TDs...over his last 64 games (4 seasons). And it was pretty clear he wasn't up to par for a NFL WR2 even with Josh. 30 minutes ago, mjt328 said: As many have consistently pointed out, the Chiefs won the Super Bowl the last two years and are favored to repeat again in 2024. That is AFTER they traded away Tyreek Hill, and knocked their receiver group down to one of the worst in the NFL. There are 9 different major position groups in the NFL. It's impossible to prioritize all of them with 1st Round Picks and high dollar contracts. I don't really know what people expect? If we use all our resources on WR, then it's going to take a toll on our O-Line, Pass Rush, Secondary, etc. etc. How can anyone say Brandon Beane doesn't value receiving weapons? In reality, he has used 3 of his last 5 top draft picks on that exact thing. He traded a 1st Round Pick for Stefon Diggs in 2020. He targeted a WR in the 1st Round of the 2023 draft, and ended up going with Dalton Kincaid when the other viable options were gone. They targeted a WR in the 1st Round again in 2024, and clearly explained that trading down (a whopping 5 spots over two trades) was due to several players being ranked about the same. Does drafting Coleman hold less value because he was picked at #33 instead of #28? I know everything isn't sunshine and flowers around this team right now. But let's at least make sure our criticism makes some sense. Cannot be serious comparing the Chiefs WR group in 2022-23 to Buffalo's this year. Absolute non-serious take. They had future HOF'er Travis Kelce both seasons, and solid production first from JuJu S-S and then Rashee Rice who both exceeded 900 yards. @BADOLBILZmakes mention of this and people skate by it like it's nothing. The Bills have a WR2/3 in Samuel, then a bunch of cast-offs (Hollins, MVS) combined with the as-advertised rookie Coleman and another slot-receiver in Shakir who is likely to be a slot-only guy. There's Kincaid who averaged 9 yards per catch and the hands-challenged Knox. That's the group. Little proven veteran depth and rookies people assume will just step right in seamlessly. The biggest challenge on this board is people the lack of a global, i.e. NFL-wide view of how the league acts. Even if you include Diggs, they've spent 3 top-100 picks in 8 off-seasons on WR's...a position where 2 and often 3 will line up. They haven't signed a decent UFA WR since Brown and Beasley 5 off-seasons ago. Do yourself a favor and see how other teams have addressed WR and compare Buffalo. I am absolutely positive you'll see there's a serious drop-off in using premium assets at the position. 1 Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 (edited) 1 hour ago, FireChans said: This is true, but how many teams are going in calling their 5th or 6th options "key contributors?" But is it the fans or the team calling him a "key contributor"? I haven't heard any one on the staff call him a "key" anything, just speak to how impressed they have been by his leadership and how good of a blocker he is. I mean we are talking about a guy who is going to be at best 5th or 6th in targets (barring injuries) by seasons end...not sure any 5th or 6th option has ever been referred to as a "key contributor". 1 hour ago, FireChans said: You yourself said that you think Hollins is going to have a bigger role than a normal WR4. I think that's a mistake. Under no circumstances should Hollins be considered anything more than a backup/ST guy. I don't care if he is a better blocker than Curtis Samuel or Khalil Shakir. Yes, I do think he will...key word being "think" as I clearly don't know for sure as we have not seen a live game yet. At least I think he will early and mostly for his blocking as they have shown and talked about the importance that plays in their offense. We do still have good blocking on this team with Knox, Kincaid is supposedly improving, Shakir is actually a good blocker too, and Keon was in college. I think once they see they need to lean on Hollins blocking less, his snaps will probably start to decrease. 1 hour ago, FireChans said: IMO, Samuel and Shakir are both better than Hollins already. Hollins should take exactly 0% of their snaps outside of injury/rest or the odd run package. I think Coleman has more of an NFL future than Mack Hollins, and ideally should easily clear Hollins on snaps because we are going to hopefully be counting on Coleman's contributions for years in the future. So really, I don't think Hollins should have a real offensive role at all, outside of ST. And this may end up being his role, we still don't know yet, they have not specifically stated what to expect his usage to be. I agree, Shakir and Samuel are better WR's, and I honestly think Coleman is right now too. Which is why I am not at all worried about any perceived role for Hollins is, I am confident Keon is going to see plenty more targets than him. 1 hour ago, FireChans said: In Atlanta, Hollins was seeing 60-70% of snaps last year through the first 4 games. That dropped to 20-30%, then a couple inactives, then back to 20%. Obviously, he was terrible from a statistical standpoint (even though he was their 2nd WR in targets and their 5th player overall in targets). Honestly, this is exactly what I expect his season to look like where his snap count is higher as Keon adjusts to the speed and nuances of the NFL game and demonstrates he handle some of the dirty work roles they would use Hollins more for early on. 1 hour ago, FireChans said: He is just not a good player. He is Trent Sherfield 2.0, who also was a guy who did not deserve the 40% of snaps he was getting. Mack is clearly a better WR in all aspects than Sherfield proved to be last year...he has done more a receiver and he is clearly significantly better blocker and ST player. But yes I agree that Sherfield should not have seen that many snaps last year and I also agree that I do not think Hollins should either. Edited September 4 by Alphadawg7 Quote
oldmanfan Posted September 4 Posted September 4 32 minutes ago, BillsVet said: Don't make assumptions. Do you quantify that based on the 105 catches he has for 1,340 yards and 9 TDs...over his last 63 games (4 seasons) played or on a different measurement scale? Because Davis had 163 catches for 2,730 yards and 27 TDs...over his last 64 games (4 seasons). And it was pretty clear he wasn't up to par for a NFL WR2 even with Josh. Cannot be serious comparing the Chiefs WR group in 2022-23 to Buffalo's this year. Absolute non-serious take. They had future HOF'er Travis Kelce both seasons, and solid production first from JuJu S-S and then Rashee Rice who both exceeded 900 yards. @BADOLBILZmakes mention of this and people skate by it like it's nothing. The Bills have a WR2/3 in Samuel, then a bunch of cast-offs (Hollins, MVS) combined with the as-advertised rookie Coleman and another slot-receiver in Shakir who is likely to be a slot-only guy. There's Kincaid who averaged 9 yards per catch and the hands-challenged Knox. That's the group. Little proven veteran depth and rookies people assume will just step right in seamlessly. The biggest challenge on this board is people the lack of a global, i.e. NFL-wide view of how the league acts. Even if you include Diggs, they've spent 3 top-100 picks in 8 off-seasons on WR's...a position where 2 and often 3 will line up. They haven't signed a decent UFA WR since Brown and Beasley 5 off-seasons ago. Do yourself a favor and see how other teams have addressed WR and compare Buffalo. I am absolutely positive you'll see there's a serious drop-off in using premium assets at the position. Yes I think Hollis is Davis. Both are excellent blockers. And Hollis should benefit from having Josh. I don’t think Hollis replaces Davis’s numbers because Davis functioned as Josh’s second option while Hollis will be part of a group which the OC says he wants to be position-less, i.e. no WR1, 2, etc. Quote
FireChans Posted September 4 Posted September 4 10 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Honestly, this is exactly what I expect his season to look like where his snap count is higher as Keon adjusts to the speed and nuances of the NFL game and demonstrates he handle some of the dirty work roles they would use Hollins more for early on Exactly. That’s the problem lol. Any plan that starts with “Mack Hollins sees 60% of the snaps” is a bad when Josh Allen is your QB in his prime. When Hollins was playing that much in Atlanta, their offense was awful. They had offensive talent. They have London, Pitts, Bijan. They are not talentless despite a bad QB. That’s why this WR room draws so much ire. They are legitimately missing a player. We all agree that Mack isn’t in the same stratosphere as Shakir or Samuel. Him drawing 60% of the snaps to start the year is a hindrance for the offense being good. That’s why @Kirby Jackson believes that Coleman needed to take those snaps immediately, because those snaps should not be going to a player of Mack Hollins’ caliber. Hypothetically, if the Bills still had Diggs or had signed a Darnell Mooney, and Coleman needed the first half of the year or even longer to develop, it wouldn’t be a big deal. And if he shows out and gets on the field and contributes early, it’s found money. Because again, it’s not really about if Coleman takes the job immediately or not (although we would all hope that he does), its about keeping guys of Mack Hollins quality off the field. The room is missing a boundary player, who is anywhere from WR1-3 in target share, who is not a negative when he steps on the field. They didn’t bring one in. And it’s possible Coleman is not ready to be that week 1 or even week 7. And so they may end up shuffling in an ST JAG to hold down the fort. 1 1 1 Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 32 minutes ago, FireChans said: Exactly. That’s the problem lol. Any plan that starts with “Mack Hollins sees 60% of the snaps” is a bad when Josh Allen is your QB in his prime. When Hollins was playing that much in Atlanta, their offense was awful. They had offensive talent. They have London, Pitts, Bijan. They are not talentless despite a bad QB. That’s why this WR room draws so much ire. They are legitimately missing a player. We all agree that Mack isn’t in the same stratosphere as Shakir or Samuel. Him drawing 60% of the snaps to start the year is a hindrance for the offense being good. That’s why @Kirby Jackson believes that Coleman needed to take those snaps immediately, because those snaps should not be going to a player of Mack Hollins’ caliber. Hypothetically, if the Bills still had Diggs or had signed a Darnell Mooney, and Coleman needed the first half of the year or even longer to develop, it wouldn’t be a big deal. And if he shows out and gets on the field and contributes early, it’s found money. Because again, it’s not really about if Coleman takes the job immediately or not (although we would all hope that he does), its about keeping guys of Mack Hollins quality off the field. The room is missing a boundary player, who is anywhere from WR1-3 in target share, who is not a negative when he steps on the field. They didn’t bring one in. And it’s possible Coleman is not ready to be that week 1 or even week 7. And so they may end up shuffling in an ST JAG to hold down the fort. Sorry I should have clarified, I wasn’t agreeing and saying I expect him to have 60% of the snaps, I was saying that’s exactly what I expect to happen in terms of his snap percentage dropping as the season goes on. I personally don’t think his snap count will be that high initially. Quote
Logic Posted September 4 Posted September 4 Mack Hollins -- week one starting receiver for the Buffalo Bills in the year 2024. What a world. Quote
BillsVet Posted September 4 Posted September 4 1 hour ago, oldmanfan said: Yes I think Hollis is Davis. Both are excellent blockers. And Hollis should benefit from having Josh. I don’t think Hollis replaces Davis’s numbers because Davis functioned as Josh’s second option while Hollis will be part of a group which the OC says he wants to be position-less, i.e. no WR1, 2, etc. Hollins...didn't get 2.25M to be a blocker. And he's listed at the top of their depth chart so he'll likely get significant PT. Does it really need to be said that in a post-1960 NFL, your WR2 has to be something of a threat beyond 1.7 catches and 21 yards per game over his last 4 seasons? He's a strong candidate for 2024's version of Harty and Sherfield...on the cheap WR's who won't help Josh much. And a lot of solid TSW posters have observed what I'm saying: that Mack Hollins and MVS are nowhere near the caliber of starting NFL receivers anymore. They shouldn't even be primary depth and especially not when Josh Allen is your QB. 1 Quote
Mikey152 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 2 hours ago, BillsVet said: Don't make assumptions. Do you quantify that based on the 105 catches he has for 1,340 yards and 9 TDs...over his last 63 games (4 seasons) played or on a different measurement scale? Because Davis had 163 catches for 2,730 yards and 27 TDs...over his last 64 games (4 seasons). And it was pretty clear he wasn't up to par for a NFL WR2 even with Josh. Cannot be serious comparing the Chiefs WR group in 2022-23 to Buffalo's this year. Absolute non-serious take. They had future HOF'er Travis Kelce both seasons, and solid production first from JuJu S-S and then Rashee Rice who both exceeded 900 yards. @BADOLBILZmakes mention of this and people skate by it like it's nothing. The Bills have a WR2/3 in Samuel, then a bunch of cast-offs (Hollins, MVS) combined with the as-advertised rookie Coleman and another slot-receiver in Shakir who is likely to be a slot-only guy. There's Kincaid who averaged 9 yards per catch and the hands-challenged Knox. That's the group. Little proven veteran depth and rookies people assume will just step right in seamlessly. The biggest challenge on this board is people the lack of a global, i.e. NFL-wide view of how the league acts. Even if you include Diggs, they've spent 3 top-100 picks in 8 off-seasons on WR's...a position where 2 and often 3 will line up. They haven't signed a decent UFA WR since Brown and Beasley 5 off-seasons ago. Do yourself a favor and see how other teams have addressed WR and compare Buffalo. I am absolutely positive you'll see there's a serious drop-off in using premium assets at the position. You should google circular logic... We are at THE BEGINNING of 2024, not the end. If you compare the receiving options of the Bills on day 1 2024 to the Chiefs on day 1 2023, the Bills win in a landslide. You don't have to look any further than the fact that MVS was a starter for the Chiefs (10 games) and is 5th on the Bills depth chart. By the end of the season, SOMEBODY on the Bills will have a career season and close to 1000 yards, maybe even two or three somebodies. It might be Coleman (who is a better prospect than Rice was) or Shakir (who is a better player than Watson) or Mack Hollins (who clearly beat out MVS in camp). That is to say nothing of the Bills best WR, Curtis Samuel, who is light years better than Hardman/Moore/Toney. And, quite honestly, I don't think the gap between 2023 Kelce and 2024 Kincaid is enough to cover that spread above. Flat out, the Bills are gonna throw 500+ times this year. Josh Allen is gonna pass for 4000 yards and somebody is gonna catch those balls and accumulate those yards. There will be a Rice on this team...it's bad faith to act like there won't be. Odds are it is Shakir or Samuel (or both?). The Chiefs didn't hit on some hidden gem...they gave a guy with decent skills a bunch of targets from a great QB. There are probably 100 WR in the NFL that could do that, including 2 or 3 on the Bills. 1 1 Quote
Alphadawg7 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 3 hours ago, GoBills808 said: I think it's very likely the plan for Hollins to do more than Coleman initially, especially if the rookie isn't quite up to NFL speed yet I don't have a problem w that approach personally. I have a problem w folks pretending Mack Hollins isn't a mediocre at best player I mean in a word yes Who thinks Hollins is better than a mediocre player? I haven't seen anyone suggesting that he is. Quote
Mikey152 Posted September 4 Posted September 4 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said: Who thinks Hollins is better than a mediocre player? I haven't seen anyone suggesting that he is. Right...more like he doesn't need to be much more than that. He's likely the guy that comes off the field when the Bills go 12. He probably loses snaps to Coleman as the season goes along. On any given play he is probably at best the third read. But he can block. He is big, physical and can get deep. Typical low target, high variance X that can do the dirty work. Is useful, but not integral. I assume they will use MVS the same way. Edited September 4 by Mikey152 1 1 Quote
ColoradoBills Posted September 4 Posted September 4 13 minutes ago, Mikey152 said: Right...more like he doesn't need to be much more than that. He's likely the guy that comes off the field when the Bills go 12. He probably loses snaps to Coleman as the season goes along. On any given play he is probably at best the third read. But he can block. He is big, physical and can get deep. Typical low target, high variance X that can do the dirty work. Is useful, but not integral. I assume they will use MVS the same way. People don't have any idea what Hollins role this year will be. They see WR2 in a "start of the season depth chart" and think he is going to get 90 targets like Davis got. I damn well guarantee he is not getting 87% of the offensive snaps which is what Davis averaged the last 2 years. Instead of having some patience to see what the O will look like some enjoying ranting and raving before there is anything substantial. 1 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.