Alphadawg7
-
Posts
24,294 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Alphadawg7
-
-
Here is my stab
- Allen
- Mahomes
- Lamar
- Burrow
- Daniels
- Hurts
- Baker
- Goff
- Purdy
- Herbert
- Stafford
- Dak
- Love
- Stroud
- Lawerence
- Darnold
- Nix
- Kyler
- Tua
- Geno
- Caleb
- Fields
- Maye
- Penix
- Ward
- Rodgers
- Wilson
- Young
- McCarthy
- D. Jones
- Flacco
- Shough
-
1
-
1 minute ago, RoyBatty is alive said:
True BUT the poster has a legit point, doing windmill dunks so high in the air is taking it too far imo, he very easily could have hurt an ankle, comparing it to Josh Allen playing softball is an absurd reach. If I was McDermott i would not be very happy.
A reach? A guy who plays basketball his whole life dunking isn't some high probability injury situation, the over reaction IMO is a bit of a reach. And guys have hurt their ankles rounding bases or chasing balls in softball plenty of times too. Also not a high probability for risk, but definitely not an absurd comparison either.
Point is - this wasn't that serious and nothing outside the ordinary of what professional athletes do in the offseason either. On the risk factor scale on what they could be doing, this was pretty low.
-
2
-
1
-
-
24 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:
I'm having a hard time visualizing Josh tearing an ACL over a putt.
He could hurt his back on a swing, could tear an ACL playing his Hydes annual softball game rounding a base or chasing a ball, etc. I mean, its not like these guys are in bubble wrap in the offseason. Allen also plays basketball in the offseason too by the way.
Players across the NFL do this kind of stuff all the time, not sure why its an issue for some when Keon does it in a teammates charity game.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, T.E. said:
Suffering an injury while doing a bunch of windmill dunks in a charity basketball game would be right on brand for him. They were good dunks, though, I have to admit.
I mean you can say that about any of the guys on the team playing the softball game every year where they can get hurt as well, or these guys just working out in the offseason, or any extra curricular activity that other guys on the team do, including Josh, over each offseason.
-
1
-
3
-
-
On 6/15/2025 at 8:25 AM, Mr. WEO said:
multiplying his yards per target by an imaginary and impossible number of targets really doesn't make much of an argument.
By your thinking, it would make more sense to target Coleman over Shakir. If Coleman had 160, he would have had over 1500 yards.....
Remember, I didn't start or make the argument or imaginary numbers...the two of you were discussing if he would or not on Diggs same targets...and all I did was chime in and say that saying "no chance" he could was a silly premise because mathematically is a certainty he would be able to achieve 379 more yards on 60 additional targets, any WR on our roster could and should amass 379+ yards on 60 more targets in this offense.
BUT - I never said he should get that many targets, and as I have said, I don't think any WR should get that many targets in this offense. I don't think any one player should see more than 120 targets in this spread the ball around offense personally.
-
9 hours ago, oldmanfan said:
I think Ingram may very well start the season as CB2.
I mean anything is possible, but I really don't think this has much chance of happening without a slew of injuries making it happen personally.
-
1
-
-
59 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:
Look, I love Josh. We all love Josh. But to say at this point he is definitively the best Bills player ever over Bruce and/or OJ is kind of silly.
I would ask if you are old enough to have watched Jerry Butler. Because those who watched him know he was much better than Lee Evans. Same with Lofton.
I watched them both, although I was younger when Butler was playing, so my memory of him is less. As far as Lofton goes, its not about whose career was better IMO, it was who was the better Bills player. If it was who had the best career, than yes its Lofton...but then in that case, Owens over takes all of them. In terms of who was the greatest Bills players, as in when they played here, then for me early and prime Lee Evans was definitely better than end of career Lofton.I think people forget how good Evans really was, he gets short changed a bit because he played in a bad era of Bills football. Yet he is still the Bills 3rd all time leading WR despite the bad teams and bad QB's he played with. He would have put up crazy numbers had he got to play with Allen during his prime.
-
23 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
This post got me thinking, “what’s the right number that it would take in exchange for a Bills Super Bowl?” Obviously, $500 isn’t the answer. The champagne I’d pop after a Super Bowl would exceed that. What’s your number?
I’m thinking like $500K would be my number. That might be insane and it might not be high enough. That number is big enough to matter but not big enough to stop working or drastically change the day-to-day.
I figure that this is an interesting place for this discussion because the people spending time here, in June, REALLY care about the Bills.
EDIT: To be clear, you either get _____ dollars and the Bills do not win one in your lifetime OR they are guaranteed a championship this year.
LOL at Klieman...$500 is pretty insignificant, so unless someone was in despair, I doubt anyone takes the $500. 1 ticket to Disneyland costs that much lol. He should have done like $5k, $10k, $25k or something like that to make it more compelling of a decision at least.
But $500K? Thats a different story, heck even $400k, $300k, $200k, etc...this is the kind of money I would use to make a lot more money over the next 3-5 years and impact my life/family, especially in my early retirement goals.
Bills winning a SB isn't going to change my life. My world revolves around my wife and kids, as long as they are good, my life is perfect. But you give me an amount of money that I can use in a way to impact or benefit my life/family, then that always takes precedence over sports fandom for me.
-
11 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:
If the argument is which did more in a Bills uniform then Lofton did much more than Owens. As for best WR in a Bills uni I’d have Reed, Butler, Lofton, Diggs, and Moulds as top 5.
I think the top 4 WR's in Bills history were: Reed, Diggs, Moulds, and Evans in that order. After that it gets more subjective with guys like Lofton, Butler, Cole, Stevie, etc as to who is 5th.
-
22 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
The list is clearly made by outsiders. No knowledgable Bills fan has Kelly over Allen.
The top 3 are: Bruce, OJ and Josh (in whatever order). Thurman is next. Andre and Kelly are the next 2. Joe D follows them. From there, it’s a little subjective.
I agree...and I will say this, Allen at 6 was a joke. They labeled this the greatest "players" not greatest "careers". And even though he is 29, he has already established he is the greatest individual player to put on a Bills jersey of all time.
You nailed the top 3 - And I think the order starts with Josh and then you can interchange Bruce or OJ at 2 and 3. But I would go Josh, OJ, Bruce. Thurman is without a doubt next at 4 too, so you nailed that again.
And I think Reed and Kelly next were clear choices too, even in no particular order.
So yeah, I agree with everything you said here, although I think Diggs has a case for 7th.
Once you get past these guys it does get murky and very subjective, especially since a lot of the most talented guys either didn't play here that long (came late, left in FA, etc) or were saddled with a terrible era of football that over shadowed them or hurt their production (Moulds, Kyle, etc). For example, guys like Gilmore, Peters, Diggs, McCoy, etc. are subjective in where you can rank them despite their immense talents.
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:
you are simply providing a math equation. in his last year in Buffalo, for instance, Davis would have had over 1500 yards with 160 targets. Last year McConkey would have had 2300 yards, Jameson Williams would have had 2750!
so, yes, I agree that 160 targets X 8.21 yards per target = 1313 yards. not a point worth making
You said there was "no chance" and denied the math equation, I simply corrected the sillyness of the premise there was "no chance". Its all it was, nothing more, literally referred to it as a "simple math" equation multiple times.
At no point did I advocate for him to get 160 targets, and quite honestly I wouldn't advocate for anyone to get 160 targets again in this offense. Other people who just want to argue skewed what was said and tried to turn into a bunch of other things...as usual because that is what they always do.
-
1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:
160 targets for Shakir? hey why not 200!
a grand total of 2 NFL WRs had 160 or more targets last year. There is no reality where he would get 160 on the Bills or any other team in the league.
These extrapolation exercises are alway pointless.
I didn’t say give him 160 targets…you said there is no chance he could reach 1200-1400 IF he did. And clearly that’s a silly premise -
2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
It's a stupid argument then because if he gets 160 targets we're screwed. Even in your projections you're assuming his catch rate and yards per catch would remain stagnant with 60 more targets. His yards per catch went from 15.7 yards to 10.8 yards with more than double the targets. His catch percentage went from 86.7% in 2023 to 76% in 2024. His total yardage only increased by about 34% despite more than double the targets. Why would 60 more targets not have the same downward trajectory?
First of all, no one is arguing for him to get 160 targets (which I just told you as well in the previous post too). Someone said there was “no chance” he could reach “1200-1400 yards” on 60 more targets and mathematically it’s simply not true and that is all that was said. So I don’t know why you want to drag this in all these other directions.
And as for the bold, because he’s a good football player. His efficiency in 2023 was an outlier on minimal targets, no one expected that not to drop, I mean of course it did. But it doesn’t drop perpetually either, he’s still a good football player, his efficiency is going to have a floor and to just imply it will forever drop at the same rate is just a ridiculous premise. And when you have 100 targets, you’ve got a pretty reliable sample size to know pretty much what would be expected at that point.
2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:Also, weren't you the one that predicted Shakir would have over 1300 yards receiving with 100 targets before last year or something like that with the idiotic assumption he'd be able to maintain the same yards per catch with the increased role?
Lmao, no I never once projected that, not even close lol. That’s a false premise a certain someone likes to pretend I said by twisting something out of context to pretend I did. That reference was made when I pointed out the difference in efficiency between Shakir and Diggs during Diggs final season.
My actual projection for him was around 90-110 targets and 900-1100 yards which is pretty much what he did when he was healthy.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:
That's the Gabe Davis and Isiah McKenzie sales pitch I heard. He's not a bad route runner but he's better creating space after the catch than before. It's why his stats are better against zone coverage. The arm length thing isn't over exaggerated as he is in the bottom 1% of WR's. It's why he can't play outside as press man coverage eliminates him from the play. He also isn't going to win any 50/50 balls down the field. I was actually pleasantly surprised with the amount of production he had last year down the field on deep throws given his limitations but that usually came on low trajectory deep ball passes or broken plays. My guess is we'll never have worse outside WR's than we had last year so those opportunities will decline
His strong suit is finding the soft spot in zones and running after the catch. Allen likes to push the ball downfield so you're never going to see him get Wes Welker like production which we are talking about with over 1,200 yards from a purely slot WR.
You are completely missing the question and the point though. One of the posters said "no chance" he could amass "1200-1400" yards on the same targets we fed Diggs (160). So the only thing being discussed right now is if he got 60 more targets last year, what would his yards have been. What you think his strengths and weaknesses are is irrelevant to the math question of how many more yards above the 821 yards would he have had if he received 60 additional targets.
Unless you think he is going to add 0 yards and 0 receptions with those 60 more targets in his role last year, then how many yards he would have on 160 targets is clearly bigger than the 821 yards he got on his first 100 targets. And based on his actual production last year, that would have been 1313 yards with 60 more targets...and if you used his career averages it would be even higher.
Its not an advocation to give him 160 targets, but for anyone to say there is "no chance" he could get to "1200-1400" yards with 160 targets is pretty silly because he clearly could on that many targets and its honestly not really even debatable.
-
2
-
-
35 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:
It's possible but highly unlikely. Shakir's strength is finding soft spots in zone and YAC ability. He isn't a superb route runner like Beasley and has a small catch radius with his microscopic arms so that limits his opportunities down the field. He's not going to win many closely contested catches. I think 1,000 is a possibility but I'd be shocked if he ever cracked 1,200 yards.
What is being discussed is if Shakir got Diggs same target share (160 targets) compared to the 100 targets he got last year could he hit 1200-1400 yards. He had 821 yards on 100 targets...60 more targets is another 492 yards, which is over 1313 yards. And if you use his career averages it would project to even more yards.
And Shakir is actually a really good route runner and the arm thing is maybe one of the most over exaggerated aspects of his game and you would be hard pressed to find many examples on film where this negatively impacted his ability to make a play when given the opportunity.
Now will he get 160 targets probably not, and definitely not in this offense as no one will hear under Brady with how they spread the ball around and incorporate the run game. But IF he got 160 yards he clearly would finish in the 1200-1400 yard range, and its not really a question to be honest, its simple math.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Doc said:
At his catch rate and YPR last year, 60 more targets would mean 492 more yards.
Yeah that was my whole point
-
On 6/10/2025 at 3:15 AM, Mr. WEO said:
no chance that would be true.
Yes he would. You don’t think Shakir could get 379 more yards on 60 more targets? Of course he could.
Diggs is the better WR in his prime without question, he was legit top 5. Shakir isn’t going to put up the same season as Diggs…But to say Shakir has no chance to get to 1200-1400 yards if he saw 160 targets is just not accurate.
-
1
-
-
Seems pretty minor luckily
-
9 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
He just continues to do and say all the right things this offseason. Will it translate on the field, we will have to wait and see, but from what is coming out it sure sounds like it already is early, which is an encouraging sign as well.
-
2
-
4
-
-
8 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
I think the bottom end of your range is more like the ceiling personally. He is a bit boom and bust Keon and I expect that to continue. He will have 2 or 3 big games and then others where he has 1 catch for 19 yards or something.
I'd be absolutely fine with a year from Keon that is over 800 yards and 6 or 7 touchdowns. But it wouldn't change the way I feel about the Bills' need for a difference maker on the boundary. To be honest even a 1,000 yard season wouldn't. The same way I always pushed back against the "John Brown had a thousand yard season he is a number 1 receiver" narrative that got some push around here coming out of 2019.
Brown and Keon each breaking a 1000 yards isn't really comparable though IMHO. Keon breaking 1000 yards in his 2nd season will be more significant in a spread the ball around offense that balances with a run game than John Brown doing it late in his career as an anomaly when we ran a pass happy offense with less options to throw to and lacked a balanced run game.
There is more than one way to be a difference maker as a boundary WR, and there are guys who are slower than Keon who have been top end boundary WR's, so what he can or can't be on the boundary is still yet to be known IMHO. What they need from Keon is to be the best version of himself, they will fill in guys around him who have different strengths than Keon as they are building this team more around skills sets and roles.
And to your point of being fine with this type if season...If Keon can grow into a role where he can consistently be a 900-1100 yard WR in this style of offense, he will be a pretty good player for us over that span. And that is all we need him to be, he doesn't have to blossom into say a top 10 WR in the NFL even, just needs to do what he does at a high level and he is going to help this team win games.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, NewEra said:
To end this conversation that’s derailed this thread- not sure if it’s been posted here yet, but back on topic
https://motociclismo.pt/en/keon-coleman-ota-standout-career-resurrection/
I have been saying it all offseason, I really think Coleman is going to silence some critics this year. Everything coming out has been very positive, including things like Allen publicly talking about how Keon has been in hitting him up all offseason on getting better, understanding more what Allen wants/expects in different situations, etc. I think we will see an improvement on the guy we saw prior to the injury. And what people forget is that 1000 yards was on the table before he was hurt in week 11. At that point he was on pace for 800-900 yards, but that pace was increasing as he started getting more comfortable and involved as the season progressed.
Barring injury, I think a realistic goal for him this season is 900-1100 yards and 8-10 TD's. And that would be a pretty strong season in his 2nd year in this offense that spreads the ball around.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:
No I'm just saying we should be led by our defense more this season. The way that KC has been for a couple years now. I mean just about every major investment we made this offseason was on the defense... As you know that would not have been my strategy, but I get it. So now that strategy has to lead to a different result. The 3rd down defense has to be much better and we can't watch KC do their annual playoff thing against us where they move up and down the field at will.
I'm not actually asking us to go 15-1 scoring 24 PPG, I am more realistic than that. But I think everybody should agree that if the defense lives up to the investments, the inevitable KC playoff matchup shouldn't come down to our offense having to score 30+ and score the last TD with seconds remaining. Because if that scenario happens for a third consecutive year, then what was the point of investing so much in the defense? In that scenario the only question that will matter is if one of our skill players made a clutch play to close out the win.
Now this makes more sense than what you stated in the previous post.
The one caveat though I will add is that Beane, the coaches, and players are not entering the season expecting the offense to be less than what it was and very much are expecting an offense that still is among the highest scoring in the league, if not better than last year. I don't think anyone expects the defense to lead this team that has the reigning MVP and just averaged 31 in the reg season and 29 in the post season.
But, there is for sure an expectation that the defense should (and needs to) be better, and most specifically improving the atrocious 3rd down performances (we near the bottom of the NFL) and first downs allowed (again near bottom of the NFL).
The defense was clearly more deficient than the offense last year, whether or not the moves we did make prove to be enough is yet to be seen, but it was a necessary area of the team to address. Its a lot harder to ask a team scoring 31 PPG to go out and score even more to mask a defense that can't get off the field...than it is to improve the defense to just find a way to get off the field one more time per game and stop putting the pressure on the offense to be perfect to over come its deficiencies.
I am pretty excited to be both units as I believe both units can, and will, be better this year. I look at this way on the offense:
Year 2 Coleman should be better than Year 1 Coleman
Healthy Kincaid > Battling knee issues Kincaid
Healthy Samuel > Lingering foot issue Samuel
Palmer/Moore bring more to the offense as pass catchers as Mack/Ghost of Cooper did last year
And of course the D IMHO greatly improved at areas of need, especially at CB and DL...2 areas KC dog walked us at in the AFCCG last year. I like what we did up front and I think its more than reasonable to think this unit can get off the field better this year on 3rd down than it was at doing so last year.
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
That's because Kincaid basically is a WR in this offense. Beane himself has made that clear. Every time someone in the media brings up WRs he says "well don't forget about our TEs." And yes any NFL pass catcher HAS to make that catch in that moment. Especially one we spent a 1st round pick on.
I agree, but that isn't what we have gotten 100 threads on all offseason, its been specifically on the WR room, specifically blaming WR's for the 2023 and 2024 endings when it was not at all related to the WR's those final 2 series.
8 minutes ago, HappyDays said:I'll be honest Alpha, I am sick of this whole conversation. Everyone has had their say, no one is going to change their mind. Now we just have to wait and see. Beane and McDermott have planted their flag that the offensive talent is good enough and based on the investments they made this offseason the 2025 Bills really should be led by the defense first... Through their offseason strategy they are telling us they want a team like what KC had last year, a team that went 15-1 scoring 24 PPG. If things go according to plan we shouldn't need to put up 30+ points and score a TD with seconds remaining to beat KC in the playoffs, which is what was needed in each of our last two playoff defeats. If that exact outcome happens again this year I'll consider our entire offseason strategy to be a failure and I will again bang the drum to go all in on investing in the offense so we have the best chance of winning in that scenario.
One thing for sure, I agree, I am over it too, the conversation in general has been beaten to death.
But...the bolded here..no disrespect, but this is just a silly statement that is a reflection of your personal disappointment and in no way what so ever an accurate reflection of how Beane, the team, the coaches think and feel about the offense. We just averaged over 30 in the reg season and 29 in the post season and they feel the offense has the potential to be as good or better between the moves they made and the expectations they have of Kincaid and Coleman to better too this year between being healthy and more experienced.
Whether they are right or not will be proven on the field of course, but to suggest they "want" a lower scoring middling offense like KC is just a wild thing to say and just isn't at all true.
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, HappyDays said:
That play was the result of Cook getting blown up in pass protection forcing Allen to throw the ball earlier than he wanted. That one isn't on any pass catcher. But on the next two plays opportunities were there and our pass catchers failed to make them, that's the reality.
No disrespect, but now you are blurring the lines here...you are now moving the goal posts from "WR's" to "Pass Catches" because the 4th down play was to a TE when the WR's were wide open.
And sorry, I do not at all think Cooper makes it 10 yards for the first down without the subtle slip, there were defenders all around him. And more importantly, the slip is a slip...its not skill related, that could have happened to any WR in the game. Saying if we had a better WR there, then the slip doesn't happen, and we for sure get a first is just not a logical conclusion.
Also - why are we throwing the screen to Cooper instead of Shakir, Ty, or Samuel who are much better and effective on a screen than the Ghost of Cooper anyway?
19 minutes ago, HappyDays said:That 2nd down play is why I don't join in with the chorus of complaints that we didn't use Cook enough on that drive. I think in a do or die drive to win the game you are going to have to rely on your pass game... Cook if anything was a detriment in that scenario so I understood taking him off the field. We needed Cooper or Kincaid to make the plays that were in their hands. But because they didn't, we have to listen to a lot of people including many Bills fans say that Allen didn't get the job done. It frustrates me to no end.
I am not one that was upset Cook was off the field in passing situations, Ty is a better receiver and pass blocker, so I agree with you. Now, if one wants to make a case we didn't need to keep throwing and should have tried to mix a run in with Cook, well that is a fair discussion. But when passing, I get why they went with Ty over Cook.
19 minutes ago, HappyDays said:Yeah I just don't agree with that. He was going to catch the ball several yards behind the LoS and KC had second level defenders in position to come down and make the tackle.
Not if you watch the replay from the top down angle, he had plenty of room to make the play, and quite frankly Shakir is excellent at RAC with ball in his hands and has broken big runs off in tighter situations. If Allen gets him the ball in stride its an easy first and likely a big gain. And Allen also had another WR in Coleman or Samuel running wide open over the middle to the left for also a first down as they were already past the marker. Cooper was even somewhat open.
The point is simple...the WR personnel is not at all why that play didn't work...yet I have seen people repeatedly blame the "WR's" specifically.
19 minutes ago, HappyDays said:I don't know why there is so much over analysis of that 4th down play. To me it's very simple - the best DC in the game called a 100% unpredictable blitz that would have automatically beaten any QB other than Allen, Mahomes, or Jackson. Allen made a miracle happen finding Kincaid and getting the pass off. Kincaid then performed the equivalent of a muffed punt and that was that. None of the other analysis would have ever happened if Kincaid had just done his job... And no one would be saying "wow what a catch!" they'd be saying "wow what a throw!" Allen did the hard part, Kincaid failed the easy part.
Exactly...I agree...yet all offseason this board has been beating a dead horse associating the full blame on this final series specifically to the WR room, which is not at all accurate on this series. What I and others are pushing back is the incorrect specific blame on the WR personnel on this final series we have had thrown around since the game ended.
We had breakdowns elsewhere is the point, it wasn't who the WR's names were on the field, they were open on multiple plays and we just didn't get them the ball.
-
1
-
Let’s rank the starting QBs in 2025
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
No offense, but unless this is a fantasy football ranking, there are definitely not 3 QB's who are better QB's than Mahomes. Its one thing to play with the Allen or Mahomes thing at 1 and 2...but to put Mahomes 4th is a bit over the top.