Thurman#1

The thing is, we've got a QB on a second contract, a very highly paid QB. I agree with you that that keeping the salary cap squarely in mind when deciding what FAs to bring in is a strategy, one that is sensible in the situation. And one of the best ways teams with that situation cope is by not breaking the bank for a Justin Jefferson type. Not all of them do it that way, but many do, Belichick and the Pats included. TEs are cheaper, so they use TEs. They do fill in with FA WRs if they don't have to pay too much. Maybe you're right that they would break the bank if they could, all things being equal. But all things aren't equal, the salary cap is a factor. And most SB winners and dynasties in the salary cap era have had great QBs and managed to get really good production with good receivers (and sometimes great TEs) and generally avoided breaking the bank at that position, particularly to bring in FAs from other teams. Tyreek is the most recent example of not breaking the bank at WR paying off very well for a team that wins Super Bowls. Oh, and efficient is a lot better than nice. It's what everyone is striving for. I'd guess they'll be striving for upgrades at WR as they always do and should do. But that we won't see any top ten WR salaries unless it's someone they drafted working out spectacularly well.

Elite YAC guys are guys who get an elite amount of YAC. That's Shakir. Glad we can agree that he's "one of the best in the NFL when it comes to turning a 2 yard pass into a 8 - 12 yard play." I think you're right about that. YAC isn't hard to understand or a difficult interpretation. It's all in the initials, Yards After Catch. He's elite. Fair enough that you'd like to see him get more big gainers but a lot of that is simply that against the Bills most Ds are playing Cover2 or Cover 3 and have more guys over the top of most plays. Anyway, I love having him on the team as you obviously do.

They'll acknowledge that he's a legit #1 when it happens. It hasn't yet. It's no insult.

Equally silly is pretending all .500 records are the same. It's idiocy. Again, you have to go way the hell out of your way into Wackytown to suggest that the 2017 Jax game and the 2019 Houston game should be held against McDermott. Is there anyone here - anyone at all - who thinks that if the 2017 Jags or the 2019 Texans played any of the 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 or for that matter the 2024 Bills either of them wins? Of course not. We lost those games because they rebuilt and hadn't yet put together the team we know today.

He's go Wildly irrational, no. Pretty unreasonable, yes. It's essentially the Chiefs. We haven't been able to get past them. In McDermott's first three years he hadn't gotten a good team together yet. Nor had Josh really become Josh yet. The Sugar Rush Josh who fell apart against the Texans wasn't the Josh Allen we know. Nor was the Tyrod Taylor team in Year one in any way a team anyone would suspect would beat a good team in the playoffs. After that, when we had a real competitive team, it's the Chiefs. You can say what about the Bengals, and if you want to count that also, it's not unfair. But the whole team had a horrible off day, something that has never really happened otherwise in the playoffs. Saw today's Buffalo Plus episode and they mentioned this, that that day in the locker room they saw a team that was absolutely exhausted, that their tank was empty, and that they've never seen anything like it. It was the year of Hamlin's death, Knox's brother's death and all the rest of it. The players themselves said the same thing in the locker room, that they simply didn't have any juice. If you want to count that, I guess go ahead. But basically, it's the Chiefs. Adding in the games in his first three years when we simply did not have a team that anyone thought should be seriously competitive is not reasonable in evaluating McDermott. He'll be back the next couple of years, win or lose. Which is as it should be. Unless he loses the locker room or something like that.

So, you think there's a possibility that they don't even interview Sanders? I just get sick of hearing every interview of a black coach being called a Rooney Rule interview. Pretty much every interview, at least any interview conducted by a competent organization, is about more than the Rooney Rule. There's a ton you can learn from anyone even if they're not one of the top candidates. And every once in a while a guy will surprise and get a job he's not expected to get.

With $15.4M in dead cap, cutting Von saves us about $2M. If he's still our best pass rusher, which appears possible, Von may well be here another year, particularly if he goes along with some kind of renegotiation. He could easily be gone - he's old - but it's still not a foregone conclusion. Wouldn't be a bit surprised to see them go DL in the first, if the right guy is available at the right pick.

They don't need a Rooney Rule interview. Sanders is the main candidate.

I'm guessing 25 - 40%. If I had to get more specific, 30 - 33%. Hard to predict, though. If our offense plays good, maybe less.

Yup. Not to mention that we're drafting in the mid to late twenties consistently.

Ya figure if somebody saw something they wouldn't post it. Kinda keep it a secret?

Who's John?

Yup, it's real. Among nuts, particularly. There should be fear out there. For every team. In the playoffs you're up against the best of the best. Every team can lose. Every team's fans should feel fear. KC could lose to Houston. Odds are against it, but you can bet that while there's confidence in KC, there's fear underlying it. There's always a chance. But the nuts are so focused in on the Bills defense that it's really pretty sad. There is reason for concern, but it's a lot worse than that among the fruitcakes. They're not great, not even very good. They're not as good as they were in past years. But as they get healthy again, they're getting better. For a team that lost Hyde and Poyer and Leonard Floyd and has had to juggle LBs all year, I think they have exceeded expectations. And again, they're getting healthier.

Yup. Tells you there are some serious wackos out there when it comes to McDermott hate. It was obvious that the OP was being sarcastic. The fact that many took it as real ... that's what tells you all you need to know. TBH. The OP was a bit over the top but there really are people who are not that far from what he was pretending to be. Yup, it's real. Among nuts, particularly. There should be fear out there. For every team. In the playoffs you're up against the best of the best. Every team can lose. Every team's fans should feel fear. KC could lose to Houston. Odds are against it, but you can bet that while there's confidence in KC, there's fear underlying it. There's always a chance. But the nuts are so focused in on the Bills defense that it's really pretty sad. There is reason for concern, but it's a lot worse than that among the fruitcakes. It's obsession and some kinky form of hatred. They're not great, not even very good. They're not as good as they were in past years. But as they get healthy again, they're getting better. For a team that lost Hyde and Poyer and Leonard Floyd and has had to juggle LBs all year, I think they have exceeded expectations. And again, they're getting healthier.

No comparison. But Herbert is better than many on this thread are saying, IMO. Awful game, yes. He's been in crappy situations. If Harbaugh can make that team tougher, I think we'll see Herbert miraculously get better. Many thought Stafford wasn't good enough till he got put in a situation where he could win. Many many many people used to talk about how excuses were being made for Stafford, how he was overrated and how he needed to take a step upwards. It was more that he needed to step onto a good team. I don't know that Herbert can be a Stafford in a good situation. But I think it's a very reasonable possibility.

I don't doubt he will work like a maniac at whatever job or jobs he picks. But he's handicapped as an announcer if he stays with team ownership, which I think is a very safe bet. I see him reaching very good but not great as an announcer. Not being able to criticize refs or visit locker rooms really is a big blow in that role. But I agree with you that I think quitting after this year is unlikely. We'll see. Good stuff, as usual from you. Me too.

Yeah, this is for real. Hard to get them at #32, though. Draft should be interesting but Josh has proven he can make extremely good things happen without a true #1. Just by throwing to the right guy, the one who comes open. It's amazing that Josh is still improving, but he is. My guess is they don't go WR in the 1st. But we'll see.

They were questioning him as far as whether he should be brought back next year depending on how much he would cost. I didn't see anyone questioning him as to whether he should be brought back this year at the extremely affordable rate we're paying him this year.

I wanna describe it the way absolutely everyone who was there described it, then and since. He wanted to go.

The Taron Johnson Pick Six says hello. Again, we really have seen some excellent D in the playoffs and a bunch of pretty damn solid. Except against the Chiefs. And just about nobody has stopped the Chiefs offense in the playoffs from getting whatever amount of points they needed to get the win. Except the Bengals that one time, and that looked more like partly a good job on defense by Cincy but also partly just a crappy day from Mahomes. Just sayin'.

I do indeed say nonsense. Asking him to miss? Absolutely no way. Doing so would have lowered his value on the open market, which is very possibly where he'll end up. Are they happy he missed? Hmm, yeah and no, I think. This is a group that's got wanting to win in their DNA. But yeah, they know that losing that pick hurt their division rivals.

Yeah, wouldn't want anyone to be happy watching good football. Unhappiness makes much more sense and stands as a clearly superior way to live your life. Content? No. Completely satisfied? No. There's more we'd like. But happy? Um, YEAH!!! We could be the Patriots. Or the Giants. Or the Jaguars, who get to watch Trevor Lawrence.

Damn, you're right about yards, my bad. Wonder how I screwed that up. Thanks for pointing out my mistake. But again, 11th in points. First in turnovers. First. That's huge. IMO they've been up and down, up for most of the early part of the season, then down and up (did well against KC and for a game or two there), then down (pretty awful against Detroit and LA), then a bit better. Fair enough to point out that the last two teams were bad, but if you do that you also have to notice that Detroit and LA are really good offenses. They're getting healthy again. I'm reasonably hopeful.

Dude, it's been like fifteen times I've told you that you are correct on that, that the Chiefs offense has played very well against the Bills. What I've also told you is that it isn't just the Bills, that the Chiefs for years now have been a team with an identity of hibernating on offense against teams that don't put up many points, just putting up enough points to win? Can you disagree? Is that something you don't see about the Chiefs? Of course they've been that way. Again, what other teams are 75% in games where their opponent scored 30 or more. Yes, the Super Bowl was close. But low-scoring. (I presume you're talking about the last one.) In low-scoring games they tend to score enough to win but not to act like the prolific scoring monsters they are capable of being. Yeah, I do point out that the last two years they've been injured. Is it even possible you don't understand why? I said that because it's true. It wasn't just a lot of injuries, it was a lot of injuries to key players. Yeah, I said it. Denying it is nuts. Pretending it didn't happen and trying to ignore it equally so. And yeah, I also said that the Bills were running on empty in that Cincy game. Again, is that wrong? The players don't think so. Many of them mentioned a total lack of juice after the game. They know better than us. And they said it. And again, was it NOT a historically awful season, with Damar dying on the field, with Knox's brother dying, with a racially motivated mass shooter in the city and all the rest? Yeah, I said it. Saying it's not so appears to me to be more nuts than pointing out the obvious. Again, the players said it. And we haven't heard that from them otherwise.

Good defenses are 11th in the league in yards. Good defenses are 11th in the league in yards. Good defenses are 1st in the league in turnovers. That's a mighty niche stat you've got there, Bill. And it's one stat. Nobody's saying they're excellent. They're not. But simply denying that they're good, especially on the basis of one stat, is facile. They're definitely not as good as past years. That's very clear. And they've had a bad stretch or two as well. But that doesn't mean they're not good. And seemingly getting a bit better. Wait, the Ravens played the Ravens? Neither the Steelers nor the Eagles is a bad offense. You could be right. I hope you are. I'd pick us, over anyone at home, but I wouldn't have a ton of confidence against the Ravens. I think their D is pretty dang good. But our offense is kicking butt as well.