Thurman#1

Another purely wack-a-doo comment. Yes, his Super Bowl wins absolutely show Belichick is the best team builder in the last 20 years. Hate him as I do, it's still not close. Not to mention that you're dead wrong in your other contention there as well. Quick, find a spot where six times in the last ten years shows "no one" wants to do that. Six top 20 RBs chosen in the last ten years and a bunch more back to 2000. So, wrong again. Oh, and how many of those six teams won the Super Bowl? Yup, exactly. Not to mention that you just got finished making the argument that not picking an RB in the top 20 was half of what you called "legitimately the worst team building strategy ever." A genuinely ridiculous argument, granted, but it's what you said.

The evidence shows differently. Belichick followed it, never using a top 20 pick on an RB and never giving an RB a big 2nd contract. Yet he's the best team builder in the last 20 years. Where are all the SB winning teams recently that have spent top-20 picks on RBs or given them big 2nd contracts and then not regretted it? The Rams picked Gurley before McVay, under Fisher, and giving him a big 2nd contract was a massive mistake. Edwards-Helaire was picked way after 20th and if they had that to do over again, they likely wouldn't have picked him at all. You have to go back to the Seahawks, who gave Lynch a big contract and were happy about it, though the team that drafted him above #20 lived to regret it. The Saints picked Reggie Bush #2, and he was still on their roster the year they won the Super Bowl, giving them 390 yards that year. After the Seahawks, I didn't check every single year but I think you have to go back to the 2000 Ravens to find a team that had a high draft pick or high second contract RB running on a Super Bowl winners. In fact, it's the strategy used by most SB winners which makes it very very far from the worst team building strategy ever. Closer to the best, actually.

So far, yeah, virtually without question. And it's just plain dumb implying Cook is a lesser RB. We don't know what he is yet, but he could very easily be worth a 2nd and Singletary is overproducing for a 3rd. So far in the last four years, since they got Allen and Edmunds, they've picked up Oliver, Rousseau and Elam where they would have drafted an RB in the first. Three players who look excellent so far, though the last couple of years you really can't be sure yet. And all at players of much more need than RB. And we have a decent productive RB group so far. So far this year, without Allen included they're averaging 4.55 YPC behind an OL that was really having problems early.

It is not a dime a dozen position, that's a great overstatement. But yeah, it's a better idea these days to get one a bit later, particularly in an offense like ours that just doesn't run a ton. Yes. He was absolutely great to watch those first few years.

Jeez. What a great kid!! Wonderful stuff.

OL, please. Beckham's more affordable, so if I had to go with either one, I'd go with him, but I'd rather have OL help.

He was absolutely excellent in college. Look at the winning percentage of that team and compare the win rates when he was in and when he was out. There's a massive difference. He was dominant. He wasn't dominant in a way that convinced everyone that his dominance would carry over to the NFL.

Me? My dad and my mom. Or at least, that's what sources tell me. But who knows, my dad may have outsourced his part of it.

As a regular watcher of their podcast, yeah, I think so. They've never claimed to be insiders or have much access.

Thanks. Too much, IMO. But we'll see. Thanks. Sorry I didn't look. I should have.

Two thirds? Three seconds? That's pretty unclear. Wonder how much it is specifically. EDIT: Ah, I see now. Thanks for those who told me.

Wouldn't mind one of the top two or three picks being OL, or maybe even two out of the top four or five. Odds of #1 and #2 being OLs would I'd guess be somewhere around 100:1. Higher, maybe. Never too early to talk draft, though I don't put much attention there this early.

Good point. This probably has a lot to do with it as well.

Yeah, Shaq has been effective at a low price, and Jordan Phillips has been playing much better against the run than he did the first time here. It seems that everyone loves being here and they really are getting the absolute best out of these guys. Settle is the only one who's not reaching or exceeding expectations. That may or may not be due to injury, we'll have to see.

Yeah, the first couple of years Star was very good. Not at rushing the passer, and not as good as Daquan but he was doing the job they needed done, space-eating, at a high level. He never rushed the passer the way that Da'Quan can, but he was a really effective at absorbing the blocks and handling double teams. He never attracted doubles at 78%, but he did draw a lot of them and handled them well. He clearly lost something after that, got it back briefly when he lost weight, slowly became a bit less effective again, and then after COVID he was just a shell of himself. He just seemed to lose the motivation that's so absolutely necessary to do that thankless job and then COVID just gutted him. Many on here refused to see how well Lotulelei was doing those first couple of years because they wanted the glory stats and the pass rush. These days it's a lot easier to get guys to come to Buffalo than it was when they signed Star.

78% double teams? Holy undynamic duos, Batman! That's extremely impressive. Already knew he was doing a great job, but this just makes it even clearer.

This. Longer balls are thrown higher and he's throwing shorter even more often this year, so it's easier for them to reach it. Defenses seeing that have to teach their DLs that if he throws quick there's only one way to affect the pass since you can't reach him. It's more of the chess match between D and O, I think. In turn, we're seeing Allen do more sidearm and arm-angled throws to make it harder on them.

Yeah, they still have a lot to prove to be considered for #1. May well be a really good team, though.

I agree. Ours is easier.

This makes sense to me.

Yes, they're punting better than ever. No, it's not having a very big effect on scoring. Last year, the highest net punting average is 46.3 yards and average is around 42.. That's terrific, historically. But it's always been in the last twenty or thirty years it's always been very high 30s. So that's around 3 - 5 extra net yards per punt. This year there are two guys above that high figure, one with 49.8 and one with 47.3. The average is probably around 43. Is that partly because of good weather? Maybe. In any case, with teams averaging around 3 - 4 punts a game, we're talking about maybe an extra ten yards of field position. Maybe. That's not going to have much impact on scoring. I'd bet average drive start isn't significantly different this year, though I'm not signed up to Football Outsiders so I can't check.

Thanks, Shaw. That about Taiwan Jones was my main takeaway. Who knew that's the kind of guy he is? Not me, anyway. And while I really see what you're saying about the death in the family, to me this would be different. You don't control most deaths in your family. This would be more like everyone reminding you of something terrible you did. The study quoted in the article about athletes watching videos of losing races having the same brain waves as people suffering from clinical depression brought it into focus for me. This means an awful awful lot to these guys.

I wondered if anyone would mention the connection to the SB Bills. Yeah, that sensational team was haunted by that first SB loss, I think. Two of those last three were simply better teams, but they had a real shot at one. I think it was still in their heads. Yeah, I loved that bit.about Diggs. And it's the first time he's felt that in the NFL, obviously, which is why it meant so much to him to realize that. Didn't notice that in the Allen picture. I'll go take another look right now.

Nonsense. Anyone who can't think of tons of examples of sports examples of teams being haunted and letting past disasters hang over their heads isn't trying hard. Possible because they're hoping it won't happen here. And if it mattered more to the media than the fans, the fans wouldn't read it and the media would instantly move on to other things.

That's not a strong argument. It's cherry-picking and it's leaving out context. Yeah, for people who don't go and look at the actual stats, it seems like the difference between the Bills' 65% and the Giants' 69% is tiny. But it's not. Not when the highest is 75%. The Giants are barely below average. The Bills are horrendous at 65%. Nobody else is at 65%. Or 66%. Only three teams are bad enough to be at 67%, the Commanders, Chargers and Texans. And only one is at 68%, the Patriots. You're twisting what the numbers show, which is that the Bills are much worse than anyone else in the league at run blocking. So far. Nobody's arguing that Barkley isn't damn good. He is right now. But with a near-average line. Not a truly sucky one like the Bills have up to now, though they do seem to be doing well when they use pin-and-pull blocking. Oh, and yes, James Conner is at 3.7, but Eno Benjamin is at 4.5, and Darrel Williams is at 5.9. It's never 100% OL or RB. It's always a combination of both. But when your OL is really bad, that will be the largest factor. This Bills team is awful at yards before contact, because the line sucks. And pretty solid at yards after contact because the RBs, most particularly Singletary, are good. Not great. But solid. Excluding Allen, 4.4 YPC behind a line that isn't just last but last by a lot. The RBs don't get much of the blame here.