Thurman#1

Great question! The people staying home because it's cold ... there must be five or six thousand of them, since that's about how many are available on the secondary market. So, hell, that would be plenty to cover the costs. Each of them tosses in somewhere between a hundred thousand and five hundred thousand simoleons, and boom!!

I think a lot of the reason he spent so much in FA this year comes down to luck and reading a situation where he had an advantage. The Pats had a ton of guys opt out in 2020. That left them with a ton of unspent cap meaning they were close to the top of the league last year in available cap. And that happened in a year when there was a Covid-related lack of available cap space all over the league. Meaning that FA demand was low, meaning that FA prices were low in a year when they had a ton of money. Belichick read that and used it. That's why he spent a lot last year, but doing so left him not so much for next year. Next year on the other hand, available cap will be low, but not as low as last year. And Belichick will have a lot less available, around $27M right now according to Spotrac.

Six or seven more years at an absolute maximum, I'd guess. I think unless he gets an excellent quarterback he'll consistently compete for playoffs, make it a lot, and get beaten early. He won't like that as a long-term diet.

What you've got there is an excellent argument for why people are wrong when they say things like "Because I watched the game, that's why I know Allen's much better than people think. Clearly you don't know football." What you've got there is a great example of confirmation bias. You're essentially giving Allen points because you like him. You assume - wrongly - that you know what other QBs would have done there. You don't. You're guessing. Other QBs in that situation escape as well. Perhaps other QBs hit the open safety valve for a 6 yard gain that Allen was rejecting because he wanted a big play. Perhaps they they throw the ball at the ground near a receiver. Do you do the same when Allen makes a play that QBR or passer rating or QB run stats call good? When Allen escapes and runs for three yards, do you say, "stats would have called that a good play, but other QBs might well have hit the outlet and their RB would have run for 7 or 8, so I call that a bad play"? You are doing an excellent job of pointing out one of the problems of "the eye test."

Fair enough. But is that because he is being asked to run shorter routes? Or that he's not getting thrown to deeper because he's not getting open when he goes deeper? Or that he's being asked to run shorter routes because he's not getting open deeper? Or some combination of the above? Perhaps with other factors. I don't think this in fact does help much in telling if that's on Beasley or the routes he's being asked to run. What we can be sure of is that there's a loss of productivity there. Ah, I see you already addressed all this, a lot. I have the same feeling when I see McKenzie run. And in past years Beasley's quickness popped the same way to me. I just don't see it this year. And that's something that the Belichicks of the world can use. He's still really good at attacking zone, but the fantastic thing about him used to be that he was really good at handling both zone and man-to-man, and that no longer seems to be the case.

Thanks, great post. Your meaning in relation to my post is totally clear to someone somewhere, I'm sure. Thing is you're comparing two guys, Berrios and Beasley. Comparing them, you compare Berrios who is an upgrade and would - you're probably right - get market rate, vs. Beasley who is being paid more than his - current - market rate after his performance drop. And again you seem absolutely desperate to avoid any mention of the fact that Berrios is a terrific returner, one of which we do NOT seem to have on this team. He adds value there too. You don't want him, fine. Everybody's got an opinion. But with a friendly cap contract they might well save money next year with Berrios replacing Beasley while getting an upgrade and a returner.

Yes, we do. They're about the many selfish and entitled things he's done this year, and the distractions which simply did not exist before these past two years, at least unless you found poor rap songs distracting. Not to mention that the less outstanding you play, the less acceptable selfishness and entitlement seem to management.

He's good. I certainly wouldn't mind. But next year we're going to be very limited in cap space, and have some real holes to fill, especially on the lines. If they can fit Godwin in with whatever else they need and can fit, I wouldn't mind one bit, of course.

Nope, not even them. Really think that team was only three points better than the 8-8 Eagles that year. Only three points better than the 5-11 Ravens? Same with the 1972 Dolphins. Even winning every game doesn't mean you played up to your talent level every game. Was that Fins team only two points better than the 7-7 Vikes? One point better than the 4-9-1 Bills? Four points better than the 7-7 Jets?

They aren't talking about only this year. Tice was teammates with Feliciano years ago in Oakland!!! And he played a lot in Weeks 1-8, a bit on STs in Week 14 and just a few plays each in Weeks 17 and 18.

Right. And how has the offensive played most of the season? Not very well. Though Bates has also been good.

This is excellent stuff generally, on such things as how quickly the whole NFL started going to Cover-2 to handicap Allen and Mahomes and those teams playing the offenses getting a lot of chunk plays. Skip the first ten minutes if you don't like the movie Casino and pro wrestling references. But the part that was interesting to me was this nugget on Feliciano. I've never understood the fact that he's not all that athletic, and he's strong but not super strong, and yet the Bills seem to play better when he's in there than they do with other guys who seem to play more athletically. Prohaska's guest is Nate Tice, "a former college QB, NFL coach and scout". (NOTE: THIS IS THREE WEEKS OLD. IT WAS RECORDED BEFORE THE SECOND PATS GAME!!!) Still really interesting on how the Pats defend us and why Feliciano has stuck around so long!! NT: "Personally, I think Belichick will go into, 'We're cranking up Cover 2, we're gonna push the pocket," and I actually do think he'll throw in some blitzes just to test that Bills offensive line. And you don't know how Feliciano - 'cause Feliciano helps out so much as far as calls. And I know that from personal experience with Jon, I was with him in Oakland. And I know he's a big tough bruiser guy, but he's actually very heady. And he helps out Morse with the protection stuff. And I just know that anecdotally. But you can see the difference when he's in and when he's not in and just pointing out stuff out. He might be limited as an athlete and everything. But he helps out mentally and calming you down." AP: "Which is a huge piece of the offensive line game, that mental side and protection-setting and front recognition in terms of who's coming. I mean, it happened against Carolina and it happened against Tampa, just using the two most recent examples. The Bills are getting beat on just simple stunts. Like the spiker was taking right guard and right tackle and then Shaq Barrett two weeks ago and Brian Burns this past weekend read it and were both like 'All right, cool, I'm just going to come free through this huge hole in this gap and get a sack." NT: "And trust me, Belichick sees that stuff." - Nate Tice starts at 32:25

I'm guessing Fitz and Dalton would be too expensive next year. Webb and McCoy sound to me like good guesses.

Why? Because Braxton Berrios a good player. You seem to have missed that. Doesn't quite compare to prime Beasley. But neither does today's Beasley. And Berrios is a good kick returner, for KOs and punts. More, Berrios has ... A slightly higher Yards per Reception number and a significantly higher one for this year A drop percentage of 0% this year (ProFootballReference) compared to 3.6% for Beasley. A career (2019 - 2021) drop %age of 3.0%, compared to Beasley's 3.7% over the same period all in Buffalo (ProFootballReference) Significantly better YAC per reception than Beasley each of the last three years A significantly better passer rating for his QB on throws to him this year than to Beasley, though Beasley was better in 2019 and 2012 before he lost that step A much higher TD/target figure ... and he accomplished all that while Beasley was being thrown to by Josh Allen, while Berrios ... was not. Think having Allen throwing to him might improve his numbers a bit? Again, he returns kicks. And as for fiery and opinionated, I don't give a crap. I don't think many fans do. I do admit that I don't like selfish and entitled, willing to pay fines for risking teammate health consistentl, and consistently being on social media causing controversy even after promising he wouldn't. I also don't like that Beasley's clearly lost a step or two and a great deal of his effectiveness against man coverage.

Yup. He's still very good at finding holes in zones and settling into them. But in man-to-man situations, he can't find space like he used to. He's lost a step. Or two.

How many fumbles has McKenzie had this year? Two. Now how many of them were NOT on kick returns? How many fumbles did McKenzie have in 2020? Zero. 2019? Zero? How many fumbles did McKenzie have in 2018? Two. Now how many of them were NOT on kick returns? How many fumbles did McKenzie have in 2017 as a Bronco rookie? Six. Now how many of them were NOT on kick returns? So, that's a total of 10 fumbles. How many were NOT on kick returns? That would be zero, in his whole career. All of his fumbles have come on special teams. McKenzie doesn't have a fumbling problem. He has a FUMBLING WHILE FIELDING AND RETURNING KICKS problem. Not a single fumble on runs or receptions. So yeah, don't have him return kicks anymore. I think they've already figured that out last week. But he protects the ball just fine when running or catching the ball.

I felt like it wasn't so much the Jets who stopped us as it was our own mistakes. I love to see them blitz him. He handles it beautifully. It's the teams that pressure well with four guys that do well against this offense. I think we'll see a bunch of stunts, shifting fronts, packed fronts with guys dropping out ... more trying to cause confusion that actual blitzes. Last time they didn't rush hard, instead trying to keep him in the pocket. I think they'll do that sometimes, other times go all out, blitzing occasionally but not predictably.

R.I.P. Used to be a big fan of his when they weren't playing the Bills.

If you look at the banner on the lower part of the screen ("Postgame plus: Pats improve to 36-7 ...") you can see this was a postgame comment from the first game, the snow and wind game that the Pats won. In that context it's a bit more understandable. If it had been said now it would have been pretty bizarre indeed.

Beasley's a used-to-be-quality player. On Cover1 they were saying that Braxton Berrios is an FA. I checked, and he is. That'd solve our punt and kick return problems too.

An awful lot of his hitting guys in the hands and getting drops was because while lately his touch has gotten better and better, it about disappeared in that game. He was whipping the ball in even when he didn't have to, and on cold days if you do that, you'll get a lot of drops. Agreed that Josh had parts of the game where he was better than Ryan. But again, just take out the five interceptions and Peterman actually passed pretty well in that game. He played very well for parts of it. Part of the game doesn't matter squat. If you want to evaluate a guy's passing game, it's really simple. You evaluate the passing game. You don't evaluate his passing in part of the game and leave out the good parts or the bad parts depending what POV you're selling. And Joe B. was rating Allen's whole game. Including the running, which was excellent. He would likely have given a much lower ranking if he were only looking at the passing game. Allen's a terrific QB, nobody with any sense argues that. But he had a bad game passing. The Bills showed that even when they couldn't count on Allen in the passing game, they could find a way to win. It was really great to see.

Five leg injuries in the last two years says something. Saying "he will be fine," is ridiculous. You don't know. I don't know. Nobody knows. He could be fine, it's definitely possible. He could also easily continue having leg problems. Taking him, you're gambling. IMO they don't - and shouldn't - gamble with guys who are injury risks that will cost a lot of money in a year when we don't have much. And even if they did want to take an expensive risk in a year when they'll be nuzzling up to the cap again, it shouldn't be at RB. Do that with a pass rusher. A DT. A CB. A WR. Hell, even a G, who would make whoever is at RB look a lot better.

Oh, my God, that is so cute! Great photos, all!!

Every fan base cares about them, as they should. And while we're deep this year, that's no guarantee for next year. There will be cuts, for money savings and for performance. There will be injuries. And we don't have a lot of money to bring in FAs, though we'll certainly manage a few. And Bates and Dodson are also free agents, though not UFAs. Comp picks can also be traded as you note. They're valuable. Obviously not as valuable as higher picks, but more valuable than lower ones, but definitely valuable. And they bring in cheap labor and sometimes surprises and high performers.

Nix was good outside QB and coaches. And he was handicapped with coaches because of the impending ownership change. Nobody wanted that job as Ralph Wilson's health grew worse. They thought they could get Wilson a round later. A bad decision when looked at with hindsight. Hindsight makes everything look easier than it actually is in real time, though. The reason Wilson lasted to #75 is that nobody knew how good he was going to be. It looks obvious now but at the time nobody knew. Every team had multiple shots at him, and he lasted to #75. Not sure I buy this rumor about the Seahawks, though. I can imagine it's possible. Equally it could be just talk.