Thurman#1

Good stuff.

Edwards-Helaire weighs about 15 pounds more, 195 to 209, and had better numbers on his athletic drills. None of which will mean anything if Patterson can find someone to take a chance on him.

Hunh. Thanks for posting that, OP. Clears things up a bit. I wonder if we'd have taken him if healthy. Or if he'd even have reached us.

True. But how come you're not complaining about the offense only scoring 24 points in "the game that mattered." And nobody had opted out on that side of the ball. You don't judge a unit by how they performed in one game only. It's simply not fair to do so. The defense played very well after the first six games. Yes, the Chiefs offense was just better. But they're better than nearly everyone they played, particularly if you look at games when their OL wasn't badly depleted by injury as they were against Tampa Bay. Not that they don't need to improve. They seem very aware that they need to improve the pass rush for one thing.

I guess you'd know better than I if they're not haters. But that's how they come across. They're not realists, not even close. Something along the lines of Edmunds chronic underestimators. The team makes it obvious again and again that they like the guy, that the FO thinks he's doing a good job, after he got healthy anyway. And these people continue not to get it. They've said again and again that it's too much money, as you say here. And thing is, it's not. This is a front office that is all about careful cap management. Not that they've been perfect at it of course. Nobody is. But overall they've gotten good value and the overpayments have pretty much been for FAs from other teams. You folks are saying it's too much because you're not looking at his role the way the Bills do. The realists are the people who thought it was wildly likely that he'd be given the option, that he was worth it and it wasn't really a question. The ones who were proven right here. Not that he doesn't need to keep improving. They all do, every player. He's certainly one that does, and I think he's already talking about how he's going to improve next year. But he's also a really good player. They gave him that money because he's worth it. The kids do say FACTS. A lot of them say it about things that are clearly wacky, though, and that's the way it looks here as well. Hater may not be the right word, but Edmunds is chronically underestimated and attacked by people who are theoretically fans of the team and the players.

Completely inaccurate, actually. Could be right or wildly wrong on any of them. Here's how it actually goes: Moss is under contract for 3 more years at the moment. Singletary is presently under contract for two more years. And Breida is here on what is right now a one-year contract. How long they'll be here is unknown.

They're in. Very silly this early, but in. About three years from now we'll know how good the draft actually was. Fun to talk about now, though. That's fair enough, but it doesn't mean anything. And by the way, ever notice how the teams with two 1sts are always near the top for being smart? And the teams with few early picks ... nobody thinks they picked well. And the teams with higher picks tend towards the top of the rankings as they generally have splashier picks? All part of the fun, but it's all silly.

Yeah, hard to understand why anyone would defend a guy who has them at 13-3. Wacky. They need to start understanding how terrible a GM this guy is. You keep trying to convince them. Listening? That hypothetical is the stupidest thing I've ever seen. The guys he drafted show will have a real chance to make the team stronger. The way to play the draft is to value BPA slightly modified by avoiding positions with zero need whatsoever. We have needs at Edge and Tackle. The way to target specific positions is to use FA, which there is a great deal of time to do. Now, if he'd picked seven tackles you'd actually have a point, but until he does, you really don't.

People keep saying that about Star, that they're likely to part ways with him. There is no reason to think it's true, none. Particularly the way we just drafted. We wouldn't save much money at all. If they cut him after this year there would be $5.1M in dead cap money and we'd save his $6.15M salary and $600K in roster and workout bonus. Unless Star regresses, there's a good chance he'll be here for a while.

Yeah, he really did start looking good near the end. I'm excited about Epenesa's possibilities.

I've always seen him listed as 6' 7". Maybe you've seen something else somewhere? I checked and he hadn't gone to the combine, so there's no measurement there. I really doubt these guys will be guards, but you never know for sure.

This is a silly take. We'll know whether it was a good pick down the road when we find out whether or not he's a good player. That's the fact. Picks aren't judged by what position they are at. They are judged by whether the player picked is a good value for the pick down the road.

A triple negative. Nice. But what do you actually mean? Your first sentence seems to contradict your second.

That DT wasn't a rookie who was struggling to learn his own role. Giving a 10 year vet a few extra plays is different. Down the road I can see him doing tackle eligible stuff. IMO he'll be concentrating on working hard on learning what he needs to do to become a good NFL tackle. If there are other things after that, great, but I think that's very likely to be his first five priorities. Someone talked about being an extra tackle on the end. Yeah, that could make sense, I think, particularly if it comes later in the year after he's found his feet a bit.

They need Tremaine back. If they can instead work on signing him to a contract, a contract that would not have too much impact this next year, that would be great too. One or the other.

Our other needs have all been addressed. Perhaps not to your satisfaction, which is fair enough, but they've been addressed by bringing our own guys back, with FAs, etc. At CB for instance they re-signed Levi Wallace. Two DEs if they were the best players available makes total sense. BPA at positions of need is the smartest draft philosophy. And even after Rousseau we still had a need there, short-term and long-term. Drafting for need is the worst draft strategy, the refuge of the desperate. FA is the strategy best used for targeting positional areas for improvement. And the offseason isn't over. Not even close.

Good thing then, that her formula is not spitting out project first rounders. He'll have some impact this year. How much is tough to calculate, but he'll play. I agree that 0.65 is high, probably. But it's interesting and thoughtful. WAR is fine in football. It's not precise but there's thought and method behind it.

This is an excerpt from this article. https://www.nfl.com/news/2021-nfl-draft-justin-fields-rashawn-slater-among-day-1-s-top-value-picks "The Bills brilliantly add versatility and youth at a true value with this pick, considering Rousseau was No. 16 on my board. Tracking his 2019 data (he opted out in 2020) shows he lined up all over the defensive front and was productive in each spot. From the first game to his last that season, Rousseau steadily improved his average time to pressure (which was adjusted for alignment). Rousseau checks both the "ideal" boxes of measurement for body mechanics at the position (low center of gravity, excellent body control). His résumé also includes playing safety, as well as offense, in high school, which suggests we haven't even seen what his development ceiling looks like. Defensive-minded Sean McDermott likely understands this puzzle piece extremely well, and the fit is a great predictor of January football in Buffalo. Rousseau adds 0.65 wins to the 2021 Bills."

That's less on Clemson and more on bad drafting by the various old Bills FOs.

I almost never vote in these things. And I won't start now. But anyone voting no is just a sad sad specimen, honestly. 13 - 3 and widely considered to have one of the solidest rosters in the NFL. Some folks just don't get it. EDIT: Ah, I see, there are two questions and one is pretty weird. OK, fair enough. "Will you be good with whoever?" isn't necessarily a yes. But "do you trust this front office?" should be a yes. Any other answer just doesn't make sense.

IMO you're framing it wrong. It's too simplistic. There is no one player who will have much direct immediate effect. Maybe if we were drafting top twelve or so, but we're not. At 30, you want guys who will give you some impact. If we win the SB, IMO it will be about the development of our younger developing guys, the continuity continuing to have good effects, a lack of bad injuries, a whole bunch of things coming together.

You're the second person to complain. There's nothing wrong with this at all. Very human and nice.

JOK, Rousseau, Oweh or Ojulari. Those were four guys I wanted and two I thought wouldn't be there. Man, things fell well for us.

5th in the league in broken tackles per rushing attempt in 2019. https://buffalowdown.com/2020/06/09/buffalo-bills-devin-singletary-ranked-top-10-elusiveness-pff/ Nobody's saying he's great. He does lack great speed. But he's elusive as heck.

I have to admit you make an excellent point here. You're exactly right that Buffalo's being a top four team in the league does indeed make a compelling argument that spending money on defense can be an excellent idea in many cases. But again, you miss out on the point about how good this defense is, which is that they took six games with all the new people to get together and gel, but after that they were very good, a top ten unit. During the last ten games they were tough and did their share. An awful lot of the reason the Bucs won the Super Bowl is that they had an excellent defense. But realistically, we spent a bit less than $7M on defense than offense last year. 52.32% vs 48.78% on offense. That is not a major difference. Fair enough that it's about matching strategy to scheme. Again, the Bills are one of the absolute best teams in the league, proving that they're doing that. It is indeed a passing league. That's why you need to spend a larger part of your resources on pass offense and pass defense. Of course, you tend to be right that the best teams spend more cap bucks on offense. But that's not necessarily some kind of conscious prioritization, as much as it is simply that most teams that have a top ten QB on a second contract are going to be tilted towards offense. The QB is 20 - 25% of the cap these days for a lot of these teams. Those teams tend to be among the best most years and of course they spend more on offense. But look at KC in 2018, the year of the first conference championship appearance. They spent $75M on defense and $73M on offense. Look at NE in 2018 when they beat the Chiefs. They spent $10M more on offense and that was when they were paying Brady. When Allen's second contract hits the cap, the Bills will probably also tilt more towards the offense.