Thurman#1

It's really your point maybe but it's sure not the point. The Bills were obviously, visibly better when Milano was playing. It was there to see but the stats back it up. I thought it was clear that he was a top two player on that defense last year. They would not have been fine without him. It's far more legit to say that about Feliciano, but anyone thinking they know more than the Bills do about Feliciano's impact is only showing a drastic overestimation of his understanding of the situation. I'll totally line up on your side on the last line there, we just don't know what's coming next. I didn't think there was any way they could bring back all three. I mean I knew it was possible but thought it was wildly unlikely, especially with Milano seeming to be giving signals that he wanted to test his worth. I'm looking forward to see what happens. They're going to have to shave some more money over the next few days and weeks, and I look forward to seeing how they do that.

Boettger is still un-signed, last I knew anyway, though it seems that it would be easy enough to bring him back. Now that we've got all that done ... OL, pass rusher, CB, TE, WR and also maybe 1-tech and RB, probably in the later rounds. Pretty much the same as it has been, really, but less concern with OT and more with G/C. Beane's way has been to find guys in FA so we're not forced to go any particular direction in the draft if we don't want to, and then he drafts BPA at the same positions that seemed to be weaknesses before FA. Not that this guarantees he'll do the same this year, but that's probably the way to bet.

I'm not going to disagree with you that Allen is a freak and that without that they don't make plays. It's correct. But if the DLs get there a half a second earlier, which they do if the OL isn't as good at pass protection as they were, it's a different story.

The reason we beat them with Josh Allen is that he was healthy and upright. That's largely due to the OL. The OL, once you have a real QB, really pretty much is the be and the end all. How many good young QBs have been beaten into timid PTSD cases because the GM refused to prioritize the OL? Luckily, Beane has showed he's not one of those.

$$

Great logic. And no, we absolutely did NOT go less power last year. Just the opposite. Less pulling. More power. That's why the guys they've brought in have been big strong and not especially athletic. They haven't brought in a nifty interior guy since Morse, and they've switched OL coaches since then. How's this for a comeback with equal argumentative logic and power: "Our backs don't suck. Just face it." Convincing, right? Thank you. I got it from you. Credit where credit is due. Thing is, Beane agrees with me and disagrees with you. And yes, he's bringing back most of the OL, they were really good at pass protection, and that's what this team values most in an OL. Which will not help any new RB any more than it helped Moss and Singletary. And I'm sure they want a game breaker in the backfield just like you. It's just not likely to be as high a priority on a team that has one of the highest pass:run ratios in the league as it appears to be for you. But they're clear that the OL was most of the problem last year, even if you're not.

They're not just JAGs, they're solid, good backs. No, not breakaway threats, but good players. Their YPAs speak to that. And it wasn't the RBs who were the problem, it was the line and the system. How many times do we need Brandon Beane to say this before we know that they are indeed the answer. The Bills have been going towards a power scheme since they switched OL coaches last offseason. The RBs aren't the reason they're not doing sophisticated running schemes. This team wants to throw the ball most of the time. As well they should. And for a team that wants to do that, spending a 3rd, a 3rd and then a 1st on an RB just is not smart resource management. I expect that they might well go RB on day 3. That could be an upgrade. But I think they feel that the upgrade will come from the development of some of our younger OLs, some more OL continuity and more offseason work time together, maybe drafting another OL earlyish, Cody Ford staying healthy, etc.

The only time that Beane or McDermott have done that is when they spent the previous year accumulating massive amounts of draft capital with the intention of trading up for a franchise QB. Maybe. Maybe not. Opinion. IMO if he were all that much better, he wouldn't be in play when we pick around 30th. He wouldn't be in play anywhere near that. And comparing the behavior of two teams is perfectly fair, especially when replying to someone who said that the Chiefs went to the SB the year after drafting an RB in the first. And again, when the Chiefs picked an RB in the first, they had not picked RBs in the 3rd round the previous two years. I personally am more interested in countering the Chiefs than copying them, but when a guy suggests we copy them, of course it makes sense to point out the differences between the two situations.

Yup. And selecting that RB provided the kind of rocket fuel to their team performance that allowed them to go from winning a Super Bowl all the way up to losing one the next year. I also noticed that they had NOT taken RBs in the 3rd round two years in a row. Did KC struggle against the better teams in 2019 when they won the Super Bowl despite being 23rd in the league at YPC? Adding another weapon seems like a good possibility. That it would be a running back is not a necessity.

Walt Whitman Leaves of Grass. It's got gay content. Can't allow that. Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species. Clearly wrong, evolution is anti-God. Mark Twain Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. For the obvious reasons. DH Lawrence Lady Chatterley's Lover. Pure filth, naturally. Harry Potter is without question the devil's work. James Joyce's Ulysses. There's a scene in which a person has a sexual interlude ... I hesitate to even say this ... without anyone else present. ... Sorry, I just got back from the toilet after vomiting for a couple of hours at the mere thought. And Tango Makes Three. A book that, shockingly, was written for children. And yet implies that there might be circumstances in which males might be attracted to other ... gulp ... males. There are an obvious bunch of others, such as To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, Brave New World, An American Tragedy. These have all been correctly cancelled at one time or another. In a clearly immoral act, some of these cancellations have been uncancelled here and there. This shows obviously the anti-child agenda out there, and how much these people hate America.

I'd argue it would end up with Ford and Feliciano starting and Boettger backing up if all three were on the team, which at this point looks a lot more doubtful than it did a few days ago.

Unfortunately, it's anything but crazy after re-signing both Milano and Daryl Williams. That cost a lot of money. He said earlier he wants to be here. I think he'll take a discount. But there's now probably a pretty decent chance that won't be enough.

How many elite Ds in the last twenty years? Maybe 60 or so elite Ds. Including probably the Bills in 2019. Last year probably the Rams, Ravens and Football Team. 2 - 4 each year, generally, roughly the same as the number of elite Os, elite QBs, elite ... well, everything, really. Only the few best each year. The Bucs weren't elite last year, just damn good. Same with their offense. And that Bucs team wasn't all new guys or anything. You say they signed 14 players to "ring-chasing deals," and it sounds like they put a whole new team out there, but they actually only had three different starters on offense, Brady, Gronk and the rookie draftee Wires, and two on defense in Murphy-Bunting and Winfield Jr, both draftees. And with those two new defensive starters their defense improved vastly from 2019. When you look at recent Super Bowl winners you see damn good defenses. And a point held off of the scoreboard for the opponent is just as good as a point added by you. And you can hold the Chiefs offense down. It's not easy but you don't need to be elite to do it. The Chargers held them to 23 and 21 in their games. The Patriots held them to 26, as did we. The Broncos held them to 22, as did the Browns. The Falcons held them to 17. The bottom line is we need to get better. Just maximize how good the team is, and that absolutely includes improving the defense. And I agree it's wildly difficult to hold them to 9 points. But you don't need your D to do that.

I think a lot of your pass rushers are 3-4 OLBs. Yeah, they're pass rushers but don't fit here. Otherwise, though, most of it sounds good to me.

I thought I'd go back and look at their history, and I've changed my mind. I think they might do what you say, dump Barkley and just keep Fromm. After all, they did virtually the exact same thing three years ago. They drafted a 5th rounder in Fromm, they could then dump a guy with more experience. They were worried that somebody might snag the 5th rounder if they cut him, so they kept him off the practice squad in his 1st and 2nd years, and they then have that 5th rounder in his second year be Josh's first backup. Heck, they already did it that way once, almost precisely the same thing. Why wouldn't they do it again? They drafted a 5th rounder - Nate Peterman - and they were worried another team would grab him if they cut him so they didn't put him on the practice squad in that 5th rounder's 1st or 2nd years. They brought in a guy with more experience in McCarron but decided that with a 2nd year 5th round pick on the roster they didn't need a guy with more experience, so they traded him away and installed Peterman as Josh's backup. Granted Peterman had a few passes thrown as a rookie and a full offseason, so he was significantly more experienced than Fromm. Why would we expect them to do anything different this time? Final thought: Yes, we'll see.

It shouldn't tell you clearly they liked him that much. The Bills have kept three QBs active for three of the last four years. It appears to be the way they like to do business, even without COVID. Another reason a team might keep the COVID replacement QB on the 53-man is so that he could be switched to active up to 30 minutes before a game if the other QBs tested positive just before a game. And even assuming that they do "like him enough to not risk cutting him," that's how they've felt over the years for guys like Andre Smith and Reggie Gilliam, and you don't want those guys or rather QBs who are the equivalents of Andre Smith or Reggie Gilliam to be stepping in to take snaps when Josh Allen is injured for 3 - 5 weeks, you just don't. Fromm is a development guy. And while he's had a year in the NFL, it hasn't been a normal year. He was separated from the other QBs and in fact the other players. He certainly might get a year in the system this year, but he might not. How will the offseason be this year? Will there be offseason get-togethers? Will there be COVID replacement QBs again? If there are Expecting a 5th rounder who again has never thrown an NFL pass to be the backup after one season in which he couldn't do the things ordinary backups get to do in practice and meeting ... to expect that guy to step in immediately and play in case of injury is ridiculous. Not much more to say about this, but I'd put the chance on them cutting Barkley and then not replacing him with a vet as very low. And if they think they have the #2 on the roster, they likely think it's Webb, not Fromm.

Yeah, I think you're misunderstanding what people mean when they say they want confirmation. Reminds me of the old Rodney Dangerfield joke: Guy goes into a doctor's office. Doctor does some tests and says, "You've got cancer." Guy says, "I want a second opinion." Doctor says, "OK, you've got cancer and you're ugly." When we say we want confirmation, we're looking for a second source. When some guy on the internet says something and we say we want confirmation, that doesn't mean that if the same guy says the same thing again we'll all say, "Oh, the anonymous guy from the internet said it again. Guess that puts any doubt to rest. When someone says something twice, well, it's always true.

Love the Nasirildeen instead of Surratt switch. He'd fit in beautifully here.

Yours is perfect so far? Mine sure isn't. Not that I put in anywhere near as much detail as Joe B did.

Yeah, that seems the likeliest guess. At that level both sides can probably stay civil. Much more and feelings would be hurt, IMO.

In a few specific directions. There's a feeling among many that you can manipulate it in many ways. You can't. A few specific ways. This is one of them. You can borrow money from future years. Until you can't anymore.

... "up to close to $14 million" That's a bit different. If he has a great year, close to $14M will be a bargain. If he has a bad year, who knows how little this might be without hitting incentives? $5M? Less? No way to know.

Some have said he was injured through a lot of the season. He did look that way late, but early in the season he had some seriously powerful throws. Against the Seahawks in Week 2, at 1:50 in the 3rd quarter, he threw it 55 yards in the air hitting his reciever on an absolute dime. He threw it from his own 14 and his guy caught it at full extension on the Seattle 31. And he didn't even step into it. His front foot was way out to the left, it's an awkward motion and an absolute bomb that he put in the perfect spot.

It's far from useless. It's still really interesting and thought-provoking, though much less so if you're not paying. It's already proven an imperfect prediction, but they're all going to be imperfect.

Very interesting. Thank you for correcting me. If no change is required to the contract because the right is already written in, then certainly they could do it.