Thurman#1

30.9% slot snaps last year and 1027 yards. 50% for his career, but the last two years much less and he's still been productive.

Thanks very much for collecting these, Happy Days. Great stuff, very promising.

Overall pessimistic? No, not really. But I wasn't quite as optimistic as many over the first few weeks. I think they've got a very legit shot at it, still. As usual. And that one of these years, we will absolutely get there. Possibly this year. I'm right in the middle. It's really tough, really really tough to win a Super Bowl, especially with Mahomes playing for Reid in your conference. But they have a real chance, I think. I do hate to see New England rising. I hated seeing them hire Vrabel. He knows how to put together a football team.

There were a few people saying these things. A very small few. The things many people were actually saying were these. "Hasn't shown himself to be a pass blocker, a " "Hasn't shown himself to be a top six guy, much less a top two to four guy, which is who you pay $15M a year to." "Hasn't shown himself to be worth $15M a year." "Davis isn't as good. But we might get by with him and another answer or two in 2026 if the alternative is to pay Cook $15M a year without seeing whether he proves he's worth it in 2025." At this point he does look worth the $15M contract he asked for. I thought he was going to play this year without a second contract and try to earn the big numbers, or that if he wanted a contract this year he'd settle for around $10 - $12M. He didn't want to bet on having a great year and on staying healthy, which I totally understand, it would have been a big bet on his health. And based on how he's playing so far this year he might have easily have gotten the $15M if he stays healthy and productive. I didn't think he'd be as good as he's been, I didn't. But I knew it was a possibility, as did most of us, even the ones who thought that paying him $15M based on what he'd shown in his first three years was not a smart idea.

This is a great point. Extra money for the NFL. But a huge and unfair advantage for the #1 seed.

Gabe was a #2. Before the injury, anyway. And no, nobody is thinking he's a WR1. Sigh. Kincaid, Shakir and Josh Palmer say hi. Yeah, we get it, no true #1 WRs there, but those are absolutely three weapons.

We ain't getting guys like Waddle or Wilson, division rival or not. We're not in position to pay what would be necessary, either as trade bait or against the cap. Give up on this idea seriously. Not that it's totally impossible. But it wouldn't make sense. It's what a lot of people want but it just isn't very realistic. Think mid-level guys. And there are plenty of good players available in that areas, guys like Budda Baker or at the high end, Shaheed or Olave. Totally agree with you that he's on the phone sounding guys out even if nothing ends up happening. Dolphins, Jets, Ravens maybe, Browns, Raiders, Saints, Titans, Cardinals are likely sellers, and there is some talent there.

Well, we'll see.

Yeah, there is indeed every chance we get to a Super Bowl. We missed it last year by one mis-aimed Allen pass that was then dropped. Every chance. But no, you're not being generous. Fairly pessimistic would be more realistic. This team has been wildly successful. KC has been better in the playoffs, unfortunately, but this team has been competititve for a title from the third year of the rebuild. Did he make some mistakes on guys, including some you pointed out? Yeah. But the Von Miller contract was risky but smart. If he hadn't gotten injured that team looked like a world champion that year. Certainly he made mistakes. The list of GMs that haven't made mistakes is not a long one. There's no names on that list.

Brown was thrown a lot of longer passes. Guys getting larger percentage of longer passes tend to get pass catching rates that are lower. I'm not arguing how good he was after he left the Bills. I didn't watch. I don't care. The stuff that was "indicative of a guy who could demonstrate success at all routes" is simply that while on the Bills he demonstrated success in a wide variety of routes at all levels. Sanders did indeed put up good numbers. Yeah, he looked good here, and he did leave the league after putting up that good season. Not sure why that is important. The point is that Beane brought him in and he performed well. 46th in yards, in a 14-way tie for 47th place in TDs, 43rd in Y/R. In 14 games. That's absolutely not a #3. Manny Sands was a #2 for us.

Don't want to call it ridiculous? OK, pessimistic to an unrealistic and wild degree. We're not "still waiting" for Groot. He's already playing at the level you expect from his draft level. The fact that he still keeps improving is good. Don't know why that's not clear. We're not waiting on him, except in the sense that we wait for an expect good play and improvement from every player. Groot is very good against the run; it's the pass rush that stops him from being excellent. They're all playing at solid levels for what we spent for them (with Elam being the exception, of course). None but Kincaid is exceeding his level. More of that would be nice to see. But it's still no reason to pretend they're underperforming, as. you are here. Kincaid is a lot better blocker than last year and far better than a "pretty good pass catching TE." That's honestly wacky. Thanks for letting us know you think Oliver would be a cut candidate. It really makes clear the level of your nuttiness. Extreme! There's plenty to be frustrated about with this team: penalties, injuries, the lack of defensive turnovers this year, the performance of the safeties, most particularly Rapp, though we see now that the knee may well have been a large part of that. Allen's play the last two games. Some issues on game-planning on offense the past two games. A lot. The stuff you're throwing a hissy fit about here isn't worth worrying about, particularly compared to areas of real concern.

Nonsense. Ridiculous. Groot is living up to his pick. Not exceeding it, but he's living up to it. Oliver keeps improving, he also is playing really really well. This DL is a different entity when he's in there. Kincaid shows signs of becoming a top five TE, and soon. Not there yet, but he's very close. Certainly Elam is a failure, even if he seems to be significantly better in the different system they're using in Dallas. In ours, though, he simply wasn't good enough. Edmunds played really well. It's not a mistake that he got what is now, two years later, still the 3rd highest ILB contract in football according to Spotrac. People hear someone is a 1st rounder and say, "How come he's not playing like this guy, who was top ten, and this guy who was top five and this guy who was #12?" It's a lot harder to get players with genuinely huge impact late in the first, it just is. It happens, but at lower rates.

"even if a move feels highly unlikely," says Russini. Yeah, that. Might be one of those, "We'll listen, but unless you blow us away, forget about it," deals. Can't see it happening, really. Wouldn't mind a bit if it did, but the likelihood is just miniscule. Haven't kept up with Thomas, really, so I can't say anything either way about the folks here saying he hasn't been very good this year. Interesting, and it makes you wonder why. But again, can't see this happening.

This. He's amusing, he's funny and he's charismantic. Not actor charismatic, though. He'll succeed at nearly anything he does after his career. But I feel very safe saying it won't be movies or acting.

Taron played pretty well last week. He'd been a bit weak before that.

What the Pats did was watch us give the ball away three times and have I think it was 11 penalties and they still barely beat us. The Falcons did indeed watch that, because after seeing it, they watched Allen throw two more INTs and the Bills get 8 penalties for 64 yards accepted. Including that turnover they gave us on the first play that got eliminated by a penalty. This isn't about the Falcons and Pats playing better or us being figured out. It's about us playing more poorly than usual. Could that continue? Sure. My bet is it doesn't, but we'll see.

Thoughtful and interesting. I disagree about a few things, I guess. About speed, Cook is fast, and it's still showing, IMO. When our 1st round pick comes back, we should see some more of that on defense as well. You say that the Chiefs have speed and give Rashee Rice as an example. Rice really isn't that fast. 4.51, if I remember correctly. He's more quick than fast. And plenty of times quickness can serve in place of speed. I have no problems with our power, or at least on the OL, the part you mentioned. Dawkins, Torrence and Brown are wildly powerful and McGovern's a big strong dude at center as well. I don't think that's a problem at all. On defense I can see this as more of a problem, particularly with DaQuan out. Offensive stagnation and struggling with mediocre opponents I think are very reasonable criticisms. Particularly the past two games or so. Hard to tell whether this was a bad streak or a season-long problem, but it's certainly true of what we've seen recently. Thanks for the thoughts. I am just as worried about injury trends and the awful riptide of penalties lately. Plus the fact that the D isn't getting turnovers. That's never been a problem in this D before. IMO a lot is to do with the safeties just not confusing anybody. They aren't as wily and in synch as the guys we grew used to. My guess on the odds of that happening? 0.02%. As a result of serious injury.

Why would you not consider Frazier, Dabs and Brady as part of his tree? Certainly they all had some experience previous to joining the Bills. But that's the way it generally works. It's not that common for guys to start out already with the person who will be their biggest mentor. I mean, Sean Payton is considered part of Parcells' tree. But he only spent four years with Parcells. He'd been a coach since '88 and didn't get to the Cowboys with Parcells from 2003 to 2005. I can see not going with Frazier, I can. But Dabs and Brady I'd say would absolutely be part of McD's tree. I'd expect more as time goes on. How successful the tree will be, I dunno, it doesn't seem to be predictable. Belichick's tree is awful, big but awful. Parcells was a defensive guy. Payton is on offense. Belichick has guys on his tree from both sides of the ball, as do many others. Same with Bill Walsh; it's pretty common.

Um, because did McDermott say that until now he hadn't known it was a possibility and just a few minutes before he discovered it was a possibility? Because it sure looks to me like that's an assumption on your part, that he just found out, rather than anything he's said. Looked to me like he was asked the question and answered it, without any additional information about when they'd decided it. It's not embarrassing in the slightest. A little frustrating that the doctors can't give more details on timetables and how quickly different guys will respond to treatment, but that's hardly on McDermott. Not at all, Brown was a real success. Did a lot of routes at all levels, with success at all of them. Dangerous in the deep middle, but was very capable of picking up the six yard first downs also. Didn't last long enough for me, what with Covid and a high but in those two years, he was a really good pickup. As is Shakir. As was Beasley. As was Emmanuel Sanders for what we spent on him. As was McKenzie for what we spent on him. As was Gabe Davis for what we spent on him. Hollins was good for what they paid him. So was Diggs till he made himself too annoying. The problem isn't really bad pickups. It's that many want him to spend many more resources on WR than he does. Yet the offense has been very good for a long time. There are some choices that should be questioned. Samuel hasn't been healthy enough consistently to be effective. Scantling didn't work out, but again, the contract was pretty small. Harty wasn't successful here. There are others, but he hasn't made many big swings, so even if these guys didn't work out, we didn't lose a ton. Now that we spent a 1st on Coleman, he'll be held accountable for that pick. Too early to say so far, but it's not far off before we'll be able to legitimately start questioning his effectiveness. Signs are not great so far, but is it him or how he's being used?

Coming out of college he had been very successful on buttonhooks also, but yeah, slants too. Anything where he was working back towards the QB at the end of the route he was good at.

As for what you say here, if that's your definition of #1 treatment, you are saying that there's a #1 on every team. And if that's your argument, yeah, maybe he is our #1 if it's not Shakir. Personally I don't think every team has a #1, and that the Bills don't feel they have a #1. And that that's what everybody eats is all about. And that game plans seem to vary every week with who plays more and who gets focused on more. IMO he's not getting number 1 treatment, he's getting most snaps treatment. Which is not the same. And he's getting one more target than Shakir treatment, which considering Shakir has about 10% less in snaps means he's getting fewer targets for how much he's on the field than Shakir is. #1 status doesn't have much to do with snaps, as far as I'm concerned. But I still don't really get what you are saying in the first post I replied to.

I'm not disagreeing with your statement. I'm telling you I have no idea what you were saying. To me, your English is not clear there. What are you saying?

Gee, tough question there. A real brain twister. Took me nearly a tenth of a second to figure the answer. How much better? I don't care, it's irrelevant. Better. Hard to imagine that they'd get better when Kincaid and Palmer return ... or when Hawes gets even more experience ... or when Brady game plans better than he did against the Falcons, or when Josh plays better than he did against the Falcons ... oh, wait, it's not difficult at all. It's actually really easy. Plus, great point there that offensive EPA per play totally equals how good they are. Not as if there aren't other things involved. Like, say, avoiding dumb interceptions, penalties and fumbles. No, offensive EPA per play totally sums up everything, as long as you don't worry about clear thinking.

"The Coleman thing and being treated as if the #1 is shocking to me," you say. I don't think I'm the only one who does not understand what you mean here.

Not seeing the "not far off" thing that you are: Lockett: 21 targets, 10 receptions, 70 yards, 0 TDs, 3 1st downs, Success Percentage 33.3% Shakir: 34 targets, 25 receptions, 268 yards, 2 TDs, 12 1st downs, Success Percentage 52.9% Haven't seen anything about the Palmer injury being "long term." Did I miss something? I heard "week to week," which could easily mean back very soon, just that it's not clear. Keon and Moore have both had some success and beaten single coverage at times. Could we use an upgrade at boundary, though? Sure, if it's a good fit. I have the same reservations as you about how well Lockett would fit our needs here, though.