Thurman#1

Report post Posted just now Great receivers make mistakes sometimes. Same with playmakers, even at key moments. It has to do with being human beings. It doesn't happen a lot, but it happens. John Brown is both a great receiver and a playmaker. But yeah, this was a mistake. He's a #1 receiver. He was 21st in yardage and tied for 24th in TDs despite the fact that they rested him the last week of the season, and he played on a team that threw the 24th most passes in the league, putting them in the bottom nine of the league. He's a #1. No, he's not a "true #1," but there are only about 6 or 7 of those guys in the league anyway. Yes, we need to upgrade the #3 receiver position on this team. No, Brown is not the problem in any way.

Poor win-loss records in the first three years of a rebuild say very little about the situation beyond the fact that it was a rebuild. That's generally what happens in rebuilds. The two losses this year do indeed count against McDermott. But those were both very competitive games. And though the Bills were a good team this year, next year was always likely to be the year when we saw what this group is fully capable of. If there's a new QB in Foxboro and it's not someone like Luck, I think they are no longer the dominant force they've been for so long. Though I wouldn't be surprised to see them still be a pretty decent team with 9 or 10 wins maybe, if they can get someone to be a game manager type.

Please. Manning wasn't bad in the playoffs. His playoff QB rating was 87.4. Brady's is 89.8. That's an insignificant difference. Brady has more playoff comebacks than Manning? Couldn't be because he's played more than half again the number of playoff games, could it? 41 vs. 27? The fact that Brady's team "had the lead with 2 minutes to go in the 4th quarter of 8 of 9 SBs" does indeed mean something. It means the New England Patriots defense had allowed fewer points than the New England Patriots offense had scored in 8 of 9 SBs. That's not a QB achievement, it's a team achievement. The two greatest comebacks really were great achievements for Brady, but also for the Patriots D, which suddenly figured out how to shut down both of those opponents late in the game. I'm not arguing that Manning's better, but it's not terribly unreasonable that Manning in Belichick's system might have been even better than Brady, and your arguments there are mostly weak. The Pats defenses really were better than the Colts, all through both QBs careers. And that absolutely did have a lot to do with both teams results.

Not at all. No, he wasn't the old Manning, but he was still the smartest QB in the game. He found ways to win. Yeah, the defense was terrific and was the main reason they win. But the offense did their job, particularly when it was Manning at QB. You can say that with Manning starting they went 7-2 and with Osweiler starting they went 5-2, but that would be missing the point. In Osweiler's seven games they scored 150 points, averaging 21.4 PPG. In Manning's nine games they scored 205, an average of 22.7. That's not a huge difference but it was against a tougher group. Manning's nine games contained five teams that went 8-8 or better. Osweiler's seven games contained three that went 8-8 or better. Manning managed three 4th quarter comebacks and three game-winning drives that year. They don't win that SB without Peyton Manning.

... and Bob Sanders. That guy was Polamalu-like. If he'd stayed healthy ... In 2006, their championship year, Sanders only played four games during the season and they allowed 5.3 YPC during the year, worst by almost half a yard per carry. Then Sanders played the whole playoff schedule and they allowed 4.1 YPC. They also had Robert Mathis. And a lot of pretty good players. But they were built mostly to defend the pass rather than the run. Very few teams could run much against them because who runs when they're 17 points behind?

Yeah, he went 11-5 with Matt Cassel ... against a historically easy schedule. Look at Miami's record the year before, that year and the year after. The AFC East had a gimme schedule that year like few in football history. Belichick's terrific, but without Brady they won't be the same. Yeah, if they get a top QB, it could all continue. Think they're going to get one? [EDIT: that post below about Andrew Luck coming back in Foxboro gave me heart palpitations. Man, I hope that doesn't happen.] Giving up Garoppolo was a move that will have repercussions for them for a long time. IMO we'll never see Brady playing for another team. He knows how good he's had it in NE. But I could see him retiring or not. I took little solace in that. They pulled Brady because it was Week 17 and they had nothing to win or lose. It was nice enough but meant no more to me than it did to the Pats.

The cap situation isn't thanks to Beane. It's thanks to Beane and McDermott. The moves made by McDermott before Beane got here were already rebuild-oriented financially conservative moves, which is precisely the opposite of how things went during the years when Whaley was making the decisions. The reason Beane is here is because McDermott gets along with him and has similar philosophies. McDermott was in the room when Beane was interviewed and you can bet that if he hadn't liked Beane and the way he does things, Beane wouldn't be here. Whaley lost his decision-making powers very very quickly after McDermott arrived. Whaley and McDermott have also made it clear that they do most of their decision-making by hashing it out and coming to consensus. Yes, if they disagree, Beane makes the decision on personnel. But they don't disagree all that much, as they've made clear. And their financial philosophies are just about the same, both pretty much right there with industry best practices.

There has never been the slightest bit of confirmation about this. Every time the Bills don't pay someone market value, the sour grapes crowd says he wasn't going to stay here anyways.

Hunh? No. Gilmore was a Bill in 2016. 2017 was McDermott's first year here, and well before February, the Buffalo News was reporting that the Pegulas, having observed McDermott's first couple of weeks, were putting him in control of things in the FO. They may well have like Gilmore but figured they needed to save cap space early in the rebuild with Whaley's poor handling of the cap. Rebuilds hurt.

Without the slightest question.

John Brown is a #1. If we find someone better than him, great, but not especially likely. What we need is a major upgrade on the folks below Brown and Beasley.

Duke's arm was hooked after the ball hit his hands the first time. It was not hooked when the ball arrived. Agreed he's young, and that it was a tough catch. Disagree about how well he performed that last year when you say he was projected "projected for first round, and top WR in draft BECAUSE of his play during that season". In his last year at Auburn, he played in five games before being thrown off the team. 147 yards and 1 TD in those five games.. His junior year 730 yards and 5 TDs. That's good, but not stunning. His pre-draft 40 time was somewhere around 4.7 ( http://www.draftscout.com/dsprofile.php?PlayerId=131529&DraftYear=2016 ) He wasn't going to be the first WR drafted. Probably wouldn't have even been a first rounder, unless he had a terrific remainder of the season.

It's not a matter of whether Brown is a good receiver. He is, it's not a question. But I totally agree that he should have dragged his feet, and that doing so would have made it a completion. That was just a mistake.

Nobody was running a deep post on the left side. I'm watching the All-22. There are two guys on the left side, Brown and Singletary and that's it. The guy you are seeing deep and left is Lee Smith, who started on the right side and ran a post, ending up on the left hash. Brown and Singletary are open. The play design worked. It confused them. No, Brown is open pretty much when he cuts, which is well before Allen throws. And he continues to be open as he runs across, though as he gets near the middle of the field, the throw would have to be a bit different, placing it over the defender rather than darting it into the hole in the zone. And I think it's precisely because it's weird that it worked (two guys open). It blew their minds but still accomplished what they were looking for (assuming they didn't actually expect DiMarco and Smith to be dropped by the D entirely, which is a pretty good assumption, IMO).

Again, though, two guys open, Brown and Singletary. McKenzie is tripled. This did confuse them. I agree that the bomb wasn't the primary read.

True, but same for the defenders. They made the same mistake for the same reason, the pass was deceptive, it wrong-footed everyone. Don't think I'll be able to post it. I'm not real tech-minded. I'm just using Snipping Tool. I've got it captured but it won't upload to the board.

I just watched the All-22. It's still on my screen. Two guys open. Agreed that DiMarco almost got it and mistimed his jump, but I don't think that's where the ball should have gone. All three guys in the area were kind of fooled by that pass, as it was a real floater, unusual for Allen, thrown off the back foot.

No offense taken. But you're wrong. Lee Smith started on the right but he is running a post and when Josh throws he is on the left hash and widening, and DiMarco is near the right sideline. The safety may have tried to cover them both, but he wasn't getting to Smith if the ball had gone to him. He got to the ball because Josh led DiMarco inside towards the safety and because Josh, who could've stepped into the ball instead threw off his back foot which meant the ball was far from one of Josh's usual darts. It was poorly placed and hung up high and was placed too far inside as well. And it's not true that everyone else got swallowed up. Beasley's [EDIT: sorry, that was Brown, not Beasley] open in the middle about 17 yards downfield, finding a hole in the zone. McKenzie is effectively triple-covered!!! They clearly were confused by this formation and personnel, and that leaves several reasonable options available to Josh. The best two were probably Brown and Singletary. After being held and pushing off, Smith is open deep, but Josh has already started his throwing motion by that time. No, the guy covering Smith stayed with him the whole way. The safety tried to cover both, but couldn't. And Smith started on the same side as DiMarco but ran a post and was on the left hash. That left the safety in trouble, trying to cover both, but he couldn't, really, as the two widened out. Josh should've gone to Lee Smith, who had beaten Bernardrick McKinney by two steps despite being held. Smith was looking back over his left shoulder and Josh could've widened him out even farther by throwing to the side. Alternatively, he had Singletary wide open for six or seven and Beasley [EDIT: sorry, that was Brown, not Beasley] between two guys not that close to either, who could've been either thrown to in the hole down the middle or thrown open behind the short zone guy on the right side at about the time. Josh went to the wrong guy. And we had at least two guys pretty open against eight men in coverage, probably a lot of which was due to Texan confusion. It's 2nd and 13 and he has Singletary open for probably a gain of eight with a possibility of breaking a long one if he avoids the tackler who's still eight yards away and Beasley open for probably 17, though he would be tackled right after the catch. I tried to upload a screen grab of the play from the All-22 as Beasley [again, Brown, not Beasley. Sorry.] cuts inside, but get a message saying " You are only allowed to upload 204.8kB. " He has two better considerably better options. The safeties on both sides are caught in a bind trying to defend two routes and caught in the middle. The design of this play worked fine.

Yeah, an extended play. Not so much broken, maybe. Also, sending an FB downfield can be a very smart move in that anyone downfield draws coverage and probably double coverage. DiMarco did draw a double. That leaves real targets underneath free of safety help on their routes. It's a surety that the play wasn't drawn up with DiMarco deep as Josh's primary target. But he couldn't/didn't find anyone else open.

Yup, not teaching that would be dereliction of duty. You have to deal with the officials, their expectations and how the way they interpret the rules and determine penalties. This absolutely should be and is being taught in every locker room in the league, and college and high school as well. There's going to be contact between WR and CB. That's life. What can you do to stay within whatever is being treated by the authorities as legal? It's part of the job.

Watt played in eight games this year. And while they were better, no, they were not a totally different team, or defense, with him in there. Quick summary, in those eight games, Houston opponents averaged 23.5 PPG (19th, and by the way three -quarters of a touchdown more than we managed against them) and 362 yards (23rd). That's a justification and not a good one.

Are people saying he's another Tyrod? Jeez. Wacky. Tyrod was in his fifth year in the league when he got here. It's a totally different situation from Allen, who's been thrown into the deep end early. And yeah, Tyrod was a game manager who could seriously run the ball. Allen can run the ball, though not as well as Tyrod. That's most of the similarities from where I sit. Good post.

Yes. The Texans were the 28th rated defense this year. 19th in points. They weren't good.

Nonsense. Just as a quick example, look at the first SB team. Their top three WRs were Andre Reed (945 yards, 13th in the league, and 8 TDs) , Lofton getting 712 yards (42nd) and Don Beebe racking up 221. Don Smith also managed 221. Even at his age, Lofton was still probably a better deep threat than Brown but not as good on short routes. The young Lofton, yeah, he unquestionably plays over Brown in any situation, but the 34 year-old? They'd have found spots for him, for sure, but it's not obvious that he was better at that point at all, though as I say, he was a better deep threat. The next year Lofton got up to about what Brown managed this year. Andre had an unassailably great year of 1113 yards and 10 TDs, and Lofton had 1072, with 8TDs. That's a great year, and that year beats out Brown, I'd say. Beebe was next with 414. With almost exactly the same number of passes thrown by the QBs that year as this year. And while I don't mean to insult Josh Allen, Andre and Lofton had a bit of an advantage with Jim Kelly throwing to them and completing 63.3%, 64.1%, 58.2% and 61.3% in those four SB years with an OL that was sensational and a hall of fame running back. Beasley would have started. Brown might easily have started half of those year or more. Though Andre was certainly the best of the lot. 1992, Andre had 913 yards, 3TDs, Lofton had 786 and 6 TDs, and Beebe had 554. 1993, Andre had 854 yards and 6 TDs, Bill Brooks had 714 and 5 TDs and Beebe had 504 and 3 TDs. There's a very strong argument that Brown is better than Bill Brooks - though Brooks was very good and I like him a lot. A pro's pro. Yeah, the rules made passing easier back then. But people look back through rose-colored glasses at that team. Andre was terrific, certainly better than anybody on this team, but after that, we had a great deep threat in Lofton at age 34, 35 and 36, Brooks and Beebe. And Lofton wasn't getting a lot done in terms of short-area quickness. And Brown is a great deep threat. Think of how many times we've seen him open long and overthrown this year. But in any case, saying that our current guys wouldn't have started on a team that made the Super Bowl four years in a row (and I believe that's wrong, because Beasley probably starts in the slot on both teams) is saying pretty good things about our group. Peep. Pass rusher and replacement LB for Alexander. But yeah you're right, the defense was absolutely excellent this year. And maybe a CB as well.

We don't need tall. We need good. If we get someone good, who's also tall, that'd great. But the tall part would be a great bonus, not an absolute necessity. My guess is they sign a solid vet who's a bit tall so we can use him as a chess piece in different designs. But plenty of tall guys can't beat the press consistently. Good CBs can defense tall. Get in his way, nudge him, restrict him. Most tall guys - not all, but most - aren't as quick or as able to find space as smaller guys. Again, it'd be good if we can find a tall guy who's also good. Maybe Duke can even become that guy as he develops. But the whole "we need a tall guy" nonsense is what got us James Hardy, may he R.I.P.