Thurman#1

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.

Again, we've got a #1 receiver in John Brown. He's probably around the 20th best receiver in the league this year, and that's a #1. As for a "true #1," (which generally means a guy in the top 6 or 7 best in the league), how many SB-winning teams in the last decade or so have had one? Almost none. We don't need a true #1. We need an upgrade at the #3, and hopefully a bit more strong depth as well. If the guy we get eventually turns out to be as good as John Brown, that'd be fantastic. If he's even better, another Julio Jones, or an Antonio Brown without issues or a young AJ Green, great. But it's not necessary. If it were necessary, that would be awful because it's extremely difficult to come up with guys that good and we're very unlikely to manage it drafting where we are. But luckily, it's not necessary. What's necessary is another good WR, another option teams have to respect. As for your comments on the OL, yup, you make sense here. Also an LB. Above all, a pass rusher. And probably another CB as well, and a hammer at RB would go down well also.

Nah. It isn't him that leaves too many points off the board. It's the offense. Does he deserve a share of the blame? Sure. But he's a second-year guy. If he's still looking the same as he does now in another couple of years, it'll be time to wonder if he's not going to be the guy. This early, though, it's par for the course. A few QBs have really quick starts, and deserve all the kudos they get. Most take time to develop.

Nice! He deserves to be treated that way. A great guy, a great player and a great Bill.

I do want to say that I like Josh Allen. It might sound like I don't, but I do. I'm just noting how many out there will not hear anything negative about him. He's not there yet, but he really does seem to be improving. I'm far from convinced, but I think things look good and my guess at this point is that he'll continue improving. I'm hoping it will be enough. And while he certainly deserves his share of the blame, for a second-year guy I thought he played pretty damn well. But there are a lot of people on here who will not hear anything bad about him. I love that he put the whole thing on his shoulders. That's a move a great leader makes. He absolutely does not deserve all the blame, but he does deserve some. And people who blame him will be accused of not understanding who is really responsible..

I'm kind of disappointed that some of you are blaming lower-ranked candidates as the fall guy for this loss. Everybody knows that the higher-ranked chumps listed here should be slapped with the scapegoat label. There's an order to all this. There's a long tradition to scapegoating that needs to be respected. There's a system ... a way things are done ... and when you're looking for a patsy to blame there's an order in which Bills fans have a long long-established modus operandi for doing so. So when you're on the way to the barn to grab your pitchforks and torches, first you need to figure out who is the easiest to blame. With that in mind, here is the official list of who to scapegoat, in a strict order which comes from long tradition and thus should not be broken. The top guys are the ones you should scapegoat. They make excellent patsies and ALMOST CERTAINLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WHOLE THING Tier 1) The officials. Always. Forever. Malign them. Revile them. Point the finger. You'll get likes up the wazoo. 2) The mysterious abetters of the officials. New York. Guys in black. The black helicopters that provide the technical support. Sure, you can't see them. But we all know. 3) The Illuminati. 'Cuz, duh! 4) The OC. This should be obvious. When plays work, it's the players. When plays fail, it's the OC. One of our Bills traditions that has aged like fine wine. IT'S PROBABLY THEIR FAULT Tier 5) Ernie Adams. Belichick's dirty tricks guy. Of course. No need to look further, really. He's behind everything. 6) God. Hey, the ball doesn't bounce that way for other teams. 7) Luck. (Not Andrew Luck, but instead the laws of chance) It's a well-known fact. Even nature and the laws of probability hate us. 8 Lee Smith. It's a rule. It's usually him, even if he was on the bench. We don't need a reason. GO AHEAD AND BLAME THEM Tier 9) The rest of the coaching staff. Because it couldn't be the players that we like. 10) Star Lotulelei. Again, nobody needs a reason once they've looked at his salary. The Bills love him and say he's doing a great job, but go ahead and vilify him mercilessly. 11) The GM and the personnel staff. Again, it couldn't be the players we like, and it has to be somebody, and Beane is from Carolina and just oozes slickness. How can you not hate the guy? He deserves all of the blame that's left after the ten choices above, and his staff as well. 12) Hauschka. Sure he didn't miss any kicks today, but he's in on the conspiracy and he would have. YES, THEY HAD A LOT TO DO WITH IT TOO Tier 13) John Brown (It's his own fault he's not 6'3") 14) Trent Murphy. He's not liked in fan circles. Blaming him will only draw agreement. Kick him around. 15) Whoever has held Duke Williams back. It had to be someone. Obviously. Besides the Illuminati and the Knights Templar. 16) Al Qaeda. Of course. 17) Mitch Morse. High salary and not very often mentioned. That makes him hateable and thus available for angry tirades. SHOULD BE BLAMED ONLY IN LAST GASP DESPERATION Tier 18) The rest of the players. They're the popular ones, and shouldn't be blamed for anything. SHOULD NOT BE BLAMED FOR ANY REASON Tier 19) Josh Allen. Because let's face it, if he's not good enough, we're screwed for a long time. So we must avoid talking about it if he has problems. As you know, I'm not making anything up here. This is well-established as the official Buffalo Bills Pecking Order for Scapegoats. The further up the list you go, the more love you'll get if you brandish your pitchforks and blame the hell out of them. Looking for someone to put in the frame? Pin it on these folks in this order and you'll be going along with history and tradition.

No. That's the basic answer. No. As for your breakdown of wins and losses, the Dallas and Pittsburgh wins were good ones and they played right with the Pats and the Ravens. Were they good enough to break through against the absolute best in the league? No. But I don't think too many people thought they should have been listed among the top five or six. If you did think that, it's on your judgment of what they were, not on whether the Bills the Bills were over-estimated.

Yeah, I absolutely LOVED this!!!!! Wanted it probably more than I wanted a win against Houston.

We've got a #1 in John Brown. Yeah, we need a major upgrade at #3, and if he is as good as Brown, that would be terrific.