Thurman#1

Sorry, man, that's just wrong You're not looking at their playoff record. You're looking only at the three playoff games that best make your point. You're looking at a dataset of 40+ games and looking only at three and throwing out the rest, and thinking that makes a point. That's flawed thinking. In fact, overall they've been a good playoff defense overall. Yes, three bad games. But again, looking only at those games says more about you and what you want to believe than it does about the defense. More, the offense was much much worse than the defense was against the Bengals, and yet nobody blames them despite the fact that they were healthy and the defense was a shell of itself from the injuries. If Von Miller and Da'Quan Jones had been healthy, if Hyde had played, and if Poyer weren't hobbling and if White was as good as he's likely to be next year, the defense would have been much much better. And we'd still have lost because of how awful the offense played.

I should have waited to finish my thought before replying. Try reading my last answer (the edited version) again. How can they be worse? Yeah, hard to figure out how the #4 DVOA defense could be worse. (That was sarcasm. There is a huge amount of room for them to be a worse defense next year than they have been. They've been really good.) And again, looking only at three games in three years and ignoring the rest says more about you than it does about the D.

Honest answer. Narrowing down what you're looking at to three games only (one of which when many to most of teh most crucial players were out for injury or playing well below standard because of injury) and throwing out the rest shows an urge to reach a pre-selected conclusion. They've been an excellent defense. That may be an honest question, but it's not a difficult one to answer.. Of course they can be worse. Much much much worse.

It's more complicated than that. You don't have to be dumb to make mistakes at acquiring football personnel. Absolutely everyone does it, as it's inherently extremely difficult to predict future behavior in extremely complicated systems. Best that can be done is to improve the percentage of good decisions. Jones is still really early in his career. People who think they know how he'll do - either way - are kidding themselves, they're guessing. I'd have paid him, myself. Without full faith that he'd be a great player. But with the feeling that it was the best decision at the time.

Guess people should have noticed when he did. But many didn't. Again, when Edmunds was on the field this year we were the #4 pass defense. When he was off the field, #27. That Vikings game was when it really showed. The D was playing really well. Tremaine got injured and after that the whole D was really bad. The difference was stark. I'm not fearful of change. But I'm also not a dullard. Some changes work out really well. Others cause huge problems and reduce efficiency and performance. Denying that change often causes major regression is ignoring reality. The reason that Tremaine and Poyer have a chance to make huge bucks is real simple. They're extremely good players. And Edmunds is both really realy good and really young. Losing a player like that is a huge blow. They'll be replaced (assuming they are actually leaving). It is likely to cause regression, particularly early, but really lasting a while.

You're absolutely right. And there really are people on here who ignore it and are happy about this. Somewhat nutty people, but they're here and they're loud. Losing either will be a blow. Losing both will seriously set this defense back. For a while. They'll be replaced, and Beane will do a good job, but being in a system for so long has benefits that won't be found in their replacements for a while in terms of instincts and understanding. People are going to be confused about how come we're allowing so many passes to the middle of the field.

We were supposed to lose Milano too. It could easily happen. But in the end, we won't know till we know.

Congrats!!! That's great news. Best wishes for health and happiness for all. They did clear up that space. Listening since then, they don't actually think the Bills will clear up that much. Agreed, he'll make some of them, and he'll be right in there trying to find bargains among mid- to low-priced FAs. He's been good at it, not perfect, of course, but definitely good.

I know, I mean Hodgins is a real talent. 392 yards. Wow!! I mean, he almost got as many as our other Isaiah who we may well not re-sign. I mean, Hodgins cleared 42 yards in ... how many .... in one game. Holy moses!!!!! And Gabe vs. Hodgins, 7 TDs vs. 4 TDs is not "on par." Nor is more than double the yards. If there's anyone he's close to on par with, it's McKenzie. One example is that McKenzie and Hodgins both had 4 TDs.

Minus $14M on the cap this year. Next year, 2024, they're less than a million over.

Moving on? Maybe. I'm not convinced, but maybe. Talking about moving on? Publicly? At this point? Dumb, IMO.

It's not "whoever they want." We never hear about all the folks they'd like to sign but can't or couldn't. The cap is real the way the guy in the Santa suit at the mall is real. Very. That guy might be flexible, as the cap is. But he exists and affects the world. The instant your team gives a dollar to a player, that dollar will hit the cap. No way to prevent it. You can delay it. And when you do you will have less money to spend on other things down the road. "ALWAYS" is absolute nonsense. The correct way to say that would be "sometimes." If your income goes up but you've already spent the extra, the raise just doesn't mean much to what you can buy. Yup, the credit card is an excellent analogy. Just as you can spend too much on your credit card and get yourself in trouble, teams can do the same with the cap. Doing it limits their options.

It helped that Texas ran 47% pass plays. Will Buffalo do the same? He is really good, no question. But picking him runs into opportunity cost problems and the fact that you don't want to take the ball out of Josh's hands too much.

Many of us have asked for that. Many of us have asked for a lot of things, some bizarre, some reasonable, some might happen, others probably not. People shout a lot of stuff from the cheap seats. They've fielded an excellent defense for a long time now. No particular reason to think they'll change the scheme unless forced to by circumstances. And part of the reason Milano in particular can run around with his hair on fire is precisely that that Edmunds is behind them not running around with his hair on fire, being more analytical, diagnosing and filling holes. They play complementary roles.

13 seconds won't. But there's certainly a non-zero chance that Leslie Frazier will. It's you who's kidding yourself that he won't be back if things fall right. There's a good chance they won't fall right, but if they do, they love Frazier here, and for good reason. This is my guess too.

You really can not. Unfortunately. There is some flexibility that smart GMs can take advantage of. But you can absolutely screw yourself. Which the Rams did, and that's why they're looking at options like this. The Bills are under the cap roungly $17M for this year, but for next year still over by about $14M, though that will go down as they fiddle with extensions and such to get under for this year. The Rams on the other hand are under the cap for $14M this year and already under the cap for next year by $19M. They're in trouble. And you can get there - quick - by making enough dumb moves. Sorry, man, that's simply not true. Was Geno Smith undervalued? The answer is an obvious yes. The new contract tells you how wildly undervalued he was. There are plenty of undervaued guys. Scouting is a very imperfect enterprise as it depends a lot on factors like scheme fit, player motivation, situation fit and plenty of others.

He's not average, nor was Russell. Good deal for both sides.

Yeah, wouldn't mind that at all, if doable.

If that was going to happen, why release him? This gives everyone a shot at him. Clark won't miss using that to his benefit. No comp picks for guys you cut. Contract has to expire.

Yeah, this is why I hope Bijan Robinson is still there. He'd incentivize a team to trade up. He'll likely be gone, but I'd love it if he's still there and we could trade back. But all it really takes is one team to fall in love with one guy who's still there. This happens all the time. Could easily happen this year.

Bijan Robinson would be the perfect guy to trade down from. There are a bunch of guy who I'd like after trades down but until we know where the picks are, it's hard to say with any degree of reason. Just for gits and shiggles I'd say Mauch, Schmitz, Wypler, Bergeron, Michael Wilson, Zay Flowers, Josh Downs, maybe Mingo, Jayden Reed, or Christopher Smith. Not in order.

Me too, but pretty sure we're not the only ones to think this. It'll depend on the doctors reports. He's not going to fall to the 7th. Not unless the knee is an absolute ruin. That's Voorhees, not Vorhees.

Jeez, no. He'll cost too much. Great player, but we don't have the un-needed resources to get him, on the trade side or the salary side for a guy who would be a one-year rental for $10.5M or else a major drag on the cap for a major last contract for Henry, for a team that will throw the ball among the highest percentages in the league.

Nicely put. I can't fully understand those who disagree. It's the process, not the result. Guess it depends on what you mean by gimme. 85 - 95% chance, probably. Two 9-8 teams made the playoffs in the AFC this year. Barring a major Josh Allen injury, we aren't missing out on 9-8. Or 10-7 for that matter. Mostly likely not 11-6 either. It's not a mistake that Vegas has the Bills as huge faves for the division. They're right. That's what the bettors think, in huge numbers and for good reason.

I looked two pages ahead and nobody had answered you. Sorry if I missed it. Once any bonus money has been paid to a player, there's absolutely nothing that can be done. The team that paid the money must account for that money on their cap. Depending on what date the guy is traded on, you can fiddle a bit with which years the dead cap money must be accounted for against the cap. But it must be paid by the same team over this year and next. The only exception is a Barry Sanders type of situation where the player retires before the end of the contract and the team can sue to be paid back. In a trade, guaranteed money is different, as money guaranteed in the future will be paid for by the team receiving the player in the trade. That team would take over the guarantee. But no, once bonus money has been paid, the team that paid that money is liable for it. There is no way around that.