Ronin

No doubt. Dickerson's single season too, but yeah, that 14-game season makes a huge difference.

Yeah, I agree that he had to be seen, which I didn't see. But I'd definitely say Sanders or him w/o much debate otherwise. Again, particularly if longetivity is in the mix. Brown quit early on top following a monster season at age 29.

I'd agree with that, especially if we're talking about longetivity as part of the mix. If we're talking single best season there's lots of room for debate.

Point is tho that Allen doesn't see the area of the field where slot receivers typically are located on routes. So Beasley will go underutilized unless Allen significantly tweaks his game. I'm not big on TEs early, they don't often pan out. Either way, and again, TE isn't a position that Allen favored last season. I'll use his last six games only, but in those last six games the TEs had only 17 targets, 10 catches, and 134 yards from the TEs, collectively. That's an average of 3 targets, not even 2 catches, and about 22 yards-per-game. I'm firmly convinced that Allen needs at least two top-notch OL-men from this draft, meaning that our 1st and either 2nd or 3rd in a deep draft for linemen should be used on them. Allen needs to learn to scan the entire field, locate the open receivers, take his time, etc. That's a tall order given where he is right now. TEs and WRs really aren't going to help calm him down like that nearly as much as OL-men are. Otherwise we're in the same spot as last season and he won't progress. I'm not of the mind that he's going to magically progress simply because he's in his second season. They need to specifically focus on what his primary issue is, and right now it's that he doesn't see the entire field. As I've said, I'm not sure how one "coaches that in," but having him settle down and take more time than the average QB is allotted sounds like a good start to me, the only start.

I won't disagree on Beasley, on many teams he's a bona fide #1 slot WR. I simply don't see him doing that here, and frankly, if Allen' doesn't begin throwing for more than 200 ypg, no one's going to be doing much of anything. Point there also being that Allen didn't make use of that position much last season. Even Jones, whose role that was, seemed to make most of his catches downfield and along the sidelines, not primarily that role. Again, much of this comes down to what extent/degree people think that Allen's passing woes fall on him rather than on everyone else on the team ranging from WRs, to TEs, to OL, to poor RB play to balance. There seems to be a preponderance, understandably if not rationally, suggesting the latter rather than the former, which is where I sit. IMO Allen's passing woes have a whole lot more to do with Allen than anything else. Whether that can be and will be corrected is another issue altogether, but problem recognition is the first step towards problem correction. I'm not convinced that the team is pursuing the correct methodology to correct Allen's issues, or the passing issues, however one looks at it. One of those things being that his biggest weakness by a country mile is his short game, but the emphasis is clearly on giving him more deep tools to work with, which merely feeds the problem, not corrects it. We'll find out soon.

I said it, you ignored it in comp to Allen. Funny how that works. If you don't want me to respond, here's a thought, don't respond to me. Better yet, just put me on ignore.

Foster was ranked 145th in catch % last season, somewhat better than Jones who's horrible in that regard. So yes, that corresponds to not catching too many balls. And again, which few seem to have caugnt onto, his best games were with Anderson, Barkley and Peterman under center. He averaged 3.25 catches for 82 YPG under them for a YPR average of 25.4. He was notably worse with Allen. Even in his last three games with Allen back from injury he averaged 4 catches for 60 yards. Otherwise, I agree, we have a roster full of 3 WRs, possibly 2's, but not a bona fide #1 among them much less an impact WR. I anticipate that they'll grab a WR in round 2 or 3. They have to focus on OL-men tho in this draft. As I pointed out earlier, last year of their first 6 picks in the first five rounds, only two players were offense, one of which being Allen, Teller being the last of those picks near the end of the 5th. They've absolutely gotta reverse that this year and go O.

See ya John, nothing personal, I just can't put up with posts like this anymore. I don't have the inclination or patience. All you want to do is argue regardless of the data. You'll be on ignore for me, so if I don't respond to you, that's why.

I cited Driskel too. Unfortunate that you seem to think, inherently, that he's good or had a good situation. Not sure how to respond to that.

I'm not entirely diminishing him in that way, but honestly and by the same token you cannot insist that it's meaningless. He definitely deserves a shot on the roster, in fact, I'd say he's our #1 until proven otherwise. IMO we're going to see real quickly that Brown ain't all that. Once again, his catch % sucks, it's right down there with Jones. Also, as I've pointed out, the narrative on him simply doesn't fit. He's supposed to be this crazy deep threat, but out of only 22 career TDs, an average of merely 4/season, he has only three TDs of greater than 33 yards none having been in the last three seasons. 18 of his 22 were from 30 on down, 17 of 22 from 24 on down, and that's the total play, not even where he caught the ball, which obviously wasn't even that deep on most of those passes. Something's amiss between the narrative and reality there, partially the viability of the deep-ball in terms of contributing to more than a victory or two in a season.

The question wasn't whether you "auto expect failure. As I said, you seem to hound me insisting that Allen's a shoe-in for franchise status. I've never, ever, anywhere said that Allen's a definitive bust. All I've said, most of which seems to be ignored by posters such as yourself, and I said it again above, is that the odds are not in his favor as no QB prospect in modern NFL history has gone from the depths of where he is and has been, any and all excuses aside, to franchise status. If you disagree, same challenge to you as to anyone, find the exception. All we hear is about his deep-arm and how we need more "deep WRs" for him, which merely feeds the problem. The problem isn't his ability to heave the ball deep. But this notion that teams' records are even remotely hinged upon the deep ball is ridiculous. How often does it have to be stated, franchise QBs ALL have one thing in common, a superb short-medium game, which includes the Red Zone where A, no deep game exists, and B, where Allen was horrid last season, as in bottom-dwelling horrid. It's nice that you seem to think that the odds of him overcoming that are better than the odds of it not happening, and again, perhaps he will, I don't have a crystal ball, apparently you seem to however, but the reality is that it's a longshot at best. Sure, as with you, I hope to high heavens that he does. It'd be a dam refreshing change of pace for us, I'm simply not nearly as confident as everyone else is. It gets old having to listen to people insist that for whatever reason, players when they get here are all of a sudden outperform their career averages, like John Brown, or how we can expect them to repeat or improve upon their career bests simply because we sign them. Gore, at 36 is a good example. Everyone ignores the fact that he's been among the worst YPC RBs in teh league on average over the past four years while deferring to his singular stats from last season on a team where two other RBs posted even better YPC averages on a team with no pass-pro OL and nothing but a good running OL. Again, as one mere example among many. Also, people post carefully selected stats to start a thread and make a point and simply don't wnat to hear any other readily available data that's far more relevant to the very topic that they started. That's not much of a discussion forum, what they're looking for is to make a post and six pages of back-slapping in agreement. Why, beats me. I much prefer to deal with reality, not pie-in-the-sky nonsense. Excuses and exceptions can always be floated. Narratives do not overcome reality. And I'll give you a really good example. Last season we had the #2 ranked D, right? According to what? Yardage D. People ignore our 18th ranked scoring D or our 30th ranked Red Zone D, much less even begin to reconcile why the gap as such, similar to the season prior. Was there any mitigating circumstance? Well, if people look into it they'll see that our oppoinents had the best starting field position on average of any team in the league. That certainly explains some of it. Yet I don't think anyone here would even consider that. Nope. All they know is that we had the #2 D and they'll be shocked when we don't this season. It is what it is. It ain't what it ain't.

Be more specific? You're only citing the source for OL evaluation? You clearly stated that houston's was among the few worst. I used your standard to make the same point. So what's the problem now? Do you want to keep picking teams until you find one for which the argument can't be made? ... or what? That'd be a tough one too.

So because it's happened before means that it's a shoe-in here? Apparently that's your point. OK, if you think that's a wise take. Fair enough otherwise, but no matter how one looks at it, he still has miles to go to become an even average passer. Even taking just his last 6 games he averaged 51.9% compl., lower than his first 6 games, a mere 207 yards/game passing, and with the exception of that last Miami games still sucked in the Red Zone. I can see it happening but it's hardly a shoe-in that you seem to be insisting that it is. The leap that he has to make to hit franchise status as a passer is astronomical by NFL standards. The odds are not favorable, again, not to say that it's impossible, but he would be in record-breaking territory if he does it based upon last season's measurables. That's regarding Allen. As I've laid out, Jones played much better under Anderson, Barkley, and Peterman for four games. Hardly Brees, Brady, and Rodgers there.

Take it up with PFF. I'm sure that you'll have no difficulty accepting what they say that's positive about us without exception tho, right. Just sayin' . Otherwise, OK, Watson seems to have done well then, and his rookie numbers last season, presumably with a similar OL, were head-and-shoulders above Allen. Your point was? What, simply to argue PFF's OL rankings? Again, take it up with them. You can find ones you like and run the same comparison. The point remains unchanged.

Context. They do, but when a player's few biggest plays are on them it's not proof that that player, in this case a WR, can routinely put up those numbers w/o having broken coverages. Anyone can run downfield, have a coverage break down, make a catch for a TD. It's altogether a different ballgame, pun intended, to do so man-to-man while actually outplaying the defender. Quite simple. I'm finding a few of the comments refreshing today, yours included. They're still surrounded by the typical emotionally-led tripe, nonetheless. Also, good stat splits also lay some of this out factually as well, so there's that too.

Easy there chief, that's why I was asking. Agree with you on Jones, in fact, I don't think he survives the season here and if we draft a WR(s) in rounds 1-5, I'm guessing he has to fight for a roster spot. Beasley's presence has made him expendable to the extent that he had any value otherwise. As I've pointed out, he didn't do well with Allen under center when he averaged fewer than 3 catches for fewer than 40 yards-per-game and below 50% catch%. That doesn't bode well. Agree on the WRs with a lock. Having said that, I'm not sold that any will outdo their season averages under a QB that averaged a mere 170 or so passing yards-per-game last season. Unless of course there's a massive uptick in those numbers.

Fully agree that Jones is a garbage-time master, on both ends, routing and playing-from-behind. He was like that at EC too. He's far from being a clutch/impact player. As to Foster, his biggest plays as well were on broken coverages. One I just mentioned, forget the game, but his 75-yarder, was on a misread by the FS as he went uncovered on the early part of the route. I'm not sold that Foster is bad, but he definitely needs to show that he can catch regularly in coverage/man-to-man. Here's the thing re: Foster, like everyone else, he posted three of his four big games w/ Allen out, featuring Barkley in one, Peterman in another, and Anderson in the other two, not even any continuity. Still, in those four games he posted 13 catches for 330 yards for an average of 3 catches for 82 yards. Under Allen he had 14 catches for 211 yards for an average of about 1 catch for fewer than 20 yards/game. Everyone just looks at the bottom-line stats and discounts the how or why they're there. Remember, Allen, other than his two games vs. Miami, averaged a pathetic 162 yards/game otherwise. I don't care how you spread out 162 yards and one TD every other game, major-league improvement has to be made in Allen's game and it's his short-medium game that are going to have to fill in the gaps, not more deep stuff. Either way, when the team averages 215 yards and posts its two best passing games of the season featuring four different QBs, none of which have played regularly or recently besides Peterman, but under Allen it averages over 40 yards-per-game less, then I would think that that's an issue that can't be as easily overstepped as most are doing here.

Who hired Housely?

A good first step would be to create a chart of the starting units and rank each of those players from poor, fair, average, very good, exellent, and go from there. As of now Allen for better or worse is cemented in at the QB position and Morse who's probably above-average cemented at C. Seems to me that all of the other offensive positions are up-for-grabs. Dawkins will start but he's average. Foster, Beasley, Brown, and Jones will be around but none of them have proven to be above-average. Gore and Shady, well, if you're living in the past they'll be great, otherwise there's major cause for concern there. Defensively the secondary is good enough, Edmunds is cemented at MLB, Milano's probably above-average, but otherwise the DL's bereft of A-iist talent in a big way and Lorax at 36 was decent last season but has been very inconsistent during his stint with us. As well, he's a band-aid fix as he's likely retiring after the season, so he serves no long-term purpose. Of the six first picks on last year's draft thru round 5 four were defensive with only Allen and Teller being offensive, and Teller was the last of those six drafted towards the end of the 5th. Seems to me that they have to reverse that this season and go O-heavy in a similar manner. After all, the recurrent theme seems to be "giving Allen the tools that he needs," which isn't going to be helped by drafting defenders.

Also, one of Jones' two best and only noteworthy games was against the Jets with Barkley throwing. The other was that emotionally-charged Fins game to end the season where the entire team was playing on all cylinders against an apathetic Miami team. Jones averaged 5.25 catches for 48 yards in four games w/o Allen, which included games featuring one game with Barkley, two with Anderson, and one with Peterman. He averaged fewer than 3 catches for 38 yards with Allen. . He's clearly not Allen's favorite target. I see Beasley doing better. You see Jones making the team over Foster? interesting take. Curious the logic there. I see with Beasley on board Jones not getting many reps. Same role except that Beasley actually catches the balls thrown contrasted with Jones who ranks near the bottom, AHEM, alongside John Brown, for horrific catch %. Methinks that they had better draft at least two WRs in rounds 3 & 4. I'd say 1/2 but we need OL-men so badly first.

It was also a completely different era, one in which RBs and defense reigned supreme. Consider, Favre hit 39 TDs that season and it was considered all but monumental. Only one other QB threw for more than 30 TDs. Same with yards, only three QBs threw for more than 4,-000 yards, Brunnell led with 4,367. Last season 9 QBs threw for 30+ TDs and 12 had more than 4,000 yards. Average number of TDs in ''96 was 15. Average number of TDs last season was 22-24, 50% more. Average number of passing yards in '96 was around 2,700. Average number of passing yards last season was over 3,700.

No, but at the same time, read the above links. They refute what you just said. Again, referring to players that will actually make something of themselves in the NFL or those that get drafted in the 1st round. Other studies have shown that basketball and football players' graduation rates lag those of the student body at large. Keep in mind, that the number of athletes in sports other than those two by far outweigh the number of basketball and football players, which are probably around 120 total at any large school. That includes a wealth of walk-ons with little if any NFL caliber football talent too. Go thru our roster of starters for example and count how many have degrees. A simple exercise, might take you half-an-hour but doable. Mabye I'm off. You can also do the same for the first round last year. Consider the number of football and basketball players that are NBA or NFL caliber, few stick around for four years relatively speaking. The best ones fulfill their collegiate participation requirements and enter the draft. It's widely known that black athletes graduation rates are well below average for their schools. Seems to me that most great NBA and NFL players are black.

Perhaps at certain schools,, the Stanfords, Harvards, etc. I would argue otherwise and studies have produced results that disagree with that. What's your basis for stating that? Did you read a study recently that demonstrated that? And BTW, re: sports other than Basketball and Football it may be different, but we're talking football here. This is dated, 11 years old; https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/paper-trail/2008/12/30/athletes-show-huge-gaps-in-sat-scores Did you run across something more current that refutes that these days? Here's an article that sums it up exactly. No date so not sure when it was conducted. https://www.theclassroom.com/academics-college-athletes-vs-nonathletes-16678.html Some key excerpts: Although athletes as a whole perform well in college, athletes in some sports consistently underperform their peers. Students in the most competitive and popular sports like basketball and football tend to earn lower grades than other athletes. One explanation is that talented basketball and football players are held to looser admissions requirements than other athletes. Some top-tier athletes are allowed to enroll in college with poor high school grades and test scores, according to CNN. This suggests that college athletics may bear little relationship to academic success. Instead, the best predictor may be a student's high school academic preparation. The availability of tutoring for athletes and strong academic oversight by coaches may account for the difference. Again, this is suggestive that football and basketball players are favored for admissions due to their athletic abilities. Secondly, it also suggests that it's the other sports, which added up feature far more students than b-ball and football, are the ones pulling up any averages or graduation rates.

A college degree doesn't make someone intelligent. Keep in mind that most of these football players get into college not on the merits of their grades or SAT/ACT scores, they get in on the merits of their football skills, hence the athletic scholarship. Many struggle to maintain grades and anyone that's been to a school with a significant team of one sort or another knows that they pamper these kids academically and even provide an easy path of coursework thru their curriculums to grease the skids as it were. At my undergraduate institution students upon entering the class on the first day of classes, upon seeing a room full of players, realized that it wasn't going to be a difficult class. Status quo. Granted, there are some bright athletes, particularly in other sports, but it's far from the norm. As merely one case-in-point, look at what happens to many of these athletes after college that get drafted but bust, look at where many end up, on the streets, selling drugs, getting convicted of petty (or not so petty) crimes, etc. Those are not signs of intelligence. Just sayin'.

Make no mistake, McBeane's careers in Buffalo are directly tied to Allen. If Allen succeeds to the extent that he becomes a franchise QB, they'll be around for their five years and perhaps longer. IMO winning won't even be necessary as 7-9 to 9-7 will be fine as long as Allen turns into that QB. If he doesn't however, apart from this team being far from winning anything, they won't last long. The only question is how long do the Pegulas give to see if Allen works out, which is rhetorical at this point. If as many here suggest, he mimics Trubisky in his second season and posts an average season as a passer, they'll be around for all five. If however Allen continues to throw more INTs than TDs, or even close, and continues to struggle in the Red Zone and short-medium to the extent that it's obvious that Allen's become a huge project, I doubt that they see year 5 and the pressure will be coming from varying sources ranging from media to fans to find a new tandem. You cannot in essence exchange four day 1 & 2 picks, move up to get a QB while ignoring a host of other team issues, have that QB not turn into a franchise QB, and expect to keep your job. Especially since they bet-the-farm with "their guy" (Allen) that it would render their judgement, against the backdrop of relatively lackluster results in rebuilding the team otherwise, highly questionable at best.