hondo in seattle

Is this true? If so, it shows what an inexact science talent evaluation is. If I was an agent, I would remind all my undrafted clients of this.

I don't watch college ball. My knowledge of prospective draft picks is limited to what I read before the draft including the good stuff provided here by people like GunnerBill. So I don't have a strong opinion about the specific players. I was however happy to see we addressed the lines. There's still some truth to the old adage that games are won and lost in the trenches - even in today's passing NFL. A good OL makes a QB much more effective and keeps him alive & healthy. A good DL can make an opposing QB ineffective. At this point, I've concluded that Beane isn't Matt Millen. Beaner and his scouting staff are good at their jobs and know far, far, far more about college prospects than I do. So I'm optimistic and looking forward to seeing what our new Bills can do. Though, as a Purdue alum, I was disappointed we didn't end up with Rondale Moore. That kid is a rocket.

Agreed. It's always fun when amateurs critique experts. When I was overseas waiting to go to war, I could only laugh at some of the media assessments of the pros & cons of our strategy & tactics. Very few military observers were at all astute. Many were downright clueless. The average football fan has extremely limited knowledge of a draft class. Even the media draft gurus can't come close. A NFL club has a team of professional scouts, doctors, private detectives, analytic experts, as well as a wide network of external sources. Some draft gurus will be honest enough to tell you which games they watched. In some cases, they only watched and graded three games of a particular player. A NFL scouting department will watch all the games, talk to the coaches, talk to the player, and so on. My personal budget for researching college players: $0. An NFL team spends millions. I appreciate that the NFL GM ranks have included guys like Matt Millen. But second-guessing good GMs, like Beane, is a task for fools and fans.

The YPC comparison isn't really valid. Defenses were more run heavy in those days. Last year, defenses only sent out 3 or more LBs on 24% of snaps. The LBs who do get on the field these days are generally better in coverage but worse at tackling than the LBs in Thurman's day. But mostly we're asking Moss to break tackles of sleight CBs. You allude to the other shortcoming of the comparison. The 90s Bills ran a lot. This meant opponents actually schemed to stop Thurman. Count the number of DBs that Josh was looking down last season. Defenses had no respect for our run game. Nearly every defender out there was a pass rusher or pass coverage guy. This is a fair argument. I know some teams actually have a budget for each position group. I get the impression that Bean has decided to prioritize his financial and draft capital on throwing the ball and stopping our opponents from throwing on us.

I'm kinda thinking what people say about good players not deserving HOF induction. It's the Wall of Fame, not the Wall of Very Good.

I'm not sure where I'd put RB on the list. It's not our most glaring need, for sure. We scored a lot of points last year with the folks we had. Still I hated seeing KC in a 4-1-6 and other teams likewise selling out to stop the pass. To prevent that we either need to upgrade the line or the RBs or both. We did a little - not a lot - to help both position groups this offseason. We'll see how it works out.

Thanks for the Hon-Do-It story. It's kind-of the origin story of my own nickname. Cool stuff. My wife - who controls the remote - really liked Shemar Moore on Criminal Minds. Maybe I should convince her to try the new SWAT. I recently read that there are 3 or more LBs on the field only about 24% of the time in 2020. Back in 2008, that number was over 50%. Back in Jim Brown's day, I'm guessing it was close to 100%. Today there are more CBs on the field. And the LBs who are out there are smaller than the LBs of Dick Butkus' time. Today, once a back is past the DL, he's facing smaller, though quicker, guys than the backs of old. If Campbell was a man amongst boys back in the 70s, that would be even more true today. I think the OJs and Barry Sanders of the world are super fun to watch. But given what today's defenses are built like, a good power back would be a great addition to the Bills. More Yeah, it's interesting how many good-to-great running backs the Bills have had over the years and how few good/great quarterbacks. If in today's game I could choose Josh or Thurman, I'd choose Josh. No doubt. But how fun would it be to have both?

Funny - SWAT is where my nickname comes from. My HS head coach used to mispronounce my last name, calling me something the first syllable of "Hondo." Another player added the -do. Embarrassingly, there was a drill we did where my form was a little goofy (some might say not very masculine though I would strongly disagree) and it became known as the Hondo Drill. The Assistant HC made me lead the drill since it was named after me. Since I was leading it, I refused to actually do it. Screw 'em, dammit, if they're going to laugh at my pigeon legs! Given that defensive speed is more important than size these days, and LB coverage skills are arguably more important than tackling skills, I think a back like Earl Campbell would be a wrecking ball. If you're a DC facing us, do you blitz from the outside when Earl might come crashing up the middle? Do you load the box to stop Earl when Josh is slinging it all over the field? There are no good answers.

I'm sure it'll 'get handled.' But let me fantasize for a second as I did in another thread. Imagine OJ or Thurman in the backfield. Or even Freddy or Cribbs. Kansas City won't be able to line up in a 4-1-6. It's a pick-your-poison scenario. DCs can't sell out. A franchise back doesn't just make the running attack better, he makes the passing attack better by forcing teams to respect the run.

This is insane. I can't believe someone took the time to do this!

Kiper says it's a "head-scratcher" that we didn't find a RB on Day 2 or 3. But we already have Day 2 backs on our roster now. The elite backs were gone by the time we picked at #30. Motor says he'll be a different back this year. Some say Breida has untapped potential. A couple posters think Moss will come into his own in his sophomore year. And the trenches set insist our OL will be better this year, giving Moss & Motor the space they need to be effective. I hope somebody's right because our offense was one dimensional last year.

Ever the optimist, I thought there was hope for Rob Johnson, JP Losman, Trent Edwards and EJ Manuel. Oh, and I though Marv would be a good GM.

I loved the 90s Bills. Collectively they gave me many good days. But Beebe and his drops drove me crazy! Hopefully Stevenson has better hands.

I really, really hope one of them proves me wrong this season but all our backs are JAGs. The lack of respect they generate allowed the Chiefs to line up in a 4-1-6, blanketing our wideouts. Imagine if we had OJ in the backfield with Josh - or Thurman? Or even Freddy or Cribbs? What would a DC do? He’d have no good options. If a ‘franchise RB’ was available on Day One or Two, he’d be worth the pick.

I don't think your remark about DBs is necessarily true. I don't think Beane set out to draft DL in the first two rounds. I'm sure he had edge on his mind but these guys were drafted because Beane thought they're were the most likely to - eventually - make an impact. But you're right, too: a good DL makes DBs better!

I couldn’t quite grade it an A just because BPA and need didn’t always match up. But I’m happy Beane didn’t reach and took guys who might become good future starters. Not a ‘sexy’ draft - no skill players in the early rounds. But picking late, Beane stayed true to his board.

What RB do you want to draft who’s better than the backs we already have?

Yeah, our pass protection sucked that game. But overall, I think our passpro is better than our run blocking. I think that's intentional. I think, on a limited budget, Beane brought in FAs to be Josh's bodyguards. In a perfect world, you want Pro Bowl offensive linemen who can road grade as well as protect your QB. In a salary cap world in a passing league, it's better to find pass blockers than run blockers. What Beane's been doing got us to the AFC Championship game. But to go further, we have to find ways to energize the run game.

I agree he's exaggerating to make a point. But there is a valid point there: Motor didn't always make lemons when given lemonade. And, look, I'm not absolving the OL. I watched Willie Ellison break Cookie's pro football single game rushing record in 1971 when he gained 247 yards on 26 carries. Most folks here probably don't remember Ellison. He wasn't a spectacular back but the holes that day were so big and lasted so long that you or I could have rolled a keg of beer through them. Neither Moss nor Motor ever see holes like that. But, damn, KC was lining up in a 4-1-6 and we still couldn't run. That's not all on the OL. The Chiefs sold out to stop the pass and dared us to run. We can't let teams do that in 2021. We need to be multidimensional. Both our OL and our RBs need to get better. So I'm hoping the change in Singletary is real.

I hope so, too. They said you can't teach accuracy. Look what happened with Josh. And they say you can't teach explosiveness. I guess we'll find out. But wouldn't it be fun if Motor took a leap as big as Josh's?

I laugh - but only because I agree. Our OL did not create a lot of holes for either back. Singletary can be a patient runner. I don't think that worked to his advantage last season. He would wait for an opportunity that never presented itself. Moss just went where the play was designed, whether there was a hole there or not. To me, these are the key sections of the article: "Hicks, who has worked magic with backs like Dalvin Cook, J.K. Dobbins and Jerick McKinnon, supplied what he calls a “humbling assessment” of Singletary’s game: Too much dancing, too slow, no explosion. And Singletary embraced it all. Singletary — 2 ½ months later — is now a different running back." And... "You’d think Singletary essentially is what he is at this point physically. Not so, Hicks says. He’s adamant that everything is 'trainable.' Start with explosion. Singletary’s greatest gift is elusiveness but, too often, he overplayed his hand. Too often, he juked himself right out of the frame. All of those dancin’ numbers — while perfect for any wedding, any Saturday night — muddy explosion. 'Motor’s got all the tools to just break one guy down in the open field and make him look like he’s never played football before,' Hicks says. 'But sometimes, you don’t have to do that. It’s all about explosive plays. I look at Motor’s explosive plays, man, and there’s not many. I think he has one carry over 30 yards for his career.' 'That speaks volumes. We’re not getting explosive plays. Why? Because we’re doing too much when all we need to do is just enough and then, also, you’re not accelerating through your cut. You need to put your foot in the ground and just go.'”

You're right - Motor isn’t Shady. But do you think Singletary attacked the designed hole as aggressively as Moss? I don’t.

I usually don't like threads that rehash old news. But this subject never gets old. It's amusing to me how much faith some of the analytics guys place in their numbers. There are always outliers. There's always a context that's unquantifiable. NFL talent evaluation is going to remain as much art as science for the foreseeable future. Physically, Allen had skills that weren't fully honed. Mentally, he possessed a "growth mindset" that would enable him to develop those skills. Beane saw this. The stat geeks didn't because they weren't evident in the numbers. Prescient note at the end of the article: "Allen will have a chance to be an NFL quarterback. One side will be right. The other side will ignore the result as a fluke and continue unfazed." And that's exactly what happened. The analytics guys (like the author) see Allen as a fluke, not a damning testimonial about the limitations of their methodology.

Sadly, I'm not invited to any NFL scouting meetings. I don't know if teams are overthinking the Justin Fields thing.

I think you missed the heart of the article. It wasn't about Motor as a good guy who works hard. Well, it was a little. But the beating heart of the article was about Motor doing specific drills to overcome his evident shortcomings - make him more explosive and decisive. Folks quoted in the article insist that we'll see a different Singletary this year. I'm hoping my own skepticism (mentioned above) is wrong and their optimism is right.