hondo in seattle

The 40 hour work week/overtime, medicare, medicaid, minimum wage, social security - these are all socialistic programs. Every country is somewhere on the continuum between pure socialism and pure capitalism. The Nordic Model of socialism - which leans more to the left than we do in the U.S. - produces countries/economies that seem to do well. Finland, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Sweden all score highly, for example, in the World Happiness Report. I'm certainly not advocating socialism - merely pointing out a few things. Oh, and I think it's great the Bills are giving a platform for their players to speak out on social justice.

I don't want to disparage an ex-Bill but... the funny thing about this highlight reel is that there are no real highlights. He never does anything that any other NFL fullback couldn't do. He looks slow and unagile even in his best moments. I get his locker room leadership contribution but we won't miss him on the field of play.

Good point. After I posted, I started thinking who else on the Bills belonged in the top 100 and while you could make a case for Edmunds, there really wasn't anyone who was a slam-dunk choice. What Beane and McD have created is a team with a lot of good players but few real superstars. I'm sure they're drafting for superstars but in free agency, Beane is more interested in the affordable solid starter and strong backup than he is in the overpriced Pro Bowler. Development of our younger draftees and a playoff run this year (fingers crossed) will put more Bills on the ESPN radar.

Given that those 100 spots are divided up by 32 teams, you'd expect the Bills to have at least 3 or 4 players ranked. I'm not sure ESPN gives us enough credit.

Good prediction - just a few years too late. The Nickel became the base defense in the NFL back in 2011. That was the first year that defenses had 5 (or more) DBs in coverage on more than half the snaps. These days teams have 5 (or more) DBs on 2 out of 3 plays - more or less. It seems to me - in this pass happy league - CBs are more important than ever. https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/heres-why-the-nickel-defense-is-the-new-base-defense-in-the-nfl/

We can criticize McD's game management and other things. But I look at the big picture. Before McD, we never went to the playoffs. After McD, we've been to the playoffs in 2 out of 3 seasons. And we've got to assume McD's still learning. Belichick had one winning season during his six years with the Browns. He made the playoffs once in his first three years with the Patriots. But he learned, he got better, and now some consider him the greatest NFL coach of all time. I don't know how good McD will become but I do think he'll also get better. And I like the Steeler model - one head coach change every decade or so. If you find a good coach - not necessarily the best coach - stick with him. Continuity in the coaching staff is important. Extending McD is great news.

The NFL might be different but most business deals are executed with borrowed and/or investor money. There are terms can't be met when revenues are lost. I'm certainly not saying the NFL should prioritize business over health but I'm sure team owners are facing a lot of pressure to make the season happen. If there's any hope they can have a season despite COVID 19, they'll chase that hope - and not just out of greed.

Shaq had 16.5 sacks over the past four years. Addison had 39 over the span. Shaq's best year during that span wasn't as productive as Addison's worst. Lawson has played like a backup during his career so far. Mario plays like a bona fide starter. Age is the only wild card complicating the comparison. At 32, will Addison slow down or become more fragile? And Shaq has already played four years in the NFL so you would think he's already hit his peak. But maybe he's a late bloomer - like Addison.

Bryan Cox Jr. being on the team reminds me of this...

In regards to Diggs, he has a right to be concerned. Either the NFL needs to cancel the season or take effective precautions. It can't be football as normal - that just isn't responsible. I'm not certain what the 'effective precautions' might be (hopefully something more robust than banning jersey exchanges!) but there's another thread about modified football helmets. Since Covid 19 is spread primarily by respiratory droplets (and, maybe, respiratory aerosols) a modified football helmet like the one below might help. https://www.americanfootballinternational.com/is-that-what-an-nfl-covid-19-helmet-could-look-like/

Since the emerging science tells us that Covid-19 is primarily spread through respiratory droplets, a modified mask would be a huge help. Here's what it could look like. https://www.americanfootballinternational.com/is-that-what-an-nfl-covid-19-helmet-could-look-like/

This is a fair point. The other criticisms I received are too, as a matter of fact. But I'm still unimpressed by this poll. Granted fifty guys working in the NFL can probably grade NFL players better than 50 random fans but I still think ESPN's anonymous panel of judges is flawed. ESPN said they asked more than "50 league executives, coaches, scouts and players" to rank players. An "executive" could be a GM or Director of Pro Personnel. Someone like that would be an expert. But an executive could be the VP of HR or IT. We don't know what execs ESPN talked to. Even coaches may not be great overall evaluators of NFL talent. How much does the Assistant RB Coach in San Francisco study AFC quarterbacks? I don't necessarily trust ESPN to put together a group of fifty fully qualified personnel experts. I think they probably got whatever fifty NFL-connected people they could convince to do the poll. We all know JA took a big step forward from Year 1 to Year 2. If he takes a similar step forward again this year, he'll be a Top 10 or 15 QB. If he doesn't step up, we're in trouble. No one - certainly not a nameless ESPN panel of random NFL employees - knows whether or not JA will improve this year or by how much. All we can do is hope for the best.

Although I certainly hope Josh performs like a top ten QB this season, I think putting Josh somewhere between 15 and 20 is realistic. 19 QBs received votes in the ESPN informal survey. Josh wasn't one of them. I personally think JA is in the top 19.

JA, with no votes at all, wasn't even in the top half of NFL starting quarterbacks. It's good to know, though, that games aren't played in the imaginations of a motley assembly of fifty or so NFL employees. The voters included NFL scouts. Scouts are experts in college football. I wonder how well they keep up with the development of professional players. The voters also include NFL players. So I wonder how much does a special teamer from the Saints know about AFCE quarterbacks. The voters also include NFL execs. And here I wonder how much the VP of Communications in Seattle knows about Josh Allen. Just because a guy has a job in the NFL doesn't mean he has an expert, comprehensive knowledge of all the players and can accurately project their play in 2020.

If Smoke can catch Allen's passes, Knox needs to as well.

By definition, a name is "offensive" if people are offended by it. While different polls have produced different results, last year Berkeley conducted the biggest poll on the issue yet. 49% of Native Americans surveyed said they were offended by the name "Redskins." https://wtop.com/washington-redskins/2020/02/study-redskins-name-more-offensive-than-previously-reported/ Additionally, the National Congress of American Indians, the Navajo Nation, the Osage Nation, the Seminole Nation, the Oneida Indian Nation, the Comanche Nation of OK, the Cherokee Nation of OK, the Hoh Indian Tribe, the Shoshone-Bannock tribes, the Samish tribe, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, the Little River Band of Ottowa Indians, and several other indigenous organizations have all condemned the name. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Washington_Redskins_name_change_advocates Would it be acceptable to name a team Whiteskins? Blackskins? Yellowskins? I don't know why anyone would want to offend our Native American brothers and sisters for the sake of maintaining the name of a team that plays a game. As a loyal American and combat veteran, I strongly feel that Americans should have each others' backs - not offend and disregard each other.

Thanks MGK. You and I are aligned. Let Allen loose. Encourage him to take more chances. With Moss and Motor, the Bills should - hopefully - be able to run both inside and out. And if Allen is throwing deep effectively, even with a few extra picks, defenses will be forced to defend the entire field horizontally and vertically. Few defenses can do that well.

I don't disagree with the folks who say Allen needs to put a little more air under the ball. But here's something else I thought all season long last year. Allen looks like a guy who's afraid to throw a pick. His deep balls tend to be overthrown. It's as if he's throwing to spot he know the DB can't get to, instead of a spot the receiver can. This happens when a QB is coached hard about ball security. Or when a QB throws a bad pick and then gets gun shy. I'm not sure what happened to JA but I'm convinced he puts just a little extra on the ball when he releases it to make sure it's not picked off because it was underthrown. It might not even be a conscious thing. In fact, it's probably not. But it's there. Oops - just saw that QB Bills posted the same thought a couple minutes ago. Great minds think alike!

Since you mentioned Fergy... Ferguson only completed 49.5% of his passes during his first five years with the Bills (1973-1977). During the rest of his career in Buffalo, he completed 53.9% of his passes. His other passing stats got better as well. As I mentioned before, some QBs get better with experience. Allen got better from Year 1 to Year 2 and it's not unreasonable to predict he'll continue to get better in Year 3. The part of accuracy that's really hard to fix is throwing-a-ball-through-a-tire accuracy. This might be better termed "precision." While reps and mechanics can help, it's mostly a DNA-driven, God-given talent. But in football, we mostly measure accuracy by completion percentage and QBs can improve their completion percentage a number of different ways. Maybe the most common is just getting better at finding the open receiver so you don't have to thread a needle. Good play calling by an OC who understands the QB's strengths and weaknesses helps too. As does better pass protection. And fielding receivers who can both create separation and catch. If a combination of improvements gets Josh to a 65% completion rating and a 90+ passer rating, does it really matter that once-in-a-while he overthrows a receiver because his precision with the ball isn't as consistent as Brady's or Brees'?

Then you're a better man than I am. I'd absolutely wear a headset at least once if I owned the Bills. The BN reports that Kim was talked into it by the VP of IT who told her, "If you really want to what's going on on the field, you need to be on the headset." That makes me think he's been on the headset. And that makes me wonder, who else has been on headsets? Maybe it's not uncommon for the coaches to have silent eavesdroppers.

Lombardi knows much, much more about football than I ever will but I don't think his doubts about Josh's future are any more sound than my cautious optimism. Some QBs seem to reach their peak in college or very early in the pros. Others continue to grow and develop during their NFL career. Brady made a huge leap from decent Michigan starter to NFL GOAT. Brees made a huge leap from mediocre SD starter to NO superstar Jim Plunkett made a huge leap from disappointing NE starter to Super Bowl MVP in Oakland. You can't tell when a QB is going to stop growing until he stops growing. JA is still on a upward trajectory and no one knows where he'll land.

It depends on the character of the involvement. If Kim starts calling plays and Terry starts making draft picks, there's a huge problem. But going to games, attending practices, and even wearing headsets simply shows they're interested and care about what's going on. I'd rather have engaged (but not meddling) ownership than absentee owners. And, c'mon Kirby, if you owned the Bills, you wouldn't want to listen in at least once?

Understandably, the results reflect some homerism. But all in all, the results are reasonable. At the time of my viewing, the Bills are the most popular pick for AFCE champs. Stefon Diggs is the top vote getter for receiving yards. Epenesa is tied for predicted sacks leader.

I don't think the turnover reflects badly on McD at all. When McD was named HC, I'm sure he knew who he wanted on this staff. I'm also sure that most of the coaches he wanted were already under contract. So he hired the best staff he could from a limited pool of available NFL-caliber coaches. Since then McD has been working diligently to upgrade his staff as a good HC should. Belichick didn't begin his tenure in New England with his dream staff either. It takes time to put a high performing coaching staff together. And it seems to me McD is methodically and successfully assembling a highly competent team of subordinate coaches.

I'm not knocking the OP's suggestion but I think the best way to end the debate is to simply stop debating. I'm also a combat vet and I will stand with my hand over my heart every time the anthem is played to honor my fallen comrades. I will not debate with anyone who chooses to do something different. This country was founded on the idea of individual liberty.