hondo in seattle

I don't know if Allen will ever be a good QB. But I do know that QBs playing for offenses that are well-oiled, finely tuned machines are more productive. When a receiver (and we have a bunch of young ones) cuts a bit too soon, or too late, or takes a slightly angle after the cut, the result can change from a completion to something else. And PFF can't account for this because they don't know what the receiver was supposed to do. The pass looks errant and that's how it's graded. Or imagine this. The beginning of the play is going well. The snap is perfect. The QB drops back and plants his feet just the way he's been coached. The OL creates a good pocket and the QB can see downfield clearly. As he scans the defense, the QB realizes his pre-snap read was spot on. The play is unfolding just as he hoped and gets ready to launch the ball... and that's when something goes wrong with the WR. He cuts right instead of left or slips behind the DB instead of cutting in front. Now the QB is stressed. He knows his OL isn't very good and the pocket won't last much longer. He quickly searches for his #2 target. The guy is covered but the QB doesn't believe the pocket will last much longer so he hurriedly forces the pass anyway. Incomplete. PFF scores the pass poorly but had the primary receiver run his route right, the pass would have been complete. If the QB had more confidence in the OL, he might have taken the time to find the open checkdown. A QB on a high functioning offense will play better than a QB on a dysfunctional offense. The Bills offense is closer to the "dysfunctional" end of the spectrum than the "high-functioning" end. This isn't a good environment for any QB, let alone a rookie.

Thanks for posting, Thurm. While some of the details are interesting, I don't think this article tells us anything we don't already know. The more basic stats (like completion percentage) - and our own eyes - have already informed us that Josh has not been an accurate passer this season. Josh's accuracy this year is not the real debate. The more meaningful debate is how much he'll improve as a QB from Year 1 to Year 2. I have not heard a convincing argument from either side. Some say accuracy is a genetic hand-eye thing that does't ever get better. Others say there are a lot more factors to completion percentage than precision with the ball: biomechanics, predictable & precise route running by the WRs, the ability to find the open guy (easiest target), and so on. Certainly some QBs have improved upon their Year 1 completion percentage. Some have not. Personally, I really don't know what to expect from Josh next year.

I'm not sure how many people remember that. Fergy's main task in his early years was to give the ball to OJ. But later on he evolved into a good QB. In 1975, we had the best offense in the NFL by a good margin - leading the league in both yards and points.

Say whatever you want about JA's potential, our QB play would not have been good this year even with Woods and Cogs. It would be interesting to see what our passer rating or QBR is when our QBs are not under pressure. I doubt it would compare well with the rest of the league. Nonetheless, I think if both Woods and Cogs played another year, our offense would have be much better - not great but reasonably competent. Defenses don't respect our running attack. They don't respect our passing attack. They control the line of scrimmage. In other words, opposing defenses dictate to us instead of the other way around. Our OL problem is worse than our WR problem. Young QBs like Nate and Josh are even more susceptible to pressure than vets. And while all RBs need holes to run through, a scatbook like Shady needs space to do his best work. His agent agreed to the restructured contract. Why would Beane be wary when Incognito's agent agreed? Cogs' behavior at the time was so back-and-forth and bizarre, I can't blame the FO.

Everyone should start a thread on some belief. Makes this site so much more interesting.

Maybe. But most of the people that you probably see as Kool-Aid drinkers are actually arguing against prejudgment rather than taking a judgmental opinion on the positive extreme. When Beane's obvious plan is to make 2019 and beyond into good years by putting all his dead cap dollars into 2018 and freeing up massive amounts of cap space in 2019 and 2020, it's hard to judge him on this season's results. It was never his plan to be good this year so how do we know if his plan is working or not? The good stuff, by design, is supposed to come later on. And when McD has the lowest paid (i.e. least talented) roster in the NFL this season, it's hard to judge him on this year's W-L record. Let's see what happens next year.

I already mentioned Walsh's rebuild in SF and Carroll's rebuild in Seattle. There are many others.

If you think it's just a narrative, you don't understand the NFL. The best teams manage the cap well and there's a huge correlation between active roster spending and win totals. This season we're dead last in active roster spending. We're still paying for the sins of our past. Beane didn't inherit a wisely managed roster. He's using this year to fix it. He's doing exactly what we'd expect a good NFL executive to do.

Because the best two players on the OL retired. And our QB wasn't a Super Bowl calibre QB and had to be replaced. And our dead money and bloated contracts made sustained excellence impossible. Seriously, just go to Over-The-Cap, or a similar site, and within minutes you'll figure out what Beane is up to. Yes, losing organizations use "rebuild" as an excuse. But good GMs and HCs do successfully rebuild teams from time to time. That's why the excuse sometimes works. We don't know yet if Beane and McD will succeed. But the plan is obviously. We're going to start loading up in 2019 and continue into 2020.

You make it sound like Beane has a track record of wasting picks. He's been in charge of one draft. While the Bills have been rebuilding for decades, the current GM and HC have only a short time in their positions. Here's what Beane's accomplished so far in his short time with us. #2 defense in the NFL. #3 most cap space in 2019 #1 most cap space in 2020 10 draft picks in 2019 This year we had the lowest active roster spending in the NFL. Beane had exceptionally little money to spend on free agency by - as much as possible - taking hits this year to free up cap space for the future. So this season McD had a talent-poor roster to work with and never had a fighting chance. This year was all about making 2019 and 2020 good years. Let's see what Beane and McD do next year before judging them on a plan that was never designed to produce a lot of wins in 2018. $100 million in cap space and 10 picks in the draft can fill a lot of the holes you mention. And no team is entirely without holes.

Bill Walsh in his book (The Score Takes Care of Itself) talks very eloquently about the intentional execution of his rebuilding plan for the 49ers. Walsh (as both HC and GM) went 2-14 his first season. But he got rid of his excuse-ridden vets and brought in a bunch of young guys who fit his culture. That worked out okay. When Pete Carroll and John Schneider took over the 'Hawks they turned over the entire roster in two years (save two players). All that transition was difficult and Pete had a losing record his first two years in Seattle. Then he won a SB in his 4th season. Are you saying rebuilds are never done on purpose but instead happen only by accident???

I'm not sure what the main point of this post is... or why it warrants its own thread. While I agree with the OP in some cases, his post seems like a collection of random thoughts that belong in existing threads.

Most of the people who looked at this year's - and next year's - roster spending realize that 2018 is very intentionally a rebuilding year. Those who have not grasped this before aren't going to grasp this now because we've added yet another thread.

I agree, it is weird. It makes you wonder if maybe there's some kind of cause-and-effect thing going on. I once watched Willie Ellison of the L.A. Rams rush for an amazing 247 yards (on just 26 carries) - the NFL record at the time. Most folks on this site probably don't remember Willie and I don't blame them. He spent most of his NFL career as a backup because he wasn't very good. I'm not really sure because football is a complicated sport and I'm not a smart man. But the Mack truck sized holes opened up by the Rams OL that record-setting day may have helped Willie in some strange way. Then again, maybe it was something else. Who knows? Maybe there's no connection at all between OL play and RB production, and RB stats are determined solely by the RB.

I suspect the relationship between McD is what they say it is: Beane is in charge of adding to the roster and McD has the authority to drop people from the roster. But they also say they talk a lot and influence each other. McD has input on FA signings and draft picks. Beane has input on roster cuts. I do think you're first question is a good one. Normally, you'd expect the GM to outrank the HC. But did McD - in effect - hire Beane? Hard to know. If so, does McD have greater input in Beane's world than they let on? I don't blame Beane for putting us in Cap Hell this year to make next year better. And I don't blame McD for losing 10 games with the lowest paid roster in the NFL (by far). But you're right - next year is different. Next year puts us 3 years and 2 drafts into Beane's regime. We ought to see progress.

How do you know what McD "wanted"? Wanting is a feeling that exists within a person. Unless McD articulated his wants to you - and I suspect he didn't - I don't think you know what he wanted. All you know - to a small degree - is what he did. Coaches are rarely in the position of doing what they really want - which is fielding a team with Pro Bowlers at every position. What we see on the field is what they've been able to do with the resources they got. It's the negotiated compromise between aspiration and realism. And McD is clueless in assessing talent? McD is the coach, not the GM. In any case, if you are going to evaluate McD's performance, please share your qualification to make such extreme global remarks like "McDermott is clueless." How many rings do you have? McD - like all coaches - has made mistakes but he's far from clueless. The question that remains is if he's making smaller mistakes than other NFL HCs? And is he counterbalancing his mistakes with enough good decisions to create a winning team? These are questions worth arguing. NFL coaches exist on a continuum. None are perfect geniuses and none are entirely clueless. They've all worked many years to improve their craft. Some are more successful at this than others. I'm not sure yet where to rank McD because this year he's been saddled with the lowest paid roster in the NFL. It's hard to look good right now with these players. I do believe, though, that everything going on with the salary cap is purely intentional. Beane has talked very openly about the need for clearing up cap space. We have tons of cap space available in 2019 and 2020 because of Beane's cap management decisions. Bean's roster moves hurt this year but give us a better future.

I'm uncertain about your knowledge of stats. Yards-per-game is a meaningful - if imperfect - stat. We're #18 in points-per-game which, granted, is a more meaningful stat. That puts us in the middle of the NFL, not at the "bottom" as you state. We're #1 in forced fumbles and # 8 in interceptions so I'm not sure why you say we're in the "bottom" of defensive turnovers. Defensively, besides yards per game, we do well in some other stats that matter... #1 in forced fumbles #1 in passing yards #1 in yards per completion #2 in yards per play #3 in yards per drive #3 in net yards per pass play #6 in drive success rate (a FO metric) #6 in passer rating #8 in interceptions #9 in passing TDs #10 in rush yards per attempt

The stats really aren't that misleading. We're #2 in yards allowed because we've been 'gashed' less than other teams. Our D had a bad day against the Pats. Every team has bad days. Other teams have had more bad days than us and that's why they're below us in the defensive stats. Point differential is a blended O/D stat and our popgun offensive isn't helping that number. The O is not producing points, not holding onto the ball, and not winning the battle of field position. All those things put stress on the D and effect point differential and points-allowed stats. Our D isn't great. But it is good.

Those aren’t tears in my eyes. Thanks fir posting, PIZ.

Obviously with one of the worst offenses in the league - and one of the better defenses - the priority is offense. But I'm sure McD and Beane both have a few defenders on their Xmas list. And - like most GMs - Beane will probably blend BPA with need. So I'm expecting a few defensive guys in the draft and/or free agency.

While I don't agree with everything, I do appreciate a well-thought out, intelligent post. Nice job, jwhit. It's going to be a very interesting free agency and we'll learn a lot about Beane. I suspect he'll go after value signings rather than overpay for stars - we'll know for sure in a few months.

After we got into the playoffs last year, I thought "This could be the start of something good!" Then we lost the better half of our starting OL and traded away our QB. And then I noticed we had the lowest paid roster in the entire NFL." And so on. So I decided to treat this year like a very long preseason for 2019 and watch what the young players offer and how they develop. I'm not disappointed. McD's club shows a lot of teamwork and grit. The younger players are getting better. The D is ranked #2 in the NFL. And we have an immense amount of cap space to build a better offense next season. I guess "lost season" isn't a bad way to describe the 2018 Bills. But this was a necessary step to a good 2019 squad. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic.

This a false comparison: a rookie versus a vet.

Being an OC in the NFL is a lot like being a contestant on the Food Network's "Chopped" tv series where contestants are given "mystery baskets" of ingredients and asked to make something good with them. Sometimes the ingredients suck so bad that even the most talented chefs struggle to cook anything palatable. But owners want a HC who has produced gourmet meals. Daboll hasn't done that in any of his gigs as an OC. I don't think he gets a HC shot until the O becomes productive.

I'll take passer rating over QBR but they both fall way short. Passing games are so dependent on scheme, talent and execution that you can't take box score stats and evaluate a QB - no matter what stat lines you include or how you weigh them. Some of the analytics guys start looking at how many passes are catchable and so on. But that still doesn't capture everything. For example, ask a QB how frustrating it can be when WRs don't run their routes precisely. No stat will take that into account. Good QB stats mean that team has a good passing attack going. And that reflects well on the QB. But it's far from the whole story.