hondo in seattle

Actually, I agree. As I was reading the Yahoo article, one of my thoughts was, "He sounds like Diggs. Only worse. And we just ate $31m to be done with Diggs!" So I started wondering what kinds of conversations took place between Claypool, Beane, and McD. Claypool must have impressed them that he's a changed man or else they wouldn't be giving him a chance. And the way McD has praised him, it sounds like we're off to a good start. I also wondered what Claypool's agent has said and done to help him. Because if I was his agent, I would have sent him to anger management classes and then hired a Life Coach with an advanced degree in psychology. Some players lack some of the physical skills it takes to succeed in the NFL and spend time working on those in the offseason. Claypool has lacked the emotional skills so maybe he's worked on those in the offseason? Or maybe adversity has forced him to grow up? We'll see. He has the physical talent to be an NFL starter but - so far - the emotional maturity of a high schooler. I'm sort of splitting the middle and guessing he earns a roster spot but as a backup.

You previously wrote that Claypool "repeatedly proven himself to be a loser" as if this guy is a total and perpetual failure in life with a long rap sheet of losing. Now you're saying he's a loser technically just once and realistically just twice. I feel like we're making progress! To each his own, but I don't like hanging definitive, immutable labels on people I don't personally know, especially in the face of contradictory evidence. As a football player, Claypool was a winner both in high school and college. And while he didn't set the world on fire, two of his four seasons in the NFL have been statistically decent. Teammates and coaches have spoken highly of his talent, work ethic, and will to win. They've also spoken about his bad temper. If Beane and McD didn't think there was some hope that he could turn things around, they wouldn't have him on the roster. Whether he does or not, remains to be seen. I'm keeping an open mind and, as a Bills fan, hoping for the best.

Way over his head? DC's have to be experts in offensive schemes. How can you stop an offense if you don't understand it? And who is better equipped to scheme against a defense than a defensive expert? I think it's safe to say that McD knows more about NFL offenses than 99.9999 of the people on the planet. Put me in charge of an NFL offense and I'll be in way over my head. McD is not in over his head. Bill Belichick, former DC, tinkered with the Pats offense all the time. On the whole, it worked out okay for him.

I did learn one thing from this thread: Douglas misses OTAs because he wants to spend time with his kids. I won't blame a guy for that.

Mup, the kid isn't lazy per se. But he is hot-tempered and emotionally immature. There's an article on Yahoo that I think presents a fair and balanced version of Claypool's NFL journey up to the time he was with the Bears (link below). He reminds me of Diggs - a talented, hard-working guy who hates losing and sometimes lets his emotions make him a bad teammate. Like Diggs, he hates when teammates get comfortable with losing. And like Diggs, some of his complaints have been valid. But that doesn't mean it's good for the team to air them out. And if Claypool is Diggs II, he's been an inferior copy: less production, more problems. Claypool has good qualities too - as an athlete and a human. I'm hoping he's smart enough to see how his bad temper and immaturity have derailed his career - and decides to make amends. Last season must have been a huge punch in the gut for him - hopefully an eye-opening one. I'm also hoping Buffalo's strong culture and leadership bring out the best in him. Whatever you may think of McD, he's not a milquetoast. And a lot of players seem to like Brady and appreciate his communication skills. Buffalo just might be what Claypool has been searching for at the time he was finally ready to find it. As a Bills fan, my fingers are crossed. sports.yahoo.com/bears-chase-claypool-saga-happened-003109392.html

He's had two reasonably good seasons (>800 yards). He had one mediocre season (450 yards). He had one 'loser' season (<100 yards). The trend line isn't good but he was reasonably good in half the seasons he's played. A person could argue that there's a 50-50 chance he'll have a decent season in 2024. Even if he matched his mediocre year with us, I'd be glad to get that kind of production from a guy who'll presumably be a backup. But given his age (25), the fact that Josh is his QB, and he's finally removed his head from his butt (one can hope), it's not inconceivable that he'll match or surpass his previous best.

I like to hope for the best and in this case, I hope Claypool makes the squad because he proves the he'll be a productive receiver AND a great teammate.

I'd be surprised if these 6 aren't on the final roster.

Agreed. Especially, when you could get this sixty-six-year-old 1,970 sq ft home in California for the same price...

I want to attend the Bills home game against the Fins in 2074. I'm in my 60s now so I think that would be fun. Barring that: Just one before I die. You know what I mean. I don't even need to be there. Just watching on TV at home would be enough.

I agree with pretty much everything you say except perhaps the last line. I think that remains to be seen. With Beane up against the cap as it is, I doubt if Beane will want to spend money at that position. And here's the Catch-22. If Cook has a great year, Beane will want to re-sign him. But if Cook has a great year, Beane won't be able to afford to re-sign him. If Cook has a bad year, then it's an easy to decision to roll with Ray Davis on a cheap rookie contract.

That's a fair point (though I might have preferred a power back for us). But when you think about cap management, do you pay him when his contract is up? I mean, ideally, our backfield would consist of Josh, a Thurman Thomas clone as HB and a Cookie Gilchrist clone at FB when we use a FB. But if Thomas and Gilchrist clones were available, we couldn't afford them except on rookie contracts. If you're a GM building a team, you have to economize somewhere. I think Beane's decided to economize at the RB position. I think he's decided that we can either be great at passing or great at running - but not both. And, for obvious reasons, he's decided he wants us to be great at passing. It's not true in every case, but Beane has tended to get us linemen who our better in pass-pro than run-blocking. After all, we do have Josh. The passing game is the priority.

In the 1960s, the best athletes became RBs. Nowadays, the best athletes become RBs and DBs. That doesn't mean that all RBs are created equal but the difference between a very good back and an average back isn't all that great and not worth the salary differential when you're trying to build a passing attack. I think Beane sees his 1567 total yards is a result of the offense Cook plays, not a measuring stick of his talent. While Cook had 1,500 yards of offense, Allen had nearly 5,000. Who are opponents scheming to stop? Other teams game-planned to stop Allen. They game-planned to cover Diggs. Cook was an afterthought. Just look at the two-high shells, 4-2-5, and other soft defenses we faced. In the old days, the D's Allen often saw across the LOS would have been called "Pass Prevent." A little perspective... Thurman got over 2,000 yards rushing and receiving in a 16-game season when he was a focal part of the offense. OJ rushed for over 2,000 yards in a 14-game season against run-first defenses when he was the offense. Cook gained 1,500 yards rushing and receiving against Pass Prevent defenses in a 17-game season when he was the threat Ds didn't worry about. It's a nice accomplishment but not special. I personally don't think Beane sees Cook as irreplaceable. That's my guess though I'm hoping Cook proves me wrong by gaining over 2,000 this year and making Beane and me rethink our positions.

The next time I need financial advice, I'm coming to the Xavier Worthy tread!

That was an impressive series. Wish we had a guard like that. RIP

I'm came here expecting a conversation about Xavier Worthy. I guess I was confused.

"A cauldron of sound!" Love the mafia!

Funny you mention Earl. As soon as I posted, I regretted not mentioning Campbell - the human battering ram. Loved watching him play. Dickerson, too, though I never quite put him in the OJ-Jim Brown tier. I've always been more of a Bills fan than an NFL fan. But in the old days before Sunday ticket, if I had a chance to watch a great RB on some other team, I did. I guess I should give Emmitt credit for his longevity. He was tough enough to avoid career-ending injuries. He kept himself in shape. Etc. But whenever I watched him, even in his prime, I felt like I was seeing a good back in action, not a great one. But using longevity as a tiebreaker makes sense. One guy I wish I could see more highlights of is Cookie Gilchrist. As I recall, Larry Felser (of the Buffalo Evening News) among others said Cookie in his prime (1962) was as good as Jim Brown. The stats don't seem to support that but there's one story about Cookie that I love and wish I could see. It was the last game of the season and the Bills had to beat the Pats at Fenway to make the playoffs. The first play of the game was a sweep. The DB squares up to tackle Cookie and instead of side-stepping him (Cookie was hard to arm-tackle), Cookie brutally plows directly into the man and knocks him unconscious. Then he walks over to the Pat huddle and challenged them, "Which one of you mother-f****ers is next?" The Pats folded. I'd love Cookie - with that attitude - on the Bills. Him hammering up the middle... Josh throwing all over the field... How could you defend that? www.youtube.com/watch?v=XF-VeROi5kA&t=193s

Actually, as little as I know college ball, this was my first thought when we drafted him. Davis will be the new starting RB on a rookie contract when Cook leaves.

When teams play Buffalo, they scheme to stop/slow down Josh. They don't scheme for Cook. The attitude is: Yeah, Cook may hurt us, but Allen will kill us if we let him. He's a nice back but I think his solid YPC since being with the Bills is more a factor of the offense he's in and how he's used.

Good points. I had thought to compare the #1 back to the average of the #2-10 backs which would be fairer and largely correct for the problems of two great backs playing contemporaneously. But it was too much work. One thing OJ's career teaches us is the importance of coaches. As you know, OJ's statistical output his first three years was mediocre because he was misused in an inept offense. Then Lou Saban came along and designed a good running attack that highlighted OJ's skills. Let's remember back in OJ's and Jim Brown's day, LBs weren't quick guys with nimble feet who were good in coverage. They were mean hulking monsters born-and-bred to destroy RBs: Dick Butkus, Ray Nitschke, Ted Hendricks, Jack 'Jack Splat' Lambert, Chuck 'Concrete Charlie' Bednarik, etc. I think Jim Brown, for example, would feast against today's pass-first defenses. I agree about Emmit. He's not the best RB in NFL history despite being the rushing leader. He played on balanced offenses - defenses couldn't sell out to stop him. He played behind good lines. And I guess I should give him credit for his longevity, but I don't. When I think of the "greatest" RBs, I think about who dominated in his prime. Jim Brown, OJ, Walter Payton, and Barry are the guys that first come to mind. For me, these are the Big Four just based on personal observation (in Brown's case - highlight film), not based on stats. And if I was asked to name my top five, I'd be tempted to add Gale Sayers to the list - his highlights are a joy to watch though he only had 2 thousand-yard seasons. I fancied myself a WR when I was young. Yet when I watched games on TV, I always focused on the RB. The combination of finesse, power, speed, athleticism, vision... It fascinated me. Still does.

I suspect part of Beane's cap-management plan is to keep drafting backs and never paying real money for one. You can't spend big at every position... RBs are a dime a dozen... Today's NFL is a passing league. I'm guessing those are his considerations. I think Cook walks.

You can't just look at stats which are significantly determined by talent of the OL, play design, play-calling, rules of the era, defenses of the era, and so on. OJ played when hashmarks were wider, so the offense was often squeezed against one side of the field making play calls more predictable. Offensive lineman couldn't block with their hands the way they could later. Defenses were still built to stop the run in OJ's day but were focused on the pass by the time Barry played. In 1973, the Bills had no passing attack (less than 1,000 yards for the entire season) so opposing defenses had to do just one thing to win - stop OJ - and they couldn't do it. OJ played in more open-air stadiums and more crap weather... In the end, it's subjective. There's no scientifically or mathematically precise way to say who was better. But in my opinion, having watched them both play, OJ's the better running back. Just for fun, this is a list of the best running back seasons ranked by how dominant he was vis-a-vis the other RBs that year:

Doc, this is very interesting but I don't think it tells us a lot unless we're playing football archaeologist and trying to understand the past. I don't think its predictive. I don't think the 2024 version of Brady is going to be the same as the 2023 version. Using the Dorsey playbook, Brady passed about the same, produced fewer passing yards but ran more and produced more rushing yards. I guess the one take-away is that Brady will maybe/probably run a more balanced offense than Dorsey did? That's about it. When asked about Brady's new scheme, Allen recently said this, “I think it remains to be seen, we’re putting in a lot of new stuff, a lot of different concepts that we typically haven’t ran since I’ve been here, which is very exciting for me. I’m learning a whole new offense, and guys are excited." It's possible that Brady will pass more this year than he did last with passing concepts he likes built into playbook. Despite being 6th in scoring, the offense last season (under both OCs) looked suboptimal and stale. I'm hoping this "whole new offense" is better though I'm not sure what to expect.

It sounds like Brady's offense is going to be significantly different than last year's. This is what Josh said: “I think it remains to be seen, we’re putting in a lot of new stuff, a lot of different concepts that we typically haven’t ran since I’ve been here, which is very exciting for me. I’m learning a whole new offense, and guys are excited. I think what coach Brady is doing right now is some really good stuff, and our guys are going out there and executing really well, and we’re just trying to learn, grow, and be the best that we can be.” www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/learning-whole-new-offense-has-bills-josh-allen-excited-for-season-ahead/ar-BB1nqeev?ocid=BingNewsSerp