2003Contenders

First some reflections on Dick Jauron... I will have to admit that I was one of Jauron's biggest defenders back in the day. He admittedly had his shortcomings ("It's just so hard to win in the NFL"), but given the terrible talent that he had at his disposal (especially on offense) during his tenure here, he did a decent job maximizing what he had at his disposal and -- dare I say -- overachieved. He was a very good coach for a BAD football team. That is, his highly conservative game plans helped to hide some of the dearth of talent that the teams had on offense in those days. Let's not forget what a pariah Buffalo was considered back then with Ralph and Marv in charge. They had trouble attracting top coaching candidates, especially with Ralph's refusal at the time to pay top dollar. Donahoe had just been fired -- and he was a darling of the media, so friends of his like Chris Mortenson heavily criticized the Bills for letting him go. Mike Mularkey had just quit. So, frankly the team had to scrape the bottom of the barrel for either retreads or under-qualified assistants. Jauron was the former. When Jauron took over in 2006, his starting QB was JP Losman! To have gone 7-9 with Losman as your QB for all 16 games and somehow manage to finish 7-9 says something about maximizing the talent on hand. The 2007 team, I believe, set the record at the time for the most players placed on IR during the season. The QB situation that season consisted of the two-headed monster of JP and Trent. Jauron was actually in the running for Coach of the Year in some circles for getting that (again) under-talented and injury-plagued team to 7-9. Of course, the rails really started to come off the following season, when the team started strong out of the gates -- and fizzled after the hot start. The following season, when the team started slowly, Jauron was a dead man walking with billboards everywhere begging Ralph to fire him. of course, he didn't last the season. Jauron Ball is NOT a bad thing when you have a pretty good defense and are trying to hide lacking talent on offense. To a certain extent that is the measure that McD used his first year here with Tyrod. In fact, Tyrod was meant for Jauron Ball with his Just-Don't-Make-a-Mistake mentality. You could even argue that if Jaron had Tyrod as his QB back when he was here, those Bills may have actually squeaked into the playoffs... That said, despite the credit I give Jauron for maximizing the talent he had -- what he really did was minimize the ramifications for the LACK of talent. That is why he was good at managing a BAD team -- but uninspiring when leading a team with better talent. He was only capable of taking a team so far. I get the comparisons to McD. Both are defensive-minded head coaches, and both pretty much let their OC's handle the offense. McD is by nature conservative -- but not to the extent that Jauron was. Jauron was a fan of Run-Run-Pass -- whereas, one of our big criticisms of the offense this year has been the play-calling in which the running game has been neglected. Also, McD is a much bigger fan of going for it on 4th down. Jauron once infamously punted from the 34 on 4th and 2 late in the 4th quarter and trailing. Another fair comparison, I think, is that McD and Daboll have drilled it into Josh Allen's head to avoid making mistakes at all costs. Maybe it is time to relax a little and let the kid play. Yes, he needs to avoid making the lame "Hero Ball" plays like he did against the Pats, but over-emphasis on not making mistakes could certainly hold him back. It would also help if our OC would design and call plays in which the ball comes out of his hand quickly. Just my two cents...

I get the sense that Daboll does a pretty good job as a coach on Mondays through Saturdays. The problem is with his play-calling on Sundays. He has trouble calling plays that help Josh get into a rhythm. That was a strength of Chan Gailey's back when he effectively managed to (mostly) call the proper plays for Fitz. Of course, maybe the designed plays have multiple options and it is Josh Allen who is refusing to make the choice with the highest likelihood of success. Regardless, a more-than-2-to-1 pass-to-run ratio against the 3rd worst run defense in the NFL is on Daboll.

I get the sense that McD and Daboll are NOT properly communicating on 3rd down plays when there is a potential to go for it on 4th (in the event that the 3rd down conversion is not met). Maybe if Daboll knows that McD is willing to give him the green light to go for it on 4th down if we don't convert 3rd and 4, then maybe the play call is different. That is, maybe running it on 3rd and 4 at least picks up a couple of yards, even if the runner doesn't make it to the 1st down marker. Suddenly, 4th and 1 or 2 looks a lot better than 4th and 4, right?

Excellent post! With the benefit of a 24-hour cool-down period, here are some of my thoughts: 1. Pete Rozelle's dream of NFL parity is upon us. Nearly half of the teams in the NFL are somewhere between 4-6 and 6-4. For the most part, the teams that are better than 6-4 have had the benefit of a lighter schedule, whereas teams that are worse than 4-6 have largely had to play more difficult schedules. This applies to the Bills, whose 6-2 record going into yesterday was largely due to a relatively easy schedule, versus the Browns whose 2-6 record was the product of a much more difficult schedule. The Vegas odds-makers understood this, which is why they had the Browns as 3-point favorites. It is not unseasonable to say that these 2 teams are pretty evenly matched -- and the outcome of this game could have gone either way. 2. The Browns HAD to have this game. Their backs were against the wall -- and the team DOES have talent. Credit them for getting things done when they needed to. Meanwhile, the Bills need to harvest this kind of intensity themselves every week if they expect to make the playoffs. 3. As bad as the missed kick was at the end of regulation, the one that was truly unforgivable was the miss just before the half. That was a short kick that wasn't much more than an extra point. Not only did it impact the ultimate outcome of the game, but given how much the Browns had out-played the Bills in the first half, I think it would have been demoralizing for them if they had gone into the half DOWN on the scoreboard. 4. There has been much talk of McD utilizing Jauron Ball. I get it. Both are/were defensive-minded coaches, and both are/were conservative by nature. I also get that right now the defense is the strength of the team, and the offense is saddled with a young QB who is still learning his way. But Jauron Ball does NOT mean having the young QB drop back to pass 40+ times and running the ball just 20 times (with 6 of those runs coming from the QB). It also doesn't mean throwing the ball downfield in 3rd/4th and short situations, especially when the young QB has infamously struggled to complete such downfield passes this season. Yes, I know that in many of those situations, receivers WERE open downfield -- and Allen just failed to connect with them. But the likelihood of his being able to connect has to be factored into the equation when trying to predict the liklihood of success of a given play. Jauron Ball, after all, is designed to play the percentages and keep things close to the vest. Going into the game, the "book" on the Browns told us that their defense is in the top half of the league in terms of pass defense and 3rd WORST in run defense. Jauron Ball would have prescribed a heavy dose of runs, right? I guess what I am getting at is that I have no idea what Daboll's game-plan was yesterday. I am not completely down on him, but I really do believe that he called a poor game yesterday. If nothing else, he needs to do a better job of calling plays that will help his young QB get into a rhythm. 5. The defense has evolved into a true bend-but-don't break specimen. That worked fine last week against the Redskins, where AP rushed for over 100 yards in the first half but failed to get the ball into the endzone. Yesterday, the defense really kept us in the game with two HUGE goal line stands. The problem is that the defense is NOT getting turnovers, even when they are forcing the offense to run 10+ plays to get into scoring position. There were several close-calls yesterday, where the turnovers were ALMOST there. When the refs (correctly) reversed Hughes' game-sealing fumble-return, you could just sense the wind come out of their sails. 6. I didn't like the coaching/time management on that last drive at all. When the offense got down inside the 40, it was pretty clear that McD was playing for a tie rather than trying to win the game in regulation. When it got down to 4th-and-4, it was pretty clear that McD did NOT have faith in Haus to make that long kick. You could see the body language and indecision on the sidelines; the first inclination was to go for it there. Then they decided to try to draw the defense Offside -- then took the timeout and attempted the kick after all. 7. Regarding Allen, I think we saw a mixed bag. When it is all said and done, he did lead the team on drives into scoring range at the end of the half and at the end of regulation -- but the kicker failed in both instances. Allen did lead the team to the go-ahead score prior to the last ill-fated defensive "stand". The "hero ball" seems to be out of his system now, but he still struggles to protect the ball when scrambling (we got lucky here yesterday). Last season he struggled to hit the intermediate passes (slants, etc.) but was pretty reliable on the deep passes. The trend has reversed this season. I think he probably needs to just hit on one of those deep balls -- and then the monkey will be off his back. As I said, Daboll needs to do a better job helping him get into rhythm with his play-calling. 8. Seeing how this team rebounds next week will be a true test. They travel to Miami, who is actually on a winning streak. Fitz, as we know, is always dangerous. That said, the Bills are the better team, and if they rebound the way they should -- then they head down to Miami and destroy the Dolphins there. If that happens, then maybe we will look back upon this loss as a blip on the radar -- rather than the end-of-the-line that many fear.

Not speaking for dnveu, but I think what he is getting at is that the manner in which the Seahawks handled Wilson as a rookie could be a decent model fro how the Bills should handle Josh Allen NOW. You are correct that there are little similarities between the two of them in their rookie seasons. Wilson joined a team with a superior defense with a somewhat established running game already in tow. Allen joined a team last year with a defense that was still trying to find itself and with a supporting cast that was REALLY bad. Now, the Bills' defense is stronger -- still need to fortify the run D -- and the supporting cast is MUCH better than it was last season at all levels (RB, OL, WRs). Had Josh played smart-but-unspectatcular football (like he did yesterday against the Redskins), the Bills win the majority of their games in similar fashion -- and probably would have beat the Patriots back in Week 5.

Can't argue with you here. I guess what I am getting at is that (and this stretched across various administrations) the front office(s) failed to be proactive in contract negotiations. Quality CBs are a huge commodity in the NFL, which is why they command such large contracts. When White signs his next contract, it will likely make him the highest paid CB in the NFL (until the next top notch CB becomes a free agent); the Bills need to accept that and work with him and his agent in good faith -- before he becomes a free agent and gains leverage. After all, part of this long term plan is to draft well and keep our own good players, right?

He was. Part of that was because Rex so badly mis-used him. That said, it was pretty clear in his final season here that he knew he was going to be playing elsewhere and was looking for a big payday, so (whether consciously or not) he went out of his way to avoid contact/injury during that final season as a Bill.

The Bills have a long history of drafting quality CBs -- Winfield, Clements, Gilmore, and now White. They let the first 3 walk before their 2nd contract, let's hope that doesn't happen with Tre.

All in all, it was just a bad game and a bad match-up for the Bills. 1. The Eagles were coming off an embarrassing loss to the Cowboys. So they were highly motivated. 2. Despite their record, the Eagles are still a pretty good team and are well-coached. They are just a year-removed from being Super Bowl champs. 3. The windy conditions made it difficult for either team to pass. (Both QBs wound up with about 170 yards passing.) 4. The Bills' defense held up pretty well in the first half. They held the Eagles to 3 points inside of the 2:00 warning when Josh Allen fumbled and set the Philly offense up in good position. Soon the Eagles went from a 3-7 deficit to a 11-7 lead. 5. After a well-done drive to place the Bills in the position to try a long field goal at the end of the half, which was no good, the Eagles got the ball first in the 2nd half. That is when the 65-yard run occurred, and suddenly it was 17-7. 6. The offense answered back with a TD drive of their own to make the score a respectable 17-13, which seemed OK at the time given Allen and the offense's success in the 4th quarter. 7. The Eagles did a nice job with long sustained drives in the 3rd and 4th quarters, including some key 3rd down conversions thanks to Wentz's legs. Meanwhile, the Bills offense got too pass-happy in the windy conditions, which led to some 3-and-out situations. The defense wore down in the 4th as a result. In the gamut of a season, you are going to have a few games a year when something like this happens. The Kelly-era Bills even had 2-3 games like this every year. So I am not freaking too much. We have 2 losses. One of them was against the Patriots, which was only by 6 points in a game win which Allen turned the ball over repeatedly. (The Pats have blown out all of their other 7 opponents). Let's see how they bounce back this week. Now, if the Redskins also manage to pile up 200+ rushing yards and shut down our offense, then I'll start worrying some. ?

Give me a break with all of this "regression" nonsense. Love him or hate him, Bill B. has made a career out of making QBs -- young ones and veterans alike -- look foolish. The biggest problem by large is that Josh kept trying to play "hero ball". You can be sure that the Pats schemed to bate him into situations like those. Obviously, they were not too worried about Gore and the passing game, because the ageless Gore probably could have rushed for 150 or more if they kept feeding him the ball. Instead, the plan was to make the young QB very uncomfortable -- and they succeeded in a large way. Josh needs to learn that sometimes, especially with the defense he has to back him up, a punt isn't the worst thing in the world. Dabol could also help with plays designed to get the ball out of his hand quicker. They seemed to figure this out a bit in the 2nd half.

This smells of a national media outlet that did't even watch the game and relied solely on box scores: "Josh Allen 1 passing TD, 1 rushing TD, 2 INTs, and 2 fumbles. He sucks." Anyone who actually watched the game would have seen more positives than negatives: 1. The inaccuracy narrative (at least in the game) seemed quite unjustified. 2. He stayed poised and made plays when he had to in the 4th quarter 3. In the first half, he was pretty much the entire offense -- and did a nice job moving the ball. 4. Once could argue that NONE of the turnovers were his fault. 5. The rushing stats are usually not factored into the equation for QB quality analysis. Yet, Josh didn't just take off when he felt pressure; he actually scrambled with purpose. Meanwhile, these same clowns are likely defending Mayfield and his 3 INTs against Tennessee yesterday because it fits their analytics narrative. "This game was an aberration", etc.

... Except for celebrating prematurely on the first offensive play of the game, where he beat the secondary over-the-top and was caught from behind and fumbled instead of scoring the TD.

All good points. The thing to remember also is that, when Bill Polian built that team in the mid-80s, the goal was to win the division first -- which meant besting Marino's Dolphins. That is exactly what he did. The 88-93 Bills were a team that offensively was prolific enough to keep up with the Dolphins aerial attack -- with a defense that placed a great deal of emphasis on the pass rush and secondary. Alas, those teams were NOT built to match up well against the smash-mouth teams of the NFC East. As fate would have it, all four Super Bowls were played against the NFC East. A pity none of those Buffalo teams matched up against the 49ers in the Big Game.

Interesting that WR is glaringly absent.

MSN? We need say no more.

That is about how I see it too. I keep saying that if you simply look at contract numbers, the money that the Bills are paying Nsekhe is starter money, and he has played well at OT when called upon to do so in the past. Another option, I think is: Nsekhe - Dawkins - Morse - Spain - Ford

I doubt Jones goes anywhere before the season starts, given he has definitely shown signs of progression since his rookie season. I really think that rookie season was essentially a slump that started with the just-off-the-fingertips near game-winning catch against the Panthers in week 2. It was likely mental for him after that -- with Tyrod not helping the rookie out with often less-than-catchable passes. Zay seemed to get past that last season. Yes, I would like to see him do a better job of fighting for contested balls (see: the sideline/goal line play at the end of the first Miami game). But he has developed into a nice route runner and his hands now appear to be as advertised when he was drafted back in 2017. This will be Year 3 for him, so hopefully we see a true breakout performance (a la Eric Moulds back in 1998). With defenses having to account for the outside speed of Foster and Brown, Zay should have his opportunities, especially if we get better TE production too. If not, we move on from Zay in 2020 (when the WR draft class is expected to be very deep.)

Think, Travis Henry.

Considering the amount of coin they signed Nsekhe to, I am hard pressed to see him serving in a backup role. Regardless, after last year's fiasco it is nice to see depth -- and so many options.

Funny you should bring up Kelsay because I was thinking about that too -- in terms of the current situation. I remember when Buddy Nix signed Kelsay to an extension, he said not every player can be "great" but sometimes you have to do what is necessary to keep your "good" players, as they serve as the back-bone of your team. I see Shaq in that "good but not great" stratosphere as well. Remember, he missed most of his rookie season with the bum shoulder, then had to learn an entirely new defense in year 2 under McD before showing real signs of improvement last year in season 2 under McD. I agree with those who suggest trying to sign him to a contract extension now that is more beneficial to the team than exercising the year 5 option -- before he potentially increases his value this season.

I agree that this may be how it will go. Everyone keeps forgetting about Nsekhe, but if you take a look at the money, it is clear that the Bills signed him to be a starter.

If all the reports we hear are true about Kingsbury's infatuation with Murray, the Cardinals' level of interest in him may have artificially upped the perceived value of a QB who may not even be viewed as the top QB in this draft by any of the other 31 teams in the league. My guess is that there is probably a battle being waged among the Arizona decision-makers. First, there is the new head head coach and his camp that want to invest the #1 overall pick in Murray. Then there are the scouts, etc. who have numerous other players with a higher grade. If I were the Cardinals, I would take a page out of what the Chargers did back in 2004. They favored Phil Rivers over Eli Manning (especially given Eli's public desire to play somewhere other than San Diego). However, they understood that Eli was the hotter commodity. So they went ahead and drafted Eli #1 overall and made a deal with the Giants -- that if the player they wanted (Rivers) was still there at #4, they would trade Eli for that pick. That trade netted the Chargers additional first rounders AND they got the QB they really wanted. If my assumption is correct about the scouts' grade of Murray being less than that of, say, Bosa or Q. Williams or whomever, then maybe it would be in the Cardinals' best interest to draft that player at #1 overall and then have a trade in the works with another team in the top 5 to swap that player for the later draft pick, provided that Murray is still there. That would enable the Cardinals to get the player they want AND pick up some extra high draft picks. Of course, if the scouts and Kingsbury are on the same page regarding Murray, then they ought not fool around and should simply take him #1 overall.

They were both stud defensive linemen coming out of Alabama. The similarities end there. Dareus had some focus/maturity issues even before his contract extension.

The team has historically been very fluid with the 2nd round picks. In fact, in recent years they have RARELY stayed still with their original pick and made a selection. Much depends, I think, on where they see the sweet spot in this draft. If they see someone they like still on the board late in the 1st, they could package their 2 and 3 to move back into the 1st. They have done this sort of thing before (with John McCargo, for example, which turned out to be a mistake). Or, if they see plenty of starter-level depth in the 2nd round, for example, I could see them packaging their 3rd and one of the 4's to move up for an additional 2nd rounder.

The two will forever be linked given that Pancho annouced his selection at the draft last year.