Rocky Landing

It seems inevitable to me that Addison gets pushed down the depth chart by players like Epenesa, Obada, and eventually the two rooks. At that point do you hold onto a 34-year old depth player in decline, or the younger guy, who is a ST stand-out? If you place value on ST (Beane/McD certainly do), then yes, Daryl Johnson has more value than Mario Addison.

On Addison vs. Johnson- Yeah, Frazier does trust the vets. And Hughes is such an integral part of this defense-- and a better player than Addison-- I'm sure you would agree that he stays. The DL needs his leadership. But, at some point it becomes a question of numbers. Do they keep more than six DEs? Seems unlikely. So, Hughes, AJE, Rousseau, Basham, seem pretty safe, no? After that (assuming they keep six), it becomes a choice between Obada, Addison, and Johnson-- pick two. Addison has been with the team for one season. Johnson has been with the team for two. And as far as DJ's ST prowess (and his defensive ability) it may just be that he has a certain, unique celebratory strut that he does every time he makes a play that really stands out to me, and has led me to believe that he makes a lot of plays (whereas Mario is more low-key). But, I just don't see Frazier, or McD, or Beane thinking that 34 year-old Addison offers more than DJ, or Obada, $2M be damned. If they do decide to "lighten up on the ST load" (I would bet they don't), I would think it would be one of the ST players that is less versatile. You have to admit-- they love versatility in a player-- especially their depth players. Of the players you mentioned, clearly Neal would be the most versatile, IMO. Honestly, I think he's a starting caliber NCB, or safety. Then comes Johnson, then Matakevich, and then I would say Smith. Taiwan Jones, in my opinion, is utterly useless as anything but a ST player.

They're going to get rid of the better player because their contract would be "easier to unload?" And... Hughes????

Serious question: From the above projection, what position do you think we could have one less of to have the luxury of a third QB?

I agree with most of this... probably because most of it is obvious. Some things I don't necessarily agree with: DL: I don't really know the cap implications (I don't generally have the energy to really follow that side of the sport-- I just listen to what others say...), but I don't think we hold onto Mario Addison. I do think we hold onto Daryl Johnson. He's young, and a decent depth player. And, I don't even know the stats, but I believe he played really well on ST last season. And, as we all know, Beane takes ST very seriously. Also, Justin Zimmer. Maybe the Bills keep 11 DL? It could happen. WR: I know people love to love Hodgins, but I think there's a lot of competition at that spot, and I wonder if Hodgins offers what they are likely looking for? With the departure of John Brown, the Bills got slower at WR, and Hodgins doesn't offer high-end speed. Also, with his injury history, and limited practices, he is probably not high up on the list of special teamers, which should be assumed to be requisite for that position. Marquez Stevenson, picked in an earlier round than Hodgins, has the acceleration that could put him the conversation for P/KR, and several of the other current WRs already may have a leg up on Hodgins for a ST role. I also have been thinking about Tanner Gentry. Sure, he should be considered a dark horse candidate for the 53. But, if McK gets the P/KR role, that opens up the depth receiver competition a little bit. And one thing is clear: Josh Allen loves Gentry. Watch Josh's highlight reel from Wyoming. Gentry was all over it. Allen knows right where Gentry is, and when he's going to make his cut. Allen gushed about him during OTAs. "Strongest hands of anybody I know." Could Beane/McDermott throw Allen a bone, here? #6WR isn't such a huge bone, really. LB: If the Bills remain primarily a 4-2-5 base defense, I don't know that they keep six LBs. And if they do, I don't feel like they'll keep Dodson. I feel like there was some buzz around Giles-Harris. I know that Dodson made some nice plays in his first game with a significant play count (vs. Miami, I think?) but, I feel like after that he settled down into being fairly pedestrian. RB: Sigh... I know we've paid for Jones, and all, and he's a ST stud... but, damn. Why even bother calling him a running back? He's terrible in that capacity. Is it possible that Wade has learned enough to make an impact? Maybe even compete for P/KR? We know almost nothing about Wade beyond his preseason games two years ago. But, man, that dude had some acceleration back then. TE: Four of them. DB: One of the UDFAs will shine in TC, and surprise everyone. In fact, I think Tariq Thomson generated more buzz during OTAs than Damar Hamlin did. I know Hamlin got a lot of buzz right after the draft as being a late round pick that could make the 53, but that had more to do with the departure of Dean Marlowe. Of course, OTAs don't mean too much, but I think it's a pretty level playing field for these lower depth players.

Wasn't sure whether to go for the laughing emoji, or the vomiting emoji...

Or Kraft, for that matter!

Moss' efficiency in pass pro makes him a lock, imo. Lately, I've been thinking Tanner Gentry, though, as a dark horse candidate for making the 53. If McK gets the P/KR role, that opens up the depth receiver competition a little bit. And one thing is clear: Josh Allen loves Gentry. And, if anybody needs to understand the familiarity, and chemistry between the two, just watch Josh's highlight reel from Wyoming. Gentry was all over it. Allen knows right where Gentry is on the field, and when he's going to turn. And, apparently, Allen gushed about him (and Hollister) during OTAs. So many good competitions for TC this year. It's a nice luxury that, for the foreseeable future, the Bills are done with the annual Quarterback Competition. It wasn't so long ago that Josh Allen was in an three-way competition with AJ McCarron, and Late Nate Peterman. I do not miss those days!

A Pats* fan I work with was trying to make a case that the Bills were some sort of anomaly last season, and would not repeat last season's success. One of his arguments (which is a common refrain on the Pats* fan forum): "Allen has been exposed..." "Right," I replied, "Allen has been exposed as an elite passer, and running threat who can read defenses, and extend plays with his athleticism. The Bills are doomed." An improved running game may reduce the amount Allen passes, but I don't see any reason to assume anything that should be interpreted as a regression on the horizon. Barring some nagging injury (like Mahomes' turf toe), Allen really should just continue his trajectory. Likely he gets a little better, and at some point, levels off. Don't expect him to start "regressing" until his body starts to decline in a decade, or so.

Perhaps attempts go down. But, the run game isn't going to get so much better that we stop playing a spread offense. And, comp%, TDs, QBR? ^UP^ Hopefully Ints go down as well. Maybe "up" was the wrong word to use... I guess my point is that the Bills will very likely be a better team this year. And as the team improves, Allen improves right along with them.

This is really a question about our entire offense-- and the answers bode well. If Diggs, and Cole can maintain their efficiency (I believe they will), if Sanders is an upgrade over Brown (I believe he is), if Knox improves his drop tendencies (good chance), if Hollister proves to be an upgrade to Kroft (I believe he will be), if the O-line does not regress (why would they), and if there is even a slight improvement to the run game (fingers crossed), then Allen's numbers go up. Go Bills.

I trust that with a few doses of penicillin, Josh's pole will get much better.

More accurate, yes. But, he throws with about 65% of Cam's velocity. And at 20-something years old, he already has a dad-bod.

Do you seriously think their season is going to speed up once Jones takes over?

I'm with you. I strongly suspect that he isn't going to respond well to pressure at the NFL level.

From that clip on page #1 (and also Mac's college reel), were I a Patriots* fan, I would be less concerned with Cam's wildly inaccurate flailing, and much more concerned with Mac's lack of velocity.

I’m sure they would have an easier time with “Washington Team Football.”

Weight?… no Schadenfreude?… why not?

I’m not going to wear my seatbelt when I drive because if I get into an accident, I might get a serious abrasion, or neck injury from the shoulder strap.

You see, it’s a complex issue. Absolutely correct.

This "debate" (quotations seem weirdly necessary) reminds me of the seatbelt law, in a way. You can't make a reasonable argument that wearing a seatbelt doesn't decrease the risk of injury. But, the fact that the government made it a law-- effectively passing a law that protects me from myself-- has never quite sat too well with me. Similarly, you can't make a reasonable argument that getting vaccinated doesn't decrease the risk of getting very sick, possibly with long-term consequences. It clearly does. But, the heavy handed nature, and the fact that it became so politicized doesn't sit well with some people. Personally, I wear seatbelts, and have been vaccinated purely for reducing my own risk, and risk to my family. The rest I can ignore. Of course, seatbelt laws were passed, not to protect us from ourselves, but to protect the interests of insurance companies. And, vaccines protect us all.

Well, if 40+ pages in under ten hours illustrates anything, it's that Cole Beasley has hard-whacked a hornet's nest. And, I fear it's going to come around to sting him.

This, like many of your posts, is really just gas-lighting.

Atlanta actually has a decent vaccination rate-- the highest in GA, which is around 47%. In fact, I have close family friends who live there, and several of them got Covid. One kid, in his twenties, is still suffering long-term effects, including lung damage. And, if you think that Atlanta being open has nothing to do with the year of precautions that have been taken, and the number of people who were adult enough to get vaccinated, you're not really paying attention to anything other than a fact-averse echo chamber.

There's only a problem if people are "dropping dead?" You have a pretty lax threshold for what constitutes a "problem" Or, more likely, you have no idea what the rest of the country has been dealing with.