Kirby Jackson

No one said that this is what’s likely. It just said the betting favorites (which is inarguably a fact). DraftKings has Baltimore at -145 & Pittsburgh +135 & Denver at +110 & KC +145 (so not favorites). This is a hypothetical. That’s what we do here. It was never intended to be “will this or won’t this happen?” HYPOTHETICALLY, “which is a better path?” The board is pretty much split right down the middle. Both sides are perfectly reasonable. No one is suggesting that either scenario would happen. Put that aside and what’s the best option for the Bills to get where they need to be?

Lol, you can’t tie up the percentage of cap space in your OL that it will take. It’s not that simple!! Your tackles are highly paid. Torrence will get a contract at or above what Hunt got (5 years $100m and $63M guaranteed). It’s just not feasible to do. The Bills can get Edwards and McGovern for that. Let me ask what’s better Anderson/Higgins or Torrence/Coleman? Those are the types of decisions that are being made. We all think Torrence is good but business decisions must be made. He has excellent value. Of course he’s very good. You’re using that to improve elsewhere. You’re betting on the delta from Torrence to Anderson is smaller than the delta from Coleman to Higgins (as an example).

Really just Houston. We can’t count games before Josh. They lost in OT vs. Houston and everything had to go against them (it did). It’s really the KC games home and away (plus the home Cincy game). Those are the only playoff losses that matter.

I do have this shirt (in grey):

So excited to wait in line with you for Ratatouille

Whatever the comp would be. It’s just an example. That’s one way for the Bills to get their number 1 WR without sacrificing their 1st. A team that starts Anderson/Higgins is better than one that starts Torrence/Coleman. There are other guys that fit the mold too. That’s why I said he’s an excellent trade chip. You can’t give him $65M guaranteed while paying those others too. That cap space needs to be reallocated.

Of course they don’t WANT to trade him. They can’t have that much tied up in the OL. Brown and Dawkins are signed and at least one of the other 2 will be. Torrence is looking at a deal north of the 5 year $100M ($63M guaranteed) that Robert Hunt signed. That cap space needs to be allocated elsewhere. The Bills have done well finding OL. Maybe they plug Anderson into that spot? The hypothetical I threw out was Torrence and a 2 or 3 for Higgins? I don’t know the contract specifics but it makes sense for both sides from a football standpoint. The Bills get more balanced and the Bengals get their best OL.

Yes!! I tried to get my family to have shirts made like this for all of the fallen Disney characters. Lol, no one thought it was as funny as I did. 🤣🤣

I’ve said it a few times but I think Torrence is an excellent trade candidate this offseason. He’s a young, high end OG, that someone will have cheap for a year (and obviously have to extend). The Bills can plug any of a number of guys into that spot. I think Edwards & McGovern will be roughly the cost of Torrence.

The Bills and Disney World are two of my favorite things. Yes, I’m an adult who likes Disney but wouldn’t consider myself a Disney adult. At any rate, this is a must trip in 2027:

Scenario A is a perfectly reasonable choice. I prefer B but not by a ton. I don’t see a scenario where anyone in the AFC but KC or Baltimore beats playoff Josh Allen. They’re the only teams with the firepower to keep up. I don’t see the Bills in the playoffs laying an egg like New England or Atlanta. The Colts are a little weird to me. They feel like they can match the physicality. I go back to though, “if Josh Allen and Daniel Jones square off in a must win game, Josh has a massive advantage.” I think there’s a huge difference between “must win playoff games” vs. a Sunday afternoon in October. The Bills advantage over those teams that haven’t proven they can win those big games is LARGE.

Because if they each win their division you’d likely play both (assuming they win). Ravens will be the 4 and Chiefs 2 or 3. There’s no reason to create a poll asking people to pick an option that would be easy to select. The entire point of the poll isn’t “which is liklier?” It’s “which option do you prefer?” Denver stinks. Lol, they’re the worst 8-2 I’ve ever seen. We’d beat them by 3 scores. We beat the Steelers 8 out of 10, New England 7 out of 10, Chargers without their OL 7 out of 10, Jags 8 out of 10. The Colts are the only one that scares me some (Texans too). If you can’t beat those teams though, you don’t deserve it. I think Ravens/Chiefs are both coin flips. That’s just my opinion. It looks like the group is pretty split.

This is obviously the dream scenario. 100% of people would pick that.

The Ravens are currently the betting favorite to win their division. Us being the 1 seed actually helps those teams in their strength of record. In this scenario you’re assuming those teams win, you’re picking between 2 home games against the hardest teams vs. 3 road games against less accomplished teams. It’s a tough decision this way. It’s split right down the middle.

As a Pats fan, you might think that. If you said, “would you rather play at New England 3 times or home to Baltimore & KC” it’s New England. It’s definitely not an easy question. That’s why the voting has been close. The Bills and Chiefs have 10 battles with the Chiefs winning all 4 in the playoffs. The Ravens battles are less frequent but still often. The Bills have had the upper hand in the playoffs. Both of those games would be a coin flip. The Bills would be a clear favorite in all other games. It doesn’t mean that they’d always win and obviously would have to win an extra game. It’s would you rather play 3 road games where you’re the favorite by a few points (I understand they could have a home game) or 2 coin flips at home?

I wonder what the odds would be of going to the Super Bowl in scenario A vs. scenario B? We need an oddsmaker on here. 🤣🤣

That’s how I voted too but could be swayed. “Who scares me the most?” “Are you more likely to beat the Ravens & Chiefs at home again, or at Pittsburgh/Indy/Denver” I’d pick path 2 (at least at this moment).

FWIW, it’s a super interesting question. That holds especially true when factoring in the Ravens would almost certainly be the 4 seed if they won the division. That means you’d play both the Ravens and Chiefs as your 2 games (assuming KC beats the Colts or whomever).

This came out of a conversation in another thread but got me thinking. Would you rather be the 1 seed AND have the Chiefs & Ravens as division winners OR be the 5 seed & the Chiefs & Ravens both miss the playoffs? For me, I think that the Bills are the AFC favorite in either scenario but curious as to what others think. P.S. Try to leave out the emotions/nostalgia of “it would be really cool to play the AFC Championship as the last game at Higmark.” Let’s keep this as, “what is the easier path to a title?”

Maybe. If the Ravens lose at the Vikings this week (possible) and the Steelers beat the Chargers (possible), they are separated by 3 in the loss column. They’d be tied with the Bengals. They can still make up that ground but the margin for error would be basically nothing (especially if they split with the Steelers). If the Chiefs lose to the Broncos next week (possible) they’ll be functionally 5 games behind the Broncos!! Now they’re looking at a WC slot. The AFCE is taking one of those spots. That leaves 2 more between Jax, Chargers, Texans, Chiefs & AFCN. A loss next week and they’re probably only about even money to be a playoff team. There is a realistic world where neither the Chiefs nor Ravens are in the playoffs. If you told me that that the Bills would have to be a WC but Baltimore & KC would be out, I’d sign up for that. Obviously, I’d prefer the 1 seed too but the Bills would be the AFC favorite in that scenario.

This year is as good as it gets from a Bills standpoint. Keep rooting against the Ravens and Chiefs (Texans too). If we go to the playoffs and are competing against the Colts, Broncos, Patriots, Steelers, Jags and Chargers, sign me the eff up.

I like it.

Bills - 41 Miami - 20

It’s about percentage of cap to a position group. You have to redeploy those cap dollars to WR. You’re paying Dawkins and Brown. In this scenario, you’d be paying Edwards and McGovern too. Torrence is in line for a big extension that would kick in for 2027. So, to answer your question, yes you can’t pay Torrence but can pay Higgins.

I agree with all of this. At the same time, not one of those guys belongs at the spot where they are on the depth chart. The Bills have a starting caliber slot receiver. He is probably a top 5-10 slot in the league. Put him aside for this conversation. They then have 2 guys that would be low end 2’s on the outside or decent 3’s (excluding slot) in Palmer/Moore. Coleman should slot in behind those 2. Samuel is a gadget guy. Shavers is ST. So they are missing AT LEAST a number 1 (and you could argue a number 2). They need either a number 2 or an elite field stretcher. I threw out a hypothetical trade this morning that I think I like. Torrence & a 2nd or 3rd for Tee Higgins. You can’t pay Torrence what it will take. Invest that money into retaining Edwards & McGovern. Play Anderson or another young guy at RG. Humor me and let’s pretend the Bills do this. In 2026 the room would look something like Higgins-Palmer - Shakir as the starters. I’d have Moore/speed guy that can return kicks drafted in the mid rounds behind them. Coleman as a backup inside and outside. You can dump Samuel and use Moore to fill the gadget role. That room is infinitely better than this. The Bills can get more out of the WRs than they have. They have, unequivocally, a bottom 3 WR room in the league. Both statements are true.