GunnerBill
-
Posts
63,579 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by GunnerBill
-
-
11 minutes ago, dbfla10 said:
Christian Watson. Blazing speed with size. Will take the top off the D and open up space for Shakir and Kinkaid. Greenbay may be willing to trade. Question is can the bills affo extention similar to Shakir. Or can the Bills afford to Franchise him next yr.
Defensively Dane Belton.
Look what he is doing for the Giants. Always around the Ball. Big time tackler, ball hawk, high energy player. Also brings a ton to the special teams.
If Watson could be had cheap I'd kick the tires. I wanted to draft him and while he hasn't delivered on his potential so far and has had issues staying healthy his skillset is the one we lack.
-
23 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:
But not in terms of winning. Sean Payton, Tom Coughlin, and Belichick all won Super Bowls - 9 in total. And Payton certainly considers himself a Parcells guy if you have any doubts (even though he didn’t start with Parcells). In terms of actual winning, Parcells remains the ultimate boss.
Yea, I consider Payton more of a Parcells guy too, even though he is a crossover. It is a fair point about the Superbowls, but Reid and McVay have definitely tilted that balance back a bit since the last Belichick one.
-
Just now, uticaclub said:
Vrable was an assistant under Bill O’Brien who is part of Bilichick’s tree
Correct, but Belichick isn't from the Walsh tree either. Belichick was from the Parcells tree and there was a point 15 or so years ago where that tree and the Walsh tree were equally as influential in the NFL Head Coaching ranks. And while there are crossover guys - Sean Payton, Brian Daboll, Dan Campbell etc - who feature on both trees the Parcells tree is now a poor second to the Walsh tree in terms of influence over NFL Head Coaches in 2025. You can trace a dozen or so back to Parcells in some form. But 31/32 to Walsh.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Buffalo Boy said:
Bill Walsh
Maybe before your time but he was THE guy in that era and so many guys came from him or someone under him.
As I said above, only Mike Vrabel of the 32 Head Coaches that started this season does not have lineage that can be traced back to Walsh.
-
1
-
-
He already has a tree. Brian Daboll. Might not be a successful one but it is a branch of the McDermott tree.
There is only one NFL coaching tree. It's Bill Walsh (and I think if you want to go back a level higher it is Paul Brown's tree). I did a thread on it in the summer. Every current NFL Head Coach except Mike Vrabel is a descendent of the Bill Walsh tree.
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, bills_fan said:
There is one "sort-of" equivalent. Tampa. When they fired Dungy and hired Chucky. And Chucky took them to win the SB. But that Tampa team rode an all time great defense. Absent adding a Justin Jefferson or CeeDee Lamb, we don't have an all time great offense to ride.
Dungy's win % at Tampa would have been good for 65th all time. That is sort of my point. There are cases, nobody disputes, where a team has changed Head Coach and got over the hump. But having a long ternured coach who is top 15 all time in win percentage but hasn't got over the hump that is pretty much unprecedented.
There are arguments to fire McDermott. I am just not persuaded historical precedent is really one of them.
-
18 minutes ago, Chaos said:
Its really not. If the goal is a championship, or even just getting to the Super Bowl something needs to change, or you are hoping for an unprecedented result essentially a lighing strike. All the coaches and QBs in that list were good. However, none of those coaches had a QB in the running for to be the league MVP year after year.
And a change does not mean getting rid of McDermott. While its seems unthinkable, there are a couple of teams who might be poised to get to the Super Bowl immediately (maybe the lions or rams, who could trade a QB who fits McDermott's preference for a game manager style QB, and a boat load of picks to use to assemble something resembling a Defensive Guru, defense.It is. None have had a first time Head Coach and QB groomed in house who together are top 10 all time win percentage. And where the coach alone is top 15.
I am not saying that means you can't fire McDermott. But what I am saying is your historical comparisons are meaningless.
7 minutes ago, Billsflyer12 said:John Fox went to the Super Bowl in his 2nd season coaching with the Carolina Panthers. My point is Fox in his career up till he was fired by Broncos had 7 playoff appearances, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 conference championship appearance, and 4 divisional round appearances and was still fired. Those who ask all the time “who you going to get who is better?” the Broncos hired a coach who won the Super Bowl the very next season.
To be clear I have never made the "who is better?" argument for not firing McDermott. That is a stupid argument. You fire your coach when you think they are not the guy and not depending on who is or isn't available.
My point in this thread is the historical comparisons are not really indicative of anything.
-
Just now, Billsflyer12 said:
John Fox with Broncos had .719 winning percentage, 3 Divisional games losses and 1 Super Bowl loss and was fired. Gary Kubiak won Super Bowl 50 the next season, his 1st with the team in 2015.
That is fair but he wasn't a first time Head Coach. And that Broncos Superbowl team is the worst champion of my fandom. McDermott has hard AT LEAST three teams better than them.
-
How many of those fired a coach who at the time was top 15 all time win percentage?
That is the point. There really is no equivalent for where the Bills are at.
-
3
-
2
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
He is who we thought he was. I hated the Josh Allen pick at the time and I am delighted to be wrong. I hated the Keon Coleman pick and am sad to be right.
-
3
-
-
20 hours ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:
You should checkout Joes' podcast it always a great listen and very informative.
9 points in concise fashion
1. Get back to mismatches as our big people are our strength on offense. 11-12-22 formations etc. and throw from it more as well.
2. Use Keon Coleman less, he has the most snaps and targets of any receiver.
3. Use Kincaid and Palmer more.
4. Use the Backs more in the pass game (doesn't understand where this went to).
5. Get Larry O and Hoecht up to speed and reduce the DL snaps by rookies and practice squad guys. Easy one.
6. Shaq Thompson is our best LB and needs to be treated as such. Try Bernard some at WLB.
7. Get Hairston going soon. Mentions ramping up and platooning and having ready by late season and playoffs.
8. Replace Taylor Rapp with Poyer. Not optimal, but addition by subtraction.
9. Workout a trade for WR who can stretch and cause some fear, mentions Olave and Shaheed (PR too).
Many of us have mentioned some of these. The Coleman thing and being treated as if the #1 is shocking to me. We have stopped using the backs receiving as much as last year and its inexplicable. The reinforcements are self explanatory, but the safety question is bleak. All in all, there is hope, if they make some of the correct moves and don't be stubborn.
There is nothing here that I disagree with. But even if they can get Hairston going and Poyer can provide some vet know how they still need Benford to round into form and Bishop to play better. The secondary has been trash so far.
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, Mike in Horseheads said:
So its another fire McD thread is what your saying
Good. We have been short of them.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BrooklynBills said:
Beane and McDermott are completely tied together. Beane is the GM but make no mistake, this is McDermott's show. My guess is McDermott is heavily involved in the draft strategy.
Draft strategy, yes he is - though they are very aligned. When Brandon Beane tells you he will always prioritise the defensive line - believe him. He'd be doing that whoever the Head Coach is. But draft selections? No. Beane runs the draft. He owns the picks.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, Giuseppe Tognarelli said:
Shared with my brothers -- we are all in our late thirties and early forties:
Some might say it's an overreaction, but is it? Or is it all just really really true?
I think this might be worse than the drought. It's potentially worse because you can feel the prime window slipping away -- worst nightmare coming true. Of course it's the Bills who couldn't win (or even get to!) a Super Bowl with an all-time QB. Of course it's the Bills who are on the verge of setting a record for playoff futility. Of course the Chiefs just continue to be great through it all and will deal the '90s Bills one final loss this January when they advance to their fourth consecutive Super Bowl. And of course it's Mike Vrabel and Josh McDaniels undoing our dominance -- like a continuation of a nightmare that never really ended. It's worse than the drought because at least then we were building from nothing and had hope of change. Now we know we have probably YEARS of mid upcoming, continuing to fall short, changes not being made, and there's nothing we can do about it, except hope that maybe it will be different in, I don't know, 10 years with a new QB and regime? When we're in our 50s and the possibility of the Bills not doing it in our lifetime really becomes really real?
(And of course there are more important things in life. This is strictly inside the vacuum.)
I'm a similar age to you but I have to say while that is possible it is definitely a negative way of looking at things. I am not saying it WON'T turn out that way but it is by no means inevitable that it will. I just don't understand doom forecasting like that when it might never happen.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, BuffaloRebound said:
I think Beane is better at his job than McDermott is at his.
Strong disagree.
-
5
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Gregg said:
I wonder what the FO would look like if Kim had remained healthy. She was the one behind the purchase of the Bills more so than Terry. Remember the video when they ended the playoff drought. They showed the owner's box when the Bills were playing the Dolphins. Terry and Brandon were sitting there watching the game while Kim was in the background pacing back and forth nervously. She even admitted that she took the wins and losses more seriously than Terry. I would have to think she would not be happy the Bills haven't gotten to the Super Bowl with Allen as the QB all this time. She might have fired Beane and McDermott by now or at least put them on notice that their jobs are on the line if they continue to come up short in the playoffs.
She was also the one who invited the McDermotts onto the yacht. He was her appointment even more so than Terry's. Maybe she would have been more ruthless too, but she was all in on this coach.
-
3 hours ago, LABILLBACKER said:
Olave or Waddle...anything else is just repeating previous mistakes. And it still chaps my ass to think all Beane would've had to give Seattle is a 2nd round pick for DK....let that sink in when you're thinking about TJ Sanders.
I think it was the contract rather than the compensation that put them off but I was on the trade for DK train too. He was the quickest available route to shoring up a major weakness. He is not an all around elite receiver. But the thing he is elite at is the EXACT thing this offense needs most. Separating outside and down the field.
-
3
-
1
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, DrDawkinstein said:
1. Won a Super Bowl already
2. Even when saddled with a hapless Russell Wilson and a crappy roster, out-manuevered and out-coached McDermott in 2023, leading the Broncos to a last second win over the Bills.
3. Has the Broncos winning and relevant again with a lesser roster and Bo frickin Nix at QB.
No one can say he is coasting on talent in Denver. That team is clearly being coached up while they beat the likes of the Eagles. While the Bills and Josh Allen are winning in spite of McDermott too many times, and are now losing as they show up unprepared, undisciplined, and unmotivated.
All of that is true. But nobody has lost more playoff games to less talented teams while having an elite QB than Sean Payton. I do think he is a terrific Head Coach (though I don't think he is quite at the cutting edge offensively in the way he used to be) but if it is playoff success we lack I think an honest assessment of his resume suggests the Superbowl year was the outlier.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:
FWIW, I understand your argument completely.
I am objecting to the omission of KC from your list for any reason.
There is simply no world that a $40M swing in cap space affects a team with a $35M QB LESS than a team with a $16M QB.
My argument is pretty simple. If COVID cap contraction affected the Bills at Josh’s super low cap number, relatively speaking, it was felt much more with teams with huge QB cap numbers.
Dallas would be another one paying a huge bill for Dak at the time.
And then, relatively speaking, it wasn’t much of a disadvantage at all to the rest of the league. Because everyone was in the same boat. I don’t believe we were disadvantaged more than the Chiefs or Cowboys were. I think we were disadvantaged LESS because we had a cheaper QB.
Unlucky for the timeline? Sure. A bigger disadvantage than 28 other teams felt over that span? Not a chance.
It is about opportunity cost. The teams who had one year of cost controlled QB lost less opportunity than the teams who had two years of cost controlled QB in the two years of the crunch.
The point is not that it made it more difficult for the Bills than the teams who had already paid their Quarteback. Nor is it that this is the reason the Bills didn't win. The argument is the opportunity cost lost was greater for Buffalo, Baltimore, Arizona. Teams who both a) had decided their QB was the guy and b) had two years of cost control in 2021 and 2022 during the crunch.
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 minutes ago, RoscoeParrish said:
Here are the facts.
From 2019-2022, Josh’s cap hits were
$4M
$5.8M
$10M
$16M
From 2019-2022, Patrick Mahomes’ cap hits were
$4M
$5.3M
$7.4M
$35M
One of these teams is complaining they didn’t have enough money to go all in during COVID lol.
That is not the argument. I am giving up. I have explained it to you three times and you have missed the point.
-
1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said:
Yeah, I guess I fail to see how that doesn’t apply to the Chiefs, who drafted their QB exactly one season earlier and also paid him massively and were also in their peak “QB still with a super low cap hit” window, are curiously missing from your list of teams that were somehow hurt disproportionately from COVID cap contraction. Of course, they managed to just keep going to conference championships and win Super Bowls despite their own $40M swing, no?
This timeline of where we had this COVID deficit gets pretty fuzzy too. We signed a massive FA in Von Miller after 2021.
Sounds like kind of a crock to be frank.
Being able to sing Von isn't really relevant. It wasn't that we couldn't sign anyone it is thar we couldn't go as all in as we might otherwise have. It affected the Chiefs, but they only had one year of cost control left. The teams I would say were most impacted were those wanting to go in all in both cap restricted years which were 2021 and 2022.
And to repeat.... if anyone is saying it is the reason we didn't get over the hump that is a stretch too far. I don't think that is justified. Who knows if the Bills spend that money? Even more so if they spend it wisely.
-
1 hour ago, RoscoeParrish said:
This take makes no sense to me.
we had next to zero massive cap hits in 2020 or 2021.
Josh’s hit didn’t fully materialize until 2024. Diggs was on a bargain deal with his accelerated guarantees from Minnesota.
the problem with the Bills in 2020 was not COVID. It was that of our 5 highest cap hits, 2/5 were stiffs like Mario Addison and Trent Murphy. Just like today where stiffs like Knox are costing us major on our books today.
So despite the argument we couldn’t “kick the can,” what can would we have kicked? Adding a few more void years to terrible players like Murphy and Star Loutelelelie? I fail to see how that harmed our chances. It probably helped maximize us by not letting Beane damage the team further.I think you miss the point. We couldn't have a couple of those big contracts because when the cap should have increased $20m it retracted $20m. That is a $40m swing at exactly the point the Bills should have been wanting to go all in.
And then I wasn't saying it stopped the Bills kicking the can. It just meant when they kicked the can (and they did onna fair few deals) they were doing that just to get under the cap instead of to invest
I am not saying Beane didn't have some bad contracts then, but the point is quite simple.... the cap contraction hurt the most the teams primed to go all in at the point it happened. That was the Bills, Ravens and Cardinals and possibly one or two others.
-
2
-
-
28 minutes ago, Chandler#81 said:
Yes, every team dealt with COVID. But teams that sucked prior to Covid had little difficulty because they were Drafting higher. After acquiring Diggs, we were bottomed out. Then the COVID repercussions began.
Yea there was definitely a disproportianate impact on the teams who were at the Bills stage of their build. Years 4 and 5 of Josh's rookie deal (I know he had extended but it is still a moment of maximum flexibility and opportunity) were the cap reduction / restriction years. I wasn't just the Bills. The Ravens and the Cardinals were similarly affected. They were trying to go all in on their guys and finding they were having to make restricted choices. Can kicking that should have been to allow you one or two more decently sized free agent contracts became kicking the can and void years just to stay cap compliant.
So yes, everyone was affected, but the Bills were definitely in a small group of the most affected. Would those 2 or 3 extra decent FA deals over that 2 year period have been enough to get us over the hump? I think that is a stretch too far. It is an unknown. But the Bills were definitely affected more than most because it restricted the ability to go all in precisely at the time they should have been going all in.
None of that is to say there were not mistakes, bad picks, bad contracts etc. But covid restricted their room for error.
And I don't think it is fair to say that is still affecting them today. I think they'd be where they are cap wise now regardless. But definitely 2021 and 2022 the timing was really unfortunate for Beane and these Bills.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, hondo in seattle said:
You're right, GB, and yet... Regardless of what separation stats may say, I feel like I see #2's, #3's and even backups getting wide open more often on other teams than our guys. The problem is bigger than not having a #1.
Let me ask: do you believe our passing game is as good under Brady as it would be under, say, Kyle Shanahan? I agree that execution (generally a factor of coaching) and talent are critical. But I'd like Brady to put together a staff that can scheme a passing game as well as Shanahan and his coaches. And get the execution, too.
And I'd also like Beane to get us more talent - which I agree also holds us back.
As a fan, am I wrong to be greedy and want both?
No it is not as good as Kyle Shanahan. Or Andy Reid. Or Sean McVay. They are the elite of the elite and not available.
As for other 2s and 3s... easier to get them open when teams are locked onto your #1. Who are teams doubling on the Bills? Nobody. That is the point. If you rank #4 and #5 receivers in the NFL the Bills are maybe closer to middle of the pack. But if you rank #1s.... there is a legitimate case they are 32nd.
Teams bracket Shakir in zone in the middle of the field and man up outside on Keon and Palmer and say "go on then, get open" and they can't.
Could one of the elite offensive minds in the league do it? Probably. Brady isn't that, at least yet, he is still a young guy. But he is a pretty good offensive coordinator. He has done a pretty good job here despite Brandon Beane tying his hands. He isn't faultless. Of course not. But the idea that he is realistically upgradeable.... I honestly don't know about that.
two Player that can really change the Bills
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I suppose the thinking is bit of a backlog at the position but I suppose you are probably right. Golden hasn't taken off yet, Reed is out, Savion is a gimmick player, they have converted Bo Melton to corner and Wicks and Doubs are more complimentary than feature guys.
I still like it as an idea though, definitely a call worth making.