oldmanfan

Helluva comeback.

We disagree. And I suspect we will see victories outside for the Bills all year.

I think we have to see, and I think we have more weapons than you might imagine. Samuel for example has been restricted by lack of good QB play, and Brady can use him all over the field. Shakir is certainly intriguing given his finish last year. And I think everyone agrees about Kincaid. We’ll see a lot of motion, more play action, screens etc. based on the latter part of last year. One last point about Josh. People are worried about his prime but he’s got a lot of years ahead. If we run the ball effectively and if Josh learns to slide quicker he’s got plenty of time to win a few.

The Bills had what you would consider a true #1 in Diggs, and I would note that even with him they did not reach the promised land. And they don't have him now because, if you are to believe his words, he decided he needed to shake things up for himself (not that I think he was a true #1 -whatever that may be - the last part of last season). To me the only surefire way to get the kind of WR you want is to do so in free agency or trade. Only through those routes would you know whether a guy has it to be a force in the league. And because of Diggs and other contracts (like Miller's), they simply were not in the position to take a swing at a guy this offseason. They did get Coleman and we'll see what impact he makes. Could they have traded a bunch of picks and such to move way up in the draft? Sure. But then you are ignoring other positions such as safety that required upgrades this year. And again with no guarantees of a real hit. I am intrigued to see what Brady does with this group. I do think there will be a lot of WRs available in FA next year (I see Higgins in our future), and Beane will have funds to make a move. I disagree with your boundary guy concept but agree about matchups. And that is what Brady has to do, create favorable matchups that allow for guys to get open downfield. Previous coordinators, as well as Brady, did so by getting a guy like Cook or Davis matched against a LB, or Kincaid matched against a slower LB, and so on. So when you keep talking about boundary guys you lose me. Split Cook out and get him isolated against a LB, is he a boundary guy?

when did you overlook "or whatever"?

And if I wanted to take the time I could find way more examples of guys that were taken and never did anything in the league. Look at the guys we drafted. We just got rid of two older guys at safety so we drafted one of the best prospects at the position in round 2. Maybe we take a WR over Carter round 3. Davis in round 4 gives you another solid RB that can also catch. And once you get to round 5 it’s a crap shoot - you pick the best guy on your board. The success of this offense will not result upon some theoretical guy you want to dream up that they could have taken at WR on day 3. At best that guy would be fourth on the depth chart. This offense succeeds of fails based on Brady and how well he uses and schemes for the talent he has. Talent that includes now a pretty solid run game, one TE in Kincaid that looks really good and one in Knox that has shown he gets open in the red zone. Talent that includes a Swiss Army knife guy in Samuel that finally gets a QB, an emerging talent in Shakir, a rookie with size and good hands in Coleman, and three RBs that all have shown they can come out of the backfield and catch passes. Oh, and a pretty fair QB. So we’ll see what Brady does. He did pretty well last half of last year even with a declining Diggs and a hurt guy in Davis. I suspect we’ll see a lot of interesting things out of the offense this year. How many times over the years have we seen a guy like Know get open downfield? Or when Davis (no speed merchant) got free on the outside? It is about scheme more that just raw speed or whatever.

In terms of raw talent no. In terms of how they fit into Brady's offense yes. We'll see how it works, but apparently you just want to live in denial of what Brady has said. People keep saying this, but would picking up another WR is, say, round 3 or 4 really be much different than picking up some of the FAs we brought in this year?

I’m just telling you what Brady has said. But if you want to choose to ignore it fine.

You’re saying he’s a WR2. I’m saying what Brady is saying; that they are looking at the WRs as interchangeable.

24-20 Bills

Yes I think Hollis is Davis. Both are excellent blockers. And Hollis should benefit from having Josh. I don’t think Hollis replaces Davis’s numbers because Davis functioned as Josh’s second option while Hollis will be part of a group which the OC says he wants to be position-less, i.e. no WR1, 2, etc.

I don't think Hollins is a star by any means, but he is a guy that can contribute. And importantly he's a guy who is an excellent blocker, which seems important given how much Brady emphasized the run game last year. I think of him as the replacement for Davis.

I have nothing against Diggs; he was a warrior for us for several years and helped Josh develop into the great player he is today. I have little doubt he will return to Buffalo at some point post-retirement and be welcomed back warmly. He is certainly competitive, and we should always remember him going to the hospital to be with Damar and his family. But if you look at his statement it seems clear his ego is pretty inflated, thinking both the Vikings and Bills wanted him but that he had to shake things up for his own benefit. In that regard, he's really not that much different than many top caliber WRs ; the term diva is used for such players and seems to fit fairly well. But I also recall the old phrase it ain't bragging if you can do it. And for a long time Diggs did it. But some things happened last year that called Diggs ability to do it into question. I have said at several points this offseason that, if Josh had wanted Diggs to stay, he'd still be here. I'm thinking Diggs quote about him shaking things up and not the Bills is kind of a defense mechanism. I don't think there's any way Diggs gets traded and the team absorbing a big cap hit without Josh wanting it to happen, maybe some other locker room leaders as well. It seems clear to me that Josh was the leader for this team (as any starting QB is by default) and Diggs' stye of leadership (yelling at guys and such) was not working. If you claim to be a leader, but you look behind you and don't see anyone following, then are you a leader? I suspect Diggs saw that and it was tough for him to handle. Ultimately Josh has to be the guy on this team. And trading Diggs confirms that. The other issue was Diggs' play the latter half of the year. Some of that was Brady's offense taking away the spotlight a bit, and I can understand a guy like Diggs getting ticked at that. But the other is that it might be Diggs get was starting to catch up a bit. Gregg Cosell, a guy I respect, indicated that last half of last season Diggs was not a #1 WR, that he was not commanding double teams anymore. Again, was that on Brady, or on Diggs? Maybe both. So what happens this year? We'll see. For the Bills, they'll miss a guy like Diggs to a degree, more if it was the Diggs of his first few seasons, less if the guy the latter part of last year. This year the offense will be more multidimensional, more runs, more play action, more pre-snap movement and such. More Josh running the show and not having a specific guy that demands the ball. for Diggs, he'll be with a young QB, but how many touches will he get when you have Collins and Dell also at WR and a decent TE in Schultz? We'll see, and we'll see if Diggs can handle not being the main focus of an offense. Personally I would have liked to keep Diggs one more year, but from his quote it seems like he decided to force the issue. At that point if you're Josh, if you're McD, if you're Beane, or if you're the rest of the team the answer is simple: see ya.

I think Samuel will be around 800 because we’ll be spreading the ball around. And that he’ll have more than Diggs because Diggs will be the third option in Houston.

Samuel has a QB to play with this year.

Some concern but not matching your scenarios. We give up experience but gain in athleticism.

I cannot imagine Diggs was traded without Josh saying OK. You can only have one alpha male on the offense and that’s Josh. It’ll be interesting to see how much grief Stroud gets this year.

Interesting approach. Seems to me if players are watching film, seeing trends, seeing which guys they can block or get open on it makes sense to get input. So long as Brady makes it clear he is the final decision maker then it should be good. In this vein I wonder if Josh is given more freedom to call audibles.

As long as Hackett is their OC I’m not worried about them

They might want to consider growing up. Easily the winner of most ironic post of the year.

Great post. To me the 22-23 turned on Damar. The Bills had already had to deal with having a game moved to Detroit and such, but seeing a teammate almost die in front of your eyes just ruined them mentally to where they just didn’t have enough in the playoffs.

It’s going to be an interesting year. In general I think we lost guys that were getting older. So younger guys now have to step up and that is at the same time exciting and scary. So we’ll see. To me the most important aspect to this season is coaching. Can Brady and Babich assume the coordinator positions and do the job?

I think Brady is going to have a lot of pre-snap motion with the wideouts to help scheme guys open.

It must be sad to need attention this much

Can you explain how a PE firm would generate profit from a 10% stake? My understanding and experience from seeing PE firms buy medical practices is that they come in, increase charges to patients, slash employees and/or require much longer working hours, pressure health care professionals to go to more high cost treatments to generate revenue, and so on. And then sell out to the next guy so they can take our profit. I am not sure how, in the NFL model, a PE entity will generate the kind of rapid ROE they typically want. Plus I just think it’s the top of the iceberg. Now it’s 10%. How long will it take to be 20%? Or 50%? Or eventually a majority stake?