oldmanfan

y my best case scenario for the receiving room is Shakir becomes a chain moving weapon from the slot and adds a couple of hundred yards of production, Coleman essentially replaces Gabe as the bigger downfield guy and gets close to his production as a rookie and Samuel is used as a poor man's Stefon Diggs move receiver the way Joe Brady was trying to use Stef at the end of last year. That would give you a serviceable room, but I agree with what someone said earlier... the only route to them being a difference making room is that Keon goes off as a rookie and is already being talked about as a possible top 10 receiver by the end of his first year. That could happen, but the odds are slim IMO. Yes, those all had contractual final say. Terry Pegula told you when he hired Brandon Beane that he was in charge of personnel, the draft and the 53. If McDermott had contractual final say we would know about it. He doesn't and those who have been in that building confirm that Beane runs personnel. He has the final say. While McDermott has more power in the organisation, Beane runs personnel. They drafted a big WR with their first pick this year in Coleman, and added several FAs that, if they can either get through injury history (Hamler) or get their head together (Claypool) would be the equivalent of double dipping in a lower round for a WR, as so many have said they should have done. I suppose Beane could still try and trade for another guy like an Aiyuk or Lamb, but it's hard to see that working with the cap. The only other thing they could have thought about is trading way up to get one of the top 3 guys, but that would have cost them a lot of capital that was needed for other spots, given the losses for example in the defensive backfield. I don' t think keeping Diggs was an option for several reasons: 1. he didn't want to be here; 2. Josh didn't want him here (I don't think there's any way Diggs gets traded without Josh signing on); 3. Diggs is on the downside of his career. I have reiterated my view several times that the success of the offense this year lies primarily with Brady and how he structures the offense.

When you get right down to it the only potential downgrade is losing Diggs, and that’s assuming Diggs is the Diggs from the first half of last season vs. the second half. I don’t think anyone can seriously argue that losing Davis but bringing in Samuel and/or MVS is not, at worst, a wash. So if Shakir continues his ascent, Samuel does better than Davis, and the other guys contribute the WR position will be OK.

Beane. They’ve been clear on that. And for the third time now McD is not Beane’s boss. Fact. Then tell your boy Badolbilz that TEs need to be left out because he adds them in when he feels like it. We’ll see where the WRs rank when they play football. See above about Badolbillz. He adds them when he sees fit.

The fact is simple: Pegula has said, Beane has said, and McD has said that the HC and GM each report to the owner. We can disagree on opinions, that’s kind of what chat rooms are for. But facts are facts. And when I have been wrong on a fact I acknowledge and thank folks for correcting me. Why is it in this thread that some ghat are negative on this topic insist we can only talk about WRs, until it’s convenient to mention TEs when it suits their purpose?

McD is not Beane’s boss, which is what you claimed. Why can’t people around here just admit when they make an erroneous statement, instead of then trying to change the statement or question?

Beane isn’t McD’s boss and vice versa. They each report to the owner.

While I get what you’re saying about Allen to some extent, Jim Brown, Jerry Rice, Barry Sanders, Lawrence Taylor, Joe Montana and others would laugh at your saying Mahomes is the second best player all time.

Yes I saw Badolbills make that mythical top 33 thing, which you bought into for some reason. And of course when drawing a comparison to KC he added in Kelce even though throughout this thread he kept droning on about how the thread only is about WRs. I know exactly what my points are: 1. The having to have two receivers in the top 32 is a mythical construct with respect to any degree of success for an offense, unless you show compelling data otherwise. 2. How many yards any individual receiver on the Bills gains this year is going to be dependent more on how Brady constructs the offense vs. the talent level of an individual receiver. 3. If you want to stick to this too 32 stuff, I think Kincaid will be in that group for all that means. 4. Ultimately it is how many points an offense scores that matters, not how many WRs are in the top 32.

First of all your post said two productive WRs. Then you threw in the having two guys in the top 32 as if that has any meaning. So, again, that is meaningless without seeing what Brady does in constructing an offense. So I mentioned 4500 yards. That would be about 260 yards passing a game. Divide that by 5 receivers and each would need 52 yards in a game. Do I think that’s achievable? If Brady’s offense is constructed to spread the ball around, yes. But we also I think can fairly predict Brady will emphasize the run game as well. So that would also affect the total yards for a given receiver. So let’s look at the Cowboys game last year where we ran the ball down their throats. In your world it would be a negative because the WEs didn’t make X yards. To me what is important for an offense is points scored, not some mythical construct as to how many WRs are within a given number of yards.

So you throw out some mythical standard and it has to be valid, but someone else throws out another and it’s wrong. Sure. So try reading, but what I said is how many yards guys get will depend primarily on how Brady constructs the offense. So predicting until we know that is blowing in the wind. We’ll know more starting this week. But I think it is a fair assumption that the ball is going to get spread around to multiple guys including WRs, TEs and RBs vs. trying to feed any specific guy.

You said we will have no productive receivers. Now that’s going to be defined by some arbitrary, capricious number? It has to be in the top 32? Based on what? How many yards any given receiver in this offense will accumulate depends primarily on how Brady constructs the offense. Do I think Kincaid will be top 32? Yes. But my guess is Brady wants Josh to spread the ball around more. So if we throw for somewhere over 4500 yards and are a top scoring offense I don’t give a damn if we have a guy that is top 32. If we had 3 guys at 33 would that work for you? Or do they have to meet your and Badolbills mythical construct? Absolutely. We’ll see how Brady wants to run his offense which in turn will tell us about how well our receiving corps functions.

That is not what you said. You said we may have no productive receivers. Which is just silly.

Kincaid Shakir Samuel There’s 3 minimum. You’re being overly hyperbolic now.

I thought we were only considering WR in this thread. Your words. Make up your mind.

As if that means anything.

We traded for Samuel. We drafted a guy in the top of round 2 this year. Found a good one in round 4 in Shakir.

Amen

Yep.

Yeah. Thank God the Chiefs had great ones last year.

I do not think there was any way the trade was made unless Josh agreed.

The word you're looking for is hubris.

For those continuing to drone on about the terrible WR corps, should they turn out to play well could you let me know now what position group you'll decide to pick on next? I'd like to start preparing in advance.

1974 season opener. Monday night football, Bills vs. Raiders. Still the most exciting game I've even seen.

Steve Young is a HOFer. Very talented guy, but anyone would be helped by having Rice to throw to and Walsh to design plays.

Bottom line for the defense is when they absolutely have had to make a stop in playoff games to win, they have not. And that has to change or McD likely has to move on. As for the offense, you cannot expect perfection, but they have come up with plays when needed far more than the defense. You need both to win a Lombardi.