oldmanfan

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?

For now

I hope Babich is an aggressive play caller and that McD allows him to do so.

Yes, opinion. You ignore vets like Dawkins, Allen, Hollins, Miller and such. Plus none of us really have any idea who players look at as leaders, last year or this year. I think the term you’re looking for is confirmation bias. You have a preformed idea of the season and try to shoehorn opinions to match it. The term fun loving goofballs gives it away.

Interesting points. My concern is based on what I’ve seen in my field of reproductive medicine. A good number of IVF clinics now are owned by private equity and they only care about making $$ and selling to a bigger firm. No one cares about the customer (in our case patients), employees are abused, and such. I have trouble seeing private equity only having a 10% stake unless they see return on ROI. And the only way they’ll get that is by things like jacking up ticket prices, etc. To me the 10% is the tip of the iceberg. But you are probably much more knowledgeable about financial matters than me.

With no statistical meaning. There was one vote separating Josh and Tua. In stats an N of 1 doesn’t mean anything. You calling leadership questionable is a fact. You did so. Whether it is or not, and your thinking it is, is opinion. The two are commonly confused by many.

I say 10. I think the offense will be OK, probably run more and a lot of 12 formation. But it may take a little time to gel. Same with the D. New safeties need to gel and Williams at the 1 LB spot will improve with time.

Ahem. There were 100 players polled and 11 voted for Josh as the most overrated QB. So let’s say we take active 53 man rosters only x 32 = 1696 players. So 100/1596 = 5.6% of the total players that were polled. And 11/100 voted for Josh. Or 0.6% of total active players. Yep, that’s the entire league all right… Yep should have drafted that Franklin kid. Just because he’s like #5 on the Broncos list of WRs doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be #1 here.

I hope you’re right. But I have seen the impact of private equity in my field: healthcare. It becomes no longer about patient care but $$. While they say it’s only 10% that a PE firm can own, the only thing that counts in the NFL is $$. And while again I hope I’m wrong, I can see within 10 years that PE become majority stakeholders, and then the only thing that will matter is ROI. And small market teams simply won’t hold up.