Logic

It is true that they are optimistic in their reporting. That being said, it wasn't really a stretch to think that an offensive system built on rollouts, moving pocket, and throwing on the run would play to Taylor's strengths. It didn't turn out that way, but it's not as if the prediction was way off base.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I'm gonna go ahead and guess that you did not read or digest the article I posted. It very clearly demonstrates creative, modern playcalling. Not "very basic". It also shows how his playcalls changed when a superior passing quarterback came into the game in the second half. It demonstrates that he called the game one way when he had a limited QB in the first half, then called it a completely different way when that changed in the second half. Again, you're entitled to your opinion. I just happen to think that your opinion is off base and indicative of the fact that you did not read the article posted.

Below is an article from Cover1.net. If you don't already follow this guy on Twitter or subscribe to the website, you should. Tremendous breakdowns of players and gameplans, often with great videos, gifs, and pictures to accompany the articles. Below, he breaks down Daboll's offensive gameplan and playcalls against Georgia in the National Championship game, and after reading the article, I can't help but be really excited for the 2018 season to get underway! http://www.cover1.net/offensive-coordinator-brian-daboll-could-bridge-the-college-and-nfl-game-in-buffalo/ "Landing Daboll is the best of both worlds as a Bills fan. The organization hired a guy that has experience game-planning and play calling on the biggest stages at both the NFL and collegiate level. He has championships with New England and now with Alabama. He was groomed under Nick Saban dating all the way back to his Michigan State days and then under Belichick in New England. So he has the attention to detail that McDermott wants, which includes teaching young QBs like Hurts and Tagovailoa, but he also has a touch of modern football in his arsenal. Daboll is able to use creative personnel groupings and looks on offense to confuse defenses, all while making things as easy as possible for his QB and offensive unit as a whole."

Didn't they just give him an extension last season? And McDermott called him out by name as one of the guys he was happiest for when the drought ended. And he played every single snap this season and was a leader and productive player. He's on a reasonable contract. There's also no one behind him that's better than him. He's not going anywhere, I don't think.

Some fans are real jackasses sometimes.

The bolded is nothing more than conjecture. The Giants are in year one of a new GM's tenure and very well may be willing to roll with Eli and trade down for more draft picks. The Browns, meanwhile, also pick at 4 and are rumored to like Josh Allen best. Simply saying we definitely won't be able to get one of the top two is pure speculation. Besides, maybe the apple of the Bills' eye is Mayfield or Allen or Jackson, and they need only to get into the top 7 or 8, which seems very doable. As for the second bolded part: many teams in the NFL have holes. It's a never-ending thing. Sometimes you finally DO get a roster all the way built up, but if you don't have a QB to go along with said roster, you wind up 8-8, as the Bills and their all-around-good roster in Whaley's last couple years can attest. You know what's a really big hole for the Bills and has been for 22 years? Quarterback. It also happens to be the most important position in the game.

The question I would ask again and again to the "don't trade picks to move up, its too expensive!" crowd is this: If not now, when? If not in year that is heralded as one of the best QB classes in recent memory, and in which the Bills have two 1sts and two 2nds and a glaring need at QB and a HC/OC/GM combo in their first full offseason together...then when? What better opportunity will the Bills ever have to secure a potential franchise QB? Again, if McDermott is as good as we all think and hope, the Bills won't be picking high enough to get a top guy most years. I say if you believe in one of the QBs in this draft, move heaven and earth to get him. Enough band-aids, also-rans, and mediocrity.

This reminds me of Sal Cappaccio posting yesterday that a good friend of his bet big money on a Jacksonville - New Orleans parlay. One tackle away from a huge windfall. Ouch.

Fair enough. I combed through about 20 pages of the Daboll thread and didn't see it, then got frustrated by the whining and backed out to the main forum. Apologies for re-posting something that was already covered.

I have absolutely no problem giving up a king's ransom in draft picks IF the Bills believe there is a franchise changing signal caller available. Why? Well, if not this year, then when? This is a potentially historically great quarterback draft and the Bills have more draft capital this year than they're likely to have most years. If McDermott is the coach we all think and hope he is, the Bills won't be picking any higher than 16th most years. So again I ask, if not this year, with all our capital and such a great QB class, then when? Yes, giving up a lot of picks will temporarily hamstring their ability to add quality players around said QB. But the cupboard isn't bare as it is. Let's say they add a decent veteran WR through free agency. Rookie QB would have Benjamin, vet WR X, Jones, Thompson at WR, Clay and O'Leary at TE, and Shady at HB. Not too shabby. Defensively, the Bills obviously need talent. Personally, though, I'd rather get a potential franchise QB in place first. I look at it like this: This year, with the talent already on hand on defense, the Bills went 9-7 and made the playoffs. Add a legitimate quarterback (and OC) to the team and you're hopefully looking at a significant improvement. Bottom line for me? This whole "build up the roster, fill all the other holes, we can't afford a QB!" argument doesn't hold water for me any more. We have seen the Bills field a pretty good all-around team numerous times throughout the drought. We've had good defenses, good running games, good receivers...and yet we've still failed to be consistent contenders. One of the big reasons why? No quality, consistent QB play since Kelly retired. Even recently, toward the end of Whaley's tenure, we had a good all around roster. No QB, though, and look how that all ended up. Let's end this constant carousel of mediocrity and take care of the most important position in the sport once and for all, whatever the cost. With the salary cap going up every year, we'll be able to add quality pieces through free agency and again in the next few years' drafts. But THIS year? The first full year of our new coach/GM's tenure, and with a possibly historically great QB, and with all this capital...let's go get our guy. Enough is enough. Send our two 1sts and a 2nd this year, a 1st and 3rd next year, and get it done. Bills would still have a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and two 5ths this year. They would still have a 2nd, 4th, 5th, etc next year. And this is BEFORE potentially adding more draft capital via trading of Glenn, Taylor, maybe Lawson.

Agreed. It would be nice to see a 2018 passing offense rather than a 1998 passing offense.

Y'all are both welcome! I am so, so relieved that the Bills didn't pick another dinosaur for OC. I was hoping they'd reach into the college ranks and take someone with a modern offense, and they did! This will help our rookie QB and help drag our passing game into the 21st century. There are two types of offenses in the NFL: Those who embrace modern concepts and college concepts (Eagles, Rams, Patriots, Texans with Watson at QB, Chiefs) and those who are stuck in the past. In 2017, the Bills were the latter. In 2018, I think they'll (FINALLY) be the former! Go Bills!!!

I haven't read all 42 pages of this thread, but I just wanted to say this: Anyone jumping off a bridge over this hire is being silly. This is a guy with a Super Bowl Ring and a National Championship in the span of 11 months. A guy who was smart enough and good enough at coaching to work for Belichick and Saban. A guy who, despite being only 42 years old, has 17 years of NFL coaching experience. A guy who -- due to having just coached in the college game this season -- should incorporate more modern passing concepts (RPOs, dynamic formations, motion, misdirection) into the Bills offense and be a real boon for whomever they draft. A guy who is WNY born and raised and is therefore emotionally invested. But sure, let's JUST look at his offenses from 7 years ago, with bum QBs on bum squads, and conclude that he stinks and will always stink. I'm sure he couldn't have possibly learned anything in the ensuing years with New England or from his time in Alabama. And one more thing: How can anyone who watched the second half of the National Championship game not like this guy? Talk about halftime adjustments! He scrapped his whole offensive gameplan and created a new one, on the fly, using a freshman QB and freshman skill players. Then, in overtime, he made the incredibly bold "Seattle" play call on 2nd and 26 and went for the jugular, instead of playing it safe and trying to just get into field goal range. No more dinosaur offense in Buffalo! Huzzah!

Below are some great articles about the Erhardt-Perkins offense, which our new offensive coordinator will be running. The first talks about the system in general, with some great diagrams of plays to give examples. The second article talks about Daboll's offense specifically. http://grantland.com/features/how-terminology-erhardt-perkins-system-helped-maintain-dominance-tom-brady-patriots/ http://www.al.com/alabamafootball/index.ssf/2017/11/why_alabamas_offense_is_like_a.html "The backbone of the Erhardt-Perkins system is that plays — pass plays in particular — are not organized by a route tree or by calling a single receiver’s route, but by what coaches refer to as “concepts.” Each play has a name, and that name conjures up an image for both the quarterback and the other players on offense. And, most importantly, the concept can be called from almost any formation or set. Who does what changes, but the theory and tactics driving the play do not. “In essence, you’re running the same play,” said Perkins. “You’re just giving them some window-dressing to make it look different.” The biggest advantage of the concept-based system is that it operates from the perspective of the most critical player on offense: the quarterback. In other systems, even if the underlying principles are the exact same, the play and its name might be very different. Rather than juggling all this information in real time, an Erhardt-Perkins quarterback only has to read a given arrangement of receivers. “You can cut down on the plays and get different looks from your formations and who’s in them. It’s easier for the players to learn. It’s easier for the quarterback to learn,” former Patriots offensive coordinator Charlie Weis said back in 2000. “You get different looks without changing his reads. You don’t need an open-ended number of plays.” Let’s look at a play that has long been a staple of the Patriots attack. This is actually two different concepts put together — “ghost/tosser,” which has the Patriots run the ghost concept to one side and the tosser concept to the other. Ghost has the outermost receiver, whoever it is, run a vertical route, one inside receiver run to a depth of roughly eight yards before breaking flat to the outside, and the innermost receiver run immediately to the flat. It’s a form of the “stick” or “turn” concept that essentially every NFL team uses. On the other side, tosser means that the receivers run the double-slant concept. The page below is from the Patriots’ playbook. The theory here is that no matter the formation, there is an outside receiver, an inside receiver, and a middle receiver, and each will be responsible for running his designated route. For the quarterback, this means the play can be run repeatedly, from different formations and with different personnel, all while his read stays effectively the same. Once receivers understand each concept, they only have to know at which position they’re lined up. The personnel and formation might cause the defense to respond differently, but for New England those changes only affect which side Brady prefers or which receiver he expects to be open. This conceptual approach is how the Patriots are able to run the same basic plays, whether spreading the field with four or five receivers or using multiple tight ends and running backs. And from Daboll: "You choose what you want to do and each week based on what the other team does, based on the coverages that they play," he said. "You don't just draw up new stuff every week...We can expand that or contract it or use the things that we think are best based on what the other team plays. I think that's what we've tried to do all year long and that's what gives the players the best chance to execute." After reading these articles and diving into the Erhardt-Perkins offense in general, I feel pretty excited about Buffalo's offensive future. The diversity that the offense offers -- while still using verbiage that is simpler than many other systems -- is enticing. I get the sense that with this offense, and with Daboll's recent experience coaching the college game, we're going to see a much more diverse, modern, interesting offensive attack in Buffalo next year. An attack that adjusts from week to week to exploit opponent's weaknesses and find advantageous personnel matchups. Unlike many on these forums, I think the hire of Daboll was an excellent one and I can't wait to see his offense in action. GO BILLS!!!

Thought you said "Shame about EJ Gaines". And then when someone pointed out that McDermott said he was day to day, you said "That is BS". So...

Not sure if anyone else has mentioned this yet, but EJ Gaines practiced today. Thought Don said he was out for the year or something?

So I fell down a Youtube rabbit hole today that wound up with me watching highlights from a 1995 Bills-Dolphins game (which the Bills won). At the end of the game, Berman shows a graphic detailing Bills vs Dolphins matchups from 1987-1995. In 20 contests (regular seasons and playoffs), the Bills held a 16-4 edge over the Phins, with an average of 155 rushing yards per game, and with 7 games of 200 or more rushing yards. I found this to be a pretty astonishing statistic. I was young in those days, but have always accepted it as general fact that the Bills dominated the Phins in those years. I don't think I realized quite HOW lopsided the matchup was, though. Marino vs Kelly is often fondly referred to as a great rivalry, but 16-4? Not much of a rivalry at all, really. For those who remember actually watching most of those games, why is it that the Bills seemed to have Miami's number? Was it poor Miami rush defense? (that's certainly what the rushing yards per game stats would point to!), was Miami's defense generally BAD a lot of the time? I'm looking at a Shula-coached, Marino-quarterbacked team, and I can't seem to figure out how Levy's Bills so thoroughly owned them in the win-loss department. Thoughts?

I'm fairly certain he IS aware of the dismal offensive situation. He has spoken about it -- and the need to improve on offense -- numerous times. He also tried to assuage the issue by changing quarterbacks (which obviously didn't work). There have also been numerous changes to the offense week-to-week, from moving away from outside zone to gap running, to adding RPOs, to adding more called QB runs. The results have obviously not been up to snuff. But to say that McDermott isn't aware of or "condones" the poor offensive production is a real stretch.

1. I'm fairly certain, based on the speed and content of your reply, that you didn't actually read the article. 2. Aside from that, I have no response, because all you posted was an insult (I guess?) in the form of a hashtag. Thanks for playing.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/02/us/russia-mcfarland-flynn-trump-emails.html When President Trump fired his national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, in February, White House officials portrayed him as a renegade who had acted independently in his discussions with a Russian official during the presidential transition and then lied to his colleagues about the interactions. But emails among top transition officials, provided or described to The New York Times, suggest that Mr. Flynn was far from a rogue actor. In fact, the emails, coupled with interviews and court documents filed on Friday, showed that Mr. Flynn was in close touch with other senior members of the Trump transition team both before and after he spoke with the Russian ambassador, Sergey I. Kislyak, about American sanctions against Russia.

So far, some of the things in the bill that seem, Oh, I don't know, what's the word? Ridiculous (I saw this posted elsewhere and had to dig through the herculean bill itself to find them, but alas). The tax bill: has an abortion law reclassifying life at conception, has a clause to drill oil in Alaska’s arctic wildlife preserve, and pulled the mandate for the ACA. So, yeah...Not sure what place any of that has in a TAX BILL.

Just as I will continue to laugh at the use of False Equivalence and Whataboutism to justify corrupt governmental chicanery.

Fair enough, Rhino. I will do just that. I am still wading through it myself, but will happily post some talking points that upset me. First, though, with regard to the other portion of my question: Do you feel the process that took place last night was reasonable, defensible, "regular order"?

Funny, that's exactly what I asked for in my original post in this thread. That someone defend the tax bill and the process that went into passing it. Has yet to happen, other than "but what about the other guys?!"

I guess I missed the part where dems had lobbyists writing last minute, hand written amendments to the ACA in the wee hours of the morning. I also must have misremembered the fact that the ACA was subject to a near-record 25 consecutive days of debate on the floor. The democrats ABSOLUTELY employed some underhanded tactics with regard to the ACA, but nowhere NEAR the level of what the GOP pulled last night. Furthermore, an endless chorus of Whataboutism and insistence on a False Equivalency does not equal a legitimate defense. I still have yet to hear a valid reason why anyone should be okay with this scam of a process.