blacklabel
-
Posts
3,267 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by blacklabel
-
-
We know dis. Taylor's ball placement has always been shaky. There are handfuls of plays in every game where you go, "Yeah, he completed the pass but if he hits that guy in stride he's getting an extra 15-20 yards." I'm sure those types of throws drive Taylor nuts. But his problem has always been how his height limits his view of the field. He's forced to peek through lanes and windows in between giant lineman battling each other. He doesn't have the luxury of simply seeing over everything. They could combat this with deeper dropbacks like they do with Wilson in Seattle or more rollouts and pocket movement, which I thought we'd see a lot of this year but I think Dennison is kind lost right now.
-
7 minutes ago, Bills757 said:
I think Rudolph has more upside than Mayfield.
I think Rudolph is exactly the type of QB McBeane wants. We've heard Beane describe his ideal QB as a big dude with the ability to hang in the pocket. Rudolph shows that but he also has inconsistencies as well. They all do. But they're gonna take one of these kids, they almost have to.
I've been saying it in threads all over. I really hope this front office/coaching staff is flexible when it comes to how high they prioritize certain player traits. It's well understood that they want team-first, high character guys, guys who play for love of the game as opposed to getting paid, etc. But I wouldn't let those traits limit my decisions. If they have Player A and Player B on the big board and one guy is a naturally gifted athlete who would likely be a great player but has some character stuff and Player B is gonna be a solid but never spectacular player but he drives a bus of 50 grandmothers to church every Sunday... I sincerely hope they give consideration to taking the purely better player, not necessarily the better person with higher character traits.
Plus, if McD wants to shape the culture to his liking, he should be confident that his locker room can be a positive influence on a player with a couple red flags.
-
1
-
-
McDermott is here for the long haul. The Pegulas were blown away with his interview, his presentation, attention to detail, his philosophy, his plan to turn things around. He's going to get substantial time to get this team headed in the right direction.
As for Dennison, I mentioned in a different thread, I think he needs to be held to the same standards that McD holds his players to. They all gotta earn their spots, right? Well, I don't feel as though Dennison is doing enough to earn his spot and keep it through next season. This is his first year as a play-caller (IIRC) and he leaves a lot of us scratching our heads with his choices. So after the season, I would hope McD isn't too stubborn or too loyal to his assistants not to make a move in an effort to improve the team. Up until the sudden switch to Peterman, McD struck me as a "stay the course" kinda guy, a coach who wouldn't make big changes mid-season, but he did so that at least shows that he's willing to change things up if needed.
-
1
-
-
I wouldn't be 100% confident that they don't at least make an offer to Matthews. He's talked about how much he likes being on this team and he personifies the qualities McBeane wants in their players. He may be one of those guys they keep for his locker room presence.
-
This is silly.
McDaniels had a massive ego when he took the HC job in Denver. I read the book "Slow Getting Up" by Nate Jackson, a former WR/special teams guy who played in Denver while McDaniels coached there. He stated that McDaniels was arrogant, cold and disconnected from his players and talked out of both sides of his mouth. Generally just a cocky SOB who felt his schemes could create winners anywhere.
McDermott is a humble guy who has made it one of his top priorities to create strong team chemistry and a family-like atmosphere. You've heard it from some of the players this season. It's one of the closest teams they've been on. And that's because McDermott and Beane have a pretty specific set of traits they want in their players.
I was very surprised when McDermott made the switch to Peterman because from day one he's struck me as a guy with a very detailed plan and a "stay the course/weather the storm" mentality where he typically wouldn't make major changes mid-season.
It is interesting, though, that Dennison wasn't his first or even second choice. I feel like he hired Dennison because of his experience and I think it was a smart move for McDermott to round out his staff with experienced coaches he could lean on and learn from.
What I hope McDermott isn't is a coach that's too stubborn and/or loyal to his assistants to make changes after the season. If he's true to what he says about constantly evaluating all aspects of the team and how each position needs to be earned, then that should apply to coaches as well. And at this point I would say Dennison hasn't done well enough as a playcaller to keep McDermott from giving serious consideration to making a change after the season.
But he's not like McDaniels at all. They turned over this roster primarily to open up cap space so they have the money to go after the types of players they want. Some of it has been about buying into the process but no coach can expect every single player to be 100% on board with their vision. There will always be guys that question the process and that's fine. Coaches need to be smart enough to know that they won't have complete buy-in from everyone. But if the talent outweighs the lack of buy-in (and depending how much they lack that commitment to the process) he's gotta be smart enough to keep players like that.
I've said this before. I hope this regime doesn't limit themselves to drafting/signing nothing but choir boys for this team. If they have two players on the board that they both like and one has superior athletic talent and a bit of an attitude problem vs. a guy who is a solid but not spectacular player with high character, I hope they have the wherewithal to take the better athlete in certain situations.
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
Yea Hyde is a stud . He's a field general , always lining the guys up in the right spot.
This is what a primary zone team looks like.. sometimes some cushions between the 20s
but smart, fundamental football.
When you are in cover 3 and they tell you nobody gets behind you... well guess what... you peel off the LoS and you don't let anybody run by you
even if it means giving up a 12 yard out sometimes
i think 1 more solid corner will do wonders for us and keep Gaines a bit healthier
I'm inclined to agree with you, sir. Definitely need an upgrade for the nickel CB spot and some better depth. Safety-wise I can see them hanging onto Elston. They seem to like him and might wanna develop him.
Season isn't even over yet, they still have a legitimate chance to make the playoffs but we can't help ourselves in talking about which types of players they need to go get to strengthen this team, haha. I think I have a decent idea on the kinds of players they'll try to get in the draft so I'm more interested in who they're targeting in free agency.
-
9 minutes ago, JM2009 said:
The scheme the last two years produced a lot of points. You guys have some serious issues with one man. Don't watch the rest of the season, even if they finish 9-7 and sneak into the sixth seed. Then you won't get HBP because he is our QB.
Taylor is definitely the type of QB a team can win with but he needs to have a very good team around him. He isn't the type of QB that makes one think, "Hey, under a minute left and they need 60 yards to get in range for a game-winning field goal, there's definitely a chance with this guy under center." He needs a certain set of circumstances to achieve his full potential, strong run game, strong defense and a receiver or two that can get over the top so he can take some deep shots which is a strength of his. If they roll with him in 2018 (even if they draft a QB) I can see them going for a speedy WR somewhere so they'll have that option.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
It just sucks that he is kinda fragile.
but that's what happens when your an aggressive corner who is not afraid to hit
he is really valuable to our team and when he's out there he gives us a quick heady corner
I agree. He is banged up quite often but when he's on the field, you can see why they traded for him. He's a great zone CB. If he can stay healthy and consistent I think him and White can be the top corners for the future. But beyond those guys they know they gotta do better than Johnson and Wright. Johnson isn't great in coverage but he's on this team because he's a sure tackler who usually takes good angles. Wright on the other hand is just another guy. Most thought that the secondary would be the weak spot on defense but they've been really good. I think Hyde was a huge acquisition, not only is he a very good player, he's very smart and he's the director on the back end, making sure guys are lined up where they need to be.
-
5 minutes ago, Commonsense said:
He said...
"Great players don't need to campaign for themselves, your actions speak louder than your words"
Perhaps that applies here as well.
No argument here, haha.
Tyrod does have a small team of PR people, agent, manager, etc. so it's possible someone from his team put out the tweet and not him himself.
-
Ball control. Game plan for long, clock consuming drives on offense to keep Brady off the field. Defensively, they need to do a better job covering the middle of the field, as they've needed to all year. He's going to unload the ball quickly, three step drop and out, gonna be tough to get to him with a 4-man rush. But even if they aren't getting to him, at least collapse the pocket and get some hits on him. If I'm Frazier I'd also work on showing them some different fronts/looks/disguises, hopefully stuff that they haven't put on film too much this season. This Bills defense works on preventing the big play by keeping everything short and underneath but that's where Brady lives. He'll take those short slants and out routes all day and nickel and dime his way down the field. To me, one of the biggest reasons for the Pats' sustained success is that they really don't have a strict offensive or defensive identity. They practice everything so they can morph into different schemes based on their opponents. One week they'll beat a team with a vertical passing game, the next week they'll run it 35 times, after that they'll run the dink and dunk. They're just always so prepared for anything that they can play just about any style or system they want.
-
This isn't as bad as the Jets' Robbie Anderson asking for Pro Bowl votes during the game vs. Carolina this past Sunday. Chris Spielman was on the color commentary and after Anderson made those comments Spielman said something to the effect of, "How about you worry about trying to win the game you're playing right now instead of thinking about Pro Bowl votes." The clip is online somewhere.
-
On 11/26/2017 at 6:47 PM, Theshallowcross said:
Shady is fine it's the Oline that is trash.
OL was a strength until they switched to the zone blocking scheme. Plus, Glenn not being consistently in the lineup has made things tough but Dawkins seems like his arrow is pointing up. If he shows enough through the rest of the season I can see them moving on from Glenn and that contract. The right side is where help is needed.
-
He was in there as an extra OL for a few plays here and there. McD says these guys gotta earn the right to start, I'm surprised Mills is regularly "earning" his starting RT spot week in and week out considering he's been not too great these last few weeks.
-
Mills has this horrible habit of dropping his head too early when rushers are coming at him. I assume he's expecting to engage but when he goes against faster guys, they pick up on that and the minute he drops his head they zip around him untouched. It's pretty bad.
-
They sold this season to the fans with their "building to win now and for the future" line to keep us on the hook and watching the games.
They did play pretty well in their 5 wins so hopefully that's an indication of what's to come. I do somewhat think that they assumed they were going to lose a bunch of games early and switch over to rookies/younger players by mid-season. But with the 5-2 record they were in great shape, however, all the depth issues and deficiencies in certain departments started showing up as the weeks went by. The defense allows the middle of the field to be exploited constantly. The straight four-man rush never gets home. They tried to switch some things up and that caused the gaps to open up and they started getting shredded for major yards on the ground.
Offensively, the scheme is not the best fit for the type of players they have. There were members of this OL that were here when Marrone was around and all he wanted to run was inside zone and it rarely worked and Marrone was too stubborn to change it. Dennison tried to mix in things from Roman's system but in recent weeks it looks like he's gotten away from that. His tendency to involve players like Tolbert and DiMarco on important downs as a way to try and fool the defense, ("They'll never expect the play to go to the fullback!") has been difficult to watch.
Early on, turnovers and an opportunistic defense helped get those wins. Plus a few questionable calls that actually went their way. But there were some positive signs which hopefully they can build on. Now, it just looks like they don't have any answers on either side of the ball. Either they're too stubborn to try different things, or too tentative because they feel they'll get burned even worse or the different things they've installed just haven't translated to the field.
Another one of their mistakes, I feel, is they haven't done enough in terms of backup plans. Yeah, Marcell was playing 30-40% of the snaps per game but he forces OL's to put two guys on him and that helps free up LBs. They ship him off and who do they have? KW, who we all love but know is ready to call it a day. Washington, who just isn't the type of space-eating DT that Dareus was. Thornton is undersized at his position and they cut Worthy to bring up Coleman who has the size that they would hope can clog up the lanes.
Also, continuing to allow Humber to be a starter is baffling. I know Milano is a rookie but he's faster, he seems like he's always around the ball and he was making plays. It's questionable that McD, who states every position must be earned, gives Humber his spot back after Milano clearly outplayed him.
Oh, and deciding that the middle of the season when the team was still in the playoff hunt was the right time to start Peterman. That was unfair to both Peterman and Taylor. I know Taylor had started playing it too safely but maybe they needed to sit down with him and start encouraging him to push it down field more. But their concern for ball security seems to take precedent over taking some risks.
18 minutes ago, Foreigner said:You are all missing the big picture.
Beane and McDermott are both in over their heads.
How many years have they been in the NFL and no one has given them a GM or HC position.
Whose idea was it to hire these guys. No one seems to know.
If it was ownership, to save money with rookie management, the last time I looked
the Sabres are again in the basement with a 6 game losing streak, which is hard to do
in hockey with OT and shout outs.
McDermott had regularly been making the interview rounds for open HC positions for the last several years until Buffalo hired him.
Beane was about to be handed the GM job in Carolina before McDermott convinced him to come here. Both these guys broke into the league without having knowing anyone on the inside. They started at the lowest rung of the ladder and have made it to the top of their respective positions. You don't get a HC/GM job after a couple years in the league.
-
I was skeptical all along because we've been here a few times before. This season reminds me a bit of the 2011 season. Started hot, had some comeback wins, beat the Pats at home, etc. And then they just imploded in the second half of the season.
The national media was wrong to buy in and start calling Buffalo a real contender right before the the Jets game. I knew as soon as that stuff started that the team was gonna go lay an egg, and they did... in the national spotlight.... against the friggin' Jets and 74 year old Josh McCown playing for his 279th team and running in 15 yard TDs.
I was wrong to think that game was a fluke. I figured they were tired, they weren't able to prepare and practice as they normally would and it showed in the form of communication errors and turnovers. I don't know if that game ate away into their collective consciousness or what but since then the train has derailed further and further off the tracks.
-
I coulda swore I saw 66 in on a play or two yesterday, as an extra blocker on the left side.
-
1
-
-
Taylor can be an effective QB on the right team. And that type of team is what the Bills have tried to construct around him for the past three seasons. Strong defense, ball control/run heavy offense, hit a few big passes when needed. Unfortunately, this defense has fallen apart. The new offensive scheme has done zero favors for anyone on that side of the ball and the WR Taylor had the most chemistry with (Watkins) was shipped out.
In an ideal situation, Taylor can win. But he's not the type of QB that can carry the team on his back when things don't go as planned. Week in and week out, they need things to go according to plan as closely as possible. When that doesn't happen, it all falls apart.
On top of that, I think Taylor has hit his ceiling. He's careful with the ball, he can improvise and create something from nothing once in a while and when he has the time (and the right receiving options) he can toss a nice long ball. Right now he's in a system which is predicated on the run and they can't consistently run the ball. Defenses don't fear getting beat by the pass so they crowd the line and take away McCoy. They go out and get a big target for him but he has trouble finding him and then the dude gets hurt.
If the bewildering switch to Peterman sparks anything perhaps it will spark Taylor to improvise a bit more, move outside the pocket and start pushing the ball downfield to his receivers. I understand the whole "take what they give you" philosophy but if you do that all game long, you're allowing the opponent to dictate what you can and can't do. You have to throw caution to the wind at some point and let these dudes play.
And for cripes sake, Wade Phillips has been saying it for years, it's not difficult. You build your system around the skill sets of the players on the roster. You don't force a system onto players who don't reach their full potential inside it. I thought that stuff would stop once Rex left but now they're in an entirely new "process" which is starting to feel more and more like the same.
-
They went 5-2 based on some very opportunistic plays (several calls that went their way vs. ATL, turnovers vs. DEN & OAK, etc) and now that teams have figured out how to exploit the weak spots in the defense it's been a sh*tshow. They didn't necessarily ship off players because they "didn't fit." For all intents and purposes, Marcell was well-liked in the locker room. People knew his issues but I really don't believe he was a guy that was defiant toward coaches or flippant about what McD's philosophy was all about it. It came down to the everyday details for Marcell, being on time, being engaged in meetings, practicing hard, etc. Sammy wasn't going to return here and he was a guy that was emerging as a leader but the FO knew they wouldn't be able to afford him. Darby is a bit of a head-scratcher but whatever, he's not an irreplaceable player.
Everyone expected them to start out 2-5 or worse, instead it went the other way and surprised all of us but the magic has worn off, it's clear that a third of the team are aging vets who just might not have it anymore, another third are a bunch of fringe players filling a spot until they find someone better and the rest are rookies and second-year players still figuring things out. So I can understand some of the shortcomings we're seeing because they've intentionally stripped this team down to have plenty of cap space and draft picks. It was never supposed to be about winning in 2017 but they flipped the script and found themselves in a playoff position until three weeks ago.
The switch to Peterman was not a smart move. The only thing it may have changed was maybe now Tyrod will take more chances down the field. Beyond that, there's gotta be some concern with player/coach relationships right now. What they're doing isn't working and the body language of the players is starting to show. It's showing that the players aren't feeling like they're being put in the best positions to succeed. The middle of the field against the defense has been wide open all year long. How can they not have fixed that? The OL consistently misses blocks and allows a horde of defenders to break free at least five or six plays a game. How has that not been fixed? It has to be partially on coaching because that OL played rather well during '15 and '16. Is Glenn's absence that big of a difference maker? They don't do the zone stuff very well. Dennison has tried to mix in elements of the offense from the last two seasons but over the last few games it seems like he's scrapped that in favor of things 100% from his playbook. Frazier can't get pressure with a straight 4-man rush and every time he dials up blitzes or extra pressure they get burned over the middle.
Are they being taught the right things? Is the scheme failing the players or are the players failing in these schemes?
One thing is for sure, McD has to can it with the "it's about winning now and for the future" business because it's straight up crap. Pulling your established vet QB (who, yes, has hit a ceiling) who is the best QB on the roster in favor of a rookie in the middle of the season is not a "win now" move. I could understand if the team was 2-8 or something then yeah, play all your young guys and whatever. But they were still in the mix and he decides that's gonna be the solution. Hopefully he's learned from it. Or maybe the plan all along was to lose out and get them higher picks. BTW, this draft class is currently being compared to the 2013 class, and it may even be worse.
-
12 hours ago, SaviorPeterman said:
No thanks on Luck, at this point NP has more upside and a higher ceiling. He's a very similar player to Luck anyway.
If there was an emoji that expressed, "DAAAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAA" I'd use it here.
-
I've followed Andy Benoit for quite a while and usually his film analysis is pretty good. It's no secret that Taylor is a "see it-throw it" QB, meaning he very rarely throws with anticipation or throws guys open. He needs to see for sure that his man is open and this results in him hanging onto the ball too long. But game after game, as pointed out throughout this thread, he's not seeing open guys downfield, or he is and he's just not taking the chance. That's going to frustrate your receivers because he's not even giving them a chance to make a play, and it's especially going to frustrate the coaches and front office who just went out and obtained a big target for him to throw to. But, by the same token, I'm sure Taylor feels frustrated as well because he's consistently being coached to take what the defense gives him. And on top of that, it's been said that McD puts almost an obnoxious amount of emphasis on not turning the ball over while on offense. So on one hand, Taylor's gotta be thinking, I need to give my guys a shot. And on the other, he hears the coaches in his head saying, "Be safe, don't turn it over, if it's not there, dump it off." But at a certain point coaches are just gonna have to let a QB cut it loose and live with the mistakes that come with it.
-
I've been perplexed with their handling of the RB position this year. We understand that McCoy is the focal point and I think the ideal situation they were shooting for was to have defenses get tired out from chasing McCoy for most of the game and then hitting them with Tolbert who would be able to plow through a bunch of winded defenders. That hasn't been the case, though. Not saying J. Williams was an all-world back by any means but he certainly had much more to offer than Tolbert, who is limited to straight runs between the tackles because he doesn't have the speed to hit the corner. So anytime Tolbert is in there all defenses have to do is crowd the middle of the line and stay in their gaps. At least with Williams they would've had more options on the types of run calls they could've assigned to him.
I understand how important culture is to McBeane. It's clear that the prototype for the players they want are selfless, team-first, low-ego guys who just wanna win. Having special teams experience also seems to be a rather important box they wanna check off. And with draft prospects, they're obviously looking for experienced players. I don't believe any of their draft picks this year were early entrants. And those qualities in a player are great. It fits in with the strong team bond they wanna build and the chemistry they wanna develop. But, one of my questions on this regime is, will they limit themselves to players with ONLY those qualities? I would hope not. I would hope when they're scouting players (let's say prospects in this case) that they're not taking a player off the board because he only has two years of college under his belt. I would hope they're not taking a player off the board because he doesn't play special teams. I would hope they wouldn't pass over a supremely talented player because he has a bit of an ego. It's all well and good to have the foundation of your roster be built on those team-first, hardworking and "I just wanna win" types of players but they can't limit themselves to picking and signing players of ONLY that make-up. Gotta take some chances on guys who may have a bit of an attitude, a bit of swagger, a bit of nasty, etc. Because it's not as if those players can't come into a healthy locker room and mature and learn the importance of the culture they want here. So, yeah, I mean, McBeane didn't spend 20+ years climbing the ladder to get to where they are to NOT realize that they can't be so limited in the players they choose for his team. At least I hope not anyway.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, xsoldier54 said:
They're not "over coached" but you are definitely over thinking things. Taylor performed poorly for an extended period as he has been known to do and they replaced him with Peterman in hopes of getting better results. Period.
Just thoughts I was sharing. Not overthinking anything. McD is meticulous about details and preparation so my thought was just, I wonder if they're doing too much, I wonder if they're trying to find a solution to every situation they may end up in. We saw it with Rex's defense, everyone knows how complicated it is and all the checks and shifts caused miscommunication and poor play.
And I get the fact that they feel Peterman will be better at the short drops and short throws to slow down the pass rush. But that stuff doesn't matter if the OL collapses by the time Peterman hits his third step. Taylor was responsible for his fair share of the sacks this season but the OL was responsible for more. No QB is going to succeed when they have defenders in their face almost right away. And Peterman is barely an inch taller than Taylor, so it's not as if that solves the issue of numerous batted passes at the line each game.
Up until the last two games Taylor was efficient and playing mistake-free football. He alone is not solely responsible for the nosedive this offense has taken. Yeah, he misses an open receiver here and there, he looks a little hesitant to make a tight window throw, and at times he does hold the ball too long because he believes his talent at extending plays is good enough to get him out of trouble and eventually hit an open receiver. And he definitely has done that over his career here in Buffalo but it's not a style of play that can be relied on regularly. But aside from his issues, the OL has been getting whipped up and down the field. They couldn't pick up those delayed blitzes against the Jets and if I recall correctly, most film analysts said 5 of the 7 sacks in that game were on the OL. And against both the Jets and Saints, the run game never got going, there were missed assignments constantly and this group of receivers they have right now struggle to gain separation which is a bad match for a QB like Taylor who rarely throws guys open. Maybe Peterman has a skill set that will help this offense move in the right direction but to think that these abysmal performances over the last two games are primarily the fault of Taylor is just not true. The entire team from top to bottom just hasn't played well whatsoever. And if the OL continues to struggle against the duo of Bosa and Ingram this week then Peterman is in for a long day. And if he performs just as poorly as Taylor then where's that leave them? It's not just the QB in this situation. All areas of the team have had some major breakdowns over the last two weeks.
And the switch to Peterman is surprising because McD preaches patience with the process and certainly seems like a "stay the course" type of coach who isn't prone to making big changes like this.
-
It's interesting how so many are now saying Dennison's system is wrong for Taylor. When they hired Dennison, people automatically made the connection to their time in Baltimore so there was "familiarity" there which "should help" in getting the scheme going in the right direction. Then, analysis of Dennison's concepts were praised as a positive for Taylor because his scheme involved a lot of bootlegs, designed rollouts and other ways to move Taylor away from the pocket in order to open up his view of the field.
Then they limp through the first few weeks while using nothing but plays from Dennison's system. Taylor can't execute the 3-step drops and short/quick passes. The OL hadn't adequately mastered the zone blocking scheme so McCoy was being bottled up rather easily. So then Dennison sits down with the offense and takes their feedback about what they do well and what they would like to install into the offense. They end up reinstalling some of the blocking schemes used over the last two seasons and that's when the run game picked back up. They moved Taylor around a bit more and he was able to be efficient and make a few plays when they needed them.
And then we see the disasters vs. the Jets and Saints. I really wanted to call the Jets game a fluke. I just assumed the entire team was way less than 100%, they weren't able to prepare the way they normally would and the results were ugly. So we figure, hey, they got 10 days to prep for the Saints, we should hopefully see them get back to playing the way they did against Oakland, Atlanta, Denver, etc. Instead, the offense stays on the field for barely more than one quarter. The defense was giving different pre-snap looks, moving around, shifting at the line, doing some things we normally haven't seen this season, all probably in an effort to throw off Brees but instead it caused them to be out of their gaps time and again and by the third quarter the team was just ready to get out of there.
And now, the switch to Peterman seems to be motivated by the fact that most think he can execute Dennison's offense better than Tyrod. So did they scrap the elements of the 2015-16 offenses and go back to using Dennison's offense 100%? Did the defense get away from their straightforward scheme in an effort to switch it up so they don't look so predictable on film? At the midway point of the season, most teams try to switch things up or use some plays that they haven't used much or at all during the season.
Did the coaches get in their own heads? Did they get away from what was working simply to show teams something different? I can appreciate the emphasis McD puts on detail and preparation... but is it possible the team is being over-coached? Are they preaching too many details at the moment? After Sunday's game, McD, Dennison and Frazier all said similar things about getting back to either fundamentals or doing what they do best. Another coach (may have been a player) stated, "That's not us. That hasn't been us in back to back weeks, that's not how we play our game." It's just my theory but maybe they got away from their bread and butter plays in favor of trying to evolve on both sides of the ball or in an effort to simply give teams different looks. I'm not saying they made the schemes more difficult or anything. I'm just wondering if they have these guys thinking a little too much and it's preventing them from playing fast like they normally do.
-
1
-
NFL executive says Buffalo Bills are perfect fit for Oklahoma QB Baker Mayfield
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Yeah, Rudolph has decent arm strength. Given his size one may think he'd have a rocket but that's something he can develop.
Lamar Jackson has a great arm but seems like most on this board are against taking him because he's "Tyrod 2.0." He's a little bigger than Tyrod and has more of that "it" factor where you could see him as a guy that always gives the team a shot.
To me, Rosen is the best QB in this class. His attitude will be the big thing talked about leading up to the draft. I think Darnold goes back to USC. Luke Falk plays in a system that throws the ball a ton and that coach up at Washington State has always been known to have QBs who rack up mad stats but their games rarely translate well to the NFL.
I wouldn't be surprised if Buffalo goes with one of these guys who isn't mentioned in the same breath as Rosen, Darnold, etc. Maybe that Northwestern kid or the NC State kid. Who knows. Actually the NC State kid wouldn't surprise me at all given that Beane and McD probably have a decent amount of knowledge on him given that he's played in the same state they just got done living in for, like, 25 combined years (McD like 6 years but Beane was there 19). And he's experienced, he's developed and improved each year he's played. Just needs to gain some weight to hold up to NFL hits.