Rochesterfan

What era era are we playing in and what age are the QBs. If we are playing in the 90’s with tighter coverage, more bump and run, and QBs that could just get destroyed on each rush - give me Kelly as he was much tougher and could take the hits and had a better arm. If we are playing in 2018, it is more cerebral because the QB has more time to read and the DBs cannot play as tight - a guy like Brady can succeed much better than a guy like Kelly. What stinks is a guy like Marino with his incredible arm talent and quick release can thrive in either era. I also think a guy like Brady has more success across every era than a guy like Jim does, but both would be good players no matter the era, but specifically in the 1990’s - I think Jim’s brand of leadership and style fit better and would take a team further.

I am honestly not sure. Before the injury to McCarron - I thought they would start Josh this week to get a chance to see him with the ones for a quarter and use some of game four for gameplanning. With the injury, I think it could go either way. I really like what I have seen from Josh, but make no mistake those have been mostly bland defenses even with the extra pressure. I think he is the better prospect, but I am not sure he is ready. I voted Peterman because I think the injury changes McDermott’s mind and he decides to start the slightly more experienced player in week one and now uses game 3 to see if he can handle a somewhat gameplanned start. I also think maybe he tries to give Allen a bit more time than normal with some of that time in the second quarter with the ones. It is interesting, but I just don’t know what they have thrown at Allen and how ready he is to recognize and change based on blitz and coverage packages.

I think this this is a very important point. The Browns ran for 65 yards on the first drive where the Bills did not game plan. The Bills played mostly nickel coverage against some different formations and I do not think they were ready. After the first drive and the DC getting his hands on the film - they mostly bottled the Browns up the rest of the half giving up less yards to backs on the subsequent 5 drives. They did not play well, but the coaches figured out things and the players improved after the first series. I think much like the Bills last week - this was the Browns home opener and there were lots of story lines and the Browns wanted t come out and dominate and they planned their first series giving them a massive advantage. The Bills played a fairly Vanilla game plan on the road both offensively and defensively and I think that hurt their run defense. Long term like last year - there are going to be games where they get gashed because they run nickel against a team that wants to pound the rock - like NO last year, but they will improve as the season goes on.

Totally disagree - Colleges have 100+ players on rosters and run in both spring and summer inter squad games that are essentially preseason games. Colleges also do not schedule important games for most teams until week 3 or 4 - again a warm up games typically against teams a division below them. Additionally a guy getting hurt in practice versus a preseason game is no different - so why not eliminate training camps completely. You draft your players and then start game 1. I would prefer to see it drop to 2 preseason games, 18 regular season games, and 2 additional reason games at the end of the summer where 4 teams get together and create some teams of guys eligible for the practice squad to give some rookies and young players more opportunities to be seen and play. The next CBA will be huge to see if changes are made, but I suspect we will still have at least 3 preseason games which is fine.

The funniest part is even if the first the Browns offered was the Texans pick - NE could have gotten what ended up being #4 overall and replaced Jimmy with potentially a player like Mayfield and had the continued success for years.

No - they knew a full year in advance that 4 or 5 prospects from 2018 would have a shot at being better than Mahomes in 2017. McDermott also knew that if you want to pick for long term success at the most important position - you want to do the most scouting with guys you trust and guys that see things the same way. Mahomes in 2017 made no sense with what the Bills had for a roster and FO. Watson made some sense because he was a mobile QB, quiet leader, and from all accounts a good student of the game. He would have fit in with TT and been a better fit. Picking Mahomes at that point would have been a disaster. As it turned out - they got themselves a top flight CB, a higher potential and better QB prospect, and a better MLB prospect because of the Mahomes and Ragland trades. I do not question that at all.

I do not disagree that TT can show him how to be professional, but I do not think Mayfield is going to necessarily pick that up from TT - especially as TT struggles in the passing game. I think you will (and already have in some cases) see Mayfield with his personality - go against what TT is doing because he is a very different type of leader. It may work out, but I think the combination and the quiet personality that TT brings is more of a detriment to the type of player Mayfield is. I also would fear that Baker at this point giving partial effort is already a better player that TT and that may color how Baker goes in the future.

I could not disagree more. I do not seem them as similar at all - in fact I think that bringing in TT was a huge mistake for the Browns in trying to mentor Baker. Baker is a rhythm passer with excellent accuracy that uses the entire field. I think he will be a great fit for that offense once they let him start. He will use all of the weapons and will open up the running game for the Browns in the future. TT does not throw in rhythm- he is a see the guy open and then throw type of passer that is going to tick off a guy like Landry - that will destroy his RAC ability for the season. It will also be fun to watch Haley (a guy that got into it with Big Ben) with TT - he will design plays that work, but the ball will be late and it will cause issues. The reason they got TT was because they knew from the last couple of years they were not going to get a FA QB worth a darn and they were going to draft a QB #1 - so they wanted a veteran on a short contract to give them something this year in case Baker is not ready. At this point - Baker is already far superior to TT (as he should be based upon talent levels) and he could do more in this offense than TT, but much like Jeff Fisher for the Rams - Hue is a bad coach that made up his mind and I doubt anything will change it until he is fired and Haley takes over and makes the change.

I don’t fully disagree, but Allen also missed a pretty easy blitz that led to his sack, Peterman saw a similar blitz and found the open TE for a touchdown. The TD play was the good you get with Allen, the missed Blitz/sack and the 4th down in game 1 were the bad. What we we have not seen is how he reacts if teams game plan for Allen specifically. He has a visible weakness with quick short passes to the RB - especially to the left it seems. He also looks uncomfortable when under pressure from blitzes. If teams blitz from the right and force that time and again - how does he deal - we don’t know yet. That does not mean don’t start him, but Peterman for whatever you want to say has completed 85% (missed 3 for the entire preseason) of his passes in the two weeks and has 2 TDs and has taken only one sack for no loss of yards. It is not like Peterman has looked inept. He just is no where near as dynamic as Allen.

I don’t disagree - I just think if we are being asked if they should start him because he gives him the best chance to win or wait until he is ready - that could be 2 different times. Much like Watson/Savage - Watson gave them the best chance (seen throughout the pre-season), but he was not really ready to start as seen by some of his mistakes once he started playing. I think getting him in - even if he is not totally ready still gives him the best chance to learn and grow, but you need to accept he is going to make mistakes and maybe cost us a game here or there.

To me is was the correct call, but close. They are making an effort to prevent these big hits when a guy is no longer a threat. You see it with the helmet hits with the second man in and you will see it more with these types of plays where the guy is tackled and someone piles on late. There was time to stop if they wanted to - I believe.

I really do not know- I think the Bills are the better team and I expect the Browns to change HC at some point this season, but the Bills early schedule and road travels could have a big impact if they get off to a slow start. In the end - I thinks the Bills will be better because of Coaching and Teamwork. I think the Browns will be internally battling esp with WR going after TT because they are not getting the touches.

I do think Allen with his talent could give them a better shot at winning, but still not be ready. I think the Texans were in that same boat last year. Watson gave them the best chance at winning, but he was really not ready to start. After the bad first half, the Texans played Watson and he did good things and bad things. The question is can you live with the mistakes as he grows. I think Allen has shown he gets a bit over excited to start with - he seems to struggle more early with high and off target throws. I would almost prefer to see if sit a bit and not have to come in right away so he has time to relax and get into the flow. His talent is just to much to keep on the bench long if they want to win this year.

Maybe look to the front page and the multiple o-line threads for an answer.

Good thing you are back and trolling again. So the starting o-line looked bad with McCarron as QB and that should impact all decisions- glad you are not in the FO. That same #1 o-line gave Peterman in week 1 enough time and space to be successful and Allen seemed ok behind the same line. McCarron struggled behind the 2nd line in week 1 - so maybe it is not the line as much as the QB.

First of Waaaaaah - I mean you want to give the GM and the scouts that traded up for Watkins in the deepest WR class perhaps in history and the scout and GM that drafted EJ a chance to make a selection of Mahomes - WHY? McDermott knew that Mahomes QB class was suspect and that Allen’s class was considered much better. They knew Mahomes had a ton of issues and most “experts” had him in the middle to bottom third of the round because of his college offense and his TOs. They knew he had a cannon, but he needed a lot of work and the Bills had a QB they wanted to see what he could do. I think you way overvalue Mahomes and your opinion on him and you did not like Allen as a prospect so you equate two totally different players to try and make a point. The Bills may have like Mahomes, but you would have been going completely on a GM and staff that failed on so many picks and McDermott is smarter than that. If you can not see his process which is slow and deliberate, but you question why in 3 short months he would draft a QB that he did not scout and trust a GM that was going out the door, then the fault lies with you. I am not curious at all because it was obvious that last year was about McDermott instilling his ethos on the team and making picks based upon what he wanted in year 1 - nearly every pick was a 4 year starter and team leader - why - because I believe that gave him a chance to draft quality players based upon the scouts the Bills had and the players he knew from Carolina. Year 2 (draft 1 with Beane) was about getting talent because they had established the team identity. Plus he now had a GM that was on the same page and had scouted, talked with, interviewed, and did background checks on the players and could give a similar grade so they could grow together. To me it was easy build a team - get the QB that your long term front office wants. It makes to much sense. Plus how do you think Mahomes would have progressed watching TT run an offense - it would have stunted his growth more. Mahomes got to watch an actual QB have a career year and learn how to use all parts of the field. Mahomes is an easy bust in Buffalo with the staff from last year and TT at QB. Allen has a shot to be special.

Agreed - a lot better

The Bills “Embedded” was a great show and it is nearly impossible not to love this coach and team. They put out a great promotional product that peels back a few layers, but leaves most of the underlying things hidden. For an internally produced production it was done very well - I gave them ??

Dorsey wanted his own guy - I believe he wanted to bring Nagy with him to develop the future #1 pick, but Haslam made a decision that Hue was staying and that was that. I am not sure it was a reward to keep Hue another year - this is going to be very hard on him with that staff.

Agreed and Haley was brought in from outside the organization over and objections of Hue. Hue ran the offense and Dorsey forced an OC in and my belief is they plan on replacing Hue with Haley at the first opportunity.

This is it exactly. Just look for the Hard Knocks press conference from May and it gives a nice breakdown of what is produced and when the Browns see things. Of course because it is NFL related the Hard Knocks crew is going to avoid certain things - they do not want to bite the hand that feeds them, but at the same time their job is to get eyes to HBO to keep their jobs and that means finding and in some cases creating drama - via their editing. Why do you think it has become so hard to get a team to do Hard Knocks? They have not had a voluntary team do it in years and had to creat a set of rules to force teams to be on the show. The NFL loves the exposure - the teams hate doing it.

It was reported leading up to Hard Knocks that the Browns would get to see a copy of the production before it goes live to ensure nothing of a competitive nature (audibles, plays on white board, lists of FA, etc.) is scrubbed, but the Browns have no control over what is picked to be shown or presented. There was a great piece at the initial kick-off about why the Browns were chosen and who had editorial control over what. It it is a documentary taking everything that happens and removing anything that would give away secrets to give others a competitive edge. The team from Hard Knocks has a ton of access and they ask the team to trust they will not show competitive issues, but their job is to drum up interest and in that way they look for drama to highlight. That is incorrect I believe - Cleveland has access to ensure that proprietary info is not released - they do not have access to control the narrative - that is controlled out of the production team. Cleveland sees a copy prior to release, but the work is done -they can just make sure things like whiteboards do not show plays or actual audibles they are installing are sent out.

Steve said it best on One Bills Live today - Embedded is an in-house production to give fans an inside peek at what goes on and the narrative is controlled by the team. Show the positive and the control the narrative. Hard Knocks is run outside of team control and it’s prime function is to find and highlight the drama to make it compelling. The two have totally different goals and that can be seen by the narrative right here on the board- Hue is portrayed as this nice - incompetent guy that has 2 large Type A personalities gunning for his job. That is the narrative and drama that Hard Knocks is playing up. It may or may not be true, but it is the angle they seem to be playing. The Bills are trying to humanize McDermot and show the team as a family. I have no doubts that Frazier and McDermot have had some squabbles probably just as bad as Cleveland, but everyone thinks Cleveland is totally going to lmplode because of internal bickering - while the Bills look like a solid well run family. I don’t think Hard Knocks destroys a team, but I do not think it does a team any favors and to me - if I was a Cleveland fan or if the Bills were on Hard Knocks - I think it would have a definite negative impact on how I feel about the team.

I am am going to say the Chargers, but for whatever reason they seem to struggle early and often in close games. I think they are the best team in the division, but I think all of them are going to be close right around 0.500 with them beating each other up. I think the Chiefs regress - they have lost talent at QB and on defense. I think the Broncos are improved - but I do not trust that offense to win big games. I think the Raiders are the worst of the teams, but all of that changes if Carr gets right. Therefore I am sticking with Chargers as the most complete team, but still flawed.

It might be worth 2 Kiko Alonzo jerseys at the stadium. ?