Shaw66

I think this is right on the money. KC's coaches picked the Bills apart.

Right. Same is true for running back. How many touches does Saquon Barkley get in the Bills' offense? If you make him the workhorse, the receding talent is wasted. And that's why the Ravens have trouble getting high end receivers.

I agree with all of this. TE is the biggest positional hole. However, I also think it's the least important position on the starting 22. Unless you have one of the top 3 TEs in the business, your TE is not the guy who's winning or losing games for you. As others have said, when you're coming at defenses with Diggs, Beasley, Sanders, and Davis, with McKenzie thrown into the mix here and there, your tight end is not going to be an important target. I say the tight end is not important for a couple of reasons. First, if your tight end is your star receiver, he reshapes your offense. He causes your offensive focus to be the center of the field, because that's primarily where he operates. You'd much rather have Diggs and Sanders be your primary threats than Kittles, even though I would absolutely love having a Kittles. You'd rather have the wideouts because they force the opponent to defend the whole field. Tight ends don't. Second, when you do have wideouts like the Bills have, you don't need a stellar tight end. All the TE has to do is be a good route runner. Very few tight ends can generate separation on their own - they get separation by running to the openings created when the defensive backs are chasing good wideouts. Sweeney can get to the open spaces in the defense as well as Kelce can - it doesn't take supreme physical talent to run to those openings. It takes brains and discipline. Is Kelce better? Of course, no question. The question is how many more balls will Kelce catch playing in that offense than Knox would catch in that offense. I think it's less than you think. Why does Mahomes throw a lot to Kelce? Because he doesn't have Beasley, that's why. Kelce is his Beasley. It's the same as punters. Sure, I want the best punter in the league. But the difference in your win total for the year between having the best punter in the league and an average punter is essentially zero. Teams rarely look back at their seasons and say, "we made it to the playoffs because of our punter." Yes, a great punt might actually win a game for you once every few seasons, but it's only slightly more likely that the great punt will come from the best punter as from an average punter. It's just one punt that the punter hit just right, and the average punters in the league hit a lot of punts just right.

I hadn't thought about it, either, but the new IR rules make it easier on the coach and GM. When you have multiple guys down 3-6 weeks, it got tight continuing to carry them all on the roster to keep them available for later in the season. Now, it's much easier to manage that problem.

Yeah, but I think Stevenson might be full go after a week or two. There are two weeks of practice now, and two more weeks before he can be activated. It may have been worth it to the Bills to stash him on IR for three weeks even though he may only need three weeks from today. In other words, it may be about roster management almost as it's about recovering from the injury. This is a convenient opportunity to evaluate the oline and dline situations, for example. And certainly the receive situation. They probably didn't like having to make the receiver decision yet; this buys them three weeks.

I don't think so. I think the TE is the least important guy on the offense, especially in this offense. And it's hard to get a really good TE - you have to burn draft capital on a position that is a real shot in the dark. I think that after the top 5 TEs in the league, it doesn't matter all that much which you have. Would you like one of the top five? Oh, yeah, sure you would, because he will reshape your offense. But the Bills offense doesn't need a lot of reshaping, and it isn't easy to find a top 5 guy. One will come along, but the Bills aren't in a hurry to find one.

Thanks for your intitial explanation and the discussion it started. I now see much more clearly what's going on up front. I never understood why Edmunds lines up on the line so often. I would think "come on, everyone knows he's dropping, why doesn't he line up two yards back, like in a more traditional 4-3?" Well, because he isn't dropping every time. And because he's good enough to drop from there. McDermott always says he wants to get pass rush from four. It's easy to see the technique. He is getting pass rush from four, most of the time. He's able to do it by making it difficult for the offense to understand which four it is. When you plug the A gaps like that, and you have guys who can drop, the combinations of four you can send at the offense can be pretty confusing. And he's apparently a master with the safeties, as well. I remember reading something where one of them was describing how their interchangeable, and how they are regularly disguising their coverage assignments presnap. So, the opposing QB starts the play not knowing where the rush is coming from and knowing where is go-to receiver likely will be. He as to figure it all out on the fly, post-snap.

What people say about McDermott's defense, and McDermott admits it, is that he makes it really hard to make any useful pre-snap reads. He forces the offense to read and adjust post-snap, and on this play it's obvious that someone on the offense didn't adjust. And add to that a growing list of guys who can simply beat their man one on one - Hughes, Oliver, Epenesa, Rousseau, Zimmer, even maybe Basham, and you're putting immense pressure on the offensive line. Those guys don't know who's coming, and the guys who ARE coming can beat you off the ball.

Thanks. That's an example of what I've been saying about Edmunds and not even known exactly what situations show it. His length and athleticism allow him to lineup effectively as a down lineman and still cover the short zones, because he can get out their quickly, but even if he can't get all the way back, his height and length save him.

Yeah, I wasn't sure who dropped. But what I found interesting is looking at the still photo and explanation of how the lineup challenges the offense to go nearly max protect. That formation says "you know that we're sending four, and probably only four, but you have no idea which four. And maybe it's five. And it it's five, the fifth may be a safety, or the slot corner. And maybe it's six. You figure it out." So, then you watch the video, and there it is - Klein and Edmunds coming, some other guys dropping. They don't adjust protections properly, Bills rush four and Wilson's on his back. Simple, consistent look, but it requires your QB, line and backs to be ready for a lot of different things.

Hap I tend to agree catch the ball and be where you're supposed to be, unless you have a special downfield talent. The really good tight ends are threats in their own right. So, although I'd choose TEs by your standard, I think the Bills see Knox as a potential high-reward receiver that Hollister never will be. Knox is downfield threat, and he's a threat after the catch. I'd guess that the Bills think that just the threat of Knox opens up the offense, and it he can emerge as a consistent threat, all the better. I think he probably has really special upside, because it's surprising to me that the Bills are still so invested in him in his third season.

Makes sense. Dabs would rather have the extra blocker who can run his patterns and catch, rather than an extra receiver who isn't a blocking threat when line up tight. It's luxury to be able to add the extra blocker to enhance the running game, especially because the Bills run so much play action. I hear you. Probably means they'll get some comfort by having a practice squad TE who might offer more of a receiving threat that Gilliam or Sweeney.

Thanks. Interesting simple look at it. Easy to see why you need speed in your linebackers. Sticking them right in there and then expecting them to make the necessary zone drops is pretty demanding.

Man, '64 '65 was so great! And four straight Super Bowls, too. Now it's time to win it.

My Dad would have loved the Super Bowl years, but he didn't even make it for that. He'd love what we're seeing now, too.

I used to get flamed when I'd argue that Tyrod Taylor was more or less as good as Cam. I said it not because I thought that Tyrod should be All-Pro, but because I thought that the Cam love always was misplaced. Great QBs have what it takes between the ears. Not many do. Cam doesn't. Still, I find it hard not to like the guy. I wish him well.

70 is when I first realized there may not be much time left.

Still, that's a lot different from five or seven years ago. Then, those final five were the best of ten guys who looked more like development players. Kumerow, Stevenson, Sweeney, Butler, Hamlin, Thomas all look like guys who could contribute if asked to play a significant role today. I mean, seven years ago, if a guy like Kumerow were cut from some team, the Bills were looking to sign him. The problem then was that a guy like Kumerow didn't want to come to Buffalo.

Everything changes when your roster is deep. In the drought, guys on the PS simply weren't ready for the NFL. All you could do was hope they kept developing on the PS, and maybe one day they'd contribute. When one got called up, you were getting just a body to fill out the roster. Now, there will be at least a few players on the practice who are legitimately good enough to be on the 53, but there just isn't enough room. When they get called up, there will be legitimate reason to expect them to perform. Something we're not used to.

Watch your diet, exercise, see your doctor regularly. That's your only hope with the Sabres.

I don’t recall what I was thinking as I left the stadium after the Bills lost Super Bowl XXV. The only thing I actually remember is that some guys outside the stadium were selling Giants Super Bowl Champions t-shirts for $25. There also were some guys selling Bills Super Bowl Champions t-shirts for $5. I thought about buying one. I wish I had. I do remember that as the first few years after that game went by, after three more Super Bowl losses and the beginning of the decline, I assured myself that the Bills had plenty of time in to win a Super Bowl in my lifetime. After all, I had been waiting since 1969, and sooner or later they’d put together a team and win it all. It’s been 30 years since wide right, and that Super Bowl win hasn’t rolled around yet. In fact, last season was the first time the Bills got close enough to sniff the game, let alone a win. I’ve gotten older. I no longer live in the comfortable assuredness that I will see the Bills hoist the Lombardi. I now understand how good teams have to be to make it to the Super Bowl, and how special they need to be to win it. Until 2020, there hadn’t been one season that began with the Bills having other than a Cinderella’s chance of winning a Super Bowl. Until 2020. Last season, suddenly and almost unexpectedly, the Bills began winning like a champion wins. I say “almost unexpectedly” because I did expect it; before the 2019 season began, I had written that these times were coming. Still, when it happened last season, I wasn’t prepared for it. I wasn’t prepared for the Bills to stand pat with their 2020 as roster they headed into 2021. Sean McDermott told us not to expect changes. Change has been a way of life for the Bills for 25 years; could 2021 possibly be different? Yes. Swap out one veteran wide for another, and that was about it. No big draft trades. Just work at getting better. I wasn’t prepared to see Bills highlights on broadcast network promos. I wasn’t prepared to hear talking heads describe the Bills as on of the early favorites to win the Super Bowl. I wasn’t prepared to behave like a fan of a good team. I don’t have to defend my team to anyone. I feel uncomfortable modestly agreeing when one of my friends mentions how good the Bills look. I don’t know how to prepare for the inevitable and unexpected events of the season. The injuries, the losses, the player disappointments, all of those things visited on every team every season. Now that I think my team could be a winner, I’m not prepared for those soul-crushing surprises. Can the Bills survive the ups and downs of the NFL season and win the Super Bowl? Yes, they are now in that discussion, legitimately in that discussion. Will they win it? Predictions are pointless. All I know is that now, finally, after 25 more or less hopeless years, after retirement, the birth of grandchildren and the inevitable arrival of old age, the Bills could make good on those assurances I gave myself after the Kelly Super Bowl era ended. I still want a Bills Super Bowl Champions t-shirt, but I want one after a Bills win.

Thanks. Can't watch that stuff now, but I'll look at it when I can. I'm interested in it. You missed my point about the goal line play. The point is that Edmunds' assignment on that play, like most plays, is NOT to slash. Klein made the play and Edmunds didn't precisely because the Bills don't ask Edmunds to do that - that's what Klein was in there for. It isn't Edmunds assignment, which is completely beside the point about whether he CAN do it. You and I may disagree about whether he can, but we don't disagree about how he's used. I'm not one of those who complains about Edmunds. I'm convinced that his value is in something that I can't see, which is how he disrupts the passing game. There was a thread several weeks that had quotes from GMs, scouts, and coaches, and someone said he's just a real problem in the passing game, because he covers more ground than the average MLB, he is taller than the average MLB, and he has longer arms than the average MLB. The combined result is that he takes away a much larger part of the middle of the field than pretty much all MLBs. That doesn't show up in any stats that the average fan looks at, but it's obvious how it helps the four DBs. It means the DBs have less of the field to cover, which allows them to stay closer to receivers and close on them more easily. And I think his assignment in the run game is not to get tackles for loss, but to help keep running plays at 3-7 yards when the ball carrier breaks through the front four. The Bills won't commit Edmunds or Milano to filling gaps, because they want them dropping in the passing game. So, their jobs are to limit the damage when the front four doesn't make the stop, not make a tackle for no gain. I think if you could interview Beane and McDermott and have them answer frankly, they would say they're getting exactly the value from Edmunds that they wanted. They'd say that since then there hasn't been another player to come into the league who can play the pass the way Edmunds does. And I'd guess they'd also say that he is going to continue to improve against both the pass and the run.

The intellectual dishonesty on display here is why people ignore you. You know perfectly well that the Bills never have brought in anyone to compete with Edmunds for the job. They brought in a parade of backups for, as you say, depth. Klein can't possibly do what Edmunds does in the passing game, and Matakevich came to be what he is, a special teams player. Just because they have LB after their names doesn't mean they were brought in to compete with Edmunds. That's like saying the Bills have Kumerow on the roster to compete with Diggs. Wallace plays because he's very good at what they want him to do. Edmunds plays for the same reason. That the fact their physical skills don't match your concept of what a player should do at his position is completely irrelevant to the conversation. McDermott took the Bills to the AFC championship game with those two woeful underperformers, and Beane and McDermott found no reason to replace them this season. McDermott and Beane do NOT leave guys in the lineup for three or four seasons waiting for them to develop. They do NOT.

Thurm - Thanks for doing the research, but what they describe is not what I see. And I think what you say - too tall and rangy, is correct and part of the problem. I don't see burst. I see good open field speed, but not great acceleration. I don't see him beating blockers to the gap, and I don't see him slipping blocks. He doesn't beat runners into the gap, and he doesn't burst through the line and appear in the QB's face on blitzes. Maybe you're correct - he isn't bad at that stuff, but I think in a different system, one that required him to be that kind of tackle-for-loss middle linebacker, he'd be average at best. He isn't a mauler, as you say. That's why so many people around here are down on him. They expected and they want Keuchly or someone. They wanted London Fletcher playing behind a nasty 1-tech or 0-tech guy, diving into holes and stuffing runs at the line of scrimmage. It's just so clear now that that is not what McDermott wants. People should look at the video of the fourth-and-1 stop at the goal line. That's vintage Edmunds. Klein is slashing into the gap, slipping a block, moving laterally behind the line of scrimmage to make the stop. Edmunds is up right, behind the line, just playing off his blocker and reading. Now, I know people will look at that and say it's terrible, Edmunds isn't attacking, he isn't shedding the blocker, there's instinctual play on display. Well, fine, that's all true. But to those people think that Frazier and McDermott don't look at the film? Do they think they don't see that? So, why don't they do something about it? After three seasons, it's clear - they don't do something about it because Edmunds is doing exactly what he's been coached to do. I mean, he isn't even trying to plug a gap. If diving into some gap was his job on that play, Edmunds would be mired so far down the bench, he'd be outside 716. So, whether you're correct about his ability to play the slashing, run-stuffing linebacker or I am, it's pretty much beside the point. He isn't asked to be that guy. Just like Star isn't asked to be a sackmeister and Knox isn't asked to be Lee Smith.

I think he isn't good at it. He isn't a physical hitter. He doesn't have great burst. But I don't think it matters. It isn't his job.