Shaw66

Particularly Morse. Between injury and weak play, the Bills may want Morse out of there, and they think Harrison and Feliano at guard is better than Felicuano and Winters at guard. Winters hasn't exactly gotten rave reviews. When will Bates be more than potential?

Yeah, I expect that McDermott and Frazier will have Lock confused, and he will make some mistakes. There no easy outs in the NFL. Well, a couple, but Denver, New England, and Miami are not among them.

Thanks for this.

Thanks. One of the things I think we hear McBeane saying about how they evaluate players in the draft and free agency is that they're looking for guys who already have the growth mindset. I used to think that McDermott's plan was to get guys and teach it, but I think they've made the management decision that it's easier to limit themselves to guys who already have it. They do that because not everyone can just easily flip into the growth mindset, and every guy on the roster who isn't successful transitioning is a guy who's a problem. They evaluate players for the growth mindset by asking coaches and teammates about them. They find out how the players responds to adversity. They find out how the players treat other people, because people with the growth mindset tend to work cooperatively rather than competitively. They collect secondary evidence of the growth mindset, and I suspect it's one of their fundamental screens for players. They can see on film whether the player has the raw physical skills - if you don't have the raw physical skills, you just can't play in the NFL. But once you have the basic physical stuff, I think McD care less about how good those skills are and care more about the growth mindset. I listen to McDermott talk, and sometimes I think he's not the brightest lightbulb in the IQ drawer. Still, he gives the impression that his future is limitless. If he's smart enough, and I think he is, his mindset is going to take him places. I think Beane has the mindset, too, but he isn't the disciple for the process that McDermott is.

Thanks. It is a good article.

Thanks. I didn't know about her, and I don't recall having heard McD talk about her. But what you and Wikipedia say about her theories clearly is at the core of McD's process. (I should note that Wikipedia says that other psycologists have not been able to replicate her clinical results, and there is a healthy debate about what the consequence is of her work.) It's interesting, too, that someone who works for Lexus (Toyota), chimed in above, because the Japanese were onto the growth mindset, apparently before Dweck wrote about it. Danaher is also famous for strictly seeking this kind of personal development, too. The growth mindset vs. the fixed mindset is at the core of a lot of discussion about McDermott and the Bills on this forum. Some people here show they believe in the fixed mindset when they say that McD isn't good at challenges or isn't good at managing the clock or other similar comments. They say it as if the fact that he didn't do those things well last year mean that he won't do those things well next year. In fact, McD is a believer in the growth mindset, which means he has in place systems to evaluate how well he does things, like challenges and clock management. If the evaluation is that he is doing those things poorly, McD views it as an opportunity to improve, so he studies, seeks advice, changes his behavior and reevaluates. The growth mindset is very much what he wants in his players. He wants his players not so much to celebrate what went right, but to question and evaluate what went wrong so it won't happen again. I think we see the result of the process in his defense. It's very rare that we see defenders after a play looking at each other and making gestures that say, "I thought you had that guy." The Bills know where they're supposed to be on defense, so they're rarely out of position. Still, of course, plays work against them, so when they watch film, they're always asking, "what could we do so that doesn't happen again." Working and practicing like that every day makes the team better and better. It's called continuous improvement. And, as I just said, continuous improvement. That's the real key. Continuous improvement means Hyde and Poyer get better as a safety tandem, year after year. It stops only after their pure physical abilities begin to decline. Continuous improvement your quarterback in the same system gets better, year after year.

Thanks. I'm sure I needed that.

Incredibly incredible.

How about the Giants beating the VIkings 41-0 in the playoffs AND holding the ball for the last 12 minutes! That's incredibly.

These are good questions. It's clear that Josh trust Diggs, and Josh trust Beasley. Josh needs a tight end he can trust to complete the picture. He doesn't so much need a tight end who's a deep threat or who makes outstanding plays (although both are nice). He has Diggs and Brown for that. He needs a security blanket, which clearly is what Kelce is for Mahomes. Whether he and Knox can make Knox into that kind of guy, we'll see. That would be awesome, because Knox's special talents make him someone you'd like to have on the field.

Read that article and feel good. Makes you feel good about Diggs, about Allen, about John Brown, about Buffalo.

Once I heard a guy speak who was a career/worker. He worked on the staff of a Congressman, and he'd worked on multiple political campaigns. He said there was one thing politicians had in common. When they woke up on the day after a landslide victory, there was no joy and basking in the glory of just having received 75% of the vote. What they always ask the campaign chairman is "why didn't the other 25% vote for me?" That's you. DId you have a kid in your class at school who got 99 on most of the tests? Sure, that kid wanted to know what he did wrong on that 1%, but did the rest of the class think? They thought he was the smartest kid in the class. I have no doubt whatsoever that McBeane look at Teller and ask themselves whether they should have kept him. They know why they chose not to. When they reexamine that decision, they might even continue to think it was the right choice at the time. Being a successful GM is all about batting average. No one bats 1.000. Anyone who thinks Beane is batting .900 should be celebrating Beane, not complaining about it. In fact, Beane isn't batting .900. I think he's doing great, but Teller is only one of many decisions we can second guess.

It sounds to me like you see the same guy I see, except that you're willing to make more excuses for him than I. As you say, Moss is playing more mistake-free football as a rookie than Knox in his second season. Singletary did last year, too. But you make me stop and think about it. McDermott isn't slow to sit people who aren't performing, and Kroft seemed to me to be pretty steady, so the fact that Knox is playing and Kroft isn't even suiting up says that McDermott sees and believes in the potential that you (and I) see. The guy has made some special plays, and he also gets into position to make more. For whatever reason, he hasn't been nearly as consistent as McDermott expects of his players. Still, he's on the field. We'll see if he develops greater consistency. Also, I wonder if he's playing because Brown isn't. I wonder if once Brown gets back, we'll see more Kroft and less Knox.

I've had that feeling almost from the day McDermott arrived. For about the first 15 years I lived in Connecticut, UConn men's basketball was more or less pathetic - rarely over .500, just a boring mid-major. I'd go to games once in a while and think that I was just watching decent college athletes, working hard but going nowhere. Then I went to one of Jim Calhoun's first games in Hartford. It was immediately clear that this was a completely different level of basketball. Same players, but different team. They fought on defense, they could break the press, they stayed in games until the end. They still were only a .500 club, but everything was different. Year after year they got better, and then they were on top. I had that feeling almost from McDermott's first press conference. That first season, that playoff season, you could see. Same players, but it was different. It was all different. And they've just kept getting better. Solid foundation, solid foundation, solid character. It's really impressive what McDermott has done.

I agree with this. I've stayed out of this thread, although I tend to agree with the OP. If you think about it, maybe more so than any single player on the team, disappoints you on a regular basis. He makes some really solid plays, but he fails to make plays much more often than he should. What you describe is exactly on the money - he's a really good athlete in some ways, but he doesn't have quality athletic skills finding and catching the ball. It was clear last year, and I thought that it may have been just rookie inexperience. We're past that now, and he still is badly inconsistent. It's always unfair to make comparisons with the best, but the best exhibit the kind of skills that you want. Kelce and Gronk find the ball - they know it's combining and they find it, and when it gets to them, they catch it. In Knox's case, I think it's mostly about finding it. I think he looks for the ball late. I think he's running so fast, and working so hard, that the added task of turning and finding the ball is physically too much for him. I think a lot of this is he doesn't really understand the playbook. A guy like Kelce, without looking, knows when the ball is going to come to him, knows when it will arrive, and therefore knows when to turn and look for it. When Knox fails to catch the ball, it seems like he's surprised that the ball is there. He shouldn't be surprised. His lack of awareness also evident in his fumble. He just seems like a kid who's really excited to be where he is and isn't really focused - in the way that most guys on the team are focused - on doing his job. Kroft, who has less physical talent, has the focus.

Thanks for keeping his name out there for people to see. Billy Shaw doesn't need my help, but that's why I'm Shaw66. People should remember.

This completely misperceives the process. The whole point of the process is that the Bills can bring in good athletes with the right attitude and they will be effective. The process isn't about getting star players, although you do need some. It's about getting your other 40 starters playing at really high efficiency in a team concept. The whole point of what McBeane are trying to do is get a QB worth paying big bucks, pay him the big bucks, and get all the guys around him to play as a team. That's exactly what we're seeing now, and it won't change when Allen gets his contract. And, by the way, the process is why I think Allen is going to give a hometown discount when the new contract comes around. Allen understands the process, and he understands that his success depends on having the right kind of guys around him. If he gives back $5 million a year on his next deal, Allen knows that the team will be better. Allen is a big believer in the process.

Thurman, you're right about what you say, but he isn't overthinking this. You're right that McDermott didn't invent the notion of process. What is unique about McDermott is that this is HIS process. He has learned that process is essential to success in an organization like a football team. He studied process, both within the teams he worked for and outside of those teams, outside of football, and even outside sports altogether, and he built HIS process. A couple of years ago he went to Penn State to watch wrestling practice, because he wanted to see their practice process. As the OP says, a portion of his process is old school - grit, persistence, and courage. A part of his process, at the core of his culture, is love, brotherhood, and respect. But there's another part that you touched on but didn't lay out completely: continuous improvement and elimination of mistakes. Those aspects of culture are relatively new to the NFL, except that I think they are at the core of what Belichick does. My understanding, however, is that the more recent coaches who are into continuous improvement and elimination of mistakes study the manufacturing management techniques found in Sygma Six and Kaizen. Those techniques rely on having every member of the organization committed to those two principles, and probably some others. The process is something like teach, practice, evaluate, correct, practice, evaluate, correct, practice until the behavior is learned, then move on to the next behavior. Everyone is committed to getting better 24/7/365 and to eliminating mistakes. One reason the love and brotherhood is so important is that the process is intended to be supportive of everyone - that is, everyone who is committed to the process deserves the love and support of his teammates. That keeps the team together, and it also helps build the confidence and performance of everyone. The OP uses Zach Moss as an example. Levi Wallace is another. That kind of process results in increased attention to detail. Everything is examined, corrected, and improved. Everything has a purpose. I remember when McDermott arrived, he got rid of the pool table in the locker room. Someone asked why. He said something like, "because pool doesn't have anything to do with what we're trying to accomplish. We don't want any distractions." So, then he was asked why he kept the ping pong table. "Eye-hand coordination, footwork." It's that kind of attention to detail that McDermott models and he teaches to his coaches and players. In McDermott land, the process applies to everyone. It applies to the guys doing film review - they're getting better at film review every week, and their establishing the process of film review along the way. The process applies to the locker room people - the towels are always there when needed, and there's always a better way to do it. The point is that it's a very specific process, and not one he got out of a book somewhere. It's a process he's designed, and process that he is continually refining and improving. That's why I speak up when people complain about things like McDermott's challenges. I don't know if he's good or bad at challenges, but I know he'll better in a couple years than he is now. Why? Because every challenge situation gets evaluated after the game, and things are learned about how to challenge better. The process that they goo through in decidind to challenge gets adjusted based on what they learn in their evaluation. It's a continuous improvement process. What's so powerful about the process is whatever happens, the team is ready. One of the Bills was interviewed in the field house last week, there were tables set up all across the floor. You could tell that they were there for a team meeting. The tables are all socially distanced, so the whole team is in there, each guy has a table, but they're all safe. You cound see it, but undoubtedly there was a microphone and speakers so the coaches could be heard, The player commented that it was just amazing how effieciently the staff configures and reconfigures that space each day, for meetings, for practice, for meals, for everything. He said he didn't understand how they could do it. It's the process. It's everywhere. The process is why the Bills have had relatively little trouble with COVID. The Bills were one of only four teams ready to practice on the first day that the NFL permitted practices this season. The Bills have dealt with adjustments to the schedule without any significant glitches. McDermott's process is a system that applies to everything the Bills do. It eliminates mistakes, it makes players better. , and it makes the team better.

Who remembers Paul Costa? Man, we had high hopes for him. Good guy.

Yeah, any other teams, no way I'm paying over face value to see the game. Probably not doing that. Any other teams, I'd go if someone gave me a ticket. In the months running up to XXV, I kept telling my wife that if the Bills go to the Super Bowl, I'm going. She kept saying "yeah, yeah, yeah. I've heard 15 years of this stuff." When there were about three weeks left in the season, and the Bills were really rolling, she said. "If you go to the Super Bowl, can I go, too?" Now, it's 30 years later, and she's had 30 more years of the Bills, and she's "yeah, yeah, yeah." But I know if I go, she's going. For XXV, I think I paid $1200 for two tix and took my wife. She'll kill me, but next time I might pay up to $10,000 for two. I'll use all that money I made writing the Rockpile Review! 🤣🤣🤣

I've been to one, XXV. I know it's different now, but I think the "full experience" is overrated. Unless you're a big corporate guest, you're not going to any glamour events with celebrities. You're just walking the streets, eating at restaurants, etc. And because so few tickets are allocated to the teams, the city isn't overrun with fans of the two teams. Maybe half of the people in town for the game have very little rooting interest. So the streets aren't overflowing with partisan fans. A Bills crowd might be a little different in that regard. Imagine Texas and Michigan State at the Orange Bowl - what's Miami like? Some people walking around in orange or green, especially in the nightspot neighborhoods, but it isn't like Bourbon Street. So when I think about going to another one, I think about it as just an extended weekend in a city, where I'm eating out in restaurants, seeing a few sites, and going to a football game. And the game, too, is a little disappointing because so many people have no rooting interest. They're there to watch, sure, but also to be able to say they were there and to say how cool the half-time show was. If the Bills get there this season, I don't think I'm going. But starting next season, I am, and I'll pay an arm and a leg, just because I want to be there. I won't go for the "full experience." I'll go for the game.

I actually, I think Murray is the most athletic QB has ever seen. He's as fast and elusive as Jackson, and he's a real thrower. I have the same concerns about Murray that I have about Jackson, but I think Murray is more likely to learn traditional NFL QB skills than Jackson, which would mean that his team would be so limited. As someone pointed out, however, even though Murray is a great runner, he isn't really a running quarterback. That isn't his game.

Actually, do you think it would make any sense if you were the Ravens GM to get a backup by signing an undrafted free agent QB out of some school that runs a wide open college offense? Some quick guy who can throw those option passes, maybe too small for other NFL teams to be interested in him. At least that way you'd have someone who actually could run the offense and pose some kind of threat to the defense if you lose Jackson for a few games.

Fair enough. I know Barkley's no McCown. But the point isn't that Barkley isn't a good enough backup. That's just a matter of making the right personnel decision. The discussion is about Jackson, and the point is that it's more or less impossible to have a backup for him. And although RGIII is a possibility in theory, if you watched him at all last week, it was clear that he can't do it, either. Yes, he's as bad as Jackson is in the pocket, but he is in no way the running threat that Jackson is. I think even with RGIII, the defense can more or less ignore the running threat, which once again means the playbook has gotten limited.

He can throw the deep out more or less like other journeymen backups who've never made it as starters, which is not very good. But you can still run the play, and if the receiver happens to get nice separation, Barkley can complete the pass. I mean, in no way am I here to defend Barkley's skills, but the difference is clear to me. Baltimore's entire offense is driven by having a premier running threat at QB; without the running threat, playing defense gets be pretty easy - ignore the threat that the QB may run. Buffalo has a full NFL playbook, and the defense must continue to defend the whole playbook, because if they don't, even a Barkley can hurt them. Well, you're right about Baltimore's DNA. Their approach has been to put together a killer defense and have enough offense to win. So I'll give them that. That's not McBeane's approach; they want to be the Patriots, not the Ravens.