Shaw66

It will always be like this. The media are driven by one thing - ratings. That's all that matters. The Bills are the smallest market in the league, or close to it. More people will stay tuned in if they're talking about Miami than about the Bills, so the media are going to talk about Miami. Moreover, the general NFL fans do not believe the Bills are or ever will be good. It's a mindset they have. The Bills have to dominate the league like KC currently is before you can expect any kind of serious, continuous positive coverage about the Bills. Beating Arizona would help, but even that won't do it. Beat Arizona and Pittsburgh, then maybe you'll see some serious attention.

I can speculate all I want about his psyche. Players sign below-market deals - that's a fact. Brady took historically below-market deals for years - that's a fact. I'm just saying I won't be surprised if Allen surprises the market.

I'm thinking Josh might take a longer-than-usual contract, guaranteed. I don't know if dead cap money is roughly equivalent to guaranteed money, but I think it is. Mahomes looks like he has $160 of dead cap money. I could imagine Allen taking $5-10 million less in annual salary, $25-35 per year, but getting a 10-year guaranty. That would be a $300 million guaranteed deal. I'm telling you, don't expect Allen's agent to drive this deal. Allen is a different dude.

You misperceive what I'm saying. I'm not saying the Bills will lowball Josh and try to force it down his throat. I think Josh will volunteer the discount. I'm guessing, and it's only a guess, that Josh already has bought the total team concept, and that Josh already understands the impact Brady had on his old team by taking $5 million (or more) less than he could have gotten elsewhere. Josh has surprised people throughout his career, and I think he's going to surprise people when the time comes to extend his contract.

I've said for a year that I think Josh will give the Bills a discount. Josh is smart and a team guy, and he recognizes the impact of the mega-deals on the ability of the GM to put together a winner. I I think Josh will leave money on the table.

Over time, the statistics catch up to the eye test. A year ago, anyone really paying attention could see that Allen is a real QB, and for their own reasons they looked to the stats to prove he wasn't.

I haven't written about not being in the stadium, and that's a good perception on your part. It's easier to be funny if I saw the game live. It's easier to report things that people didn't see on TV, the feel of the place, the activity on the sidelines, whatever. Especially when I go on the road, which I'd been doing once or twice a year. There's a certain sameness when all I can see is what's on TV.

Thank you both for the comments. Virg gets his up so fast, I don't know how he does it. Maybe he writes it on Saturday and leaves a few blanks here and there, fills them in after game and he's done. I'm watching other games, stuck in the couch, pissed about the loss or thrilled about the win. Then about 8 pm I get started.

Watching other games today caused me to think that the Bills need more speed. I think we will see Beane get more juice on the field next year.

On the way to becoming a good team, you beat the teams you should, and you struggle against the upper echelon. On the way to becoming a good team, you must learn to win your share of the big games. The Bills beat the Rams and the Raiders earlier in the season, two teams that at least are in the discussion of good teams. Then they stumbled against Tennessee and Kansas City, and the question arose again – can the Bills beat good teams? Sunday against Seattle was the test. The Seahawks are a certfiable good team. They have the pedigree, they have the Hall of Fame coach, they have the true franchise quarterback, they have a couple of deadly wideouts. Yes, they have a suspect defense (and “suspect” may be an understatement), but the Seahawks are winning a lot. They came to Buffalo favored to win. The Bills handled Seattle. They didn’t manhandle them – it was no blowout, but they handled Seattle. A week after a grind-it-out win against the Patriots, a game in which the Bills relied on a solid ground game, they won an air-it-out shoot out with the Seahawks. They jumped out to an early lead, 17-0, which in some games would have been enough. But the Seahawks have one of the best offenses in the league, and the Bills defense isn’t shutting down good offenses this season. It was predictiable that Seattle would come back, and they did. The Bills were tested. By late in the third quarter, the lead had shrunk to 27-20, but the Bills kept making plays and closed out the win, 44-34. It was two great offenses against two defenses that have struggled. The difference was that the Bills defense returned, at least in part, to its 2019 form. Against the Seahawks the Bills defense made plays. They took the ball from Seattle four times. Each was a big play by a defender – Jerry Hughes forcing a fumble, Jordan Poyer dropping into the end zone after the pass rush had pinned Russell Wilson near the sideline, Tre’Davious White coming way off his man to undercut a Wilson throw, and A.J Klein sacking Russell and taking the ball from him. In a statistically even game, those four plays maintained the Bills’ grip on the lead and the win. White’s interception was the kind of smart, opportunistic defense that Sean McDermott and Leslie Frazier got from White and the Bills last season but had been missing this year. It was third and 25, at the Seahawks 10. White’s man ran a shallow out route, and after covering the intitial cut, White didn’t just cheat, he abandoned his man altogether and dropped 15 yards downfield. Wilson never saw White and threw the ball to a spot where he never expected to find a defender. Why did White leave his man so far open? Because he knew, no doubt he’s been taught, that if Wilson throws to the underneath receiver, there’s no way he’s going to make the first down. White knew what to do, timed his break well, and made the play. The Bills also blitzed – a lot. Like everything else the Bills do on defense, the blitzes often were well-designed. Guys coming from around the ends, guys coming from six yards behind the line of scrmmage, guys overloading one side, with defensive ends dropping into coverage. The blitzing was relentless, and Wilson was pounded all afternoon. And then, at times, there was no bliitzing at all. Wilson often seemed off balance. Still, Wilson put up some good numbers – 28 completions and nearly 300 yards, with two TDs, including an inexplicable blown coverage that resulted in a 55-yard touchdown. This was a different version of the 2020 Bills defense. Jerry Hughes continued his excellent play – he’s been creating problems for offenses for weeks now. Micah Hyde returned to the lineup and seemed to settle everyone down. Levi Wallace is playing like he did last season – not outstanding, but solid. Tremaine Edmunds seemed revived – he was playing with quickness and anticipation, and he made some solid tackles. A. J. Klein was active and didn’t look like a liability. Mario Addison was getting good pressure. Maybe the Bills defense has turned the corner. Josh Allen proved something Sunday that one would have thought the league already knew – you can’t let him stand in the pocket and throw the ball downfield. Allen’s too good, and his receivers are too good. By the time Seattle got serious about getting real pressure on Allen, and dropping him for a season-high seven sacks, it was too late. Allen shredded the Seahawks defense for 400 yards and three TDs, then added a rushing touchdown, just for fun. Seven sacks is troubling, except for a young QB in a win. The sacks didn’t cost the Bills the game, and sacks are how young QBs learn. Allen protected the ball all afternoon, never flirting with interceptions and surviving plenty of hits without fumbling. His growth continues. Allen’s worst play was the overthrow of Diggs deep down the left sideline. A well thrown ball would have been a big completion, an underthown ball probably would have drawn a pass interference call. After the game, Pete Carroll said the Seahawks had a lot of great plans for stopping the Bills running game. Sorry, Pete, Brian Daboll had other plans. Now the Bills go to Arizona – another big game. Those guys can play, and they have great playmakers. You can’t win ‘em all, especially against good teams, but you can be sure the Cards know the Bills are for real. GO BILLS!!! The Rockpile Review is written to share the passion we have for the Buffalo Bills. That passion was born in the Rockpile; its parents were everyday people of western New York who translated their dedication to a full day’s hard work and simple pleasures into love for a pro football team.

Exactly. That is exactly how I felt. I saw the trade up and was so excited. Then the Bills drafte - whom? Who is TJ Graham? I don't think I've been more disappointed about a single pick when it happened. In retrospect, I was pretty disappointed the Bills took Watkins instead of Mack, but at the time I was thrilled. But Wilson - there was a guy with first-round talent but fourth-round height. It was clear that he was worth the risk in the third round. Russell Wilson ran the offensive, was a captain, and starred at NC State. Then he transferred to Wisconsin, and within a couple of weeks of summer camp, the players made him the captain - it was clear he is a natural leader. He was outstanding there in one season. It was about as obvious as it could have been that this guy was a player. This was the guy that we had hoped Flutie could be. And the Bills took TJ Graham. Unbelievable.

I didn't even mention talent. Talent on the field is an entirely different set of variables that complicates play calling. Do we have a guard in the game who can execute the block we need in this situation at this point in the game? If we don't, then certain plays an OC might have in the playbook simply aren't good choices at this point. I don't think fans are thinking along with the coach in that kind of detail. That's only one example. Multiply by 15-18 guys the OC has available to put on the field, and you can see the complexity of play calling. When you roll all that talent together, then you get what you describe. Have the Patriots suddenly become bad play callers? Not likely. I think there are good play callers and bad play callers, but the good ones are on the sidelines and in press boxes, not on message boards.

Well, maybe I'm just splitting hairs, but there's a difference between philosophy, game planning, and play calling. The Chargers trying to sit on a lead is a matter of philosophy and game planning. They have an idea of how they want to play the game in certain situations. Play calling is different. On fourth and one, do you have the right play? On third and seven? Is misdirection the right approach in certain situations? Did a series of plays keep the defense off balance, challenging the defense to move laterally on one play, to withstand power on the next, to cover deep, etc. I think that philosophy and game planning is something that is transparent enough that fans can have meaningful discussions about it. I think to analyze play calling, you need a meaningful understanding of what the offensive philosophy is, what the defense is doing, how the flow of the game feels on the field. That is, I think play calling is an artform that is understandable only by insiders. It's similar to, but much more complicated than, a catcher calling pitches. The catcher wants to be thinking along with the hitter and getting the hitter off-balance, in a sense, to surprise him with pitches. A knowledgeable fan, paying attention, can critique a catcher's pitch calling, because the variables are limited: inside, outside, high, low, fastball or off-speed, off the plate. It's not simple, but an attentive and thoughtful fan can have an opinion based on fact and the options. The variables for an OC calling plays are much, much more complicated. Thinking along with the defense is much more complicated, because the defense has a lot of variable that it is controlling and that the OC can't predict. The offensive playbook offers many more options than a pitcher's array of pitches. To understand and critique play calling in the NFL requires an understanding of the game in general and of the offensive and defensive playbooks of the teams in question that I think is simply beyond all but the most knowledgeable fans. I'm not one of those fans, and I think there are very few, if any, fans posting here with that kind of understanding. So I don't get into discussions of play calling, because I don't think it's a subject that typical fans can discuss meaningfully.

I do have a lot of confidence that what they are doing will work. I wouldn't say I believe. What I do is watch the games and listen to what they say. Then I make my own judgment about whether what they say sounds correct, plausible, etc. What I've discovered over the time they've been in Buffalo is that what they say is consistent, and what they say will happen actually is happening. That is, I've built up a fair amount confidence that they know what they're doing. But, believe, I' don't thing so. I've said repeatedly that I like their system and I understand what they're trying to do, but that the "process" requires excellence in all aspects, including excellence in things like play calling, Xs and Os,, things that require specialized forms of intelligence that either you have at a high level or you don't. I think the biggest potential flaw in the system could be that McD simply doesn't have the ability to think about the intricacies of the game like Belichick does, like Reid does. I'm not saying he doesn't; I'm just saying God (or whatever) may not have blessed him with all the grey matter he needs, in the same way some kid may be out there with all the brain power of a Tom Brady, but if he never gets taller than 5' 7", he isn't playing QB in the NFL. So I wouldn't say I believe the Bills will get to the top and stay there. What I believe is that they're running a system that, all other things being equal, is more likely than most other approaches to get you there, but ultimately whether you get there depends on the people in the various jobs. One of those jobs is QB, and Beane figured out how to get the right person. Head coach is the job I worry about. Ten years from now, are people going to be saying McD is a Hall of Famer? I don't know.

Maybe you're right. My impression is that he needs to get his body set and get his body into the throw to get velocity on deep balls. My impression also is that on the short throws he has a quick release and plenty of velocity. We'll see as the seasons go by. I'm not a Bleacher Report fan, but it's the first draft scouting report I found. It says this among his draft negatives: That's what I see when I watch him. As I've said, it doesn't mean he can't change his game, but I think it's a bit of a challenge, especially when the style of offense he plays doesn't ask him to make those throws regularly.

I think he can't throw outside well because he doesn't have the arm strength. That throw from 7-8 yards in the pocket to 17 yards downfield on the sideline travels 35 yards in the air. To complete that pass consistently, the ball needs some real zip on it, because the windows are small - throw it too far inside and it's a potential pick six. So the ball has to go to the sideline, but can't be thrown until the cut, or just before the cut if QB and the receiver have really good communication. Sometimes the QB has to throw off balance, sometimes he can't step into it. My impression watching Jackson is that that's a tough throw for him. He can make it, but he needs good mechanics and excellent timing. Mahomes and Allen can flip it out there and get it there faster. That means they have a bigger window, which makes the timing on the throw easier. Can Jackson learn to make that throw? I think so. He's an extraordinary athlete. But someone will have to tinker with his throwing motion, number 1, and number 2, he has to practice making those throws in game conditions - that is, he has to play real games in an offense that regularly asks him to make those throws. But if you're the Ravens coach, if you know he doesn't do that really well and you can win in the short term by asking him to avoid those throws, that's what you're going to do. The result is that Lamar never grows into a good pocket passer.

Those are all good points, and I won't go through each to explain why I disagree. I appreciate you're taking the time to lay it out intelligently. In general, here's why I think I'm correct about this. I think if you look at the long-term history of the NFL, it's always been about offensive innovation and defensive response. The defense eventually always figures out how to stop the offense. In some cases it takes weeks, in some cases it takes a season, in some cases it's more. Eventually the defenses begin to win. The offenses then tweak and adjust, like they start creating legal pick plays to get guys open in the passing game, because they can't figure out how else to do it. And then, and we see it in all the territorial games (football, hockey, basketball), as the defenses really take control and scoring begins to drop, the people who run the games change the rules to help the offense. It's happened over and over again in all three sports, and it's happened continually in pro football. This season, for example, the league decided to stop calling so many offensive holding penalties. Why? To goose the offense. Right, we're in a period where the super athletic young QB with the right kind of talent around him allows coaches to run a limited offense that can succeed. I don't see any reason that the long-term trends suddenly no longer apply - the defenses will adjust to those players and that style of play, and as they adjust, those players and that style of play will have less success. The style that always has won, despite the continuing evolution of strategies, is the style that demands that your QB be a field general, a coach on the field, a guy who has the ability to attack the defense everywhere. That's been true since the 1940s. The Luckmans and the Grahams and the Tittles and the Starrs and the Bradshaws and the Staubachs and the Grieses and the Montanas and the Aikmans and the Kellys and the Youngs, right up to the Mannings, the Bradys, the Breeses, the Rodgers. It's always been that way, and I don't think there's any reason to expect that this flurry of excitement about Jackson and Murray is any different. In the end, the QB has to get back on the pocket and run the game from there.

That's what everyone wants, for sure, but you need to recognize how unrealistic it is to criticize your team when they aren't in that kind of run. Look at it this way: At any given time there are maybe four teams on a really good five-year run like that. There are 32 teams in the league, so on average you can only expect your team to be on such a five-year run every 40 years. It's simple math. So right now the Bills are above average in the NFL in terms of high-end success, because they've had one of those runs in the last 30 years. The Jets, the Dolphins, the Lions, the Falcons, the Rams, the Washingtons, the Buccaneers, the Raiders, the Chargers, etc., etc. haven't had one of those runs in a much longer time. So, sure, that's the standard we all want to get to, but on average the Bills already are ahead of the game. Plus, McBeane have been very clear that that is what they're building toward, and that it would take time to "build it right." All indications are that they're doing exactly that.

I think I've said he's plateaued, not regressing. And yes, he will HAVE to beat teams from the pocket. That's what I said. Whether he's done it before on occasion isn't the point. Watch him play and ask yourself where Jackson is in terms of progress toward being an excellent pocket passer, a guy who can consistently beat you from the pocket. I think an honest evaluation of Jackson is that he is way behind Mahomes for sure, and behind Allen, and I think there's a good argument that he's behind Watson, Prescott, Wentz, and even Burrow and Herbert. I think Tua is way over-hyped, but there's a good chance he's better, or soon will be, better in the pocket than Jackson. Create any list you want, I think there are a half-dozen young QBs in the league who are showing much better progress than Jackson in becoming master pocket passers. And Jackson's progress as a pocket passer is going to be limited until he's asked to play in an offense that demands that he be a good pocket passer. That's what the Bills have done to Allen. Sure, they still look to Allen to contribute to the running game, but the message has been clear from his rookie season that the Bills wanted him in the pocket, throwing the football. The result has been that he's learned and made progress at it. Jackson, on the other hand, is playing in an offense that doesn't give him the opportunity, play after play, to be the kind of QB who will dissect defenses by throwing the ball all over the field. If his coaches aren't demanding that he play that way, he won't develop. Why aren't the coaches demanding that Jackson play out of the pocket? Because he can't throw like Mahomes and Allen and Watson and Prescott and Herbert, that's why. And that's why he wasn't taken in the top 10 of the draft.

Yeah, this thread ran longer than I'd ever expected, and then someone brought it back for a second run. For the record, I never intended to bury Jackson this week or this month. I was talking about the trajectory of his career. I think Jackson is great at what he does. I just don't think any team can enjoy long-term success playing like that, and I think we've already begun to see that he's reaching the plateau from which his gradual decline will begin. Just like Newton and Vick plateaued and declined. When your offense depends on the QB running, your passing game suffers, and when your passing game suffers, your offense is too limited to win consistently. Unless Jackson can morph into a version of Russell Wilson or Drew Brees, and he hasn't shown much ability to do that yet, he is not going to be one of the top QBs for the next decade.

I wouldn't ask anyone to go back and read this entire thread, but I have some earlier posts here, and I've said the same thing for a year now, explaining why I don't think Jackson will progress. It isn't that he can't progress. Of course he can. What I've said is that at the end of the day in the NFL, you have to be a good to great pocket passer and pocket decision maker. Allen has shown definite progress in that area for three straight seasons, to the point where he isn't scrambling nearly as much as he did a couple of seasons ago. Jackson is just as mediocre in the pocket now as he was in 2018. Why do I think that he won't succeed there? One reason is arm strength. He isn't a good thrower. He doesn't have a good standard throwing motion. He doesn't have the arm strength to make the mid-range sideline throws with zip and accuracy. He's not bad in those areas, but he isn't great. The reason he's succeeded, as we all know, is that he's a running QB in a run-oriented offense, and he's an outstanding runner. That's great, but it's limiting in a couple of ways. First, he's not going to be doing that when he's thirty. Running backs don't last that long, generally, and no running QBs have been as good in their later years. When Vick and Newton had to dial down the running, they had to sink or swim as pocket passers. It will happen to Jackson, too. Second, defenses will adjust. McDermott says, and he's right, that the way to succeed on offense is to attack every part of the field, sideline to sideline and line of scrimmage to end zone. When your offense threatens to make plays all over the field, the defense has to spread out, and when the defense spreads, the offense has opportunities. Having an offense that features a running back attacks disproportionately at the line of scrimmage and between the hash marks. You can see it in their passing game - short passes and a lot of throws to the tight ends. That allows the defenses to pack in, to deemphasize defending the deep zones and the sidelines. That allows the defenses to shut down the offense. Now, defenses haven't consistently stopped Jackson yet, because he's such a great talent, but it's already begun. We've seen multiple games, beginning late last season and into this season where the Ravens get slowed down. When that happens, Jackson has to beat them by attacking deep and to the sidelines. That can be done pretty much only from the pocket. As soon as you roll out your QB, you aren't attacking the far sideline. So your QB has to have the arm to throw to both sidelines from the pocket. Can Jackson learn to play that way? It's certainly possible. However, so long as he's playing in an offense that focuses on his running, he's not going to be getting a lot of in-game reps learning the pocket game. And, as I said earlier, so long as the offense focuses on running the ball, he's not likely going to get really good wideouts to throw to, because wideouts want to play in offenses that are designed to attack everywhere. Why did John Brown leave Baltimore and go to Buffalo? Well, duh, look at the passing game he played in Baltimore and look at the passing game he's playing in in Buffalo. Name the greatest running quarterbacks of the past 50 years. Now name the greatest quarterbacks of the past 50 years. No one on the first list is on the second. We're in a period, for a few years, when running QBs are having some success, but it's very unlikely that that will continue. Defenses will adjust. Quarterbacks will be forced to play out of the pocket to succeed. Russell Wilson isn't running as much as he did when he was younger. So Jackson has to get his butt into the pocket and learn to play there. I don't see that happening, certainly not in the offense as designed, and I don't think he's a good enough thrower to make it in the pocket. As spectacular as he is right now, there was a reason the 2018 draft had a big four at the top of the draft and not a big five, and that reason is that Jackson couldn't throw a football the way the top four could.

You're right about the single rusher. Josh always seems to see that guy, and he's able to do something about it - get the throw off, stiff arm, side step, scramble. That's evidence of how he has matured. He understands what he's seeing at the line of scrimmage, and he knows where to look for the free rusher.

Right, except I wouldn't bet against Vick on straight line speed. He was a burner.

Different running styles. Vick had great speed, better power, more fluid moves. I'd prefer Jackson in tight spaces, but I'd take Vick in the open field. You know those 20-25 yard scrambles Josh Allen has? Those are touchdowns for Vick.

The point was winning is difficult. Most games are difficult to win. It's not that it's impossible. Steelers are 7-0. Ask them if it was easy. Four of the seven wins were by a touchdown or less. Winning in the NFL is difficult.