Shaw66

Actually this guy sounds a bit like me. I've been here for three years or whatever, and I just discovered the links to all the news. That's really useful. Anyway, as I've said before, a lot of fans, including me, are happy thos place is here. I practically live here.

Well, yeah, it's legitimate, but you guys run this playground for all of us to play in, and whining with that tone is a little out of line.

The committee approach on the D line is why we saw all those DTs in for tryouts last week.

I don't think so, but the idea isn't as off the wall as most posters think. I think such a move would be driven by some things we don't know. First, it would make sense only if you had a backup who was so good and had such a bright future that you weren't going to be able to keep him off the field. If there is such a person, it's Gabriel Davis, and as much as the reports out of camp are positive, we aren't hearing reports that he is, right now, a big-time #2 receiver. That's what he'd have to be, right now, to make a Beasley deal affordable, because he's not a natural slot receiver. He'd have to be good enough to take Brown's job and force Brown into the slot, which might work. It's comparable to the Eagles trading that clear starter, Sam Bradford, to Minnesota because Wentz had demonstrated in camp that he was really ready. I don't Davis is that kind of guy. Second, there were some recent reports out of camp about Beasley being unguardable. As others have noted, Beasley was playing out of position some last season, and he still was excellent. This year, he'll be more regularly in the slot. He's a Welker-Edelman type talent in the slot - that's why people say he's unguardable. When you combine that fact with the fact that the Bills are still trying to get Allen to take the high-percentage throw more often, a guy like Beasley is going to be that high-percentage guy. He will be the guy who the QB can see at the line of scrimmage will be open, and that's the throw the Bills continue to want Allen to make. So it seems unlikely to me that the Bills would take that particular option away for Allen's third season, no matter how good Davis may be, because whoever is in the slot won't be able to do what Beasley does. Finally, there's just no question that Beane saw in Diggs what we all saw - a true #1 receiver who would allow both Brown and Beasley to return to their natural positions. I just don't see Beane upsetting that formula without giving it a chance to work for one season.

Thanks for the insight. Good stuff.

I'm not sure. Bills spec teams coach had him in Carolina for a year. More likely that the Bills know he can fill a need better than what they have. I expect he is on the 53. I don't see them doing this so late in preseason otherwise. Too disruptive. It's conditional because Beane is smart to cover the downside if for some reason he doesn't work out. It would be phenomenal!

That's an interesting comment. I'd guess there's more of that in big-time football than we recognize. Lots of very good athletes in 200-pound range who can't make it as running backs, receivers and DBs who bulk up, trying to play at a higher weight class. It's tough on knees and ankles.

As I said, McKenzie is versatile. And he has speed, which is always a good thing. I'm afraid the nod goes to McKenzie. Hodgins isn't an UDFA, and it probably won't be easy to hide him on the PS. Strikes me as a closer call, and I think the nod goes to the guy who looks like he'll be the best contributor in 2021. I say that for the same reason I said it last season about Duke and Zay Jones If you're not one of the top three receivers on the team, your chances of sticking with the team are based on your longer term potential. Zay wasn't top 2 last season and was barely top 3, so he was expendable. It wasn't long before Zay was gone and Duke was on the roster. The current talents of the #4 guy are somewhat important, but if the #5 guy has more potential, the #4 guy is at risk. That's where Duke finds himself. So, unless Duke has been really special this summer, unless he's staked a strong claim to the #4 spot, he's in trouble. Unfortunately for him, Gabriel Davis is the guy who apparently has staked that claim. So Duke is fighting for the #5 spot (Roberts is #6). Hodgins apparently has impressed, too, and so, given his age and his growth potential, I have to think he has the edge.

Well, as much as I love Duke's story, and as much as might heart wants to argue with you, I think you're right. If Duke were going to be a productive #2, we would have seen more of him on the field last season, and more production. Is it possible he'll be a late bloomer? Yes, and I'd love it if that happened. Is it likely? No. I do think he'll be in the league for three or four more years. There's a place for him on someone's roster. In Buffalo? I still think it's possible, but I'd say the odds of him making it in Buffalo are getting longer by the day. I'm not a McKenzie fan, but McKenzie offers more to the team than Duke. The worst sentence Duke Williams has heard through eight months of 2020 is "With their fourth pick in the 2020, the Buffalo Bills select Gabriel Davis." Through nine months, the worst sentence will be "Duke, we're sorry but ...."

My first thought. I wanted Wade to be Sproles. I guess not.

Moss won't have enough experience to start. Rooks rarely play on yhi re d down until later in the season Singletary will be primary.

Maybe it was not a good day for Allen.

I agree with this. especially the Diggs part. Other than McKenzie, the Bills had no one who was effective running the jet sweep and similar plays where the offensive wants to attack quickly with a quick, elusive runner. Beasley tried but couldn't do it. When McKenzie came it, the defense knew the chances of one of those plays increased. With Diggs in the lineup, every play threatens to be such a play. Diggs has shown he has the ability to run those plays. So McKenzie just isn't as useful as he was before. For whatever reason. Roberts hasn't shown the ability to be an effective receiver, but McKenzie isn't much better, and Roberts is both a more sure-handed and a more effective punt returner. I think McKenzie is at risk, unless the Bills just like the fact that he is sort of an all-purpose backup on offense and special teams. That may be enough to save him. Having said that, I don't think that Roberts running with the first team signals that Roberts is in and McKenzie is out. It also could mean that McKenzie is in and the Bills wanted to see whether Roberts could save himself by finally showing something on offense. Much too hard to read any tea leaves yet.

SDS - You're Ray in Field of Dreams and we're all Shoeless Joe Jackson, thanking you for building this place. Thanks.

I'd love to own it. I was there that day. I'd frame it and hang in it my basement. And when the Bills win the Super Bowl, ideally with a Bass field goal, I'd buy the Bass jersey, frame it, and hang it next Norwood. Bookends.

Somehow it's like Fitz is our friend. It happens with an occasional player on the team over the years, but Fitz is way up their on the list. We all love him, and we all are incredibly saddened by his loss. Prayers to Fitz and his family. He should take comfort in the love and support of fans all over the country, but especially from Bills fans.

It's probably true that the Bills are looking for guys who could be useful mid-season if one of the DTs goes down. But I think it's more than that. There have been a lot of DTs coming through over the past couple of months, and not at other positions, even though DT isn't necessarily a high-injury-risk position. Why hasn't there been a similar parade at other positions? I think another explanation is that McDermott has particular roles in mind for his DTss - he needs them to play a particular way. I'm not expert enough at the position to say what those things are, except that it's clear he like versatility in the interior of the line. He likes guys who can play the 3-tech and the 1-tech, which is an unusual combination. Because McDermott is all about disguising his defense pre-snap, I think he wants guys in the D-line who could attack in a variety of ways from where they line up. That sort of versatility makes calling blocking assignments at the line of scrimmage more difficult at the line of scrimmage. So I think the DT parade is in part about finding guys with versatility and quickness (as well as the right character attributes). Also, the emphasis on veterans continues.s McBeane's strategy is clearly to load the roster with guys who know how to play in the league, who know how to practice. They aren't looking for projects. Draft young talent, sign some undrafted talent, then surround the young guys with veterans.

The NFL has gone the route of the NBA in some respects. By limiting the ability of corners to play in contact with receivers, they've reduced the importance of physical strength at cornerback, and emphasized speed and quickness. Just like eliminating handchecking and contact away from the basket in the NBA. The result in both cases is that there is no great advantage in being big and strong playing defense on the edge of the offense - the corners in football and the guards in basketball. Unless you're one of the world's most extraordinary athletes, extra height and weight at corner just tends to make you a little bit slower and a little less quick, so you can't play the position quite as well as the smaller guys. Of course, we see the speed and quickness think all over the defense. Smaller edge rushers, faster safeties. Edmunds is the real anomaly, with cover linebacker speed and enough bulk to play the middle. Milano couldn't have played OLB in some earlier eras, when size was as important as speed. In the earlier eras, when corners could hit the receivers all over the field, it was easier to play man-to-man, so teams needed less zone, so they didn't need cover linebackers so much, so the linebackers could be bigger and play the run more aggressively. Now, with receivers free to roam the defensive backfield without fearing for their lives, defenses need cover linebackers to play the short or even deep zones, so the linebackers have gotten smaller and faster, which opens up the running game. Butch Byrd was 6', 211, and he was a monster in the 60s. He was an outstanding punt returner, even though he carried 20-30 pounds more than the average punt return man. He was a bit of freak at that size.

Tom Janik, 6'3", 190. Long and lean. Played more safety than corner.

Over and over, and I'm surprised by it every time. These guys have no fear. Hauschka's at least a solid NFL kicker; not the star we'd hoped, but more than serviceable. But McBeane want more. Sometimes a rookie comes in at some position and simply blows everyone away, makes a clear case that if he isn't already better than the vet, he will be soon. Those decisions are relatively easy. But at least based on what was being reported out of camp, Bass wasn't clearly better than Hausch. What Bass did have was better upside. We knew what the best was we'd see from Hauschka, and it is clear that Bass could be better. The risk, of course, is that Bass turns out to be inconsistent or can't take the pressure. There's no way to know that until they see him in games for a season. In other words, Hausch wasn't likely to make the big kick and win a game; Bass is. On the other hand, Hausch wasn't likely to miss the routine kick and lose a game; Bass could be. It takes courage to make that call and go with the unproven guy with bigger upside. McBeane have shown over and over that they aren't afraid of those moments. They make the bold decision and live with the consequences.

Oh, man, if Allen is down for a few games, you wouldn't want to have Winston, Mariota, Flacco, Dalton or Keenum instead of Barkley? Frankly, I'm hoping Fromm fights his way to the backup spot. Fromm could be a Keenum. I do agree, however, that there are plenty of names above Barkley that I'd lump with Barkley and several names below him. Unproven or worse is a good description.

Well, people can argue that point all day long. That's what's good about putting them in categories rather than simple rankings. There's a large group of guys in Barkley's category - a group of guys who you definitely do not consider long-term starter material, who probably can manage the game for you okay and may even make a play for you once and a while, but is probably not going to carry your team to any big wins. Put another way, the guys in Barkley's group will make you count the days until your starter returns - their time on the field is not going to start a QB controversy when the starter gets healthy.

Schaub stuck out for me, too. He was a great backup before he became a starter, and then as his starting career faded, it seemed like he just lost whatever it was that made him effective in his early days. I didn't study their methodology, but I think there isn't a simple, or maybe even a complicated, way to determine the best backups. One way is to ask a simple question: If you're starter is down for a game or two, who do you want to bring off the bench. That is the most important question. I think this list is pretty good if that is the frame of reference. But if the question is "you're the GM and it's February, who do you want as your #2 QB?" That question is a little different, because that question is also about who is the best guy to be the #2 guy in your QB room during all those weeks when your starter is not down. Winston is the obvious best choice when you're answering the first question but probably isn't the best choice when you're answering the second. Keenum may be the best if you want the quality in response to both questions. And the third question is who is the guy I want to be my backup for two or three seasons? That question is about the QB room, but it's also about continuity. And the answer to that question depends on whether you feel like you need a guy who will challenge for the starting job (like in Chicago) or not challenge (like in Green Bay) or not challenge but be training to replace the incumbent (like in New Orleans). It also begins to disqualify some guys, like Winston, Flacco and Dalton, all of whom probably want to be starters again and aren't that interested in making a career out of being an advisor to the young starter and getting an occasional spot start. So any given team's answer to the question "who is the best backup" depends on how the team is thinking about issues like that, and different teams will take different approaches. As I said, Winston to New Orleans is perfect, because he's the best backup if you need him for a game or two, and he's also the guy you want to train to replace Brees.

I agree. I doubt Newton will know the system and have the discipline to run it. The unknown is how much Belichick will modify the system to get Newton's talent on the field.

Learning the position is cumulative. Reps, reps, more reps, film study, games, more reps, etc. So yes, Josh is missing something with reduced work. But he is still learning. I'm not too worried. If Josh jas what it takes, 2020 wont keep him from succeeding over his career.