Shaw66

If they cap the salaries, it just means the owners get richer. The players are workers in an industry that just happens to generate huge amounts of money. The players, being the people who make the league successful, have demanded and gotten a share of the profits. When the profits go up, the players' share, in terms of dollars, goes up. How would you like it if someone told you that you were making enough and no longer could get a raise? Why should the players be any different? Now, maybe the players' association might want to revise the contract to limit in some way the difference between the lowest paid and the highest paid players, which would indirectly cap the QB salaries. It would be something like no player on a team can make less than 1/20 of the highest paid player. That would mean that if the QB is making $20 million, the lowest paid guy would make $1 million. I suppose they could do something like that. But if I'm the QB, I'm asking the players' association what they're doing, because they're supposed to be representing me, and they're taking money from me. I don't worry about that stuff. I just watch the games. Well, they ARE struggling. Let's start a GoFundMe page for the players.

The picture says it all!

Some good names in this thread. Another name that doesn't quite meet the criteria is Kyle Williams. I'd have to say that if the Bills had Fred Jackson in 2019, they might have won the division and they would have beaten Houston in the wildcard game. Fred and Kyle were about the two best locker room guys the Bills ever had.

Stank, I'd bet there are new faces, good players, competing at every position. White is safe, but no one else.

A lot of good stuff in this thread. My take is that Allen is still learning. He definitely improved in his second season, and I think we will see more improvement next season. His reads on pass protections clearly need improvement. I think he gets rattled late in games when defenses come at him with things he doesn't recognize, and that should improve, too. But I think that the narrative that he and the defense choked in Houston is unfair. They didn't make the plays they needed to win, but they didn't choke. They held Houston to a three and out and drove to tie the game, then held them to a three and out in overtime and then drove for an opportunity to win the game. That's not choking. That's not finishing.

Thanks. Interesting response. I don't know that I was saying all the players are as I described, and you understood that. I like your points, and it dovetails with something I've been saying about players for a long time, which is that many of them are smarter than some posters give them credit for. The smart ones are smart at football and often smart at other life skills, including picking a mate. Still, good looking women seem to be found disproportionately among jocks, money and power. Just the way it is.

I was sitting at Hartford Whalers game one time and noticed, couldn't help but notice, that I was surrounded by 10 or 12 stunning young women, mostly blonde, all dressed in flashy clothes. It dawned on me that I sitting with the players wives and girlfriends. That's when it first occurred to me how natural it is for big time male athletes to have hot women. Both, for somewhat different reasons, are unusually focused on their bodies. They focus much more on their bodies than ordinary human beings do. It makes sense that people who are particularly focused on their bodies would come together as couples. And if they're unusually focused on their bodies, they look in mirrors a lot, and they take pictures of themselves. There's nothing more interesting to them than their bodies. So for them, it's natural to post those pictures - they love to look at them, so why wouldn't their friends? And, of course, it works for their friends, too. Who are their friends? Athletes and hot women. Collectively, they're a group of people interested in bodies.

Thanks - that's interesting. Hap - great question.

This true about the Oline, and it's a commentary about how bade the 2018 oline was, because 2019 was a serious improvement over 2018. in 2019 there were four new starters and a new offensive line coach. Between the draft, free agency, a second year of this unit together, there certainly ought to be improvement again in 2020.

McDermott is all about getting his team to play as near perfect football as possible. He's on track. I do t think he expected the 2019 be there yet, and the lost opportunities in that game were the evidence.

I agree with this. Whether Ford will be the RT will depend on wherhw McBeane like his intelligence, work ethic and attitude. He clearly has the physical ability to play the position, and rookie linemen often struggle. Bills certainly will upgrade the oline. Who they get will determine whether Ford will move to guard.

I think it will happen. I don't know what to expect as for actual numbers, and we will never know, but I expect Allen will stay with the Bills and will take less than the best contract that he could have gotten. I think Allen values team, values the environment Buffalo and the fans offer, values the kind of approach to the game and life that McD teaches and lives. I think he values the owners, too. I'm convinced he'll stay in Buffalo. As for adjustments to the CBA, that's very interesting. It makes some sense to separate QB contracts out of the general salary cap, since those salaries so far out of line with all the other positions. But I kind of like the way it is - if you want to blow your wad on the QB, that's your privilege - you just have to figure out how to put together the rest of the team with the money you have left. In fact, I think that QB salaries for many of the best guys will be controlled for just the reasons that I think Allen's will - QBs will recognize they're all becoming incredibly rich, and it just doesn't make that much difference to be the highest paid. Take Goff, for example. A guy who extends his rookie deal early probably is leaving money on the table. It's hard to know, because he never reached the free agent market, but I have to think he took less than his agent told him was his max value in exchange for the security of a longer term deal and for the opportunity to continue with a coach and in a system that he thinks is good for him.

Actually, I think Beane has said things like this before, and McDermott has acknowledged it. What they describe is a healthy tug-of-war on issues, with an agreement that McDermott will work with the players Beane gives him and Beane will accept that McDermott will run the team, even to the extent of being able to release players that McD really doesn't want around. The joined-at-the-hip notion comes from their repeated statements that they work together, that they share the same fundamental objectives and understanding about what makes a team great. The working relationship they describe is one that requires honesty, mutual respect and a commitment to move forward together, always. (Like a successful marriage.) They're committed to that. Might it fail, come undone? Sure, it might. But McDermott for sure, and I think Beane too, is a guy who makes lifetime commitments. McD's commitments are to God, his family, personal honesty and excellence. I think in his head, and perhaps spoken, he has a career-long commitment to the Pegulas. The model that he and Beane are pursuing is a model for long-term excellence with honor. He won't sell out for money or for short-term success. He has almost a maniacal commitment to success the right way. As for Beane's comments generally, I think we can see again the emphasis on sustainability. He's not in a hurry to get to the top; his focus is building something that he can keep on the top. So he talks about managing the contracts in a way that he's always able to build, recognizing that as they get good they will begin to lose guys they would like to keep. He's not going to write big checks and make big splashes in free agency, because the guys he really wants are rookies who grow into keepers. Frankly, I think the most interesting thing he said is about franchise quarterbacks. I've always at least wondered if McBeane aren't actively trying to get in Allen's head about his next contract. Beane pretty clearly says here that he's going to pay a franchise quarterback (that's one message he's sending Allen - "you keep growing, we're keeping you at your price"), but he's also sending a subtle message to Allen ("if you're taking every last nickel, we won't be able to build the team around you as well as you and we would like. So think about whether the best price for you is really the highest price you can get."). It's almost as though he's explaining it to Allen. You can be sure that somehow the Bills' front office is saying to Allen "we're working on building a long-term winner like New England. One aspect of the Patriots' success was Brady's willingness to leave some money on the table because he knew he'd be plenty wealthy for life even at a reduced rate. That's what we're going to need from you. Keep it in mind over the next couple of years, as you see this team get better around you." We all know it intuitively, but think about QB compensation for a minute. Allen has a four-year guaranteed deal at $21 million. His option year is another $6 million or more. So that's $27 million in five years. If he gets good franchise QB money for the next ten years, that's $30 million a year, or $300 million. Plus his rookie contract, and even modest endorsements, he makes $350 over 15 years. Say he pays half of that in taxes, he has $175 million left. Say he spends $1 million a year living. He has $160 million left in the bank, or enough to have $5 million a year to live on for the rest of his life. If he takes, say, $20 milliion a year on his next contract, leaving $10 million for Beane to buy other players, he makes $250 million over 15 years, or $125 after tax. Spend a million a year and he has $110 million to live on for the rest of his life, or $3.5 million a year. And, of course, if McBeane are right in what they are doing, Allen will win multiple bowls, be on lots of Wheaties boxes and earn extra dough on the endorsement trail, but forget about that. And also, the numbers are better than that. Franchise QBs are going to do better than $30 million, and all the extra money, even from his rookie contract, is invested and growing at 5% or more. The point is that even if Allen gives the Bills a serious discount in order to build the team, Allen's going to be ridiculously wealthy. What Beane is saying to Allen is this: "How much is winning worth to you? What's important to you, winning or having a bigger bank account that you never, ever will spend?" Everything about what McBeane do is about team, and they're going to be telling Allen that his comp is about team, too. I think that's a message that will resonate with Allen. I think McD is building an emotional bond with Allen that will keep Allen in Buffalo for Allen's career, and that will cause Allen to take less than his market value. That will give the Bills an edge over teams with a great franchise QB who is getting paid as much as he can negotiate.

I'm no expert, but as I've said before, I don't think Allen has mechanical problems. I think he just has recognition problems. When he isn't rushed, he's generally fine. I expect to see continued improvement in his accuracy and consistency as his understanding of the game improves. I think Jackson has actual mechanical problems - he doesn't have a classic throwing motion, and I agree with those who think think that significant mechanical problems are hard to fix. So I think you and I just disagree a bit on this.

No doubt. But the arm is a serious advantage or put another way, Jackson has to be a nearly all-time great field general to over come his throwing limitations. I think it's interesting how the press continues to overlook DeShaun Watson. He runs nearly as well as Jackson, and he is one major-league thrower. He's the guy I think Allen will be chasing, not Jackson.

That's a good short answer. However, I believe that the difference in their current limitations makes it more likely that Allen will have the better career. Jackson won't run like that forever. Russell Wilson doesn't run as well as he used to. Injuries and defensive strategies will catch up with Jackson. They both will have to learn to be field generals. Let's assume they learn to be as good running offenses as Brady and Rodgers and Brees. If they do, Allen will have a very large edge over Jackson: his ability to throw any kind of pass, more or less any time. Jackson doesn't have the arm, and there's nothing he can do about that.

Could Wade be a gunner?

I don't know rugby at all, but what you say is consistent with something I read about him last summer, which was that he was a pure outside threat but primarily because of his size he couldn't defend larger players well enough to be a top player. A little bit like being a small point guard who, unless you're John Stockton, becomes more of a liability than asset because you're getting posted up all the time. On defense in the NFL his size would be a liability, too, but unlike rugby, he doesn't have to go both ways here.

Exactly. I know your point is that you don't want two backs with the same style, but I've never but that theory. I don't care a lot about Singletary's size. He runs inside and he runs outside; that's all you need. Wade looked like he had first class speed and moves. I'll take first class speed and moves in my backup running back. That would have been better than what Gore and Yeldon gave the Bills. Not saying Wade could have played in 2019; just saying those characteristics would have been fine in a backup. Darren Sproles was an ideal backup for a lot of years. No substitute for speed. Small guys need to be tough, but Wade seems to check that box, too. So I'm waiting to see how much he gets on the field this summer. He had all year to learn, and the most learning happens in the first year, so who knows how close he might be? Yolo - thanks for the Wade interview. He seems to think he can compete.

Thanks. So let's see what the summer brings. Small running backs are in; maybe he's one.

Is that true? I thought the extra PS spot was a one-year deal. A two-year deal, as Ghost says it is, makes more sense for the host team, since it was a good bet that none of these guys was going to make a roster in the first season. Why take a guy into camp who has no shot, only to lose him after a season, when he finally might mature into something. Still, I thought that if the Bills don't put him on the 53 in 2020, if the Bills keep he's a regular practice squad player.

Okay, Dawg, here we go again, you and me against the world. Last year it was Duke (who I still have hopes for next season); now it's Wade. You took the words right out of my mouth. Why is it that the position that rookies can succeed in from day one is running back? Because it's fundamentally a position that requires speed and instinctual skills. Learn pass protection and learn to a half dozen receiving routes and you're good to go. He's clearly shown the raw physical talent. He's had an entire training camp, preseason and regular season to work in the system. He could have another training camp and presseason to polish what he knows. By September 1, 2020, he should have learned enough. The question is simply whether he's good enough. He'll have plenty of opportunity to show what he can do in preseason games. (Well, maybe less if the preseason schedule is shortened.) Just like with Duke, I'm waiting to see what the summer brings.

They and you are working with a incorrect definition of the term. Sophomore slumps suggests that there is something about the sophomore year that causes performance to decline from the freshman year. That is, if the sophomore slump was caused by being in the second year, all players would suffer a sophomore slump, or at least most. The data in the linked article demonstrates that in fact most QBs improve in their second season. That suggests there is no slump. The fact that the rookie QBs with the best rookie years tend to regress in the second year is a statistical reality. It's called regression to the mean. A few of the best QBs as rookies are just really good, and their second season is fine. But for most rookies, if they have a good first season, it's aberrational. As a statistical matter, their performance is expected to fall. In exactly the same way, if your rookie stats are below average, as a matter of statistics, your performance in your second year is expected to improve. Josh Allen didn't have a sophomore slump. In other words, it goes without saying that high performing rookies are likely to perform less well in their second seasons, just like low performing rookies are likely to perform better. It doesn't have anything to do with it being the second season.

This is sort of what I said in an earlier post. People who are looking for fun city to live in have their eye on the wrong ball, and McBeane aren't interested in those guys. One other thing. When free agents talk to Kelly and some of the others, what they hear is that this is a city where you can be a hero for life. You become part of the fabric of the city. Now, Brees did that in NO, but that was a special circumstance. In Buffalo, like in Green Bay, you're never forgotten.

This, sort of. A guy who has the mental makeup, the competitiveness, the dedication, the willingness to improve year after year, is not going to be deterred because of how he views Buffalo. He's going to Buffalo to be part of what McBeane are doing. A guy whose decision is going to be controlled by how the city compares to others or the taxes or the money is not the kind of guy McBeane are looking for, and I'm okay with that. They want guys who WANT to be there.