Shaw66

1. As I've written, I don't think there are a lot of receivers in the NFL who can create separation. The offensive coordinator creates separation. If all receivers could create separation, offensive coordinators wouldn't be standing on their heads trying to figure out how to run legal pick plays. The pick play came into existence precisely because receivers CAN'T get separation. 2. Yes, he is slower than most wideouts, and yes he isn't Jeffries or Benjamin big. But I've watched the Buffalo Bills for 60 years, and I can't remember the Bills EVER having a receiver who consistently came down with the football like Williams has this summer. Like you, I won't say he can make it. I don't know. But when I see him make the catches he's been making, I'm smart enough to know NOT to say he CAN'T make it, because he has a talent that few receivers have.

Of course they matter, but a deficiency in a characteristic doesn't mean you can't play. It's just a limitation. Most players don't have great speed and most players can't get separation and they still play in the league. I learned the lesson a long time ago. I watched Adrian Dantley play in high school. He was fabulous. I and thousands like me said, well that's nice, but he can't play big time college basketball with that size and style of play.. Wrong. I and thousands like me said, well that's nice, but he can't play in the NBA. Wrong. The point is that players succeed with what they bring to the game, and there is not one set of characteristics that everyone must have in order to play. Nobody thought Adam Thielen could play receiver in the NFL. Nobody bothered to draft him. But, some will say, he had speed. Sure, he had nice speed, and not much else. Duke has this remarkable ability to come down with the ball in traffic. Maybe that's all he has. But that also may be enough to make him a player in the NFL. Whether he can make it, I don't know. What I do know is that none his detractors here actually knows either. It's just foolish to say he can't make it when he continues to make plays like this.

So Duke has limitations that will keep him out of the NFL, and Josh has limitations that the offense needs to be structured around to make him succeed. Do you have any idea how wrong that is? If Josh can't make all the anticipation throws that every other good quarterback in the league makes, HE WILL FAIL. Windows do not stay open in the NFL, and QBs who wait to see the window open FAIL. Tyrod Taylor FAILED. The QB MUST be able to read defenses, anticipate and pull the trigger before he sees the receiver in daylight. And, although most everyone chooses to ignore this simple fact, MOST NFL receivers do NOT get open because they can create separation. MOST NFL receivers get open because every defensive formation has weaknesses against a well-balance offense, and the offensive player whose assignment allows him to attack the weakness is the guy who gets open. That's a simple fact. Once again at practice today, against Kevin Johnson, a real NFL defensive back, Duke got open for a touchdown. Duke will either fail in the eyes of McDermott or he will get his chance in the NFL. Stop telling us that you see something that makes it clear that he can't make it the NFL. If you can see, McDermott can see it, and McDermott wouldn't have him on the practice squad. Oops. He grew. Seriously, then it's Wilson, Brees and Mayfield, plus Murray going #1 overall. The point is, players were too short to play QB in the NFL until, well, they weren't. The only rule that applies is that you can play in the NFL if you can play.

You guys are talking about a lot of stuff that just doesn't matter. He's too slow, he can't get separation, he should be a tight end, blah, blah, blah. That's exactly the same thing as people who used to say you can't be short and play QB in the NFL, until Wilson and Mayfield and Mahomes came along. People who say you need a tall wideout. If you can play, you can play, and if you can't, you can't. It's very simple. If you can catch passes in the NFL, you should be in the NFL. I don't care if you're too short or too slow or if you have red hair. If you can get open enough for the QB to decide to throw it to you, and if when the QB throws it to you you catch it, you should be in the NFL. In Duke's case, there isn't any question about the actual catching part - he does that just fine. He also seems to have been able to get open enough to have his QB decide to throw to him on multiple occasions. The only real question is can he get open enough against starting NFL defenses, because most of his success has been against second and third teams. But there is no way to know what he can do against first team defenses until he actually gets a chance to do that. It's just pure BS to say he can't do it because he's too slow or he can't get separation or he's a red zone receiver but can't play in the middle of the field. That makes no more sense than it makes sense to say Drew Brees is too short jto play QB in the NFL. The only way anyone will know whether he can play in the NFL is when he gets his chance to play in the NFL, or when it becomes clear to the Bills coaching staff that he's so hopeless that they don't even want him on the practice squad and no one picks him up. Answer me this: if Duke never will be good enough to play in the NFL, why did McBeane put him on the practice squad? He''s on the practice squad because he continues to show the potential to be a real NFL player, that's why. And tell me he's there because they're going to convert him to tight end - he has no realistic possibility of beating out Kroft, Knox and Sweeney.

That's about right. Unless there's a total disaster, like 5 wins, they will get another year, which is what I've said all along in response to those who used to post that this year is win or you lose your job.

No one throws jump balls in the red zone either, except hail Mary's. You throw to the receiver who is in position to make a play, a player who has a window. So I will ask again: if Duke can create a window, a throwing lane when he is in the red zone, why can't he do it in the middle of the field where zones are bigger? Exactly. If he can't anticipate he won't succeed. His job is make his decision BEFORE he sees separation, so your point about Duke needing to get separation early is wrong.

This is nonsense. Waiting for separation to throw the ball was one of Tyrods principal problems. NFL QBs throw on certain keys, and if Allen doesn't do that it won't matter who the receivers are.

People keep making this red zone argument, and it just doesn't make sense. Why would he be good in the red zone and not other parts of the field. His ability, or lack of ability, to separate is MORE important in the red zone, where the man coverages are tighter and the seams in the zones are smaller. If he can be a factor in the red zone, that means he's a guy you can throw to for five to 20 yard completions. If he's good for that in the red zone, he's good for that all over the field. He'll never be a classic tight end, because he isn't tall enough. He could be one of those tight ends who's primarily a receiver and isn't counted on to do any serious blocking along the line.

Somebody actually posted a good discussion of this. Very few guys get picked up off waivers after the final cuts. The reason is that the guy is a complete unknown to your coaches. They just got done making some very hard decisions about whom to cut, and they've almost always cut guys they like, and they almost always are happy with the guys they kept. So they aren't ready to cut one of those guys who they're happy to have in order to acquire a guy they know only one thing about - the guy didn't make some other team. And in this case, it's a guy who didn't make another team on a previous try, a guy who has baggage, and a guy who is relatively slow. Duke isn't the kind of guy who gets added to someone else's team a day after the team got down to their final 53.

This I pretty much agree with, except it doesn't apply to what this GM and head coach are doing. What most teams have done when they have the top three in place is add some big-time veteran talent, and go all out. So you KC signing Shady, for example. You see a Watkins getting big contracts, despite his underproduction. You see Seattle go after that tight end from New Orleans a few years ago and after Clowney this year. That's the way to get good fast. McBeane have been very clear that that is NOT their way. Their way is to acquire young talent through the draft, not veteran talent. Beane has said repeatedly that he gets talent in the draft, he fills holes in free agency. So although you are correct that there are very few examples of a Head Coach and GM with a QB continuing to proceed slowly, that doesn't that what McBeane are doing is a bad technique or won't work. There are very few examples of teams with a successful HC, GM actually trying what McBeane are doing. In fact, the sample size of teams that have a good GM and HC is so small that there's pretty much nothing we can conclude about what will work and what won't work. That leads me to the conclusion that although what you say may be true, it is irrelevant. I also agree about your targets win totals. Ten wins means they're doing it right. I'd say six wins is a bigtime fail, seven it depends. Eight is the minimum number of wins necessary with which it could be reasonable to conclude that the process is working. That is, if the process is working, the Bills should get at least two more wins than last year. Nine is solid improvement.

As much as I'm a Duke booster, this is essentially correct. Zay IS a proven NFL performer, and Duke is not. I just don't see how you can keep a guy who catches balls like that off the field. He outfights everyone for the ball.

I'm expecting him to be over 60. 10 points would be 64. And if Beasley catches 100, it could very well be 64.

If Beasley catches 100 balls, his hands will be sore.

What they've said is that they're building for sustained long-term success. They said it would take more than three years. Both things are paraphrases of what they've said, repeatedly. As I wrote, there is only NFL example of modern sustained long-term success - the Patriots. I said that, not McBeane. But if you put together what they have said and what is the obvious goal - Patriots-type success, you get to the conclusion that what McDermott meant when he came to Buffalo was that he intended to build an organization that succeeds like the Patriots and that it would take 5 or 6 years. They HAVE repeatedly said that to get to where they want to be it would take more than three years. Repeatedly. It's often been debated around here whether the Pegulas would give them more than three years. So the notion that this would be a process that takes more than three years is not new or novel. If you've listened to McBeane for the past two years, they've been completely clear about the timetable.

You're correct. It's all about Allen. I think he is a star in the making. He's going to be a top 15, maybe even top 10 passer this season, and next season he will be one of the premier QBs in the league. It's coming.

And I think this is exactly correct. I actually think Josh Allen will be much better than Matt Ryan, but beside that, I think what you've said fits nicely with what I just said. These things you describe are happening, they've been happening for two and a half years, and we can see them working. There IS a sense of urgency, but the urgency is to do the right thing today. There's a maniacal focus on getting better today; McBeane operate with the supreme confidence that if they do the right thing today and every day, the wins will come in time. And you're right, the team is being designed not be a blow-out winner, not to have the greatest show on turf, but to win soundly week after week. They aren't going to play turtle ball. They are going to relentlessly grind opponents into the ground with sustained excellence. Just like, umm, New England. And I agree, we'll see evidence of all of this this year. Will that translate into 10 wins? Maybe. But if it doesn't, I won't mind so long there is good evidence that this team is improving and the process is continuing to drive the improvement. By the way, people shouldn't lose sight of the fact that this process applies equally to coaches as to players. McBeane have said that the coaches, including McDermott, are evaluated and driven to improve, just like players. I expect Daboll to get better, I expect McD's game management, including clock management and in-game decision making to get better. He won't tell us publicly, but I am certain that they've developed techniques and McD has learned things to be better in those areas. I'm excited.

Yes, we do disagree. I missed where I said that Belichick took many years to build the Patriots. What McBeane have said all along is that they're trying to build a team that will have sustained, long-term success. What I've said, not McBeane, is that what sustained long-term success looks like is what the Patriots have - winning over a long period of time, despite poor draft position and repeated roster turnover. That's the objective. No one said that it was going to be done in two years, and it doesn't make sense to say that it has to be done on the same schedule that Belichick followed. In fact, McBeane have been very clear: they were surprised to make the playoffs in year one, they told us the team would be worse in year two, the team would begin showing the results of their efforts in year three. They've said that. They also said the year three could be but probably wouldn't be the year where they first start having the kind of success they want to have. Three years ago the Bills could have hired a head coach who said "in three years I'll give you what the Packers have, what the Saints have, what the Chiefs have." Instead, they hired a head coach who said "in five or six years I'll give you what the Patriots have." If it had been my choice, I would have said give me what the Patriots have, and that's the choice the Pegulas made. One reason I'm so excited about the team is that I've seen McBeane do exactly what they said. I didn't understand fully at first what that would like, but I do now. I see now what they meant about getting guys with a certain set of personal behavioral characteristics and then building from there. McDermott began teaching his system and his values, spending the first two seasons weeding out all the guys who did fit the system and bringing in new guys who looked like they WOULD fit the system. One aspect of the system is that McDermott wants guys who develop what he believes are the right habits, and that leads to the conclusion that you get your talent from the draft not free agency, because free agents already have developed their professional habits. It's tougher to find the right fit in those guys. If you're building through the draft, you can train them be how you want them to be, but it takes longer. Now, I can see, we all can see if we look, that he's doing exactly what he said he was going to do, and we can see how it works. We can see the team coming together, Poyer and Hyde to jump start the defensive philosophy and then White and MIlano, then Edmunds and Allen and Ford and Dawkins and Singletary and Jones and Foster and all these Johnson guys and Joseph. It's easy to see what they're doing. It's driven by finding good football players who will learn their jobs and commit to doing it well, which is exactly what Belichick has and has had for nearly 20 years. You say I'm accepting mediocrity. I'm not, and neither is McDermott. What McDermott expects, and what I understand and accept, is that he starts with men with the right mental makeup and he teaches them, year after year, to be a team that wins. Along the way he finds men with the right mental makeup who are physically more gifted than some whom he already has, and so he improves the talent. McDermott believes that when everyone in the organization is totally committed to his core concepts - competition, continuous improvement, reduction of mistakes and when the talent gets to the level it needs to be, the team will win. His coaching technique is driven by those concepts. He won't accept mediocrity in those categories - in those categories he expects excellence. His belief is that when that culture is fully implemented, the wins will follow. I now understand what he is doing, and I have seen how it works over two seasons and a third preseason. I believe it makes sense, because I've watched the team get younger AND get better. I can see that the team isn't done getting better. And because everything McBeane have been saying about how they were going to do this has turned out to be accurate, I'm now inclined to trust them when they said, as they've said from the beginning, that this process was not going to be quick. I'm okay with that because I now can see what's happening. I'm looking at a team that is going to lose Lorenzo Alexander next year and (if the previous two years is any example) add one or two stud rookies and some sleeper rookie free agents. I'm looking at a team whose QB and whose middle linebacker, the two linchpins, are still climbing the NFL learning curve. I can see now that this IS a long process, but one that makes sense. Yes, Belichick did it in two years. He did it with a second year QB, and he did it by adding eight or nine cast off free agents that year, guys who were marginal starters elsewhere. The rest of the league hardly noticed. Well, McDermott has his second year QB, and he has a rebuilt offense, rebuilt largely with castoffs (several linemen, Brown, Gore, Yeldon), so maybe McDermott will win the Super Bowl in two years. McBeane have always said that success will come and probably will come over time but may come more quickly. Everyone will be pleasantly surprised if it comes more quickly. But they've always thought, because they've regularly said in so many words, that 2020, 2021, 2022 more likely would be the years when truly great expectations would first be justified. When you say playoffs is generally the expectation in three years, I get what you're saying. What I'm saying is that it's foolish to apply that standard (which may or may not be true) to a situation when the coach and and GM have told us from the very beginning that it would take longer than three years. They TOLD us they would build a very good team and that it would take longer than three years. Now they're two and a half years into the process, it's completely clear that this team has gotten better at its very core, in all of the fundamental things it does, that it's poised to have success and that the building process will continue for another year or two. Why should anyone apply an arbitrary three-year standard under those circumstances? I'm completely prepared to accept what you call mediocrity (which is mediocrity in the win-loss column) for another year, because long-term success in the win-loss column comes only after first developing exceptional (and not mediocre) behaviors across the entire organization. McBeane told me to expect it would take more than three years, and McBeane have so far been very good at delivering what they say they're going to deliver.

Thanks. I appreciate the kind words. Very few of my friends are serious football fans. They think I'm crazy.

Not much different. Worse without him, to be sure, but not much different and not so much that it will matter, unless, of course, there's an injury or two. As soon as I saw Singletary's college highlights, I thought his running style was very much like Shady's - quick burst into the hole, great change of direction, lacking in top-end speed. I think he could easily be a 1000-yard back in a good rushing offense. Shady was a leader, but the coaches quickly figured out that Gore could fill that role. And Gore gives them a better 1-2 combination than Singletary and Shady. There was at least a question about how Shady would handle, personally, a running back by committee approach. As the preseason wore on it became clear that Yeldon could contribute, so I think the coaches realized they could spread the ball carrying load among three backs and make it work. Shady's always been the workhouse back, and he might not have fit in so well. Plus, they make these decisions with an eye toward the future, and they clearly seem to have decided that there's a future for Singletary. Saving the $6 million was a factor, but I doubt it was the driving consideration. More generally, I'll say what I always say about this stuff. Except for QB, no individual position player is all that important. There are maybe a half-dozen non-quarterbacks, maybe a dozen, in the league whose presence on the field changes the outcome of games, and those guys are mostly on defense. Actually, I can see Edmunds becoming one of those. It truly is a team game, which is the message that McDermott preaches. I heard Colin Cowherd say one day that he asked a Las Vegas odds maker how much difference it would make in a Houston Texans point spread if JJ Watt wasn't going to play. The odds maker said half a point. This is a one or two time NFL defensive player of the year, and he makes half a point difference in the spread. Now, I loved LeSean, but he couldn't impact a game like JJ Watt can. I have a pretty simple view of the game. It's all about the coach first, and the QB second. Everything else a good coach can work around. Shady was just another player. Special, fun to watch, tough on third down and could make big plays, maybe better than Singletary, but absent injuries, I doubt that the Bills will lose a game this season that they would have won with Shady in the lineup.

Say hello to Bill Belichick. He wins with an elite quarterback and a shutdown corner, period. The rest is window dressing. It's average talent, because he never is drafting in a position to bet elite talent. I'm not telling you what McBeane are doing is the right way or the only way. I'm telling what it is that they're doing and I expect will happen. You may think there's a different way or a better way, and that's fine, but your way is not what is happening at One Bills Drive. It's foolish to apply your expectations based on how you would rebuild to a system that is rebuilding in a different way. Nervous is the word. I was optimistic a month ago. Not now. I can see too many things that can go wrong. I can see how it could be beautiful, how it SHOULD be. But I'm nervous.

Oh, you're absolutely right about the waiver claim. No one else wanted him on their 53. Someone else might have wanted him on their practice squad, but staying in Buffalo made sense for a lot of reasons. And your point about Ray Ray is a good one. Obviously Ray Ray was claimed because his speed; otherwise, Duke was the more obvious choice. Thanks for responding.

Love that six-hour drive. Bengals, baby! Can't wait.

And, Vet, one more thing. You say they should be "expected" to win 10 games. That too misunderstands how McDermott is running the team Players are "expected" to do their jobs, nothing more, nothing less. They are evaluated on their individual performance, play by play, and they are coached to improve continuously. They are told that the wins will come when everyone's doing his job, from the coaches on down. The head coach and GM are evaluated in the same way. Their performance objectives are not measured in wins and losses (although it's true that at some point they will lose their jobs without wins). Their performance is measured by the quality of the talent they've acquired and the extent to which those players are doing their jobs. Those objectives are established each year, and McBeane are measured against them. Those objectives are established by them in meetings with the Pegulas, and as I said, I'm sure the Pegulas are on board with this system. At some point, the Pegulas are going to say to McBeane "we need more wins." and McBeane will make their case about why the process is still on track and they should be patient. McBeane will either win that argument and continue or lose it and have one more year to achieve a designated win total in the way you suggest. I am certain this is NOT the year McBeane have a win-or-else ultimatum.

As to the military, I get your point and it's completely fair. I haven't been in combat, and I completely understand that I can't imagine it. I remember seeing an interview with Spielberg when Saving Private Ryan came out. He said he spent a long time interviewing DDay vets and studying, and then he created that incredible opening 20 minute scene, recreating the experience. But then he said, he had to dial it back a bit, because he knew people literally would not be able to stomach sitting through a half hour of what it really was like. So, yeah, I understand that I don't understand. Still, understanding that you think it's hyperbole, other than being an inner city cop, I don't think there's much of anything in our society that people do that approaches the tension and desperation of battle as football does. And I say that without intending to cheapen or demean in any way what real soldiers do and experience. I'm in awe of what those people do. As for tolerating an 8-8 or even a 7-9 season, I think you misperceive what's going on with the Bills. Yes, there are teams that have had successful turn arounds in 2-3 years, but McBeane have been very clear that their objective is NOT to get to the top as fast as possible. They aren't operating with a model designed to do that, because the race-to-the-top model is a sacrifice-the-future-for-the-present model. It's a model that says let's go out spend whatever it takes to get the player we need for this season, the player to put us over the top. What McBeane are trying to do is build a team with sustained, long-term success. That is, they're trying to succeed like the Patriots have succeeded, to have a team that continues to succeed with the next man up. McDermott always talks about building it the right way, and by that he means getting players with the right attitude and having them grow. And then you add players on top of those players and have them compete. And you keep doing it, and your team keeps getting better. This the first season where McDermott has a roster full of players chosen in accordance with that philosophy. So to expect them to be a playoff team this season is to not recognize what they're doing. They have a very young team, a team that's still learning the NFL ropes. It's not a team of seasoned veterans. They need to add another layer of talent, or two layers, to keep upgrading what they're doing. They aren't building a team that depends on having superior talent across the roster; they're building a team of really good football players who do their jobs all the time. They're trying to build a team like the Patriots. They've said repeatedly that it takes longer to build that way, but it's better because it's sustainable. They are so vocal and so clear about it, it's impossible to think that the Pegulas are not on board with it. They've sold the Pegulas on the concept that it may be a long process, but it will lead to sustained excellence. So I have trouble believing that if the team shows good progress but goes 8-8 the Pegulas will pull the plug. Some fans, apparently like you, who espouse the quick build philosophy might be calling for a change at 8-8, but I doubt the Pegulas will agree with those fans. Thanks. BIllsVet is saying some interesting things here. Obviously, I don't agree, but I enjoy his thoughts.

We SHOULD bring back the tolls. Now there's a ridiculous double whammy, as far as the state's revenue is concerned: I drive to Massachusetts and pay tolls on their roads, then go to their dispensary (speaking theoretically, of course!) and pay 20% to the state to buy THEIR pot. Why shouldn't Connecticut collect both of those from me, instead of Massachusetts?