Shaw66

I think we have to remember how bad it actually was. My recollection is that it was a rare event to see a BIlls running back get to the second level without having to break a tackle. The running GAME, not the running BACKS, was abysmal. The Bills finished 9th in the league in rushing, which is remarkable, given how bad the run game was. But they were 9th only because Allen got all those yards, and Allen's rushing yards were really inflated because he's a quarterback. I'd guess that almost half his yards came when he was running completely free on plays where he broke from the pocket and, because the defense was in man and not looking at the QB, he had huge chunks of open field. If you take away all those free yards, the Bills were more like 20th or 25th. Now, I know those are real yards, and every yard counts however you get them, but those yards are NOT evidence that the Bills running game was good. You know all you need to know when McBeane, who are careful not to criticize in public, were very clear that the offensive line play in 2018 was inadequate, wouldn't say that the lineman are good players with futures in Buffalo, and fired the offensive line coach. What they said and what they did in the first week after the season ended was a measure of how bad they thought that aspect of the team was. It's not a secret, I know; we all saw it. It's just that we tend to forget after the season ends. So - keep in mind how bad the offensive line was, keep in mind that the people running the team have by word and deed demonstrated they thought the offensive line was bad, keep in mind how few holes Shady actually had in 2018 as compared to previous years, and keep in mind McBeane's post-season comments about Shady. Put it all together, and I'd say it's about 95% certain that Shady's 2018 lack of production was about something other Shady having lost a step.

I think what you say is correct, certainly about Allen. That's what I saw on his short balls. I think it's a concentration issue. And recognition. But you describe the problem well. As for Shady, I didn't think he looked different in 2018. I really think he had very few opportunities. People keep talking about how Belichick uses his backs, and Shady is still better than those backs the Pat's use. Its more about scheme. I think that is on Daboll. And that has to do with whether Daboll can create some kind of passing offense generally.

People don't understand the locker room presence point about Shady. They confuse his occasional off field issues with what kind of a teammate he is. From what I see, he works his butt off and he doesn't complain. My sense is McBeane love him and will keep him. What they should be doing is fixing the line and the offensive scheme to maximize his talents. In 2019 he likely will be the most talented non-qb on the offense, more talented than any receiver, so the Bills need to do a much better job taking advantage of those talents.

I don't know if third down back is the right characterizatuon, but a different role in the offense might make sense. Making McCoy more of a primary target in the offense, using more west coast principles, probably stresses the defense significantly. This ties in with the notion that Allen needs to go with the shorter option more often, to boost his completion percentage (also a west coast idea).

Its interesting that you follow that stuff. McDermott knows who is friendly with whom for sure, because he believes it's important. . These guys get graded on leadership, and you're correct that we really cant see a lot of what the coaches see. That's why I think a lot of the discussion here misses the point. If Clay is committed to the process 100%, then he is much more valuable to McD than we can know by evaluating film. I said the same thing in the thread about whether Star is overpaid. I think Kyle was the leader in the d line room and Star was brought in to succeed Kyle. We cant see that, but I'm pretty sure that's why Star is in Buffalo. And whether Clay is McBeane's ideal tight end on the field, he may be the best tight end for 2019 off the field.

I don't know if Clay is gone, but I think your analysis is largely correct. What is missing is that McBeane say they want veteran leadership in every room. That isn't Croom or a rookie, and they may not find the right free agent. They may decide that they want Clay at least for one more season. Clay has been in the system for two years and may be important to groom his replacement.

Absolutely. But I don't think McBeane will go after a tight end with a lot of miles on him. They'll go with youth. Only exception would be if Tyler is a really high character guy and the Bills think that he can be a positive addition to the team for the next 2-3 years.

I agree he isn't a part of the long-term plan. Definitely not. And if you can find someone in 2019 who will be better than Clay is in 2020, yeah, I agree, you get that guy and you give him the job in 2019. But what if free agency and the draft fall some other way, and the TE of the future isn't on the team in 2019? What if they draft and sign offensive linemen and defensive linemen and receivers and by the time they get to tight end, all they have is Logan and Croom and some rookies who can't beat them out? That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, if they've strengthened a lot of other positions. If that happens, even though they're overpaying Clay, why wouldn't you want Clay to be your tight end? If he's the best player at the position, who cares how much he's getting paid? His pay and his play are two different things. The Bills can afford his pay in 2019; if he's the best they have at the position, why wouldn't you want him?

I think they're two different things. Are the Bills overpaying Clay for the production he's delivering? Absolutely. He's turned out to have been a bad investment. They could have had the same production for less. Will they be overpaying him in 2019? Yes, unless he turns things around. And turning them around may only mean more time with Allen and a more effective passing attack. But whether you cut him is a different question, and it doesn't really have much to do with what you're paying him. As I understand, he's going to be a cap hit whether you keep him or cut him. So the decision turns on whether the team will be better with him or without him. That is, how good will the guy be who replaces him? If the replacement isn't any good, then you're better off keeping Clay, even though he's overpaid. Now, obviously you can't run a team effectively if you're overpaying too many people, but the Bills aren't in that situation. Clay's one of the few guys who is clearly overpaic, and every team has at least a few. .So I don't see Clay as being a problem for McBeane. THey keep him if they want him, they cut him if they don't. It doesn't have anything to do with money.

I try to avoid this "for what he's making" approach. FOr a couple of reasons. First, it's really hard to know exactly what someone's value is. In theory you could figure out the value of every player on the roster relative to all the other players on the team and in the league and do some sophisticated math to figure values, but that's in theory only. More importantly, though is that what you're paying him is just a value that was put on him at the point in time when he signed. Even then, there were a lot of things that went into the determination, but whatever went into it, it's just history now. You have him on the team, and the important question is not whether he's worth it but whether he makes your team better. I suppose you can consider whether he's worth it in terms of whether you could get the same production for less money, or get better production for the same money. The answer to that question is pretty much impossible to figure out, because there aren't a lot of tight ends on the market. The rookies you can get certainly will be less money, but they are less likely, on an individual basis, to produce better than Clay, even given his meagre numbers last season. You're not likely to get a rookie with equal production who blocks better, for example. Maybe, but not likely. The Bills have Clay. Can they do better? In the short-term, maybe not. In the long term, I certainly hope so, but that will take a few years to develop someone.

I think Clay will have a future depending on McBeanes character issues. Veteran players have to buy into the system and be leaders. If Clay is a leader he will stay. If he's just the best player at the position, his age will doom him. McBeane want young guys and they want them now.

I agree. I just posted about what happens if they win 6, but I , see it happening. As someone said, it will be tough to have the number 2 defense again, but I expect Edmunds will become an impact player. I think their ranking might fall, but I think their explosiveness will increase. Allen almost certainly will be better - a year's experience, a full off-season, first team reps all summer, better line and better receivers. The team is set up to succeed, and it's up to the coaches to deliver.

Yeah, a six win season would be REALLY disappointing. It would put a lot of pressure on the Pegulas, because the fans would be calling for McBeane's heads. It would test the Pegulas guts: do they REALLY believe McBeane can do it, or should they cut their losses and move on. I think they swallow really hard and ride them through 2020. But it wouldn't be an easy decision. Imagine if Allen looks good AND they win 6 games. Then what do you do? Thank them for drafting Allen and fire them so that someone who knows how to win with a good QB can take over? Or let them have 2020 and see if they can produce a real winner? Tough calls for the Pegulas. I hope the Bills are 8-8 or better, and then they wouldn't have to face the decision.

Man! How you can you remember that stuff? Larry Garron is a name and a player I probably have thought about in past 30 years. Saimes's open field tackles are legendary.

I wondered how deep into the thread I'd have to go to find Saimes. Saimes was a true free safety. Strong got the tight end, free was free. Saimes had GREAT instincts and was a fabulous tackler. Also a dangerous return man. He was probably the greatest the Bills ever had. I'd forgotten about Greene. He and Saimes 1 and 2. They were different eras. Saimes was more dominant, league-wide, in his era.

Interesting names there. My recollection is not so much that Gailey want a scatback but that after the draft they kept saying they took Spiller because he was the guy available who had the ability to be a game changer. My cousin, in reference to why the Giants didn't take a quarterback in last year's draft, said "when you have an opportunity to get a Hall of Fame player, you take him. As great as I think Barkley looks, I think that doesn't apply when you need a QB. In any case, my recollection is that that's what Gailey was thinking. He thought Spiller was a generational player. I like your notion about how the GM has to distill all of this information, based on what they value most, and come up with a ranking for every guy. They have to take stuff that is very subjective and turn it into an objective number. Can't be done. If it could be done, people wouldn't have missed Brady and JJ Watt and all the other guys we can name.

First, I think you have to recognize that Allen may have been the b est player available where the Bills took him, and Edmunds may have been the best available where the Bills too HIM, too. I think what you saw in each case that the Bills saw an opportunity to trade up to where, with that pick, the best player available also happened to fit a need. In other words, they TRADED for need, but they DRAFTED the BPA. I think Spiller is a good example to consider. I don't think that Beane is so BPA oriented that if he had been in the Spiller situation, he would have taken CJ. I'd like to think he'd either take the guy right behind Spiller on his board (because everyone knows that no one is absolutely sure who the BPA is among two closely ranked guys. If the guy right behind Spiller on Beane's board was, let's say, also a running back, I think Beane would work hard to trade out of the spot. That is, he'd trade away from a pick if the BPA isn't a need, and then at the lower picks he'd take BPA. In the 2019 draft, for example, if Beane's BPA when he's on the clock is a QB, I think he's trading out.

I really, really believe you're wrong about this. This issue has been argued a lot here. I think you'll find that most of the throws that you call "way off target" were the result of incomplete understanding and communication on the part of Allen and the receiver. That doesn't have anything to do with accuracy - it comes from rookies throwing to rookies.

This was my first thought. He said when the season ended he was going to work on his game,. Now it's two weeks after the season ended, and he's been working out with Palmer for two weeks. He has McDermott's guidance about what he's supposed to be working on. Remember what McBeane have told us. They want guys who are intense competitors, who want to get better all the time, and who are willing to work at it all the time. Those are qualities they saw in Allen that, together with his physical talents, sold them on him. We've seen the competitive nature, and now we're seeing the willingness to work. Love it. And, by the way, would people rather he worked out on his own, without any coach? League rules prohibit him from working out with the Bills coaches, he can't work out with coaches of any other teams. Jordan Palmer, whether it's valid or not, is recognized as one of the best. What QB coach is sitting in his den waiting for Josh to call? Is he better than Jordan Palmer?

No thanks. I'd like to follow him around for a couple of days and just listen to him and ask him questions.

I agree, although Belichick always has one more trick up his sleeve. Kc has better talent, and Reid's a good coach. Given time, the talent would have prevailed. The Chiefs wasted the first half trying to figure it out.

Belichick is a defensive genius, pure and simple. And he has a very simple formula: Take away the opponent's single biggest threat and then teach your players the opponent's tendencies when the biggest threat is neutralized. He does it all the time. Yesterday he took #10 out of the game with double teams and got burned only once. Then they put pressure on Mahomes and forced him to make decisions, and Mahomes couldn't find the Pats' weaknesses often enough. Not really a knock on Mahomes; he just doesn't have the experience yet to have attacked the Pats effectively. Fact is, veteran QBs, like Brees, also have trouble with the Pats that way. The other thing that Belichick is a master at is raising the level of play of his team as the stakes get higher. The Pats played GREAT football yesterday. It was a clinic. The team with the lesser physical talent won because they played extraordinarily sound fundamental football.

One thing I've come to understand about McDermott's process is that it's about continuous improvement in all areas. That doesn't mean all areas will improve at the same time. It means they are trying to build good habits in all areas, so that as new players arrive they learn those good habits - they're built into the team culture - and they build on that. They keep building. So, I agree completely about the penalties. I found them very troubling. However, I think if you could get McD to talk candidly about it, he'd tell you that he's working on it and his team will get better on the penalty issue. It just doesn't happen all at once. Look at Belichick, the Pats and fumbling. Within the franchise the rules are pretty clear about fumbling. Don't do it. Belichick has imprinted that idea in the heads of his players, so they don't fumble. But it took Belichick years to establish the behaviors within the team so the players, including every new player, gets the message and learns. I hate to say it, but it's a process.

I want the Patriots to just stop winning all the time. HOWEVER, I for one was mesmerized last night by the level of excellence that that team has achieved. They have a coach who is smart enough to think of everything and be prepared for everything, and they have a quarterback smart enough to understand and implement everything the coach thinks of. We've never seen this level of excellence in the NFL before, and we probably never will again. It's truly magnificent what they do. Belichick does it by taking ordinary athletes (by NFL standards) and teaching them. The one thing that isn't ordinary about them is their personal commitment to perfection. They know their jobs and they do their jobs on every play. They do the basics - blocking and tackling, better than anyone in the league. They never give up on a play. It is, by the way, what McBeane are trying to build, and when they do we'll know how the Patriots fans feel.

I suppose there might be a question, but he would be my choice. Moulds would fit nicely. Bruce could play in any era. Lofton would have to be a consideration. Sentimental favorite would be Billy Shaw.