Shaw66

I think he chose Buffalo because of McDermott. He's kind of like a recovering alcoholic. He knows he needs a supportive environment. He knows that absolute hard work and dedication to his job is what he needs to stay away from the world that has caused him so much trouble. And he knows that McDermott preaches that ethic. So I think he's in Buffalo because he saw in McDermott the perfect combination of football coach and personal counselor. He's going to run through walls for McDermott.

This is where I am on the guy. As I said, I love how he catches the ball. I also love his determination. The stories about him are that he's gotten his head screwed on straight, finally, and he is a ferocious worker. He's going to do everything possible to make the team. In other words, he's McDermott's kind of guy. I think his hands and his determination make him a good prospect to make the team. If he doesn't, then he just wasn't good enough.

I'm guilty of over-proping Beane because I don't thing he's failed seriously at anything yet. But you're right about Whaley. And you're right about the Bills not being in cap trouble; all that happened was with a new coach and GM there was a new philosophy about how to build a culture and a team, and several guys with big contracts didn't fit the philosophy, so they had to go. Whaley had a pretty clear vision, but he hadn't gotten the right coach or QB yet. Beane had a different vision, which required a house cleaning.

People used to claim that Overdorf had too much control, indirectly, over major personnel decisions, simply by exercising his control as the cap and contract guru. I can't imagine that he has that kind of control under Beane. Beane is highly structured and organized. There is, for lack of a better word, a process. There's a chain of command, and whenever Beane talks about the chain of command it's clear that he, McDermott, the Pegulas and no one else are in charge. I'd like to think that Beane's view of Overdorf is that he is someone who, compared to others in the league, is very good at what he does. And it's fair to say thT Overdorf has survived because he has adapted to the process. The process is all about total commitment to the team and continuous personal improvement. Overdorf has goals and objectives that are established for him by Beane and Overdorf jointly; Overdorf buys into the goals and objectives and he must be achieving them or he'd be gone. That's the way the process works. Changing the subject slightly, one thing that gives me hope for the offense this season is that the Bills kept Daboll. Part of working in the process is continuous improvement. The special teams under performed in a variety of ways, and Crossman is gone. The oline under performed and the oline coach is gone. I'm guessing that McBeane's evaluation process told them that the special teams problem was at the special teams coach level, but the evaluation told them the offensive problems were NOT at the offensive coordinator level. I mean, no one would have been shocked if the Bills had fired Daboll after last season. The fact that they didn't says to me that the Bills have a high level of confidence that Daboll can do the job, based on how he performed last season. That is, Daboll survived like Overdorf has survived. Which leads me to expect two things that we've talked about here extensively: 1. Josh Allen is going to be completing a lot more passes to underneath receivers, because he will be told by Daboll, repeatedly, to take the high percentage throw. 2. The receivers who play will be receivers who catch the ball well. That's why they got Beasley; they've said as much. He's going to be Allen's security blanket, as he was Prescott's - "when all else fails, Josh, Cole will be where you expect him to be - throw it to him." And, I'd guess they're hoping, Duke will be another. He'll run the route and he'll fight like hell to catch the ball. "And, Josh, you see that really big guy? That's Tyler Kroft. You can expect to see him out there, too. And, by the way, you already know Robert Foster, and this guy here is John Brown. When the defense gets tired of letting you complete passes to Cole and Duke or Zay and Kroft, they'll bring the safety down to plug the middle. That's when you'll see Foster or Brown running past their defenders, heading for the end zone. When that happens, throw it to them." And I think that this vision is very clearly on Daboll's plate - he knows it's his job to make it happen.

I agree with this. I don't expect the Bills to trade up. I agree that picks=power. And, yes, I wouldn't rule out a trade up, but I'm guessing that given his choice, Beane would rather have more picks in the first two or three rounds than a higher pick in the first. I think he's at the part of his plan for the future where he wants to start adding a lot of good, young talent. I don't think he's looking for a few stars. He's looking for a lot of quality players. And although Beane is completely clear that in the early rounds he's going purely BPA and not need, I think there's a sly exception to that rule. I think if they get to their pick at 9 and their BPA is NOT a true need guy, they will trade out of 9 (if there's a trade partner). That way they get maybe a late first round pick and a second round pick. Then they package some later picks with one of their seconds and move up into the late-first round - to end up, for example, with something like the 20th and 25th picks overall and #9 in the second round. That way they have three good picks in the first two rounds, and THEN they go BPA with each. That increases the chances that one of their BPA picks turns out to be, conveniently, also a need pick like a quality offensive lineman.

Yesterday I wrote somewhere that McBeane don't do anything without a reason. I don't think they planned to do last off-season what they did this off-season. I'd say there is a very high likelihood that they did off-season last year pretty much what they planned to do. As I wrote elsewhere, I think their plan was to do a two-year tear down, with the rebuild only starting in the second year and continuing in earnest in this, the third year. Beane has said that they considered doing a more gradual transition from the roster they inherited to the one they wanted, but they decided that although that would be less painful than the housecleaning they did, it wasn't the best way to go. And it's important to recognize that it wasn't just roster turnover they wanted to work on so they could build the culture they wanted; they also wanted to transition to their cap philosophy, which is to write big contracts only for homegrown talent they want to keep. They said after their first season that fans should expect the team to get worse before it gets better. They knew it would get worse because they were going to continue to jettison players whom they didn't want (for culture reasons, cap reasons or both) and they weren't going to replace the talent except through the draft. That's the thought that was behind the get worse before it gets better comment. They didn't say it, but they knew they would get worse because they didn't intend to start investing cap room in veteran players. Even after the 2018 season ended, Beane said fans shouldn't expect the Bills would spend all their cap money heading into the 2019 season. That isn't how they're building. The evidence is clear that they've followed this philosophy. I think they've made only two significant free agent acquisitions: Lotulelei and Morse. They're the only free agents over $10 million a year. Hyde, Beasley, Brown, Murphy are all just getting average good-player money. I used to think average good-player money was $5 million a year, but with cap increases it's gone up, and those guys are all in this group. I don't want to start a discussion about whether any of those are good signings or not (for example, I think the Bills got what they wanted in Star - a solid presence in the middle of the d line with a work ethic that will make him a leader now that Kyle is gone, but I'm happy to entertain the possibility that he isn't what they hoped). But that isn't the point - the point is that their philosophy in free agency was never to build by signing a lot of high-end free agent talent. Their philosophy is perhaps once in a while to get a guy you want to build on, like Morse, but the rest of the time the philosophy is just to fill gaps while they take their time drafting the guys they really want. So, when you look at 2018, I'd guess McBeane were blindsided by Wood and Incognito both leaving. Their plan probably was that those guys would be around and they needed just a couple of free agent journeymen to help shore up the weakest spots on the line. They were planning, I'd guess, to build the line over several years, replacing Richie and Eric as the time came, gradually getting better. When those two guys left unexpectedly, McBeane did what they always tell they will do, which is to stick to the plan. They didn't panic and say "we need more linemen in here, NOW!" They didn't, because that wasn't how they planned to build a better line. They planned to do it primarily through the draft. So they stuck by the plan, knowing that they'd have a pretty ugly offensive line in 2018. That may be one of the reasons they said things would get worse before they got better. They didn't do last season what they did this season - bring in a bunch of journeymen olinemen - because they also wanted to complete cleaning up the cap situation. Beane has said he wanted to clean it up completely and quickly before he started consuming cap again. That meant he was going to use 2018 to get out from under bad contracts and NOT to start getting into a bunch of new contracts. So that's what he did. He didn't sign a lot of free agents. He did have the revolving door for receivers, but he never was investing any serious money there. Instead, he just let 2018 play out so that he could get to 2019, which is when (I'm guessing) McBeane always thought the rebuild would begin in earnest. They probably also thought they'd get an offensive lineman pretty high in the 2018 draft, someone who would be a 2018 starter. But then the QB situation and the MLB situation fell in a way where they could get the two core players that they wanted to build on, and they used draft capital to make those two major moves, figuring they were more important than a lineman. It's important to remember that they have a long-term view of this (and presumably have the Pegulas support in that view). So having made the decision not to sign free-agent linemen in 2018, even though they lost their two best starters, in part on the assumption that they'd get some help in the draft, they pushed ahead with the long-term plan, which was get a QB and a middle linebacker. When that happened, the free agent linemen that might have helped as a stop gap had already been signed. You can't get after the draft the kind of free agent line talent the Bills got before the draft this year. (Again, I'm not saying they got great talent. They got enough talent that the line should be okay this season. The point is that no talent like they signed this year was available to the Bills AFTER the draft last season. Just like this season, all the talent at that level had already committed somewhere.) So, no, I don't think the Bills tried to do last year what they did this year. I think they had a plan last year for how they were going to build. It didn't go exactly as planned, because Richie and Eric left, but they did what they always say they are going to do - they stuck with the plan. They stuck with it because their long term view for the oline did not include any journeyman free agent they could have signed last year OR any journeyman free agent they actually did sign this year. (Morse being the exception - he isn't a journeyman). Their long-term view is that they are going to draft the entire offensive line of the future, except that some free agent journeyman signed for the short term might emerge as a keeper.

Like, I'd forgotten Crossman was gone. Farwell has very little experience coaching - two years as an assistant at Seattle. But he was a star special teamer in his day. He must be an intense competitor to have been a special teams standout, and intense competitors are what McD wants. The heat will be on him, because I think McD intends the Bills to be substantially improved this year.

I really haven't paid any attention to special teams. Thanks for this write up. There may be other positives, but you identify several aspects of the special teams that should improve. Crossman was well thought of a few years ago, right? I agree that he'll need to be creative, because it's pretty clear that McD's expectations of everyone is to get better, and for the units that were woeful, to get really better.

McD and B don't do anything without a reason. If I had to guess, I'd say this: First, they didn't want to go into the draft with a new GM. Whaley had been running a scouting process for a year, had been collecting information, distilling it and making judgments. And, as has been pointed, his background was scouting. He was reasonably good at evaluating talent. Second, the most important decision was QB, and they (the Pegulas and McD) didn't want a lameduck GM to make that decision. So, one way or another, they forced the tradeback. By doing that they assured that the new GM would have extra ammunition in the QB search. They also knew that the upcoming QB class was strong, so the extra first round pick would likely be useful. Third, McD knew he was going to tear down the team, but they had enough confidence in Whaley to let him pick at 29 and after that. Fourth, they began the tear down in 2017, but they also wanted to get a look at some guys through that season before they decided on everyone. That's why after 2017, they said fans shouldn't expect 2018 to be as good as the playoff season - because they knew that they weren't done cleaning house. So the rebuild began a bit in 2017, but it didn't begin in earnest until 2018, when Beane got to run his own draft. I don't have any trouble seeing McD having the beginnings of that plan in place before the 2017 draft, and the full fledged plan in place went into place shortly after Beane arrived. As I said, they don't do anything without a reason.

I think he has seriously good ability to go get the ball. His hands catches, albeit in a highlight real, are excellent if not outstanding. There's been a lot discussion about Zay Jones. Duke looks like a serious threat to take Jones's job, because he looks so sure-handed. This guy goes and gets the ball in a crowd, he doesn't seem to get outfought for the ball, he doesn't bobble it.

Great article. When i listen to McD it sounds like they're building to avoid this kind of thing. Article should be required readi.g for McBeane and Allen. Belichick and Brady got this right, and that's why they have the rings and McCarthy and Rodgers don't. If haven't read it, it's worth it.

Magox That's an outstanding analysis. I think it's on the money. Nicely done.

Time will tell, but I think this is a good assessment. There has not been a ti e in the last 20 years when I could envision a GM holding the Lombardi in the air and saying "this is for Buffalo," but I can now.

Nicely done.

Well, your underlying premise is wrong, but I think your draft strategy is correct. You don't need studs but you need a lot of good players. Beane has said you get those on the draft. I wont be surprised if the Bill's trade out of 9 so they can picked later in the first round and twice in the second.

You know, all you guys are talking about this, and as far as I'm concerned, Terry had the right answer the other day at the owners' meeting. He said "let's wait until the current study is complete." That's what a smart business man would do. So are so many different factors to consider that it's never going to be an easy decision. If the core infrastructure at New Era is sound, upgrading New Era probably makes the sense. With $500 million, they probably could widen the concourses, install seats, create some more corporate boxes and upgrade all of them, cover a lot of the seats, do some work on the score boards and sound system. That would be fine with me. I have no idea how much control the owners have or what they want, but they certainly understand the math. The market studies will show how much the fans are willing to pay, and if what they're willing to pay won't cover the cost of a new stadium downtown, I doubt the owners will fight it. They aren't going to gang up on the Pegulas and force them to drop ANOTHER billion dollars into Buffalo - they already made a lot of money for the owners simply by paying $1.2 billion for the team. That forced the value of ALL the other franchises up by a few hundred million dollars. Plus, they aren't going to want the bad publicity that would flow from forcing the Bills to move. At least that's my guess. I've said all along that a downtown stadium is a mistake. It chews up a lot of real estate that eventually is going to be very very valuable, more valuable that a stadium that's used 8 to 15 times a year. It's not like a baseball venue, that brings in fans 75-90 times a year. It's just a big white elephant sitting there. I know others have other opinions. The good news is that the Pegulas are committed, they're smart and they're tough. They will force a decision that meets everyone's needs, including the city, the NFL owners and the fans. Some of us won't like it, but it will be a good decision. (Plus, by the time it's done, I probably won't be going to games any more, so what do I care?)

I think as a general rule, the more time that goes by, the more your value goes down. Yes, it's true that injuries occasionally may make a guy more valuable, but I think even that is unusual. A guy like Beane decides how much a guy is worth, and he doesn't pay more. In Spain's case, for example, Beane has a price he's willing to pay. One reason Spain hasn't signed, perhaps, is he doesn't like the money. A second is that he doesn't like the competition. He's a afraid that the money that Beane is offering isn't real, because there's some chance he gets cut and never makes even what Beane is offering. When a guard in Buffalo gets hurt, Beane doesn't think Spain is more valuable, but Buffalo just became more attractive to Spain, because he's closer to a guaranteed spot on the roster. You have to remember that as far as Beane is concerned, free agents are stopgaps. They are guys he hires to fill a spot until he drafts a guy who will be the guy he wants. So Beane is not going to overspend. Now, when Beane thinks he may be going to the Super Bowl and he desperately needs a guard, yeah, then he might overpay Spain to get to the Super Bowl. But Beane isn't in that position, so I doubt he's overspending.

I think you have this backward. He will get more before the draft. The risk he runs is that some team interested in him drafts a good guard and drops out of bidding. As fewer teams are interested, the price teams are willing to pay will go down. He isn't signed yet because no one needs a guard as badly as he would like to think. He has to recognize that people aren't going to pay as much as he wants.

That's pretty well done. Nice.

Don't forget Wray Carlton

I didn't post in that thread. My draft night list was Mayfield, Darnold, Rosen, Allen. Then, when the Bills traded up, I thought to myself, "no, Allen. Take Allen." Not that I thought he'd be great. I was disappointed we didn't get one of my first two, and I tended not to like either Josh. At the last minute, I thought "I want the big guy, the big arm. Maybe the Bills can teach him what he needs to know. Rosen will never have a big arm." I felt a little better when I heard McBeane talk about him. They sounded like they really wanted Allen, that they knew that he could be their horse. But even then I didn't know what you've concluded, which essentially is his upside is better than his downside. Ask me last June, and I wouldn't have said that.

Interesting. I'm fascinated by Belichick. I read half of the biography about him. Got to the Patriots part of his life and I'd had enough. I think there are several basics in his philosophy. In no particular order no turnovers do your job study take the easy play be fundamentally sound tacklers hit hard. That last one is right in line with his preferences, so he may in fact have a bias for a guy like Brown. Still, I'd tell you it's a coach's bias - he's telling you the player HE'D like to have. This is the best coach probably in the history of football, whose interests are exactly in line with what his fans want - wins, and he's telling you he'd take Brown. He wants to win, he could take Sanders if he wanted, he takes Brown. That's a pretty powerful argument. Any way, there are no answers. Thanks again for chatting.

No apologies necessary, for me, anyway. Your point about schemes is also interesting to me in a different context near and dear to many Bills fans. Who's the best running back in BILLS history? Man, I can recite that debate from memory. What brings me to the conclusion that it's Simpson is in my mind I can put Simpson on the field with Kelly, Reed, Lofton and Beebe, and what I see is an offense that would have won some Super Bowls. Simpson would have been BETTER in the K-gun than he was in the offense the Bills ran back then. Why? Because the Bills would have thrown to him more, so he would have gotten the ball more in open space. In open space, only Sanders and Sayers regularly did what Simpson could do. So, yeah, I agree completely that scheme is important. In the SI article, Belichick said the modern runners run in a much more run friendly scheme. They get to line up deeper in the backfield, which Belichick says is a big advantage. Still, if you ask me how Sanders would do in the Browns 1958 run offense, I don't know. And I don't exactly how Brown would have done in Sanders offense, either. And beyond THAT, Brown played for the Bill Belichick of the era, and Sanders played for, I don't, but it wasn't anyone who was winning championships. Brown had a coach whose game planning was a week or a year ahead of the opponent. We complain the the coaches misused Simpson so badly in his early years. I mean, what were they thinking? Brown, on the other hand, had a coach who when asked why he didn't give the ball more to Bobby Mitchell, a BIG, BIG open field threat, said "when you have a shotgun, why shoot a popgun?" If you haven't read the SI article, read it, especially the Belichick section. Belichick knows more about football than anyone, and he seems to be saying, from a coach's perspective, that there isn't any question Brown is the guy. It's impossible to prove anyone right. What I like about the discussion as much as anything is that the discussion makes revisit memories of all those players we've seen, including just on video, and the amazing things they did and still do. Remembering Brown and Sanders, watching a few clips here and there of Simpson and Campbell, it's fun. It's why I dug up the Terence McGee video and posted it. The discussion of Sayers made me think about kick returning and I hadn't see McGee's return for a few years. So this discussion got me to watch that play again. Thanks for chatting. Sayers has jumped in and out of the conversation some. I don't know about similar styles, but they are my all-time top 2 guys in the open field.

I want to jump in here. I haven't been on much and just came back to read what's being said. I'll get to that in a minute. First, I guess I've got to apologize. I've upset some people and certainly did not intend to. I thought we were just having a football conversation. I talk football the way I do because that's my manner. I think I know what I'm talking about, but I'm also quick to say that I don't know anything compared to what the coaches and gms know. I DO think I'm right about what I say, as do you all of you. I'm sorry that the way I say it makes you think I think I'm some sort of guru. I know I'm not. Truly sorry. Second, I think this is a pretty high level football conversation going on here. Post after post has really good and interesting thoughts. I gotta say that, altho some may think it's politically incorrect, mannc probably is correct that Brown stood out because he was playing in a league that didn't permit many blacks to play. Doesn't establish what Brown might or might not have done in more modern football, but it certainly supports the notion that the modern players actually DO get better, and that rising tide of better players lifts the stars to ever greater levels. Third, I thought the discussion about Jordan and Lebron, whoever did it, was very interesting. Your brain has a way to cement in your head that the heroes of YOUR day are the GOAT, bar none, whatever happens. But year after year as you watch Lebron do what he does, you start questioning your memory, and, it's true, you DO have the ability to watch video, a lot of video or both of them. And so, there's the additional problem in Brown vs. Sanders, of many people being too young to have memories and pretty much no video to go back to. So the Sanders crowd brain is saying "all we've seen is some video of Brown; we SAW Sanders. And the old timers are saying "well, we SAW them both and let me tell you" when in fact maybe our brains have been denying Sanders greatness because we want it to be OUR guy. No one's perspective is the correct perspective, it's just a perspective. Oh, and speaking of perspective, someone said something like "the oldtimers talk like they'd seen every game Brown played live." I thought that was amusing, because it's not like he had any real way to know, but some of us actually probably did see live, on television, 80% of the games he ever played, maybe 90%, maybe even 100%. If you were growing up in Buffalo in the 50s, you were either a Browns kid or a Giants kid. (Bills didn't exist.) Browns were on every week on WBEN and Giants were on every week on WGR. Even when they played each other, they were on both stations, same video, different announcers. In short, a lot of the oldtimers here watched the Browns EVERY week, just like your kids watch the Bills now. So, yeah it IS like we saw every game of Browns career. Doesn't mean I'm right, I know, but when we were kids we watched Jim Brown the way kids watched Thurman or Cribbs, pick your generation. Finally, i think there's another perspective here. That's the "values" perspective. Chamberlain was amazing, but I bought the Celtics' view that Russell was GOAT he made his team a winner. So what defines greatness, individual talent or productivity (and leadership) that brought championships? I think Sanders was the greatest in terms of visual greatness - if you had to pick one running back to watch, who would it be? Sanders, as I've said. If you had to pick based on contribution the team effort, because of individual greatness and play after play consistency, I'd pick Brown. Last play of the game, you need a touchdown, 2 yards from the goal line, who do you want? Brown, no question. Forty yards to the goal line, who do you want? Some will say Sanders, I'll say pick 'em. Brown had exceptional big-play capability. Thanks for talking about this. And, again, apologies to anyone I've upset.

That is an incredibly ridiculous statement. Brown's attributes are not the norm today. There is exactly ONE player today who has the tools Brown had, and his name is Adrian Peterson. The fastest guys in the league today, which Brown was, do not have Brown's size. The 230 to 240 pound backs do not have Brown's speed and ability to change direction. That's the whole point. As for Sanders as a power back, the Lions regularly removed him from the lineup on on first and goal. He was NOT a great short-yardage back. He was good at it, but he wasn't great.