Shaw66

This doesn't surprise me. I listen pretty carefully to what they say about the process, and Mayfield and Rosen each had issues that suggested they wouldn't fit. McB have been clear that fitting the system is a critical component in their decision making. So Darnold and Allen at the top of their board makes sense.

I agree, except that McD DOES say some things about the "process" that are revealing. Never anything about players.

I thought the same thing. People here really misconstrued what Beane said. However, I also didn't trust people here who said his accuracy problems, to the extent he actually has any, we're due to footwork. Beane confirms that that IS the problem and that he's already gone a long way toward fixing it. Thanks Yolo!

Thanks for the link. Feels good to be part of the Bills family knowing a man like that is in the family, too. The Lord knows he isn't perfect, but none of us is. But he is a stand-up guy, a leader and an inspiration.

Don't tell McBeane you can't tell who has it and who doesn't. A major part of their draft evaluation process is what we generally lump together as "character" or "intangibles." They put a lot of effort looking into the mental makeup of players: are they fierce competitors, do they hate losing, how do they react to failure, do they stick to their craft or take time off, are they committed to the right things. I think Beane said that those issues are among their first screens - if you don't have the kind of mental makeup they're looking for, you drop on their board or fall off completely.

Ej is a nice man. I like him. But - being a QB in the NFL requires some true mental toughness. Mental acuity and mental toughness. You've got to have the heart and the guts to make tough decisions in virtually no time and then to execute. Very few guys have it, and there's no shame if you don't. So I'm sorry to say, but I think it's true, that admitting he became depressed when he got benched is just his admission that he didn't have the heart and the toughness it takes to play the position. Tyrod Taylor could have gotten depressed when he got benched. He reacted differently. He said all the right things (which EJ did, too) and then we went back to work. He didn't let the benching change his attitude. As each year goes by, I'm more and more impressed at how tough players are in the NFL. They take incredible physical and emotional beatings and come back for more as if nothing happened. Taylor has that. Manuel doesn't. Edwards didn't. Fitz does. Being tough isn't all it takes, but if you aren't incredibly tough, you aren't surviving in the NFL. It's why it's such a brotherhood. Those are all real mean in the locker room.

This is an interesting rumor. I suspect there's some measure of truth in this. What I find interesting is that this describes the kind of detail that this leadership studies in making their decisions. Sure, everyone knew that Rosen had had a concussion and there was some general concern about how well he'll hold up in the NFL. But this suggests that the Bills tried to get an understanding of the probabilities of various QBs (Taylor and the draft candidates) having long-term careers as starters. That's not the kind of thinking that Rex and Whaley were doing, at least so far as we know. This kind of thinking is what the PROS mean when they talk about analytics. Was Taylor a concussion risk? I think so. We saw him get dinged several times. His style of play certainly leads to his getting hit more frequently than most QBs. Does that decide the issue? Of course not, but when you're evaluating the future of your team at this position, you consider all factors. Is he good enough to be a pro starter (in Taylor's case, marginally), and what are the chances you'll actually have him for the long term? Makes sense that a detail-oriented management would study and quantify things as the OP suggests. So why is Glenn gone and Benjamin still on the roster? The calculus is different in each case. First, they're position players, and their long-term futures are less important than QB. You lose a lineman or a receiver, you move on. Second, the Bills had an answer at left tackle, they didn't have an answer at wideout, so taking the health risk on Benjamin and not on Glenn makes sense. Third, the Bills had detailed information about the health histories of both, so they would have known whose injuries were more likely to be chronic. The same kind of probability analysis may have told them that Glenn's probability of being off the field a lot was greater than Benjamin's. In any case, the injury probabilities wouldn't have been the ONLY factor considered, but those probabilities likely contributed to the decisions. Thanks for the OP.

Makes sense to me. You sound like I'm pining for Cousins. Don't know how you got that impression.

This is the article that convinced me he was perfect for McB. 24-7-365 and a religious family man. I think he was made for McDermott and I would have expected Cousins to value that. I guess not.

Hapless - Good info about what Cousins was thinking. Thanks.

Ohhh. I wasn't at all a Cousins fan in the draft. That's an interesting take. Maybe you're right about Cousins in free agency. I have a different take. I think Cousins is all about system, and I was guessing that therefore McDermott was high on his list. I guessed that Cousins didn't care so much about any of the short-term issues - he wasn't in win-now mode. I think he wanted the right place for him and his family, right including a serious shot at long-term success. I think the Bills took themselves out of the auction. Beane is very clear that he believes that the opportunities come to you, and you shouldn't make moves that put you in a hole because you believe there's some great opportunity out there. So, for example, he was clear that he was willing to make moves in the draft this year, but he was NOT willing to give up 2019 picks to make a move. That is, even if there was a guy he wanted, he wouldn't mortgage the future to get him. And he's also been clear that he believes the draft is where you can good talent cheap. (I think he and the whole league learned an important lesson when they saw the success the Seahawks had accumulating a lot of low-priced talent in the draft.) I put all that together, and I think Beane decided he wasn't going to be a player for Cousins. He didn't want to put himself in a much deeper cap hole than he already was in, and he had confidence that good things would happen in the draft. Probably when he decided to pass on Cousins, he also decided to trade Taylor, because he'd long since decided Taylor wasn't their guy, and trading him then would position Beane even better in the draft. Your clever use of the past tense was clear. Your clever use the past "tends," on the other hand, was just a bit befuddling!

Me too. I was beyond excited when the Bills traded up in the third round, because I was sure they'd take Wilson. And I was convinced Cousins was the right move. I never ran the numbers, but I think they simply concluded that they couldn't afford to bet it all on Cousins, given their cap situation. Tyrod shines this year and the Bills are on SOME logical path at QB, I'm okay even if 2018 is somewhat ugly. I've convinced myself the defense is going to be very good this season, and I'm expecting the team to be .500 or better.

I'm kind of surprised at myself, but I have supreme confidence in McB. I don't know if Daboll is the answer, but McB have a process, as we know, and we've already seen that if a guy doesn't fit the process (Dennison, Dareus, Watkins, Taylor) he gets moved quickly. So I think if Daboll isn't the answer, the answer will arrive soon enough. Yes, 3 would be hard to swallow, but would it be really that much worse than 4? McB failing would break my heart. Absent a major disaster, McB will be with the Bills another four years. I'm getting old, and the thought of starting over then with another leadership group what's tough for me to swallow. So maybe it isn't that my supreme confidence is rational; it's simply that at my age they look like the last best hope, so they'd better be the ones.

I liked Taylor but I don't mind that he's gone. Maybe his ceiling is higher than we saw, and I think it is, but I still don't mind. Why? Because I trust McDermott and Beane. They decided that Taylor didn't fit what they're trying to do, whatever that may be. Maybe he didn't fit because TT couldn't ever be better than we saw. Maybe he didn't fit for other reasons. I don't know. What I do know is that McD know what they want and Tyrod wasn't it. There are four possible outcomes: 1. McB are winners and TT is a star. .2. McB are winners and TT never emerges. 3. McB bust and TT is a star. 4. McB bust and TT never emerges. I'm great with 1 or 2.

But how could a rookie left tackle play so well if Castillo didn't know what he was doing?

If Dawkins was good as a rookie, why do people think Juan Castillo sucks? And if he sucks, why didn't McD fire him?

That's cool. Thanks. I keep saying here this game is about coaching. Notice the only guy mentioned here on Caesar's team is Marc Antony, another leader. No soldiers are named and few if any are remembered. But as fighting units they were excellently prepared, and they obviously responded as directed, over and over, as Caesar kept analyzing and reanalyzing the situation. McDermott gets his troops prepared. The big question in my mind is whether he can be the strategist Caesar was. Can he see the who has what advantage, and can he strategize to overcome his opponent's advantages and to maximize his own?

I complained to the Bills. A flag that says Beat Louder? Do they think I'd actually fly that thing?

Sorry. I may be old enough to remember Doc but not the other dude.

I can hear Doc Holiday now. One of the great American philosophers.

Two big differences between Manuel and Allen: Wonderlic score - 28 vs 37 Head coach - McDermott prepares his players to succeed.

I think it's interesting that this thread got resurrected. As I examine my own thinking on July 2, this thread demonstrates how pointless all those pre-draft discussions about qbs were. I mean, if you're a gm, you're asking those questions daily before the draft, but the questions are now completely irrelevant. If you're an owner, those questions next become relevant a year or two from now as you evaluate your gm's performance. But now it's July, training camp will start soon, and all this analysis just doesn't matter now. The Bills have a roster, they're going to camp and they'll put together the best team they can. I will watch and cheer and worry, and we will see what happens. Will I be taking a look to see how Darnold and Mayfield and Rosen are doing? Sure, especially Darnold because he's in the division. But for me, the question is how good is my team, not how good is some player that some other team got. After Mayfield and Darnold went off the board I wanted Rosen. Then when the Bills traded up and we're on the clock, literally seconds before thir pick was announced, I changed my mind. I wanted the better athlete with the better attitude. NFL-ready is a bogus concept when you're looking for a ten-year player

Thanks for the compliment, and let me give it back to you. You are dead on about this. Sports columnists used to know the stories of the athletes, the behind-the-scenes stuff, and they wrote about it. They informed us about the stories behind the events. The modern guys rarely do that. They're too busy being "experts," telling us what's wrong with how this coach did this or that player did that. And I believe in Sullivan's case, as the years went by it became more and more difficult to tell those stories, because fewer and fewer athletes and coaches would talk to him. When a new guy joins the team and is learning the ropes, you better believe that among things the vets tell him are whom you can trust and whom you can't. You could hear it in Rex's first press conferences when he became HC. He'd already had some experience with the folks who covered the Bills, and he was cautious and defensive with Sully and others from day one. If you're Kyle Williams, do you tell your story to Gaughan or Sullivan? No brainer. The tougher question is whether Sullivan even would have been interested in hearing his story. "I am RIghters" is exactly right.

I generally have disagreed with a lot of what you've posted, but your ultimate conclusion here is correct. The News could have gotten rid of Sullivan any time they wanted. The Guild wasn't going to stop them. I don't think you're correct, however, that Sullivan's columns weren't a problem before them. My guess is they WERE a problem that the editors discussed from time to time, but they weren't a problem that was big enough to cause them to move him out. That's why I said many pages ago that he's gone because of combination of factors: his columns, the unhappiness of the Bills about the coverage they were getting, and the economics of the newspaper. The News clearly was willing to put up with some of the crap that Sullivan wrote, the News was willing to push back against the Bills to some extent, and the Bills knew that Sullivan wasn't the primary reason for their declining economics. However, when the News decided it was time to ease the economic pressure they were feeling, Sullivan became a prime target because of his compensation, the attitude he displayed in his columns and the unhappiness of the Bills.

Three areas: 1. LINE 2. LINEBACKERS 3. SECONDARY Seriously. You think McD isn't telling EVERY PLAYER to improve?