Shaw66

Absolutely. But some people get a lot of enjoyment, or get to vent, or whatever, by pretending they now what the right thing to do is.

Well, first, unless something goes wrong, Josh is in. They're letting a lot of guys in the HOF now, and by the end of his career, Josh is going to have pretty amazing numbers, where he ever wins a Super Bowl. A lot of TDs, a lot of yards passing and a lot of yards rushing. He's already 8th on the career rushing list, and it's not a stretch for him to get into Vick/Newton territory. And his passing number will blow those guys away. The real problem is the MVP. It's just a weird popularity contest. I don't know who votes, but what's happened the last few years is about November the broadcasters all start speculating about who the MVP might be, naming a top 5, and somehow over the next month they drop names off the list, so that by the end of the season the announcers have built a consensus for one guy or another. As we saw this season, the announcers anointed Lamar before Josh and the Bills had a late season run - by early December they all were saying Lamar is the consensus choice. How can that make sense - it's a 17 game season, and a bunch of announcers decide who's going to be the MVP after 12 games. Plus, of course, the MVP is a regular season award and not a playoff award.

I voted for "Never make a change as long as the team is competive and makes or amlost makes the playoffs every year." I might not have spelled it that way, but that's okay. The answer is a bit misleading, and I think the poll asks the wrong question. The question is when would make a change? And the offered answers are specific periods of time. The real answer is that I don't make a change if I have confidence that the leadership I have can do the job. And I would not decide whether they can do the job based on the fact that they haven't won the Super Bowl yet. So, yes, if the team is competitive every year, I'm keeping my leadership team UNLESS they've shown me things that make me believe they can't do it. Shown me actual, real things, like they have trouble keeping assistants because they're such hardasses and won't change. Not just, well, they haven't won the Super Bowl yet. If four years from now, the Bills have won the AFC East four times, had the #1 seed once, gone to one Super Bowl and lost, am I replacing Beane and McDermott? I'd think about it, but probably not.

I think you and Sooner are both correct. The guys in the locker room see the whole thing, and different guys in the locker room will have different opinions about it. Some will think that they want to have a career with the Bills, and they'll want younger, healthier blood to make a run with. Others will think he's the heart and soul of the team because, well, he mentored them, or he says the feel of the defense is different with White on the field, or some other reason. What they'll know is that it's what the Bills management wants and what Tre and his family want. Tre and his family will work it with the Bills, one way or another, and Tre and his family will stay or will go. All the players understand that's what happening. And if some players are upset about Tre leaving, they'll understand and get over it because they know it's how the business works. They've seen it before. And if it works out, one way or another, that Tre stays, the players will be all in on it and in September they'll be ready to go to battle with Tre (even if he's a backup). And I don't see any way at all that a player in Tre's position DOESN'T talk to his wife about what to do. These are major decisions about their life. How much does the money matter? Has total career earnings are $65 million. After taxes, even if he's spent a lot, he has $20 million minimum left, possible less if he was really stupid about it, probably more like $30 million. By almost anyone's standards, that's enough money to live more or less any way you want. But that's just one person's perspective. Maybe Tre wants every last nickel, maybe he doesn't. And if his wife wants every last nickel, you know they're having some serious conversations about it. And the other half of that question is where will we be living in six months? Are we retiring and going home? Retiring and staying here? Where's home? If we're playing but not in Buffalo, where are we going? Are there places we don't want to go? Tre is not just going to come home one night without ever having discussed any of that with her and say, "I've decided I'm done here. I'm signing with the Vikings." Maybe their discussions are very brief - "Honey, you say we have enough to live on for the rest of our lives, and I trust you with that. And I want you to have the football career you want, so I'm ready to go wherever you want, whatever you're getting paid." Even if that's what she said, along the way he's still giving her a chance to help decide, by telling her he thinks he likes the Vikings, and they're offering a good contract. She may still say she trusts him and will go wherever. But he is not just flat out deciding without her input. Not in this day and age.

There are a lot of interesting things in this post. Not sure I agree completely, but it's interesting. As for the video, Brady is definitely not considering running there, Mahomes will be thinking about it. But Josh is a better runner, and I don't know that I'd fault him for making that decision. I like your discussion repeatable plays, and you do get it by throwing on schedule. I believe you're correct about this point - Mahomes is excellent throwing on schedule AND creating off it when he has to. Allen improved a lot this season, and I think he's close. The other thing about this issue, however, is the quality of the offensive scheme and the play calling. Allen was pretty good at staying on schedule this season, but the scheduled throws often weren't there. That happens to Mahomes much less frequently, and that's a function of Reid's scheme and playcalling. It's also amusing - valid but amusing - to say that he doesn't do it like Brady or Mahomes. That's sort of like saying Lebron is good, but he doesn't do it like Bird or Magic. Allen is remarkably good right now, and I'm confident that he's now entering a period of several seasons where he is going to be every bit as dominant as Mahomes. He's gotten better every year, his judgment is better, his leadership is better, he's more confident, and on top of all that, sometimes he simply wills his way to a big play. Amazing player.

Yes, you said "consistent" but you said juggernaut. There are no successful juggernauts. Haven't been any since the Bills and Cowboys in the 90s. Even the Chiefs have slipped dramatically. A "real traits alpha guy who can stretch the field" is a pipe dream. When is the last time one of those guys won a Super Bowl? Tyreek Hill, and the Chiefs have won two Super Bowls since letting him go. And before Hill? We've all seen dozens or articles explaining how all the defenses around the league are stopping the deep ball and forcing even the best offenses to work underneath the deep protection, be patient, etc., etc. Joe Burrow had two of those alpha guys and lost the Super Bowl. A good #1 has to be able to get deep, but in the current NFL, the most important skills for a good number have to do with being deadly on a whole variety of shorter throws. Look at the Rams, the Lions, the 49ers, the Chiefs. They're hurting people consistently with excellent receivers who hurt people underneath, not with the glitzy 6'4" burners who can slam-dunk 35-foot alley-oop passes on the basketball court. I agree. There still are a few steps forward that Allen needs to make to be a truly great one, and those steps have to do with the intangibles that we all see in Mahomes. I think he made big strides in that area in 2023, and I don't think he has far to go. I so want Joe Brady to be the guy. If Brady has the right offense and gets into Josh's head the right way, we'll begin to see the complete package, and it will be a thing to behold.

As I've said, I think the offense has enough skill players to win, assuming Diggs is back and Brady does his job. And as I just said, I absolutely do not think the answer is top-shelf receiver. I don't know whether the Bills have drafted a lot more defense than offense in the first couple of rounds. A lot of people seem to think so, and for the sake of argument I'll agree with that thought (although Kincaid, Torrence, Cook, and of course Josh are good arguments to the contrary). History is irrelevant. I don't care if the Bills have drafted 20 defensive players to five offensive players, the question is, "what does the team need going forward from here?" The answer to that question is defense. And the answer definitely is not CeeDee Lamb or the equivalent.

Well, I absolutely agree that coaching probably is part of the problem. The Bills' linebacker woes notwithstanding, there was something of a defensive meltdown against the Chiefs, and I think you have to look to the coaching and preparation for that game as part of the problem. But I disagree about this notion of an offensive juggernaut. I think fans, including me, love to think of their team having this explosive team that just rolls over opponents, over and over. Big wins, high scores, etc. The problem is that although our eyes can imagine that kind of team, it is rare for that team actually to exist in December and January in the NFL. The Lions faltered, the Dolphins faltered, and finally the 49ers falter. With only a few exceptions, and usually only in the wild-card rounds, are games decided by some team scoring 30+ points and putting the game away in the 4th quarter. The defenses are too good, and they're getting better. So, I'm all in having the 2024 focus be on making the defense better. Defense is what failed the Bills late this season, and defense is what wins in the playoffs. High-flying offenses get stopped, and offenses that have effective, creative QBs who can grind it out are what wins. The Bills have that offense, but it needs to be a little better. It's instructive to see the Chiefs winning after letting Tyreek Hill walk, and the Dolphins continue to falter. The devastating one-on-one deep threat pass receivers is fun to watch, but he's not the key to winning championships.

I agree with all of this. Good stuff. Particularly, I'm with you on the "several new weapons." I think it's much more on Joe Brady and Josh's continued growth as a field general. The oline is good enough (although I wouldn't be surprised to see a new face there in 2024), and Cook-Diggs-Kincaid-Shakir-Knox plus whomever are good enough for a good coordinator to have an effective, multi-faceted offense. Plus, if Hines comes back, he's another dimension. The Bills simply do not need anything resembling an overhaul of their offensive skill position players. The only serious question for me is whether Diggs will be sound, physically and emotionally, in 2024. Something happened late in 2023, and I don't know that anyone outside the organization knows what it is/was. Assuming he's back at 100%, the man on the spot is Brady. I have high expectations for Brady (but I had high expectations for Dorsey, and we know how that went).

I agree. First, as others have said, looking at these obscure collections of data is interesting but really not very useful. We live an age where there's practically an infinite amount of data, and it can be sliced, diced, and presented in multiple ways. The result is that there's always some collection of data that makes my guy look like a winner. Now, if Josh actually is having all these clutch 4th quarter drives AND the Bills are losing a lot of these games, there are only two conclusions: Either (1) the defense isn't holding up or (2) the defense is holding up but on a later possession, the offense or special teams fail (give away, blocked punt, 3 and out, whatever). I haven't seen that data, but my gut feeling is that this past season it was more often 1 and occasionally 2. Either way, I'd say this data supports an argument for more and better defense. If your quarterback and your offense are making clutch plays at the rate this data suggests, it would seem that all you need for the team to succeed in close games is for the defense to perform average or better. I suppose the real question is this: Can we see the same chart for how well the defense performed in the same game situations? One further note: I was clicking around to see the original of this chart, who compiled, etc., and I discovered that although the OP links to to this guy Kurt Benkert's tweet from yesterday, the chart first appears in a tweet from @waddlehouse17 on December 23. He notes that the data is only through week 12, so this chart doesn't include however good or bad Josh was in the final weeks of the season.

I agree about all of this. My only quibble is that they need a decent sized #2 with decent speed, good hands, good route running, good blocking. They might actually come back to Davis, if his price doesn't get too high. I know people will react strongly to that, but I'm not sure the Bills are done with him. Personally, I think he's not as mobile, as shifty, as the Bills need. In any case, I think the need at #2 is manageable. Of course, if a can't miss receiver falls to the Bills in the first round, I wouldn't be disappointed. A guy who can be the #2 and the replacement for Diggs at #1 when the time comes. Timing of that fits right. But it's the defense that needs more immediate help, as you point out. A defensive rookie who can a starting job in training camp would be ideal. I think about the impact Bernard made this past season. I know he wasn't a rookie, but he came out of nowhere, solidified the defense, and made plays. Imagine a defensive lineman who did that - a real playmaker. I haven't studied the draft - either the players available or the Bills' situation, but I've heard here that the Bills have plenty of picks, and they're in line for a comp pick (or two? I don't know). Maybe there's a trade where they pick up another. Assuming the Bills have a good stockpile of picks, it would not surprise me to see Beane trade up to get that playmaker. Again, it might be a wideout who can be the successor to Diggs, but I think the Bills would get the most impact from a defensive guy - a stud defender who starts as a rookie and anchors the defense for the next ten years. Soon enough, we'll be in discussions about BPA vs need. Beane always has been clear that the first couple of rounds are for BPA, and in the later rounds he's more BPA-at-a-position-of-need. But he fudges that rule almost every year, it seems, by trading up when he sees a BPA who meets a need. I expect we'll see the trade up this year, and for the Bills that pick will be critical.

The Bills are not in salary cap hell. The salary cap is a collection of rules that GMs have learned to manage in ways that preserve their ability to sign new talent every year. The rules require certain accountings, and depending on the time of year that we look at the accounting, some teams look like they're in better position than others. However, if the GM of your team knows what he's doing, he always has the room he needs to make the kind of moves he needs to make. Beane knows what he's doing. Now, in some years will a team have more cap room than others? Sure, but the cap properly managed, every year there's enough room to manage the roster properly. Beane has been clear that he will not mortgage the future, because his objective is to be good every season, not to overspend on talent because he thinks the Bills are in a window.

Excuse me. This is both wrong and inappropriate. The fact that a word has a definition - like the definition of window above, does not prove that windows exist or are a viable roster strategy. Flat Earth is the concept that the earth is shaped like a disk, but the fact that there is a term for the concept doesn't prove the existence of that concept, either. The windows that you're talking about naturally occurring. They occur by design of the GM, who tries to make their team succeed by acquiring a lot of talent, all arriving at the franchise at more or less the same time. Modern NFL GMs rarely operate their team that way these days, because the draft and the salary cap work so well that it's essentially impossible to out-talent the rest of the league. Baseball teams sometimes have tried to do it intentionally by tanking to accumulate multiple years of high first round picks, unloading talented veterans for more picks or just to stockpile money, then race to the top on the backs of young talent that the team won't re-sign to monster contracts. It just isn't an effective model in the NFL. One place where it happens occasionally is when the team hits on a rookie QB who is so good so young that the team has a window with a lot of cap room. But that doesn't happen very often. The Bills signing Von Miller was not window behavior, because Von Miller was signed to a long-term contract that was designed to give the Bills a great edge for at least three years and as much as six. That's building a team, not loading up on talent for the short-run. Beyond that, the notion of "window behavior" is bogus. What you're talking about is behavior like the Rams acquiring Miller the year before or signing OBJ. That doesn't mean the Rams had a strategy based on windows and rebuilds. The Rams expect to be good year after year. All those signing represented was something that Beane says he would do, too, which is that if the team is having a good regular season run and looks like it could win it all, then he'll do whatever he can to get additional talent on the team. So, for example, when the Bills were 6-6, Beane was not going to run out and get a special player on a one-year (or less) rental. If they're 10-2 next season, he might. The Bills have been built, intentionally, to compete for championships every year, year after year, and to reload talent in such a way that the team doesn't have peaks and valleys with talent. That is exactly what McBeane described when they first got to Buffalo. What's worse than the fact that you were wrong, however, is your attitude and the tone with which you address the rest of us. We are not "brainless" (far from it) and we are not "dumbasses."

This has bothered me a lot since that game. KC just took big plays all game long. It certainly looked like they knew exactly what would work when they saw certain defenses. Clearly, the players weren't prepared for what KC was doing. I think that has to be a problem with the Bills' self-scouting. If Reid and his coaches could see all of these opportunities and knew which routes to run to take advantage, the Bills' self-scouting operation failed, because the Bills coaches should have been able to see those opportunities. Now, maybe Reid is just so creative he sees things others don't, but the frequency of their success getting guys open suggests that it just wasn't very hard for the Chiefs to know when and how to attack for chunk plays. I haven't looked back at the game to look with any greater care, but it's also possible Reid's success related largely to attacking the linebackers. The absence of Milano and Bernard probably made life easier for Reid.

Yeah, it's the doom and gloom that drives this kind of talk. People need to remember the doom and gloom around here six months ago, as preseason was ending. Remember the crisis the Bills had a middle linebacker. There was no one to play the position, Beane hadn't drafted anyone, and he also was doing nothing in the free agent market. The bottom line was that this board didn't know what it was talking about, collectively. So, now it's the "window," because there is some roster change coming. I can 100% guarantee you that McDermott and Beane are not sitting around One Bills Drive talking about the closing of the last window and how long it's going to take to open the next window, just like they weren't sitting around talking about who's going to play middle linebacker. They're working on building the 2024 roster just like a year ago when they were working on the 2023 roster. At this time last season, the Bills didn't have McGovern, Torrence, Harty, Kincaid, Douglas, Rapp, or Floyd. No one was saying the Bills "window" was closed. Every team's roster changes, every season.

There are no windows. There just are seasons. Every season is an opportunity to win the Super Bowl when you have a great QB. Before we talk any more about windows, I invite someone to analyze the seasons when Tom Brady was the QB for the Patriots and explain when their first window opened and closed, their second window opened and closed, etc. Belichick went 5-11 in his first season there; after that, he didn't have a losing season with Brady, and he had only one season when he didn't have double-digit wins. Their window was always open. How about the Chiefs? They've had plenty of roster turnover. When was the window closed?

Thanks. Excellent points. Excellent. I wasn't really talking about some kind of statistical improvement. I agree, in a physical sense, Josh elevates the performance of his teammates. I was thinking more about his ability to instill confidence in his players, to have a such a complete understanding of what's happening on the field that he raises THEIR level of understanding of their job. That's the magic that Kelce and Mahomes have - they are literally playing the game at a level higher everyone else. Allen and Diggs were close to that but haven't gotten there. Allen and Kincaid showed some flashes last season and may be special. And it's not just the receivers. Mahomes is thinking along with the center, and through the center with the oline. I think it's one reason Creed transitioned so easily - Mahomes raised Creed's level of understanding. What we see in Mahomes is total package - arm, athleticism, brains, leadership. That's where I think Allen has to go, and I think he's well on his way.

Agreed. I think he made real progress this season, starting out almost forcing the checkdown. But by the end of the season, he seemed really comfortable, making solid decisions, good throws, and still having the freedom and smarts to run when it was time to run. I think we'll see an even better Josh next season.

I think this list demonstrates that the receiver issue is quite manageable, so long as we assume Diggs will return to form. Personally, I think Diggs was dealing with undisclosed, or underdisclosed, injuries, and he'll be back. If that's true, they just need a quality #2, and they can fill in the #4 spot easily enough. The success of the passing game depends much more on what Brady does than some major overhauls of the wideout room.

First, in my experience, very few people get worse at their jobs, at least until age begins to erode their abilities. Very few people. Second, yes, some people refuse to change. However, you're ignoring that McDermott is a person whose core principles include a commitment to continuous improvement, lifelong learning, and change. He is all about growth and change to achieve objectives. For example, the Bills were among the very most successful teams transitioning their entire operation when COVID hit. His leadership allowed the Bills to continually change and revamp their procedures as new NFL rules were handed down. Why? Because McDermott has built an organization that embraces change. So, yeah, some coaches get fired because they have one and only one system and they don't change. That isn't McDermott. I think the weakness of the AFC East is a bit of a myth. During the first two decades of this century, the Bills-Jets-Dolphins had collective bad records because they had to play the Patriots twice a year. That meant that in most seasons, each of those teams had to go 10-4 against the rest of the schedule if they wanted to make the playoffs. And, in fact, over the period of the Pats dominance, the AFCE east teams had a better record against the Pats than the rest of the league had against the Pats. We're seeing the same thing now in the AFC West. When a truly dominant team comes along, the other teams in their division suffer.

For sure. In fact, I said as much in my post. It's what I see. That doesn't mean it's wrong. Or right.

I don't know what this means, exactly, but it's exactly correct. Mahomes has an approach to the game that is superior to Allen's, and it's something that Allen still needs to develop to be an all-time great. I'll mention a few things. When Mahomes comes on the field late, with the game on the line, he has an attitude that we all can feel. First and foremost, it is a total absence of fear. Everything about him says he expects to win. And his look says, "I know we're going to win." It's more that it says, "I know what I need to do at this moment. I'm going to do what I need to do." Allen is getting there. Earlier in his career, sometimes you could see the fear in his eyes. Late this season, it wasn't there. He was in charge, and confident about what he was doing. Still, he isn't so much in charge that you can feel his presence and his confidence. Some of it comes from having completely mastered the offense, from understanding every nuance of what needs to be done on every play. The importance of that attitude that others can see is that it affects his teammates on the field. The other players all admire the QB, because the QB knows so much and executes under fire. When the QB executes like Mahomes and is in charge like Mahomes, the players' attitude goes beyond admiration. Maybe it's trust. The other players trust Mahomes to get them into the right play, to execute the right play, and the other players know exactly what he expects of them. So, Patrick seems to raise the level of play of the whole offense. Josh has all the tools. Josh's punishing physical style already has won him the admiration of his teammates. They love him for that, and they'll follow him anywhere. However, he needs to show the mental power, the mastery of the game. He has to execute with discipline, something that Mahomes is great at. Patrick just never seems to make the wrong throw. His judgment is excellent. Josh is still growing into that. I know others in this thread have said, "Josh is great and he's not the reason the Bills haven't won," and I get that idea. However, the supremely good quarterbacks raise the level of all the players around them. We're seeing Mahomes, and we saw Brady. Peyton had it, too. I don't think Rodgers had it, and I think Allen currently is like Rodgers. Rodgers has amazing talent, and sometimes his amazing talent wins games for his team. But Rodgers didn't have his team behind him in the same way that Mahomes and Brady do/did. Rodgers demands that his teammates follow him; Mahomes brings his teammates along with him. Allen's teammates love him and all that, but when they're on the field with him, they don't execute for him the way the Chiefs execute. It's as though they're waiting for Allen to do it, whereas Mahomes gets his teammates to help him do it. Obviously, there's no data to support any of this, but it feels real to me. One of my strongest reactions to the Super Bowl was that I was hoping that Allen was watching Mahomes, because Allen has to do what Mahomes does. Physically, he doesn't need much of anything, but mentally he needs to have truly mastered the offense, the plays, the strategy, the situation, all of that, AND his has to project an attitude to the players that says, "I've got this; not just physically. I've got ALL of this."

Don't assume McDermott won't don something like you suggest.

BuffBIlls is right. What holes? I think people have memories that are too short. People need to remember the drought. Those teams had holes. I mean, every year, as free agency and the draft approach, it was completely obvious that the Bills had no one - I mean NO ONE - to play one or two or three positions. Those were real holes. The Bills don't have one hole on offense. All they have is a position - wide out, where it would be good to get better, but that's not a hole. Defensive holes? Well, if they lose Hyde or Poyer or both, those are holes. They don't have holes on the D line, at least until they lose someone in free agency. No holes at corner. All those positions are just places it would be good to upgrade. No holes at linebacker. This is a solid, championship caliber roster that needs to get better.

On second down in red zone at the end of the game, you didn't "expect" Allen to get the touchdown? I did. Each season is different. I didn't expect the Bills to go anywhere in the playoffs last season. I was prepared for the Bills to lose to the Bengals. I did expect more this season. I don't see why I have to wait for the Bills to prove it before I can expect that they will win. Waiting for them to prove is taking a negative attitude - "I'll believe when I see it" means, literally, "I don't believe it now." Why don't you believe it now? Because you believe that there is something wrong that keeps them from winning, based on previous performances. I don't believe previous performances control future outcomes. Think about this. Dawkins holds his ground for a fraction of a second longer against Jones and Allen hits Shakir in the end zone. Chiefs have the ball with a minute 43 and need a touchdown? Do they get it? I don't know. Most people around the league would say, yes, they get the TD. Why? Because Mahomes seems to ALWAYS get that score in that situation. So, if that's true, is it really the Bills fault that they lost? The point is, losing to the Chiefs is not the measure that something is wrong. Everyone loses to the Chiefs. The Bills are the only team good enough to have seen them in the playoffs for three of the last four years. That history doesn't justify not believing the Bills can win it all. All that needs to happen is for Dawkins to get a little better or the Bills to get better in some other way, and/or the Chiefs getting past their prime. Today, February 13, 2024, I believe they can do it. I don't have to see it first. Well, maybe some of what they've been doing is working on the wrong stuff. Or they've been attacking it the wrong way. But the whole point of the process is to figure it out, whatever it is, and fix it. Day after day, year after, work at continuous improvement. And multiple businesses in the US, here and around the world, use this process.