Shaw66

I didn't say it was stacked with talent. I said it was stacked with "potential." I think Davis is better than you think, but I don't disagree. And yes, there would have to be a plan in place. The plan might be Shakir. The plan might be that Kincaid actually plays some wideout. But yes, they won't trade Davis unless they know what the starting group will look like. Not clear who that would be.

Who would give a third for a receiver as bad as you suggest?

That's a pretty creative idea. I like all the soft evidence you've given. There's a limit to how many big receivers you're gonna put on the field, and Knox and Kincaid both should see the field a lot. Hard to say what to think of Shorter at this point, but he has to be a long shot. The other point is that McBeane love speed, and it's been in short supply in Buffalo. The possibility of moving Davis makes the Isabella signing make more sense. Maybe they want a burner opposite Diggs, with Kincaid in the slot. Maybe they think Shakir can handle the load at #2, or maybe #2 will be receiver by committee. It is curious how stacked the receiver room is with guys who have potential. Interesting suggestion.

Well, my heart is with you, but it really is about, I hate to say it, complementary football. I think your point about time of possession isn't correct. The offense isn't on the field very long because it's a big-play offense. It moves the ball in big chunks, which means the Bills don't have the ball long before scoring. If he took the short, easy throws, the time of possession would go up. And as much as you (and I) talk about the bend-don't-break style of defense, that isn't really, correct, either. The Bills can't be at the top of the league year after year in yards allowed if they're bend-don't-break. BDB, by definition, gives up a lot of yards, and the Bills don't. The truth is, the Bills were 5th in first downs allowed by the defense, and they were seventh best in third-down conversions by the opponent. In other words, the defense stops the big play AND forces punts. I love the big defensive plays, too, but it's hard to argue with what the Bills do. Hard to argue, that is, until you get to the playoffs, where that style may not be the best. In the playoffs, you need some big plays.

I love this! I do. It's fabulous having Josh as the Bills QB, because his entertainment value is off the charts. But I want the Lombardi. He can be 5% less entertaining and 10% more effective, and I'll take that.

You missed the point. I wasn't saying Dane is better than Gardner. I was saying that McDermott requires his DBs to play the position in a particular way, and it isn't always apparent to the fans, including me, why a guy plays. Levi Wallace was a whipping boy around here for years, but he stayed in the lineup because he played the way McDermott wanted. What was perfectly clear last season was that Elam didn't play the zones the way he is supposed to. The reason Hyde and Poyer are so good is that they've internalized their assignments so well, that they always know what they're supposed to be doing AND what the other safety is doing. Elam didn't show that last season, and if he never learns it, he never will be a full time starter. White was a great cover guy when he came out of college, but the reason he started as a rookie was because he understood and executed his broader role. I hope Elam gets there, because I like his cover skills, but it's up to him.

As my thinking has evolved during the off-season, I've come around to what you're saying. It's heresy around here, I know, but I think the problem with the offense is not the weapons surrounding Josh, it's Josh. In particular, it's Josh's completion percentage. What makes for consistently good offense is getting positive yardage on every play. 0 yards on a play is bad, negative yards is worse. Josh has used the wrong thought process up until now. If you have a 60% chance of completing a pass for 20 yards, one would think that's a better option than the 90% chance for 10 yards, because on average you get 12 yards out of the 60% play and only 9 yards out of the 90% play, but I don't think that thinking is correct. The consequences of getting 0 yards on 40% of the longer throw is much worse than the extra yards gained on the 60%. It's better to get positive yardage virtually all the time, even if that positive yardage is less than you'd get on the longer throw. 0 yards on a play is a bad outcome. Josh needs an offense that gives him 2-3 quick reads for 5-7 yards, and he needs to take them. Save the downfield throws for the times when the chances of completing them are 80%, not 60%. The rest of the time, take the easy throw. Josh is 37 on the career completion percentage list, behind about 15 current QBs, including Burrow, Mahomes, Herbert, and Rodgers, to name a few. Retired names ahead of him included Peyton and Brees, Big Ben and Tom Brady, Steve Young and Kurt Warner. Josh doesn't complete enough passes, period. He has the best arm in the league, maybe even in the history of the league, but to date he hasn't had the best head. He needs to take and complete the easy throws.

This shows a significant lack of understanding. It's day two of training camp, and Torrence, a rookie, was starting with the ones. Edmunds started from day 1. Your characterization of McDermott is simply incorrect. And I continue to say that complaints about Dane are evidence that people don't understand the defense. Somebody posted data a month ago or so showing Sauce Gardiner gave less separation than any corner in the league in man and in zone. Dane gave up a lot of separation in zone and was middle of the pack in man. Why did Gardiner give up less separation in zone than Dane? Because he didn't know how to play the defense. In zone, you're supposed to leave your man as you read the keys. Sticking by you man when the play is going the other way is a bad move. Dane knows what he's doing, which is why he's on the field, and Elam hasn't learned that yet. I hope he does, because he has talent. And for those who say Elam outplayed Benford, I don't what you were watching. Benford was clearly better until he got injured. He was better because like Dane, he understood his role in the defense.

In McDermott’s world, NOTHING makes up for lack of scheme knowledge.

They moved up because their #2 corner had lousy man skills, and you can't play zone all the time.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/38075863/aaron-rodgers-agrees-reworked-contract-jets

Lou Saban was a center for the Browns!

I don't expect anything else from him. That's what I like. But someone else writing a camp commentary might already be trying to tell us who looked good and who didn't, whether Dorsey looked like he was in control of the offense, all sorts of stuff that is opinion or wishful thinking or whatever. What I like about what astro does for his readers is just tell you what he saw.

Great stuff, as always. Just observations, but it gives a sense of what's going on. Thanks.

RAS difference is striking. Alli said was the description I quoted sounded like Knox. Seems he's different. Still, like you, I could see a role for him. For the Bills, he's just an experiment, like a lot free agents looking to catch on somewhere. We'll know in a few weeks.

I guess Chaos is still doing his research.

What's your basis for saying this? Can you name even 6 corners who will pass him in 2023?

Yes, it is. I believe Oliver was #8 among DTs when the deal was done, and he's already down to 12. Diggs is #4. Oliver was paid as a good, efficient DT, but not a star. Diggs got star money, so far as I can tell.

I agree. He seems to get beaten more often than a top cover should. Takes chances. Gunner is correct that we would get similar money if he hit free agency, but I think this continues Jerry Jones's pattern of caving to pay top money to guys who are just less top-players. I don't think he shows the discipline that a good GM shows.

I don't study the draft, so I had no idea who Sternberger was until I saw this thread. Having read the thread and the comments about how he sort blew up his career coming out of college, I think the Bills are thinking there's something else going on here. I think the Bills asked him, "Kid, have you rehabilitated yourself?" (apologies to Arlo). In fact, I think the Bills are already sure that he's a good bet. I say all the time that one thing you can tell about players in the draft is the quality of their physical skills. Guys taken in the first have outstanding talent, in the second, high-quality starter talent, in the third, starter talent. After that, guys are projects. Third round, Sternberger presumptively has starter talent. (He played some quarterback in high school, he was a star tight-end on an undefeated state championship team, and he was a power forward on the basketball team.) If the Bills were interested in him in the draft, then he passed the Bills' character screens - hard worker, team orientation, wants to learn, etc. In his college career, he bounced around. In his pro career, he got injured, had a substance abuse suspension (related to his recovery?), caught a playoff TD from Rodgers, got released by the Pack and bounced around, only to resurface as a standout in the USFL. Sounds very much like a guy who needed a reset. The Bills signing him suggests that they think he now is bringing to the game the kind of attitude that they value. Training camp and preseason will give him six weeks to demonstrate that he's now bringing the right focus to the game. He's still a project, but an interesting gamble. If he makes the roster, great. If he goes to the practice squad, he probably won't stay there, because other teams will recognize that the only reason he isn't on the roster is the Bills' depth at the position. If he gets cut, then we'll know he's just the latest in a long line of receivers who I, along with a lot of others, fell in love with who never went anywhere.

This is a creative look at Sternberger. Big Al said this: Sternberger went ahead of Knox in the draft, and Big Al's description actually sounds a lot like Knox. OK speed, OK route runner, undersized for a blocker, but that's undersized for a traditional tight end. Take another Knox and put him on the field just as DC said, in the red zone, and you've got something. Diggs is a guy who separates like Beasley, and he's valuable, but teams were taking him away in the red zone, the Bills didn't other have good options. I like Davis, but he hasn't been effective in the red zone. Knox has. Kincaid should be. If there's a Knox clone on the field, that's four legitimate short-route targets, and it should be a simple thing for Allen to find the mismatch and go there. Knox. Sternberger, and Kincaid all running tight curls, some small back will be boxed out by a big body.

This may be the training camp depth chart, but I've thought all along that Murray is a better back than Harris, and I'm expecting that late in the season he will be RB1b. He's a more versatile runner than Harris.

I'm with you. McKenzie always was a problem back there. Give me Hyde fair catching every ball and put the offense on the field. Actually, I don't want to risk him back there. For my money, right now, it's Shakir with very strict instructions.

Exactly what you don't want in a punt returner. 150 kick and punt returns, 9 muffs and fumbles.

Yes, ahead of Knox. Maybe he is the guy Beane wanted. Connor McGovern, too.