Shaw66

Well, just to quibble, pursuing OBJ and DHop is not about his "wanting" to replace Davis. He wants to upgrade every position, and he's said that whenever talent may be available that would be an upgrade, he will pursue it if he can. That's different from Beane thinking he needs to replace Davis.

Look out, St. George! A new era is coming!

Sorry, Bob. Most everyone agrees that Einstein is entitled to his opinion, as are you. Where people disagree with him is that he thinks he can prove that McDermott can't win a Super Bowl in Buffalo because no head coach ever won a Super Bowl after five seasons with his first team. There is no logic that supports that conclusion. No head coach in Buffalo ever won a Super Bowl. So does that mean that no head coach in Buffalo ever will? It's the same faulty logic. The fact that something hasn't happened doesn't mean that it never will happen. EVERYTHING never happened until it did. Nobody walked in the moon until someone did. What he is trying to prove is simply wrong. Whether he or you believe McDermott never will win is beside the point.. He cannot prove it will not happen.

First they already have two first round picks invested in receivers - Diggs and Kincaid. And who is this $10 million man? The only receiver who is going to be a serious upgrade over Davis is a true #1. Who is that, and can you get him for $10 million?

I agree with this. That's why I've said for months the success of the offense will be determined by how well Dorsey uses a good collection of assets and how well Allen runs what Dorsey designs. As you've said, once you've invested in your QB, you can't expect to have Pro Bowl talent as your #2 wideout. Oh, and by the way, and as you said, the Bills actually went after receiving talent in the first round. They don't need Hopkins to have a good offense. They need the talent they have to do their jobs.

I mean, you want to talk about best qbs? Best rbs? Great At least you have some stats to look at. Best offensive guards? Tougher to find relevant stats. PFF tries to do it, bit PFF is really suspect. What stats do you look at to evaluate OCs. You don't see any highlight reels of OCs. No replays. And they do their jobs during the week, and we don't see them do it. So, exactly how do we know who's good at it and who isn't? We know by seeing how they do over time. Their head coaches know, because they see the OC every day, but the HCs aren't telling us who's good and who isn't.

I would fund ways to measure who's offenses are most creative. I would find coordinators who turned around bad offenses. I would find coordinators who manage thei assistants well. Again, I wouldn't say that Dorsey is a good coordinator just because he didn't screw up the good offense he inherited. He didn't make it all that different or better, so far as I can see. And when offense stalled late in the season, he didn't seem to have answers. What is it that actually was good at? The fact is that I don't know, and I don't think many people here know, what it takes to be a good coordinator.

You missed my point. I was responding to someone who said that if the Bills have a top offense, then Dorsey must be a top coordinator. I said if that's how you measure top coordinator, then that's a list of the coordinators of the to9p offenses. I didn't say that this guy, whoever he is, made his list that way.

Yes, the Browns would have been heavy favorites, but the Bills may actually have won that Super Bowl. Their defense was outstanding that year, nand the Bills had the second best running in pro football. It would have been an interesting matchup.

Sure, but that way the list is not top 10 coordinators. It's coordinators of top 10 offenses.

All I'm saying is that if there's no material improvement in the offense he took over, how can you tell if he is a great coordinator? Nothing changed. It's like saying you have a great auto mechanic when all he did was an oil change. Maybe he's great, maybe he isn't. You cant tell from what he's done. The one piece of evidence we have is that in the last quarter of the season and in the playoffs the offense wasn't particularly good. How does that make him top 10?

They were 5th and 3rd the year before, essentially the same. So, how do we know that Dorsey did anything? It didn't look to me that he did much.

They had the same offense they had in 2021, and it wasn't Dorsey's offense. I didn't see a lot of Dorsey in the 2022 offense; it seemed like the offense just was an extension of the previous season. So, I don't see how that means he's one of the 10 best coordinators. As I said, a lot of people could have stepped into that job last season and gotten the same performance out of the offense.

Well, yeah, I would be top 10, too, if I inherited Daboll's offense and I had Josh. I'm far from convinced that Dorsey should be anywhere near the top of this list. There's not enough evidence that he should be on it at all. This off-season noise is really a joke.

Actually, flat was Cowherd's word, and Dawkins agreed with it. I think he agreed because it was the easy way out. My impression was that there's a story behind what happened, and he didn't want to talk about it. He said it was a really difficult time, and somehow it just all came together badly in that game. He didn't say more in part, I think, because he didn't want to sound like he was making excuses. I think it'll be years before we hear the full story. After they win a Super Bowl, after these guys are retired, some time. For now, there's radio silence.

I think he's an emotional risk. Bills already have one kind of prickly star wideout, and adding a second is a risk. I've talked before about GM, the book the Giants GM wrote about building their Super Bowl team. He said no team can win with three prima donnas, and it's really hard to win with two. One you can manage. Diggs is one. Hopkins has the potential to be the second. One of things that made OBJ such a great addition for the Rams was that he came with a team-first attitude, something he hadn't shown consistently at his earlier stops.

Hopkins over Floyd or Poyer. Not over both. I think Hopkins is a risk. There are reasons he was traded and now is an unsigned FA.

I don't watch every interview with every player, but this is one worth every minute. Good stuff. Good insights. Good way to get to know Dawkins. Thanks for posting it.

We sort of agree. Whether Josh gets injured or not, he almost certainly will not be running five years from now like he was running two years ago. The wear and tear on players is simply too great to expect them to continue to play like they did in their early 20s. Nathan Peterman is exactly the point. Super Bowl quarterbacks are great game managers and decision makers. Brady, Mahomes, Montana, Rodgers. Great quarterbacks are elite in that area, and whether they can run or not is pretty much irrelevant. Allen's highlight reels are fabulous and Brady's are boring. Running is a nice piece of his game, but if he doesn't get the presnap and postsnap reads right, running can't save him. That's exactly what we've seen from Josh. Spectacular as he is running the ball, running QBs don't win Super Bowls. That's why no matter how many unbelievable runs we see from Lamar Jackson, he's not my quarterback. And although I can see the logic behind saying the Bills need to be better at drafting offensive linemen in the first and second round, it just isn't that simple when you're picking at #28. The Bills really needed a corner back last season, and pretty much no one was complaining when they took Elam. Elite tackles are almost always gone by then, and it's very unusual to take a guard in the first round. So, they got their guard in the second round this season. Similarly, stud wideouts are hard to find - it's easy in hindsight, but late-first-round wideouts often flame out. Most second-round receivers have little impact in their rookie seasons. Again, I'm not saying there isn't some logic in what you say, but I don't think it's as simple as you think. Even given that, they took Kincaid. I don't see much reason to complain about how they've acquired talent. This league is about quarterback play - it's about having a coach on the field taking snaps, elite, cerebral talent. And it's about creative offensive play design and play calling. It's likely the Bills will have a better offensive line this season, with Brown healthy, and two new guards who both will challenge for starting jobs. They have a better collection of receivers, particularly if Kincaid does what everyone expects of him. The Bills' success will depend on whether Dorsey can prepare an effective offensive, and where Josh can execute it. Where we agree is that an effective offense is NOT expecting Josh to be Superman carrying the ball. It's a bad solution for the short term and for the long term.

Actually, I don't think the fundamental point is about running and risk of injury, although I agree that if Josh keeps running, he's going to get hurt, and he's going to slow down. The fundamental point is as I said earlier - he needs to be a better decision maker on the field. He needs to be a better passer, finding the right guys and hitting them. He isn't good enough at that yet and oddly enough, his running has something to do with that. When Josh doesn't make the right decision, he often runs, and his running turns a bad play into a good play. The result is that he isn't forced to learn how to make the right decisions. As for Derrick Henry - look up his stats. The guy gained 1500 yards rushing last season, had more receptions than in any previous season, and he did that even though he isn't a three-down back. I don't think there's any reason to conclude he's "slowing down considerably." As for your last paragraph, it's simply a truism: In order to have a good chance of making it to the Super Bowl, you have to have a stud quarterback. The Chiefs aren't winning consistently without Mahomes, nor the Bengals without Burrow, etc. Roethlisberger was a serious running threat when he was young - not like Josh, but he ran well and hurt teams because he was big and picked his spots. Then he got banged up, more and more, and eventually he couldn't run much at all. But he played a lot of good football later in his career because he kept getting smarter and smarter with the ball. The point is, Josh's mobility, or the loss of it, is not what's going to determine how successful he and his teams are going to be. It's his quarterbacking skill. When he can manage the game, play after play, like Mahomes and Brady, he'll win all day long, because NOBODY throws like Josh.

I think this is the wrong perspective on Josh. What gives him no limitations is his arm. He could be the best purr thrower ever. Running is an important, additional feature, but if he never ran at all but he learned to manage the game and read the field like Brady, he'd be the best QB ever, because Brady could only dream of throwing like Josh. Michael Vick was the best running QB ever. Josh never will run like him. Vick had an excellent arm. But he never was a great QB because he never became a top level decision making pocket passer. Josh has the brains to be elite in the pocket, and if he learns to be that, his arm will make him a deadly QB. His running will be an incredible bonus. If he never learns, his running won't make him elite, just like running never made Vick elite.

Those skills you're talking about, running skills, don't win Super Bowls. See Newton, Lamar, Vick. Being the smartest passer in the pocket does. See Brady, Montana, Mahomes. Josh needs to be an alite decision maker. When he's elite like Brady, Montana, and Mahomes, he will be better than any of them because of his arm and legs.

It's this attitude that drives me crazy. As MJS said, the drought has nothing to do with it. And the Super Bowl losses have nothing to do with it. Your personal disappointment has nothing to do with it. Whether the Bills win a Super Bowl has nothing to do with the "many." And history will be what it will be. And I don't believe it, for a minute, when Josh and all these guys say they're objective is to win a Super Bowl for the fans. There's one thing going on here, and only one thing. It's sports competition. It's a team of 60-odd players and 20-odd coaches with a personal burning desire to win a championship. Many of us tried to do that in high school, in one sport or another, and some of us tried to do it in college. Most of us have had the experience at one time or another - trying to win the championship. The Bills are trying to win a Lombardi, one of the toughest championships in the world for a team to win. It takes talent, hard work, determination, guts, and a half dozen other things. It's really difficult. Really difficult. The only thing relevant to the conversation about Beane and McDermott is whether they are the right people to do something that's very difficult to do. That's all. Whether one fan or million want them to win doesn't matter. Whether there is some bad history to be erased, whether it's the drought or the four Super Bowls, or whatever, doesn't matter. And whether no coach has won a Super Bowl after five years of coaching or ten years of coaching doesn't matter. Whether Mike Tomlin won one in his second season doesn't matter. NONE of it matters. All that matters is whether Beane and McDermott are the right people. MJS is correct.

Bills would have won a Lombardi if they had Thurman instead of Motor. Would have won a couple if they OJ instead of Thurman.

And OJ.