Shaw66

Nah, I think you're way overstating this. McDermott simply is not comfortable talking to the press about internal matters. He doesn't want to make a mistake in that arena. He knows there is no benefit to cultivating the press, and he knows there's real downside to making a mistake. So, on Tuesday, when they talked to Diggs and decided that he was still too hot to have around, they suggested he go home and come back after practice. But in the press conference, McDermott didn't think he needed to give that detail - he thought it was enough to say Diggs wasn't there without trying to explain it. Super cautious. Overnight, he saw that it was getting spun as Diggs skipped practice, and McDermott realized he needed to say more to take the heat off Diggs. So, on Wednesday he explained that Diggs had been excused and hadn't just blown it off. Just super cautious. And Frazier was handled brilliantly. DC for one of the best teams in the league gets relieved of his duties, a Black DC at that, and there was hardly a ripple in the news. Perfect for Frazier, because the press wasn't all over him about how it felt to be fired, and perfect for the Bills because the press wasn't all over them, either. By the time it became apparent that Frazier had been canned, it was old news and no one wrote about it. Now, whether there are people who don't like McDermott's style, I can't really say. I haven't seen anything before suggesting Daboll wanted out, but maybe that's true. Not everyone loves the guy they're working for. Everything you hear from the players sounds like they love it. Phillips and Lawson came back, and Oliver likes it enough that he didn't seem to look too hard for a new place to land. Maybe it doesn't work for Diggs, but I'm not too worried. I think he'll be seriously into ballin when the time comes. I could be wrong. Florio and all the others need something to talk about. Diggs gave them something, and they wouldn't be doing their jobs if they just let it lie there. Chris Jones was in the news, too, for not showing up. Press has to find something to say about the Chiefs. It's a good thing if the only controversial thing they can find to talk about is that the star didn't show up for a practice in June.

Well, my answer to your question, if I answer it, is "no, McDermott is not Doug Collins." But it's a really good question, and only time will tell. The answer certainly could be "yes." Let's start with the underlying premise: That Josh Allen could be a transcendent talent like Michael Jordan. I don't want to get into any arguments about that comparison, because Jordan really was otherworldly and the argument could be endless; however, the premise is not off the wall. The NFL never has seen a talent like Allen. Vick was the only truly outstanding QB who was a better runner, and there are only a handful of guys who could throw like Allen (actually, maybe no one). The point is that if Allen can get all of his immense talent under control, including all of the critical game management skills, he COULD be the equivalent of Michael Jordan. I mean, if someone told you Allen could have two three-peat Lombardis, we could argue about whether it's likely, and talk about how hard it is to win and repeat in the NFL, but isn't the only response to such an outrageous prediction, "If anyone could do it, it would be Allen." So, let's accept the premise. There's little question that Phil Jackson had the key to unlocking Jordan's true greatness, and Collins didn't. (Similarly, Steve Kerr had the Steph Curry key and Mark Jackson didn't.) Doug Collins wasn't a bad coach, but he didn't have the key. Does Sean McDermott have the Allen key? Well, you can analyze and argue that one all day long, too, but if you're asking the question as part of a consideration of whether and how long the Bills should stick with McDermott, it's a point less discussion. Think of the possible outcomes: At the end of his career, Allen has become Jordan or he hasn't. If he has, then his coach had the key. The only way to find out if a coach has the key is to play it out and see if Allen becomes Jordan. The Broncos changed coaches and Elway won Super Bowls. Was that because one coach had the key and one didn't? There's no way to know what Elway would have done without the coaching change. Moreover if, as is likely, at the end of his career Allen has NOT become Jordan, then what do you conclude? That none of the coaches Allen had had the key? Or maybe, more likely, Allen isn't the once-in-a-lifetime transcendent player that Jordan was, and you were changing coaches trying to unlock a door that never could be opened. In that case, maybe you fired the coach (like the Eagles firing Andy Reid) who was going to win Super Bowls for you. There just isn't any way to know. I don't think Allen is Jordan, but I think the right coach can win multiple Super Bowls with Allen. I think McDermott is the right head coach for Allen, so long as McDermott has the right offensive coordinator. So, as I've been saying all along, I think Dorsey is the big question mark. And, by the way, I think McDermott is the right head coach because I think we will now begin to see McDermott's real genius, his defensive genius, begin to emerge. I think we are about to begin to see sustained, defensive excellence out of the Bills, just like the Patriots saw from Belichick.

Pretty thin evidence. Until the no show today. That's real evidence.

It's just the kind of thing we like to worry about, when there's pretty much no evidence. What we know is that Diggs is prickly. More so than he ought to be, as far as I'm concerned, but that's how he is. His commitment to winning is A-1, and I think his willingness to respond to McDermott's leadership will win the day. But there's no way to know how any of this will go until it plays out. Maybe Diggs starts to get more out of line, maybe not. All we can do is wait and see.

I think you're wrong about this. With very few exceptions, everyone here is living with the dream. Everyone is in it for the Super Bowl. The difference between people here relates to how they react to the disappointment of not making it. Some people have something that is akin to anger. They want to blame someone, and they want to insist that change happens so that they, the fans, can have what they want. Other people react differently. They're response is more akin to "that's too bad, let's try again next year." Interestingly, those two points of view are fundamental to two different motivational philosophies, both of which have had success. The anger approach is the leadership approach that George Patton followed, and plenty of coaches do - put the fear of God into them, demand that the players not fail, etc. Parcells was in that camp, Lombardi was in that camp, plenty of successful coaches have been there. McDermott believes in the growth mindset. He believes that the best way to achieve a goal is to work at it, to remain personally committed to it, and to surround yourself with other people with the same attitude. It's much more of a "that's too bad, let's try again" approach. Pete Carroll is one of those. These coaches are demanding, but they are demanding about the behavior of the players, not about the outcome. Players are not bad people because they didn't win; however, if they didn't try, every day, that's a different story. Now, we can argue the pros and cons of those two approaches, for fans and for team building, but whichever side you're on, the objective is the same - win the Lombardi. No one is satisfied with less. It's just that people respond differently to failing to reach the goal. When the Bills win the Lombardi, everyone will celebrate together, and it will be impossible to tell one kind of fan from another.

Interesting point about emotional insecurity. I'm not sure winning 13 seconds would have changed a whole lot, but maybe. I hear you about being sick of it. It's frustrating to have teams that just didn't do it. I don't mind losing, but wide right, Music City, 13 seconds, and a few others are games that turned on one play, and it's a burden to keep living with those games and never actually make the play to win the game. I feel that too. I wanted to comment particularly on your last paragraph. I don't think that the explanation of what happened in 2023 is excuses - a lot happened, and the Bills simply couldn't win when the big games started. Couldn't. But I've found myself having the same thought you have, and I said it someplace earlier - for me the thought is "okay, you've had pretty much everything happen to you that could happen to you, year after year you take good shots at improving the roster, we all like the way the team is headed, blah, blah, blah. Now, just go out win the games you have to win. Whatever happens, win the games." I've also found myself trying to imagine the mindset of the coaches and players. I don't know what the mindset is - they're not telling us, but I'm guessing there's a team full of players who, like you, are saying, "**** it, let's do it. Let's just do it." It's long way from here to the playoffs, but I have the feeling that this time in the playoffs is going to be different. I think this time this team is going into the playoffs thinking "no one is beating us. We are going into every game with one intention. To dominate." I mean, think about how these guys feel about not having won a Super Bowl: Hyde, Poyer, White, Milano, Allen, Diggs, Dawkins, Morse, Knox. Add in Miller, because he really wanted it last year. I think there are a lot of guys on the team who are ****ed off and are determined that nothing will stop them. I enjoyed the NBA playoffs. Talent wise, Miami had no business in the finals, but there aren't many teams that play with the heart and determination that they do. Every game, it seemed, win or lose, they challenged to win it in the end. And Denver showed the attitude that I, and I think you, are talking about. Denver just decided that they were the best. They just were determined to push themselves to be sure that their superiority won the games. Last night, Miller kept telling them, "Take it. Take it. The game and the championship is yours. You just have to take it." To win the Super Bowl, you have to fight like Miami. And when you're a really good team, a potentially dominant team, you have to fight with the attitude that you're taking what you deserve. Patriots under Belichick with Brady played that way.

Thats a good point.

Yeah, I think a lot of it is a state of mind. I'm really into the Bills, but I can watch and be entertained. I get anxious before, and I'm frustrated after if they lose, but if they win, I'm just satisfied and waiting for next week. I live in Connecticut. This year's NCAA championship was different for me. It was just a game. I was excited about the team this year, but it was different from previous years. It's like I'm just as interested, but I don't live and die with it. Maybe I'll be different when I get to watch another Super Bowl. I listen to other people, mostly younger people, and I remember feeling like that they seem to, but it isn't me any more. It's different states of mind, and the states of mind relate to age and one's perception of the world. Not saving every older guy has mellowed out; just that some guys do. The result of the mellower approach is that the ride is more enjoyable. It's just amazing to have this team, and from this state of mind, it's easy to enjoy it.

I wasn't diagnosing anyone. All I did was write in response to someone who said that the emotional issues were not relevant; I was pointing out that there was no way he could know that. I know that's true because I know that a lot of traumatic emotional issues do in fact disrupt the well being of people, traumatic issues like the ones the Bills went through. You're right, I don't know. All I know is that the emotional issues coincided with their decline in play. Was there causation? I don't know. But I do know that it's a plausible explanation for their decline. Or part of the explanation.

This is great. It's tough medicine to swallow, but your view on is could very well be true. Maybe the Bills just weren't good enough. I think there's something to that. But I also will say that the Bills inability to play as well as anyone expected coincided with the onset of the emotional disruption. At the end of the day, there's certainly some truth in both views. To Beane's credit, he's done what looks like a pretty good job improving the team. I like the receiver room, I like the additions on the interior of the oline, the additions to the dline. It's not clear what the answer will be at middle linebacker, but I like the potential. Both the personnel improvements and the distance from the emotional chaos that was 2022 suggest that the Bills should be a serious contender for the Lombardi. In a way, it's a serious test for McDermott and Beane. "You've been through the worst, you have your quarterback, your roster. Now is the time to show you can do it."

I like this. And to add on to it, even thought it's a McDermott thread, is that I've always thought that although Josh won't ever be Peyton, I think it's quite likely to be, and maybe outperform, Elway. They are just so similar in style, athleticism, arm, onfield attitude, everything. I think Josh is better, physically and pure arm strength, but he's in the same period that Elway was in his career. He's now being forced to learn, really learn, how to run a game. It took Elway to the end of his career to put it all together. If Josh can there in the next couple of years, he'll be fantastic for years.

Ah, yes, "they." Obviously, Schoen was on the correct side of that decision, not o correct. My cousin was a Giants fan. I told him it was a mistake. He said, "When you have a chance to get Jim Brown, you take it." I didn't get it, but he thought Barkley was that special. Maybe he would have gone after the next Bronco Nagurski, too.

One of Joe Schoen's first big tests. You've got a monster player at a position that teams don't like to sink a lot of money in. He's a guy who's started 16 games only twice in five seasons. How do you manage it? One thing I like about Beane is that he has the courage to evaluate, make a decision, and stick with it. He offered Edmunds less than he could get in the market, and he didn't back down. He offered Oliver, who knows, maybe less than he could have gotten elsewhere and Oliver took it. Schoen's got a fan base in love with Barkley. (If I were a Giants fan, I'd have been screaming then and now that he didn't take Allen.) Tough decisions.

I think that's a good way to start an analysis of McDermott. By football Head coach, I'm sure you mean his abilities when it comes to football, because leadership is one of the necessary characteristics of a good head coach. As for football acumen, I'd probably give him an above average, because it's hard to win that much being just average. But I get your "average" grade. What encourages me is that good coaches keep learning football stuff, year after year, and McDermott is a dedicated learner. His football knowledge five years from now will be significantly better than today. I think I've told this before, but one night Scott Van Pelt asked Lebron James what he, at age 37, would say to the Lebron, age 25. Lebron said, "I'd say, 'you don't have a clue.'" Point is, sophistication about the technical details of these games keeps growing.

You aggravate me sometimes, but one of the things I like about you is that you get the point. You would argue that with a different oline, Allen could be the best. But you say "could" because you understand that it's more or less unknowable. I mean, who knows, really, why Allen's performances are inconsistent compared to the very best QBs? Might be oline, might be Dorsey, might be Allen. And you acknowledge that in the second quote, when you say, "are you sure? Answer: no, none of us can be sure. What's really aggravating about posters is when they are unwilling to acknowledge that none of us, including ourselves, really knows. In my opinion, @GunnerBill knows more about the game and about the Bills than anyone posting regularly these days. I'm inclined to believe most anything he says. But not everything. Occasionally, he'll say something that doesn't make sense. When someone replies and explains the point, Gunner readily agrees and adjusts his thinking. His knowledge is great, but it's his willingness to learn and change his opinion that makes him a must-read around here.

Others have said this, and it's true. The ignore feature works very well. I have about ten posters on "Ignore," including one who was added minutes ago. I put people on ignore who I find I end up in arguments with, instead of discussions. They are typically very knowledgeable Bills fans, but they go round and round, simply disagreeing with whatever you say and not actually having a discussion that tends to educate both. What I really like about the Ignore feature is that while you're in a thread, you can see whether one of your Ignored users has posted anything, and the system lets you reveal that posted, take the poster off ignore, etc. It's very easy. So, while I'm reading, if I see that an Ignored user has posted, and because I know he's knowledgeable, sometimes I'll click to see what he had to say. It works really well. Sometimes it leads to me taking the user off Ignore. Try it.

Like I said, you're ignorant. I explained every one of your objections here, and you still raised them. Bye-bye.

Because you spend all of your time studying sub-atomic particles, you can be excused your ignorance, but it's ignorance nonetheless. Scientists who work in the field have shown conclusively that traumatic events have serious, long-term, psychological effects. In some instances, it's called post-traumatic stress disorder. They've also shown that multiple traumatic events has more serious cumulative impacts. For example, children who experience one serious traumatic event typically recover; children who experience three or more are quite likely to have serious, long-term negative psychological issues. This particular group of men, more so than most pro football teams, is closely attached to the community. A mass murder of the kind that took place in Buffalo affects many people in the community for a long time, including many people who did not witness the event and did not lose a loved one. I live in Connecticut, and the community of Newtown has not recovered from their mass shooting, and that event took place ten years ago. They are not close to recovering. On top of that, the team's owner, a virtual family member, had a major health care incident. The brother of one of the players died. The community suffered a snow storm in which more than 40 people died. And finally, one of their teammates nearly died, in the field, before their eyes. It was an unprecedented emotional year for a football team. Other than the Marshall plane crash, I can't recall anything remotely similar, in quantity of events and magnitude of events. It's ignorant and insensitive of you to sit comfortably at your keyboard and dismiss it all as nothing.

And someone pointed out that all of the bonus money is taxed in the home state. It's complicated. In NYS he would pay less than 11 and more than 5.5%.

Listen to Dungy talk. Listen to McDermott. They are two entirely different personalities.

EVERY team has a lousy record when their star quarterback has a bad passer rating. Does that.mean that EVERY team should replace their coach?

That's just your guess.

Those guys feom the past underperformed because they didn't have McDermott. On McD's team now, they'd be excellent.

McDermott is not Dungy, and this comparison is really dumb. Dungy was laid back, nice guy, everything-was-okay kind of guy. McDermott is intense, demanding, and holds everyone accountable. As I've said before, McDermott would have a head coaching job within days after the Bills fire him.

That's right. Who knows what will happen? 11-6, 12-5 may be most likely, but anywhere from 14-3 to 9-8 certainly is possible. But predicting 9-8 doesn't make a lot of sense. That's predicting a lot of injuries or total coaching failure or a half dozen teams getting remarkably good. This things are unlikely.