Shaw66

This great, BL, so I quoted it. It's just so well put. And I'll add more thing. "Excuses" is a loaded word. They are explanations. They are statements of the events that happened to them as individuals and as a team, and the emotional impact of those events explain why the team could have been flat. An excuse is an explanation that someone uses to absolve themselves or someone else of responsibility for what happened. No one is saying the Bills players aren't responsible for what they do - after all, they're the only ones who could play the game; all they're saying is that it's not surprising that these human beings found it hard to perform under the circumstances. It's not surprising, because our sense is that most people would have found it hard to perform. We all glorified Allen for playing well after his grandmother died. Why did we glorify him? Because we understand that emotionally stressful events make it difficult to perform at peak efficiency. It's hardly surprising that 100 human beings, collectively, found it difficult to perform at NFL playoff efficiency after having multiple deceased grandmothers in their previous eight months.

I just jumped in here and was reading some of the recent posts. I'm really in no position to say what all this means on the oline, especially because we can only speculate about the draft. I think the reason we've seen these moves on the line is all of the above. Some of these people ARE going to turn to have been only camp bodies. Some of this collection will emerge as starters - maybe even as a starting right tackle. Some will be versatile interior line all-purpose depth. And even some of those camp bodies may show up on the roster if there's a bad string of injuries. The objective here is to have 10 or 12 guys, all with a role to play, and to be good at oline however the pieces are mixed and matched. I've never been convinced that this all-purpose oline approach is the best way to go, but it seems to be what McBeane believe in. Morse was their only big-time player on the offensive line, draft, trade, free agent (and Cody Ford).. The versatile role players can be had more cheaply than the studs.

Did I fall asleep and just wake up on April1?

I couldn't agree more about the adjustments. I simply do not think that Dorsey had a very good year. It was as though he came out of the gate with Daboll's offense and then didn't know what to do with it as defenses around the league adjusted, not just to the Bills but to all the good passing teams. In my view, either Dorsey needed a rookie year in the job or he just isn't good enough to do the job. He got the running game going a bit later in the season, but that too was something Daboll did. That's why I've been saying over and over - Oline and Dorsey. As for that video, it's actually not as bad as I feared. There are maybe 15 plays in there, and three of the drops were excellent plays by defenders knocking the ball out of Davis's hands as it arrived. I can look at those, and Davis can too, and say "should have had it," but the reality is that those are tough catches. They beg other questions, like what kind of route leaves him so covered, why is Allen throwing to him instead of someone else, etc. In fact, on some, Davis is double covered. Then there's one that was an Allen express and Davis was a split second late on it. We've seen everyone, including Diggs, miss those occasionally. The last replay on the video is a ball where Allen led him too far - as the ball is going through his outstretched hands, Davis's foot is about to step out of bounds. As I said before, I think all the detailed data can be misleading. Thanks. As I said, I don't know any of these guys, but it's good to know that there are oline prospects worth taking in the first round. Im my perfect world, I wouldn't mind a tackle at 27 and a trade up in the second to take a center. One think about taking someone to replace Morse is that he perhaps could displace Bates in his rookie season, let him play beside Morse for a year and eventually move over. Two birds with one stone.

I don't follow the draft until it actually happens, and I don't even know who Avila and Schmitz are. I had to look them up. I'm all on board with this. I've never been a huge Morse fan, and his days are numbered, so let's get someone solid there. And a tackle. Or a premier guard, but tackle is the greater need.

Yeah, I completely agree about Davis's reception numbers. They are completely puzzling to me, but I don't think they necessarily mean what we think they mean. Someone would have to take a deep dive into the film to understand it. Purely anecdotally, I remember that Davis had more drops on easily catchable balls than I thought he should. I also remember Allen making some desperation throws to him that were targets, yes, but not very catchable balls. I've seen enough of him to know that he can be a very reliable receiver catching catchable balls. He seemed to do that less well last season. But these are stats that the Bills have analyzed already and to the extent any underperformance exists, adjustments have been developed and will be installed in the coming months. That's what the coaches do this time of year. And that's why it's up Dorsey. Diggs is great and Davis is a very good number 2; the job is to get them open and to give Allen time to get the ball to them. They have talented guys in the slot. They have talented running backs. They have an all-world quarterback. Upgrades in skill position talent are always nice, but they don't need any upgrades beyond where they are right now (barring Injuries) to be a top-5 offense once again in 2023. They need an offensive line and an appropriately creative offensive coordinator.

Got the agree to disagree. I look for production of the offense, not for little nuanced stats like contested catches or catches when Diggs is bracketed. All I have said and continue to say is that the production that Davis gives the Bills is good #2 production, and the solution to the problems on offense (real or perceived) is not to get a receiver who will get you 200 more yards per season. Having a #1 receiver playing behind your true #1 receiver is not a sustainable plan for the offense. The solution to the offense is to improve the offensive line so that running backs have consistently better opportunities and so that Allen isn't forced out of the pocket so much. That's what will improve the total offensive production in a sustainable way.

I think that's nonsense. KC won the Super Bowl with a great QB, and they didn't have a number 2 over 1000 yards. They just had Kelce. That's my whole point. A super stud number 2 is a luxury, not a necessity. Allen can get 4000 yards with the receivers and backs he has. No problem

It's this notion that Davis somehow is not "a real proven #2" that I don't get. What's not real and proven about 48 receptions for 836 yards (17.4 per reception) and 7 touchdowns in 15 games? I think there were three teams with two receivers over 1000 yards each, and that proves that it's unusual to have two. Davis doesn't have to go over 1000 to be a "real proven #2." What he did in 2022 proved it. It's a luxury to have two receivers over 1000 yards, and it's a luxury that is short-lived. Teams can't afford to pay two. (And, by the way, ten more receptions gets Davis over 100 yards, and do you really doubt that better protection and better work from Dorsey won't get Davis ten more receptions? I don't.) Now, if you're operating the team from the perspective that you have a "window" to succeed, then, yes, sometimes you blow out the budget to try for one magical season. But Beane and McDermott have been completely clear that they are building for sustained, long-term success, and they are not going to blow the future by writing big checks to create some kind of dream receivers room for one year.

I hear you, and most of what you say in this post is exactly right. I disagree with the bolded "pervasive opinion." I agree that it IS the pervasive opinion, but think that opinion is wrong for one very clear reason: the needs of the team in general and the resources available to fill those needs. The Bills need to prioritize its needs, and no matter how much the team's management may think it needs another wideout, I think quality management will recognize that it needs another offensive lineman more. They also need a linebacker more. Given the resources available (in the grand scheme of things, relatively little cap room and relatively little draft capital), it's simply not reasonable to expect the Bills to acquire the kind of receiver people are talking about. Not OBJ, not Beckham, not (please not) Jeudy. Beane may surprise me, but I don't see it. For years here, discussion at this time of year was about how the Bills were going to fill the holes in their starting lineup. There always were holes, and it seemed the Bills had more holes to fill than they had resources to fill them. That's changed. Last year at this time, and this year, too, the Bills can see that they have their holes under control (they must have some plan for middle linebacker), and they're in the business of trying to upgrade positions. Wideout is definitely in that category. Davis is by no means a problem. There is no hole at #2 receiver like there was when the Bills tried to make Beasley a #2. Given the resources available to acquire talent and give the current areas that most require improvement, I don't get talking about getting a major upgrade over Davis.

As to the first - Davis had a much better season in 2022 than Sanders had in 2021. Sanders wouldn't have been a disappointment in 2021 if he had the season Davis had in 2022. As to the second, we already know Shakir can handle Allen throws, and we know Diggs, Knox, and Davis can. I really am comfortable. As to your last point, I really think that we as fans tend to magnify the problems in our mind. Allen threw plenty of deep balls last season, even with the lousy pass protection. Yes, the offense needs to be better, but the offense was not far away from where it needed to be last season. As I keep saying, improve the line and get a quality job out of Dorsey.

This is fun to talk about, but I think you're playing with words a little bit. Going into the season in 2020 I was really excited. I thought the Bills have proven, natural 1, 2, and 3. The reality of what we had was different, at least with respect to Brown. Brown rarely had seasons where he was a really solid, versatile 2, and I didn't think he did in 2020. How would I compare now to then? I'd give the edge to 2020, but not by so much that it matters. Davis is a better 2 than Brown was, able to get deep surprisingly well - not in Brown's class, but quite good, a better possession receiver and a better blocker. Beas that season was hard to beat. 2021? Proven wide receiver talent? Well, of course, Emmanuel was proven, but he turned out to be not so good. He looked like an upgrade over Brown, but he wasn't. And 2021 Beas was showing his limitations, particularly in the deep game. I'd say right now, Shakir and what I've heard about Sherfield, some combination of them will be better than Beas turned out to be in 2021. Plus each of those two fit more naturally into the wideout role than Beas, when the Bills want to put Diggs in the slot. Do I know all that for sure? No. But I'm quite confident they have a room full of receivers who can make more than enough catches. I also think that in making the comparison, you also have to consider the running backs. Bills could have their 1, 2, and 3 on the field AND have Cook and Hines. Or Harris and Hines. If Harris runs anything like he has, he's going to force defenders into the box, and the Bills definitely have the talent to attack deep and on the perimeter when that happens. Bottom line, I think the Bills have the skill positions covered. Work on the line. And it's a make or break year, in my mind, for Dorsey. The oline is his job, and utilizing those skill players is his job.

I wouldn't go that far. The Bills ranked well in both sacks and pressures, and I wouldn't say abysmal, but if you could put together a compilation of my posts for the past couple of weeks, you'll see I agree completely. O line has to be better, and Dorsey has to be better. And I don't think it has much to do with any skill position. If the O line does what it has to do, and if Dorsey does what he has to do, then the current collection of skill position players is more than good enough. I like that the running back room has gotten more diverse. Cook and Harris offer an interesting and difficult change of pace, because as someone said, Harris runs like we hoped Moss would run, and Cook runs with the juice that was just beyond Singletary's reach. Even Hines offers something a little different. Diggs and Davis offer two different styles, and Shakir and the new guys, too, all seem to offer a different mix of talents. Point is, the Bills' attack could be as diverse as you want to make it - they could play ANY style. Allen can run ANY style, and contribute. It all depends on the offensive line and on someone creative enough to use the different styles against different opponents. O line and Dorsey.

I can't say I've been following what you and Alpha, have been talking about, but from what I can tell, I think Alpha's largely right. I mean, I agree with you that Smith Schuster is a fine #2. I wouldn't take him over Davis, but that's a different discussion. From I can tell, people have been arguing about getting a "1B" to be the #2. A 1B is a lesser #1, a guy you really don't want to be your number 1, but he can be useful in that role. Stevie Johnson was 1B. Doesn't strike fear in anyone, but makes plays for you. Stevie, like JuJu, is a very nice #2. The real point is that JuJu is NOT some kind of magic remedy for the Bills offense. He's just a guy who's going to get you 900 yards, thank you very much. (Which is what Davis gets you.) Is it possible that JuJu will get you 1200 as #2? Maybe, but if he does it won't be because he's JuJu, it will be because the offensive coordinator know how to run a passing offense. (By the way, he WAS, as you point out, the #1B to a #1, and he DID play for a great passing offensive coordinator, and he got 933 yards, which is essentially what Davis got.) And I think you misperceive who Kelce is. Yes, he posts #1 receiver numbers, and yes, he's their go-to guy and he delivers. But he's a very talented, including very smart, tight end playing in a system designed for him. He does not run tight end routes to make his money. He does not split wide and run 13-17 out patterns to the sideline. Why not? Because he can't get separation out there. He lives over the middle. Tight ends and slot receivers are NOT the most physically gifted receivers on the team, so the team gives them the advantage of lining up in the middle of the field, which allows them to attack deep and to both sidelines. Wideouts start with a disadvantage, because the defenders know that they have help from the sideline. But good wideouts, including Diggs and Davis, can get open despite lining up wide. Kelce is a #1 because Reid made him a #1 with his offensive design and with a talented QB pulling the trigger.

It was one game. They were scoring consistently in the 30s prior to that one game. And you seem to want to overhaul the o line, get a new set of receivers, and can Dorsey. As I've said, I think your focus is 2/3 correct, but the solutions aren't very drastic. The Bills don't need any more or any better receivers. I mean, sure, I'd always like better receivers, but with Diggs, Davis, and Knox, the Bills had the seventh best passing offense in the league. They now have Shakir and Cook coming into their second seasons, and they have added two good receivers to the room. It ain't about the receivers. O line sure looks to me like it could be better, but have you looked at the stats? 8th fewest sacks (Bengals were 20th). 11th fewest sacks (tied with Bengals). Still, I would love to see at least on true stud on the offensive line - in my opinion there isn't one now, and that makes both running and passing less consistent. But when we look at the stats, the Bills are all over the top of all the right lists. Where they've fallen down is in - here it is, one of McDermott's favorites - situational football. And that is on the coaches. With Josh Allen and the skill players the Bills have, the offense should be able to deliver when it needs to. All they need is to be in the right play. Dorsey, Dorsey, Dorsey.

Dorsey, Dorsey, Dorsey. As far as I'm concerned, it's all about Dorsey. If the Bills protect Allen, there are more than enough skill position players for them to attack all over the field. Dorsey has to understand what defenses are doing and adjust from week to week and in games. If he can do that, the Bills can be unstoppable.

I really don't get the Davis stuff Really. 48 receptions, 836 yards, 7 TDs in a year, at least if we listen to the Davis bashers, that was a bad year. He had a bad year, and he got close to 1000 yards. One of the top 20 receivers in the league in TDs. A bad year. Can't separate? No one in the NFL can separate. or practically no one. Tyreek Hill can run away from people, and probably three or four other guys can do it with speed, and another three or four like Diggs can do with amazing agility? Everyone else? They don't create separation - they get open by running routes that are called that take advantage in weaknesses in the defense. If Davis isn't open, it's because the defense is covering him and not someone else. If Davis isn't open, it's because the play designs against the defense are failing. A couple of teams, like the Bengals, have been fortunate enough to have two number 1s at the same time, but that's almost an accident, and it won't last past the next contract cycles. Pure number 2 receivers, guys who aren't number 1s but are solid all-round guys to have on the field, Davis is in that category.

He is one of those guys who has something that McDermott prizes in his players. Not sure exactly what it is - some combination of work ethic, leadership, competitiveness. I never saw much in him, either, but he is a McDermott guy.

It's funny. I have no concerns about Davis. I think he's almost a model #2. I think it's all about Dorsey. I've never been impressed with Jeudy, as I've said elsewhere I don't think it makes sense to add a personality like Hopkins to the receiver room, and I feel the same about Beckham, plus his injury concern. I'd much rather spend resources elsewhere, namely the offensive line and middle linebacker.

If he's effective as a special teamer, then he's a serious upgrade on the roster over Kumerow Seems like a nice signing.

I haven't read the entire thread, but I've been interested in this thread for a while. I think the OP is on the right track. We misperceive the reality of the NFL, largely because our fan mentality clouds our judgment. The reality of the NFL, like almost any other similar activity, is best understood by considering an ordinary bell curve. In any season there are a few very good teams, a few very bad teams, and a lot of teams that are in the middle. Over a few seasons, the bad teams generally improve to the middle group and the good teams fall back to the middle group, and other teams move down to the bottom or up to the top. But in any given season, the Lombardi winner is likely to come from the group of very good teams. Some posters here talk about the Bills as though they aren't in the top group. This is wrong with them, and that, and the coaches are stupid, and who knows what else? The fact is that the Bills are one of the very best teams in the league. That's true whether we examine statistics or we examine won-loss records or we ask coaches and GMs around the league. What about the Cincy game? Well, I don't think it matters. Whether the Bills got sort of blown out or lost a nail biter (which is exactly what happened the previous season), the reaction from a lot of people is the same - there are multiple things seriously wrong with this team and it's hard to imagine the Bills fixing them. That reaction simply doesn't jibe with reality. Yes, the objective is to win the Super Bowl. And yes, the Bills needed to do things differently in each of the past two seasons to win the Super Bowl, and yes, changes need to be made. But changes are being made on EVERY team every season, because their players age and the salary cap forces personnel changes, etc., etc. etc. There is a lot of luck that goes into winning it all, including injuries, weather, the schedule, etc. All that any team can team is the best they can restocking the roster, adjusting offensive and defensive strategies, and try again. It is very clear that the Bills didn't have to do much different to have won 13 seconds instead of losing. And I don't think they needed to do a lot different to beat the Bengals. Look at the team stats for that game. They are much closer than we remember the game. It felt like the Bengals dominated, but if the Bills had gained 60 yards more, especially if 50 of those had come in the running game, the game would have been a statistical draw, and the score would have been a lot closer. And/or, I would argue that if Micah Hyde had played in that game instead of Jaquan Johnson (he was, after all, the third string safety), the Bengals' passing attack would not have succeeded so much. In my view, Hyde was the most important player on the defense, and his loss changed the season. I've said elsewhere, I don't get people talking about the Bills' need at receiver. They have four good receivers, and Kumerow probably will again be on the roster, so they need one receiver who almost certainly won't see a lot of action. What they need is a well-planned and well-run passing attack, which is on Dorsey. And what the Bills need is some luck. Last season was an emotional train wreck, and I think it's foolish to deny it. It was mess. 2023 is a new season. The Bills quite likely will be at the far right end of the bell curve again, because they are well coached, they have a solid roster without holes, and they have Josh Allen. The question is whether they will do the things they need to do, and whether they will have some luck. The fact that they didn't it do it last season or the season before really doesn't have much to do with whether they'll succeed next season. Each season is a new season with a new team, and one or two teams will rise into the elite and one or two will fall from it. Could the Bills fall from the elite? Possibly. The Packers had Rodgers and weren't elite every season. It's not easy to stay on top. So, yes, the Bills could fall, but I don't see that as likely. The point is that the Bengals game was just one game; the judgment of a lot of people is colored by the how it felt for the Bills to lose that game. The reality is, however, that the Bills are an elite NFL team that will continue to try to win the Super Bowl.

That's just wishing away the problems. As others have said, Henry is only useful if you give him a lot of carries. He has to pound away, play after play, and he is not a threat in the passing game. He simply isn't useful, and never has been, as an all-purpose back in a role like Motor's role. And if you think Hopkins and Diggs isn't a potential problem, you really haven't been paying attention to their careers. They both want the ball, and they're both vocal about it in their ways. Both expect to be the lead dog. To suggest that their personalities are going to change because they want to win the Super Bowl is ignoring reality. Another good point. Dorsey wasn't good enough with the cast of characters he had, and that cast of characters was good enough. Dorsey is the answer to the offense in 2023, Dorsey and the offensive line.

I wouldn't. The offense can't give Henry enough touches. Cook and Hines need to see the field to be part of the passing game. Diggs is the team prima donna, and I wouldn't put another in the receiver room. The Diggs-Hopkins show would be a distraction. If I were going to stretch, it would have been for a stud offensive lineman.

Well, I certainly wouldn't be tempted to draft him if he WASN'T there.

Virg - What exactly does your title mean? Is there anyone here suggesting that the Bills should draft the second-best available at a position of need? It's a simple binary debate - BPA regardless of need, or need regardless of BPS.