MJS

He had a rough couple of games, but played well to begin the year and well later on in the season as well.

I can say that many teams I looked at had a higher cost linebacker or defensive end in the 1.5 to 3 million range who I can only assume does the same or similar things as our guy. It seems like this is an in-demand role throughout the league.

It's a mixed bag. The Ravens play a lot of starters on special teams, I noticed. The Giants had more contributions, but that is because they were scraping the bottom of the barrel talent wise. If you play linebacker, running back, or defensive back in the NFL and are not a starter, you likely contribute on special teams in the NFL. The Bills are no different in that regard. Go look at the analysis. Most teams have 5 to 7 players that are almost exclusively special teams contributors. Why? Because your starters are better and you want them on the field as much as possible. A lot of good teams spend a lot on special teams. A lot of bad teams don't spend a lot. And vice versa. There was no correlation between spending and performance, or good vs bad teams overall, but I also did not include two of the biggest contributors to special teams (punters and kickers).

The Jags are getting pretty good. The Lions are getting better. Then the teams after that are all relatively good: Vikings, Seahawks, Dolphins, Bengals. To me it just seems like it comes down to team philosophy. Good and bad teams are all over the spectrum, some paying a lot, some paying a little.

If he got $2.5 million, that's actually a big pay cut from last year. I noticed most of the highest paid special teamers in the analysis were linebackers. They fill a specific role and there is measurable value all throughout the NFL for that role.

We'll have to wait till next season for that data. Or look at 2021 if you'd like. Again, if I can't compare the same for all teams, I won't do it. I'm not going to add those players for the Bills without doing the same for every other team, and I just don't have the time to carry out that research.

Sure, but if the team gets offensive or defensive contributions from their primary special teams contributors, they would literally be the only team in the NFL where that is the case. Every single team had at least 3 players (most with 5 to 7) who contributed almost nothing to offense and defense. If the Bills managed that, they would be in a class of their own. And it would mean that the offense and defense would be worse, because your bottom of the roster guys are worse players. You don't want those guys to play. You want your starters to play.

I was specifically looking at whether or not the Bills spend the most in the league on primary special teams contributors, which is the claim I see from time to time. Whether or not we spend too much is up for debate. The Bills don't spend the most, but they spend a lot. They have good results in ranking from that spending, but perhaps we don't need to be THE best special teams unit in the NFL. Maybe we can just settle for top 10 and reallocate some of those resources elsewhere. I'm all for that. But I do understand the approach to wanting dominant special teams. There is real value there. Nope. That is close to a minimum salary.

Most of the defense has double digit missed tackle rates. 6.8% is not that bad. Edmunds was like the only player on our defense with a decent missed tackle rate last year.

Sure will be harder positioning ourselves in the regular season to compete for the 1st seed without that #1 defense. People are acting like the regular season is nothing.

All this Hodgins talk is crazy, in my opinion. He is a late round pick who went to a team with no other option at receiver and got some targets. To his credit, he did a good job with those targets. This is Robert Foster 2.0. The Giants are going to look to upgrade at WR this year. Hodgins is not going to be featured.

I'm not going to consider nuances like that because I can't compare that for the entire league. I don't know all 32 teams well enough and it would take me too long to research specific cases like that. It has nothing to do with my own arguments one way or the other. All that stuff evens out. Other teams have situations like that as well.

We'll see. If they can get cheaper and still have good special teams, I'm all for that. But I'm not totally sure why some are so focused on how much some of these guys are getting paid. The Bills are spending like 2-3 million more per year than the average team. That's just a drop in the bucket, honestly. I guess it means the team is good. We used to be arguing about starting QB's and #1 WRs! It's gotten all the way down to bottom of the roster special teams contributors. There's always something to nitpick.

Nope. I used the data and only the data. Kumerow was hurt so he doesn't factor in with the overall snaps. Hines was only at 22% of special teams snaps, so he doesn't make the cut either. McKenzie was barely used on special teams with only 6.83% of special teams snaps. He played over 50% of offensive snaps. But every team has situations like that as well. Feel free to go do your own analysis where you specifically identify kick returners and injured special teamers for each team. I'd be interested in seeing that, but I'm not sure how you would do that.

This only one year of data, remember. Many superbowl winning teams the past decade have been top 5 in special teams DVOA.

This is also only one season of data. I bet Andy Reid has historically invested more in special teams. They went through some changes last year. Bill Belichick historically invests a lot in special teams as well, but he was low in 2022. A lot of changes with the Patriots lately.

Every single team pays an exclusive long snapper. Every single one.

Well, I think we can all agree that it sucks to be the Steelers, who are paying by far the most money to special teamers and had the 27th ranked special teams unit. If you are going to pay so much, you have to at least be good at it. Terrible job by them. The Vikings are paying as much as the Bills and had the 30th ranked unit. Really poor.

Special teams contributes stolen possessions too. If you can cause a turnover, or block a punt, etc. Or return one for a TD. Even just a long return that starts your offense in field goal range. That can swing a game. Those big plays really make an impact. Yes, they don't happen all the time, but they happen enough to make a difference, even if you don't see the value in hidden yardage (which I think most coaches would disagree with you anyway on that).

Some other interesting things I noticed: Baltimore has excellent special teams, but they use a lot of their starters and veterans on special teams. So, even though they are low on the above table, it's because they are having their guys take a larger role than average on special teams. This made me think of their injury issues rhe last couple of years. Are they taxing their starters too much? On the other side of the coin you have the Giants, who also had a lot of their starters and role players contributing on special teams. Why? Because they were a team deficient in talent. I think on most teams some of those special teams guys would not be contributing on offense and defense. Daboll did a good job of maximizing everyone's talent, similar to McDermott in his first year. Tampa Bay was one of the outliers. To me, having good special teams is caused by the following: having good coaches, having a talented roster, having continuity in core contributors, and being willing to invest some money in it. Some of those things also contribute to having a good team overall, and being a playoff contender every year. I don't think anyone thinks good special teams causes you to be a superbowl contender. But it certainly helps when one or two possessions or a few yards here and there make a difference, which it often does.

I see this thrown around a lot about the Bills, that they pay their special teamers the most in the league, and especially that they roster too many primary special teams players. They claim that other teams only roster 2 or 3, while the BIlls roster 4 or 5. So, I ran the numbers, because I really didn't know if that was true. For this exercise, I looked at snap percentages for each team. I considered a primary special teamer as a player who played approximately 30% or more of the total special teams snaps for the team and who had less than 15% total snaps for either offense or defense. I also removed Kickers, Punters, and Long Snappers, because every team needs those specialists and their roster spots are guaranteed. I then recorded the 2022 cap hit for each of those players (from overthecap.com) to see how teams compared in both the number of primary special teamers and the cap hits associated with them. Here are the results for the Bills: For the league: Findings: - There were 16 teams who rostered more primary special teams players than the Bills. This includes good teams like the Bengals, Cowboys, 49ers, Eagles, and Chargers, plus our divisional opponents in the Jets and Dolphins. The average was 5.5 players, so the Bills were just below average in the number of these types of players rostered (Myth Busted!) - Five teams spend more than the Bills in total for these players: Steelers, Texans, Jaguars, Bengals, and Vikings. - The Bills ranked 3rd in the cap hit per player for these primary special teams players at $1.68 million. The Steelers and Texans pay more per player. (Myth Kinda Busted. They pay their teamers well, just not the most in the league) Here are the top cap hits in the league for primary special teamers in 2022. The Bills had 2 in the top 15. The Taxans and Steelers also had multiple: In conclusion: the Bills do not roster too many primary special teams players. In fact, many teams roster more. The Bills are on the lower end. But, the Bills DO pay their special teamers well, with two teamers in the top 15 of the league (in 2022, at least). And the results can be seen in the Bills fielding one of the best, or the best, special teams units in the league. Joe Marino from Locked on Bills did an analysis awhile back looking at super bowl winning teams and found that most of them had good special teams units. There were a few outliers, but having a top 5 special teams unit is one of those marks of a good team, and even a super bowl contender.

That's the amount everyone thought he would get.

That's free agency. You want to sign a starter? You will overpay. Poor players get paid like average players, average players get paid like good players, good players get paid like elite players, etc.

Can you share?

How do you know? How do you know?