technobot

Count me in the cautiously optimistic crowd. I was fairly pessimistic post-draft, and during Allen's run pre-injury, Vikings game notwithstanding. Flipped to optimism after the Dolphins game. I really didn't know what I was supposed to be looking for in terms of "hope and progress", but I saw it in the Dolphins game. I think if the ask was to watch Allen dink and dunk down the field with 5-10 yard lasers, Tom Brady style, then it was setting myself up for disappointment. Perhaps he adds this to his game as he matures, but what I saw last Sunday was a playmaker. He is gradually improving as a passer, at least that's what I saw. Say what you want about running, but if it can be such a deadly component of Mahomes' game then why not Allen? I realize Allen isn't the passer is Mahomes is, but the Bills don't have the roster the Chiefs do, either. And as much as I want Allen to be "the best QB in Bills history, better than Kelly", I don't think this has to be the case. If the front office can assemble a quality roster, they can still win with Allen as more of a complementary piece, instead of being "the guy". Of course, if Allen hits his ceiling... look out, NFL.

I've been pleasantly surprised with Lorax this year; considering his age I thought he might fall off a cliff. Quite the opposite, he's playing his best football ever. I hope they do sign him. Agree with the sentiment that he provides a veteran presence and value on ST on top of his defensive performance. Even if he takes a step back he's of tremendous value for those two reasons, assuming he doesn't ask for a truckload of money (doesn't seem the type, will probably be happy with a "fair" contract assuming he still wants to play). Of course, try to draft/sign his eventual replacement, but keep him if he's interested.

Wasn't the best throw but it didn't have to be. Clay was wide open. Robbed Allen of a prime entry in his (hopefully) extensive career highlight reel.

No way, barring a 180 in work ethic and professionalism, and maybe a "prove it" contract. But IMO, not worth the hassle. Even if he is a good soldier now, and is willing to do the Star L thing (eat blockers, free up linebackers), how much is that worth? I really want to know what was going on behind the scenes, because you can laugh at McDermott's process all you want but you even had Coach Daycare (Rex Ryan) also badmouthing Dareus. The Bills created this monster; after wasting a ton of money of Mario Williams, they doubled down and gave Dareus a ridiculous contract. What was it, 60 million guaranteed? I remember Belichick throwing shade at the Bills, saying something along the lines of "that's a lot of money to pay a defensive tackle..." Either way, Dareus wins. If he was smart with his money (would be shocking), the Jags could release him next year and he could walk away from the game with no major injuries, content to live a very comfortable life; "generational" wealth if he plays it right. Or he could keep playing, I'm sure someone would take a flier on him but it doesn't have to be the Bills.

Agree with the "heck, no!" crowd... Tyrod perhaps gets us to 4-6. So I'll contradict myself and say, perhaps, with a 5-1 streak to end the season the Bills squeak in with some (much) luck on Week 17. There's no guarantee that this Bills roster with Tyrod could finish almost perfect in the last 6 games, either. And in the alternate reality with Tyrod at QB, who's to say they still win the Minnesota or Tennessee games? Probably, but we simply don't know. As pointed out, there was too much roster regression on offense, and the defense did take a step back. T-Mobile was obviously better than Peterman (who isn't) and is better than Allen (how much better?) at this point but he's not a carry a team kind of QB in my opinion, not even close. A complementary piece/game manager type QB for a team with an elite defense and special teams? That's another question...

I agree with the sentiment if they were a truly "best in the NFL" defense, they wouldn't have given up so many points, bottom-line. Historically bad offense or not, a true #1 defense doesn't get run over against Baltimore or San Diego like the Bills D. Whether it was one half or not doesn't matter. Throw Indy into the mix, Derek Anderson notwithstanding. For a defense predicated on bend but don't break, they've broken plenty this year. Once again, I'm not exonerating the offense or special teams; the inability to play "complementary football" has put the D in tough spots. But as Chan Gailey once said, sometimes in football it comes down to "whipping the man in front of you". The Bears game gave the Bills D a statistical boost because the massive penalty yards aren't counted in yards allowed. The D still could have stepped up and held the Bears to field goals. They could have stopped Houston marching right down field to kick the go-ahead field goal. Shutting teams when the chips are down, no matter how tired you are, in spite of your offense... that's what elite defenses do. None of this is to say the Bills D is trash. There's plenty of talent, and with a couple of pieces, they will look very "complete". The first few games were kind of skewed by the fact that they weren't getting many/any turnovers, and certainly weren't converting them into defensive touchdowns. The 2017 iteration of Buffalo's defense had shades of the 2018 Bears defense: they capitalized on their big defensive plays; we're not seeing that much this year. For the first half of the season especially, it would be turnover on defense, then Bills offense goes three and out again (or gives the ball right back). Now whether you can have a shutdown defense like the 2000 Ravens Defense or the 85 Bears... that's another discussion. I'm guessing in the current NFL it's folly to think you can hold teams down every week and squeak by in 13-10 defensive struggles. I'm afraid the head coach thinks this is still feasible.

What always disturbed me was the fact that McDermott, who (hopefully) knows defense, couldn't see how easy it would be to gameplan against Peterman. People joke "10 in the box!" but we really saw something similar. There was simply no fear of using single coverage on receivers and selling out to stop the run with NP at QB. It really jumps out on television how his throws simply float. And how we would go to the well with that line of scrimmage/sideline pass that requires a laser or a dart, not a duck. CBs were smacking their chops, ready to freelance that throw when it inevitably came. Nice guy but thankfully this is over, for everyone involved. I'm just in awe that it took so long to get there. I really like/want to like McDermott/Beane but I do wonder... does McDermott learn from his mistakes? If this season is a wash, then at least it's a growing opportunity for not just Allen and the youngsters, but McD as well. But then I question: does he disregard sage advice or is he in an echo chamber with people nodding their heads, saying "yeah Sean, you're right (again)". His refusal to move on from Peterman was mind-boggling. I understand that as this season went on, there was simply no choice, but there was ample time to cut bait previously. Sorry for clubbing this horse, I just realized it had died.

That was not even implied in my post... Did we miss out? Sure looks like it. My point was simply Mahomes wouldn't look so great here. That's not a knock against him, he obviously has "it". It's my opinion that the current coaching staff would have wasted him, especially with the roster as it is. I can't prove it, obviously, but like everyone else I'm entitled to my opinion. To me, we're dealing with alternate histories, like the one where the Bills drafted Tom Brady or even Rob Gronkowski; let's throw in Aaron Rodgers for giggles. Could even Brady/Rodgers have elevated those Bills teams, without Belichick and his genius/system, or without a strong Packers roster used to winning? Would Gronk "Gronk Out!" on the Buddy Nix/Gailey Bills, lead by the plucky Ryan Fitzpatrick? I don't think so. Seems like people are worked up about stuff that didn't happen. Sometimes that's for the best. And hindsight is 20/20. I agree, it sucks we missed out on what was apparently a generational talent. As a fan of the NFL, I'll be content to watch him from afar, watching him (likely) reach his full potential. My point was simply that I don't think he would have reached his potential here, at this time, much like the Bills would have wasted Brady/Gronkowski/Rodgers.

Long time lurker, first time poster: my 2 cents: Mahomes would have been wasted on this iteration of the Bills, especially considering the roster teardown that just occurred. We don't have the pieces nor the coaches to cultivate/develop him (yet). I believe he's got enough talent that we would have seen obvious flashes but my guess is he would not be tearing the league up like he is now. TBH, he would probably be running for his life.