Arm of Harm

Thanks for the kind words. I personally was of the belief that the Bills should have taken a WR. While WR does not appear to be a need this year it very much could be next year. Sanders is on a one year deal and is an aging, declining player. On the other hand I think the players Beane chose instead have great potential and could be really good pass rushers (high value position). While I think you could fully justify WR I agree that RB would have been a luxury pick.

In the weeks leading up to the draft, there was a lot of discussion about how the Bills should use their first and second round picks. Among the opinions presented: #2 CB RB (due to the disappointing running game) OG or C (due to the disappointing running game) WR (Beasley and especially Sanders are on the wrong side of 30) TE Pass rushing DL One tech DT There was validity to pretty much all the opinions mentioned above. So . . . what did the Bills do about the above list of needs? For pass rushing DL they signed Obada (5.5 sacks last year and a fairly young guy), while using their first and second round picks on pass rushing DL. There were other free agent signings, such as Hollister and Lamp and Sanders and Breida. Not everything on the bulleted list is a hole. But with that many question marks going into the draft, anointing ourselves the team with the least holes seems a bit ambitious. Sure there's a chance the Bills do turn out to be the team with the least holes. Maybe Harrison returns to pre-injury form, maybe Star has a good year, maybe Sanders experiences no age-related decline, maybe our two early DL picks contribute much more than Epinesa did last year, maybe the light bulb comes on for Lamp, maybe Knox becomes more consistent, maybe someone steps up at #2 CB, maybe Breida turns out to be exactly the spark the running game needed. All that stuff could happen. More likely, some of those maybes will turn out the way we want, while others won't.

I read the article you provided. It contained no quantitative data about productivity rates in diverse workplaces, compared to productivity in more homogeneous work environments. The only quantitative data of any kind it provided were survey data of board members, the majority of whom stated they believed in the benefits of diversity. Those data are unsurprising, considering that diversity is a core religious value of the Western corporate world. Were you to survey the boards of Chinese, Japanese, or other non-Western corporations, you'd likely see very different results. To determine which culture's view of diversity is correct (from a corporate, profit and loss perspective), you'd need quantitative data about productivity in diverse versus non-diverse workplaces. It is precisely those data which are conspicuously absent from the article to which you linked.

The specific concern in this instance is Kim Pegula's involvement. Kim has stated that she wants to see an increase in diversity, and it's clear she believes that's an end in itself. If as co-owner she influenced McDermott to hire someone in part on the basis of gender, that would be a concern. Not because I'm overly worried about whether this team does or doesn't have the very best possible offensive assistant, but rather because of the influence Kim might exert in the future. If Kim hadn't been involved, or if she didn't have a stated desire to "promote diversity," I wouldn't be concerned. Suppose Kim had said, "We want to hire the very best, most capable candidate for every open position. Sometimes a candidate might be overlooked due to being female. We believe that including females in our applicant pool is an important part of finding the most capable candidates we can." A statement along those lines would have been non-threatening. Unfortunately, that's not what she actually said.

Diversity as a religion is rather unique to Western nations. Asian nations do not celebrate the reduction of the percentage of Asian males, Sub-Saharan African nations do not celebrate the reduction of the percentage of black males, Middle Eastern nations do not celebrate the reduction of percentage of Middle Eastern males. Maybe in the future that will change. Maybe at some point, the rest of the world will be so in awe of the benefits Western nations have received from embracing diversity, that they'll feel compelled to embrace that same religion. Or maybe they'll embrace it anyway, even if a case for benefits cannot be made. Time will tell, but for now the religion is regional, not global. I suppose that my own view--that hiring should be done on the basis of merit or ability--might also be considered religious, or at least normative. But at least there, there's a fairly obvious connection between profit (if a typical corporation) or winning (if a football team).

It would never work. There'd be constant debate about whether it was suicide or murder. Either way there'd be debate about the motive. If murder, there would also be debate about who the culprit was. You'd never hear the end of it!

I have a female cousin who is not interested in football. One time there was a Bills game on, and she remarked that Drew Bledsoe was very handsome. At the time, I thought that was a perfectly normal and reasonable thing for her to say. Was I wrong? Should I have engaged in a similar shaming effort to what we've witnessed in this thread? Or is it only wrong and shameful for men to comment on the physical appearance of a woman involved in football, but not wrong or shameful for a woman to comment on the physical appearance of a man involved with the sport?

There are two scenarios: 1) The Bills hired the best, most capable candidate for the position, in a sport which traditionally gravitates towards male hires. 2) Due to Kim Pegula's influence, the Bills hired someone less capable than the best male candidate. Scenario 1 would make me happy. Scenario 2 would displease me. My concern with scenario 2 is not about whether the Bills have the best possible offensive assistant. It's more the question: what happens after Terry dies and Kim inherits the team? Will she choose the best, most capable candidates for open positions at head coach or general manager? Or, will she choose someone other than the most capable candidate available, due to her ideological objectives? As usual, there's nothing I or any other fan can do about any of this. All I can do is sit back, hope that we're looking at scenario 1 for this hire, and that we'll continue looking at scenario 1 situations after Kim becomes the sole owner. In addition, I wish Terry Pegula a very long and happy life.

I talked with the director of a daycare center, after observing that all the people working directly with children were women. I asked her if they'd ever hired any male employees during her time as director. She said there had been two or three over the years but they hadn't worked out. But then she corrected herself and mentioned a man who'd come in periodically and would play his guitar and sing to the children. That worked out well. The director did not mention any effort to equalize the number of male and female employees. She did not indicate any belief that men and women have the same innate abilities to nurture young children. Nor did I think it necessary for her to do either of those things. Think of all the deeply knowledgeable football fans you know, either in real life or through fora such as this. Now ask yourself this: of those deeply knowledgeable fans, what percentage are female? Whatever that percentage is, is probably about where the NFL should be in terms of its percentage of female coaches.

McDermott may not care about her gender, but Kim Pegula does. I personally believe that the best, most capable candidate should be chosen, regardless of gender. If she is better or more capable than the best male candidate considered, great! If on the other hand she is less capable than the best male they interviewed, but was chosen anyway due to Kim’s involvement, I would be disappointed.

This thread consists of two categories of people: 1) Those commenting about her physical appearance. 2) Those complaining about people in category 1. What this thread does not consist of is anyone providing any kind of analysis of her coaching ability. Nor am I aware of any commentary on this forum about the quality of the coaching we've received from male offensive or defensive assistants. While the overwhelming majority of fans do not have the knowledge necessary to comment on subjects such as those, people people can make evaluations about her physical appearance. So that's what most are doing. If you have a valuable insight about her to add which does not pertain to her physical appearance, no one is stopping you from adding it.

I hope the same. Teef asked a reasonable, straightforward question. He deserves a straightforward answer. It is flat-out unacceptable for the OP to ghost him like this. That’s why I’d like to add my voice to those pressuring the OP into responding.

I have some reactions to your reactions. 1) I love to see the emphasis on long-term over short-term. We had short-term, quick fix type thinking during Tom Donahoe, during Marv's time as GM, during the Whaley/Ryan years. Such thinking resulted in the Bills using a lot of early draft picks on first-contract-and-out DBs and RBs. I'm glad those days are over! 2) In support of point 1), there are those who believe that the Bills' window to win a Super Bowl will last only as long as Allen's rookie contract. I disagree. I believe our window lasts however long he continues playing like a franchise QB. Some years the breaks won't go your way. In the AFC Championship Game, the Bills were playing with every WR hurt, and with a bad officiating crew which let KC get away with a lot. Maybe a different year the breaks will go the Bills' way. The best approach is to give yourself as many realistic chances as possible to win the Super Bowl, and hope that at least one of those chances pans out. A long-term approach accomplishes that. 3) As frustrating as it is to have opposing defenses only put 6 men in the box, the Bills were not a RB away from winning that AFC Championship Game. Without a better effort from the defense victory would have been all but impossible, no matter how well the offense had done. As you point out, a big part of the problem was scheme. That said, it was great to see the Bills address their biggest player weakness on defense (the defensive line) in the draft. 4) You are very knowledgeable about football, and your analysis of Edmunds is more likely to be correct than mine. 5) Go Bills!

I personally look at the Bills in 2005, Donahoe’s last year as GM. That team had a bad defense, an aging defense. Not much young talent in the pipeline on defense. The offensive line was bad, even by Bills standards. The first round QB, Losman, was anointed the starter and had begun the process of showing he’s a bust. WR was a problem: you had an Eric Moulds on his last legs, and you had Lee Evans, and not much else. Lee Evans would have been reasonably good as a speed #2, but was unsuited to being a number one. They had no one in particular at TE. It was a team which needed to be completely rebuilt. TD and Whaley were similar in that neither was good at drafting but both were reasonably proficient in signing free agents. That allowed both to create reasonably competitive teams over the short term but without staying power. After two years of McDermott, pretty much the only pre-McDermott starter left on the team was Jerry Hughes. Hughes wasn’t even a Whaley acquisition, as Buddy Nix had traded for him before retiring. McDermott (and later Beane) appear to have regarded the situation they’d inherited as a rebuild. It’s difficult to argue with that assessment.

The Giants’ brain trust has apparently decided to re-envision the TE position. No longer will the TE position require blocking or pass catching!

I'm not going to, ah, wade through every post in this thread. But I do have some thoughts. 1) The Bills are not a team that runs the ball a lot. So, RB is not necessarily going to be as big a priority. 2) Both Moss and Singletary are reasonably competent RBs, and you have to like the fact that Moss had a 100% success rate in pass blocking this past season. 3) Trading away a guy like Moss or Singletary creates a risk, in that you don't know how well Wade will or won't do until you start giving him snaps in the regular season. 4) Due to Wade's age, it's unlikely he'll play at a high level in the regular season for more than two or three years, before father time catches up with him. So, you'd be giving up on a young guy, a known guy, such as Singletary or Moss, in order to give snaps to an older player and a far less known player in the form of Wade. Don't get me wrong: I love the big play ability a guy like Wade gives you, and I don't see the same speed or athleticism in Singletary or Moss. So I understand the temptation. But there just aren't many carries to go around, and those carries are pretty much spoken for. However, if some other team were to offer the Bills, say, a 2nd round pick for Singletary, then I'm guessing it would be goodbye Singletary and hello Christian Wade! While something like that is unlikely to happen, I think it's Wade's best chance of getting a significant number of regular season carries.

"Catch" is probably not a verb you want to put a lot of hope in, when discussing Kelvin Benjamin!

The video clip starts with the words, “Benjamin! You nasty youth. Your heart is rotten to the core.” Seemed applicable to Benjamin the WR.

I disagree with pretty much all of your post. 1) In a game like football, it's normal for fans to want games to be played fairly, and for fans to be angry when a team cheats or otherwise gains an unfair advantage. 2) During the playoff drought the Patriots were a well-run team and the Bills were not. The Patriots would have dominated the Bills regardless of whether they'd cheated. But, you'll recall that after the 2001 season, the Patriots beat Kurt Warner and the St. Louis Rams in the Super Bowl, by a 3 point margin, at a time when the Patriots were cheating. That game could easily have gone the other way, had both teams played by the rules. 3) Belichick cheated with the video taping stuff, got caught, and was penalized with the loss of a first round pick. Having gotten caught once/been punished once, Belichick chose to do the exact same thing again. You don't risk losing early draft picks by cheating, unless you think cheating gives you a meaningful advantage.

The nice thing about the Panthers game is it’s a great opportunity for the Bills to scout the players they’ll be signing. Even better the Bills’ front office doesn’t even have to leave Orchard Park!

I see the Colts went fishing for a starting LT, and ended up hooking . . . Eric Fisher!

There have been cases where Beane has overpaid players, with the defensive line being an excellent example of that. Trent Murphy and Addison come to mind as some guys who didn't necessarily earn what the Bills have paid them. Jerry Hughes is also making more money than he probably could on the open market, but at least he's been more productive than those other two. From a cap management standpoint is Beane a major upgrade over Whaley? Absolutely! Can you find overpaid players on just about any team? No question. I think in a case like the Bills, the overpaid players stick out a little more for two reasons. 1) Beane had come close to maxing out the cap, presumably in hopes of a Super Bowl run while Allen was still on his rookie contract. 2) While the Corona-related salary cap reduction was equal for all teams, those teams harmed the most were the ones closest to the cap, such as the Bills.

The Bills had a historic season last year, making it to the AFC Championship Game for the first time in decades. While the team was very good overall, there was still room for improvement. Problem: The OL did not run block well during the regular season. During the postseason it neither run blocked nor pass protected well. The decline during the postseason was caused in large part because some guys were playing hurt. To me that says either a) the backups were hurt also, or b) the coaches thought an injured starter would be better than a healthy backup. Solution: The Bills worked to improve the depth of their OL, using 3rd and 5th round picks on offensive tackles. They also signed Lamp, and took an OG in the 7th. These steps should hopefully improve the depth on the OL, making it less likely they'll be forced to play injured starters. If the light bulb comes on for Lamp, he could challenge for a starting position. Evaluation: the Bills have addressed their depth on the OL, but it's not clear how much they've done to address their problems with run blocking. Problem: Defenses didn't respect the running game. Solution: the Bills brought in Breida to be a home run threat. Evaluation: The problems with the running game were caused in large part by play design, blocking schemes, or the offensive linemen themselves, more so than the RBs. Breida's presence should help, but adding him needs to be part of a larger solution. Problem: lack of pass rush. To the best of my knowledge none of the Bills defensive linemen had 5 or more sacks last season. As usual Jerry Hughes did much better achieving pressures than sacks. Solution: The Bills signed Obada (5.5 sacks last season), a young international player who may not yet have reached his ceiling. They used their first and second round picks on defensive linemen. Star is coming back, and Harrison Phillips will should be healthy, so in theory you'll have guys to play the 1 tech. Evaluation: At least on paper, the Bills have done a rock solid job of upgrading their pass rush. Problem: Lack of pass coverage, especially in the KC playoff game. One of the problems in that game was Edmunds getting fooled too often. Tre White also did not play well that game. Solution: The Bills did not necessarily add any new starters to their linebacker corps or defensive secondary. Maybe the solution lies in more effectively using the players they already have? If Edmunds has great physical tools but gets fooled too easily, maybe the defensive scheme could be modified to simplify his role. Evaluation: TBD Overall This team has seemingly taken a step forward this year, especially on the defensive line/pass rush. Some of the team's problems are with coaching/scheme, especially the problems involving running plays and pass coverage. It will be interesting to see what solutions the coaching staff will come up with.

Hapless Bills Fan, a.k.a. "Gruntled," wrote Unfortunately for you, Pixieland doesn't allow the use of hot links!