BillsFanForever19

If we traded for Metcalf - we absolutely wouldn't be re-signing Cooper. Metcalf would be taking his spot on the roster. As for the other Free Agents, honestly the only other ones I'd want to see brought back are Mack Hollins and Ty Johnson. Pretty much everyone else on the list can be replaced with Day 3 Draft Picks, vet minimum players, or even UDFA's: WR Amari Cooper CB Rasul Douglas FS Damar Hamlin WR Mack Hollins RB Ty Johnson FB Reggie Gilliam DE Dawuane Smoot TE Quintin Morris DT Austin Johnson LS Reid Ferguson DT Quinton Jefferson DT Jordan Phillips To your point though, yes, we'd have to still find a Starting CB. And even though he's not a FA, we need to replace Daquan Jones as our 1T DT. And if we're doing two massive moves that would require not only a large amount of cap but also Top Draft Picks to require them - I don't know how you address those spots adequately.

You think bc Stefon Diggs went nuclear that means he'll never again make a move for a quality WR? He traded for Diggs knowing he was a bit of a head case. The risk was worth the potential reward and we got multiple VERY good years out of him. Metcalf (to the point) hasn't shown to be a headache. I don't see the correlation. I'll say to your point - I don't see a DK Metcalf and a Myles Garrett in the same offseason. There's far too many other holes we need to fill (namely starting CB and 1T) and players we'll need to retain in the coming years to dedicate two massive contracts that also require premier Draft Picks in compensation. But a Garrett OR a Metcalf? I don't think getting 1 of them is unrealistic. But it would require a lot to win the sweepstakes and get them on the books.

Did you read my post? I never said we shouldn't improve the Defense. That's obvious. My point was - an improved Defense alone wouldn't have overcome the Eagles in the Super Bowl, even if we had gotten past the Chiefs. There's this idea that the Defense for Philly alone won that Super Bowl. That's not the game I watched. The Defense playing as they did, combined with the Offense scoring at will and putting the game out of reach early was what won that game. Them being able to pile it on made KC one dimensional and allowed the Defense to tee off and continue to impose their will. Our Offense sputtered when it mattered in the Playoffs. If not for James Cook against Baltimore (and them making a bunch of mistakes) and the Chiefs - we'd have been nowhere. And against the Eagles Defense in that Super Bowl game? It would have went much, much worse. We cannot roll back Shakir, Coleman, Hollins, Samuel, Kincaid, and Knox and just hope guys are better this year when we have to get points. An improved Defense alone may or may not have gotten us past the Chiefs, as they seem to have the answer for McDermott's Defensive Scheme and he refuses (or doesn't have the personnel) to run the kind of physical man coverage D that Philly ran. But against Philly's D that you saw? With the firepower we had (or lack thereof) we'd have been dead in the water. We couldn't even get the points when we needed it against KC's D - which Philly's superpowered Offense manhandled. You want a title? Of course, we need to improve our Defense. But we also need guys we can rely on to get open on a regular basis and not drop the ball. Josh won the MVP bc he did what he did with the cast he had. That will get you an MVP, but it's not getting you a Lombardi. If he had more (and yes, an improved Defense), he'd have more hardware than that.

So Metcalf replaces Cooper and Garrett replaces Epenesa in the starting lineup (effectively making Epenesa the replacement for Miller). Say they make that work and this regime is cool with Cole Bishop replacing Damar Hamlin as Starting Safety. We still need to find a starting CB opposite Christian Benford and a starting 1T to replace Daquan Jones, who is absolutely, positively toast. Not to mention smaller integral re-signings like Mack Hollins and Ty Johnson (who might not be as small as we'd like). We'd need to do all of that with little to no cap after those two moves and no pick greater than basically a 3rd Round Pick.

Cap hell? Even after tagging Higgins, they're 43.9m under the cap. Tagging him again doesn't necessarily mean they're signing him long term. They may just keep him for another year or even Trade him. But they're so far under the cap this season, it's not something they have to worry about right now.

Which got us to a point. But when we needed those nobodies to step up against Kansas City when it counted, they let us down. Without James Cook going off in the 2nd half - we wouldn't have even had the chance to have Dalton Kincaid drop the ball with the game on the line. And if we had the Defense to get past them, we'd still have needed to go toe to toe with Philadelphia - who were steamrolling on BOTH sides of the ball. This idea that if we improve the Defense alone we're winning a Lombardi - I don't agree with it. We need to upgrade the weaponry just as much. That and getting both teams who don't appear eager to trade either to trade both. And win the sweepstakes of trading for both, against all other suitors. Which I don't agree would leave us with a 2nd. Unless the Browns decided they're not trading Garrett until after June 1st. Which would open up a whole 'nother ball of complications. All in all, seems like a pipe dream to me. A nice dream though.

Cody Ford was taken at 38. DK Metcalf was taken almost a full Round later at 64, the very last pick in the 2nd Round. Every team in the league passed on him, practically all of them twice. Even the Seahawks passed on him twice before taking him with their 3rd pick.

Josh isn't the kind of precision pocket passer Brees was. He more than makes up for that with how he evades the pocket, impovisizes plays, his rocket arm, and rushing ability. But he's never going to be a Brady, Manning, Brees type high completion percentage guy. He takes more chances than they did and isn't quite as accurate.

Seahawks Reporter

Maybe a little more. But not the 3.3 the tender would require.

Obvious things that are obvious.

In some situations, I hear what you're saying. But since we were only talking about Crosby in particular - I've never seen a player say "ya know, I wanted out but I don't think I do anymore" as part of the game of being traded. I don't understand the advantage of that kind of rouse. And as a fan favorite player, I wouldn't think the GM would want the fans thinking "yeah, Maxx wanted to be here - but I wanted him gone". I don't see the advantage of it either way.

Later in the Draft? Have you met James Cook, Khalil Shakir, Christian Benford, Spencer Brown, Terrel Bernard, and O'Cyrus Torrence? Not to mention Dion Dawkins and Matt Milano coming here a couple weeks before he arrived. And Tremaine Edmunds in Round 1, who went on to sign a 72m contract with the Bears. Greg Rousseau has exceeded where he was picked. Ed Oliver is not nearly the failure this board makes him out to be (truly feel that Jones being completely washed this year played into his being neutralized with double teams). Yes, Elam was a miss. Yes, Kincaid had a disappointing Sophomore season. But this idea that this regime is terrible at Drafting is overblown. Josh Allen or not, we wouldn't be consistently competing if we didn't have hits. And every team has misses - that's the nature of the Draft.

We're 10+m over the cap. You're talking about signing 3 of the Top 10 Free Agents available. You act like that's something that other GM's pull off. When do you ever see that? Osa Odighizuwa is a DT, not a DE. And he's expected to cost 90+m by himself - https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/nfl/dallas-cowboys/article300983019.html Even with restructures, void years, and lowering the hit in Year 1 - we're still paying a big cap hit in Year 1 for each. It's not realistic.

That's fair. Compensation for veterans always seems either way too little in the case of most or ridiculously high in the case of premier talents. And there seems to be very little middle ground. I think Deebo is a much better player than this board perceives his talent to be.

He's on a 1 year contract with a massive cap hit and he's coming off a bad year. I'm not surprised the return isn't much.

How are they instant contenders? That roster is in shambles. Sticking a 41 year old Aaron Rodgers on the team doesn't change that.

You do know it's not easy to hit on Blue Chippers when you're consistently picking in the mid 20's to 30, right? If they're "blue chip" - they're off the board by the time we pick. It takes a lot of luck to turn a basically 2nd Round Pick into a blue chipper at the NFL level.

We've already done that, financially speaking. That's why we're in the position we're in. We started last year 54m over the cap. We're starting this year 10+m over the cap. There's only so much we can "mortgage the future with" when it comes to playmakers. You can lower a cap hit in Year 1 by pushing it down the road. But the big ticket items will still carry a decent sized cap hit in Year 1 even with most of it pushed down the road.

I don't want to speak for them, but my feeling is that it's bc those types of moves don't happen often league wide. There's this idea that "well if you offer up x amount of picks, you can just get anybody". And that's not the case. For example, for all the noise that Myles Garrett made, the Browns have said they're not trading him under any circumstances and thus far reportedly have turned away people who have called. Just because you want a big trade doesn't mean a big trade can be done. It takes two teams to do that, not just Beane. And knocking him for moves that you perceive he could have made without knowing if he actually could have is kind of an eyerolling situation.

The problem is that even if you put together a package that works on the Trade Value chart - teams high up on the Draft board *VERY* rarely want to move all the way down to 30.

We may not have the option to do something big. Garrett seems to be in a stalemate that won't end anytime soon. Crobsy doesn't appear to be actually available. Bosa may or may not be released. Hendrickson wants to be paid or traded, but the GM doesn't seem interested (https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/news/duke-tobin-weighs-in-on-possibility-of-bengals-trading-trey-hendrickson-01jn4p98zq6h). The only known available players that could be obtained that would be a bigger move is Eagles DE Josh Sweat (if he isn't franchised tagged) and Khalil Mack.

I think if a National Reporter puts their name to a player and the Bills, it's worth mentioning. Random joe schmo's on Twitter, absolutely not. But reporters from ESPN (like with Hollywood Brown) or Sportskeeda from the Combine when teams and agents are talking, sure. Does it mean anything? Maybe not. But it's worth looking into the player and their possible fit. These types of reporting don't happen "daily". Brown and Smith are the only names i've seen thus far linked to the Bills by a National Reporter.

Maxx Crosby doesn't seem to be a real possibility. He's gone from doing some cryptic stuff last season to saying he's never been more optimistic about the Raiders since adding Pete Carroll: https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/maxx-crosby-ive-had-doubts-in-past-but-this-is-the-most-optimistic-ive-been-about-raiders The Owner doesn't want to move him and the GM has never seemed interested in moving him and spoke of him being a Raider for a long time at the Combine: https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/john-spytek-i-envision-maxx-crosby-being-a-raider-for-a-long-time-here