Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

OK Was it another guy around that same time frame they gave a second contract to?

I do think there was somewhat of a disconnect between Daboll and McD. Often when we'd lose McD implied there wasn't enough running plays called and most posters seemed to be in agreement and the fire Daboll threads would start. Then other weeks, like the KC game, it seemed there were too many running plays called. I know McD has often stated that we don't need to run more, but just need the threat to run. Makes me wonder if it was somewhat of a case of the thought going through Daboll's mind. "Need to call some running plays here to get the boss off my back" In that respect having someone new may be better if they are more aligned.

I just posted this in another similar thread, but same answer IMO applies here too: The problem isn't teams paying superstar QB's huge salaries, it's paying tier II QB's top $$, but he's the best the team has had in awhile and they hope he can become tier I so they pay him. Tannerhill in Miami, Carr, Flacco, etc. The Bills did that to some level with Fitz and Edwards. Then not enough money left to put a great team around him and those guys need greatness around them to win. Take a Brady, Rodgers, Manning, they can make middle of the road guys i.e. WR, TE, RB look great and get the team to the SB. Often then their contract runs out, they want to be paid top $$ based on the numbers they put up, but the team realizes it's really Rodgers that made him great, so they decline he goes elsewhere and puts up middle of the pack numbers and everyone is shocked. Allen appears to be good enough to make the middle guys look great so not as concerned here. I do think you want one top tier guy like Diggs, but was reading a post the other day how we should sign Adams or Godwin to make the offense unstoppable. We don't need that, nor can afford that. Allen can win with Diggs, Davis, a decent rookie WR, Knox, and one middle tier backup for injury like a McKenzie. Add a RB who's a very good at catching passes out of the backfield. So don't think it's a true problem when you have the real superstar QB, but too often teams have phony Tier I paid QB's

Agree for the most part. To often team get in trouble by paying close to top $$ to the QB for a guys that's really not a top QB, but he's the best the team has had in awhile so they pay him. Tannerhill in Miami, Carr, Flacco, etc. Then not enough money left to put a great team around him and those guys need greatness to win. Take a Brady, Rodgers, Manning, they can make middle of the road guys WR, TE, RB look great. Often then their contract runs out, they want to be paid top $$, but the team realizes it's really Rodgers that made him great, so they decline he goes elsewhere and puts up middle of the pack numbers and everyone is shocked. Allen appears to be good enough to make the middle guys look great. I do think you want one top tier guy like Diggs, but was reading a post the other day how we should sign Adams or Godwin to make the offense unstoppable. We don't need that, nor can afford that. Allen can win with Diggs, Davis, a decent rookie maybe slot WR, Knox, and one middle tier backup for injury like a McKenzie.

Or something like a vet min, but $1/2 million bonus if the Bills go to the SB and a million if they win it.

I agree with you to a point. Do think there was often a disconnect between the two. Whenever we'd lose a game, it seemed McD was annoyed that we didn't run enough. Seemed most posters here tended to agree and were also ripping Daboll for not running enough. But games like last week would complain we ran too much. So do think McD had a somewhat different take on how much we should run the ball and may have created friction between the two. But not sure personally who I'd tend to agree with either. Likely would depend on whether we won or lost the game! LOL

Pretty sure the Bills will want to add a mid level TE regardless. At this point, wouldn't call Gronk much more than mid level. So IMO whoever it might be will take some targets away from Knox. On the other hand adding another TE will also take defensive attention away from Knox so may allow him to be open more. Last couple of weeks of the season the Bills offense seemed to play better when using two TE's so may not be a bad thing overall. Good chance McKenzie is gone, Beasley who knows. So going with Diggs, Davis, 2 TE's and RB may work best.

I read the article and the one thing it mentioned was that the two OC's both ranked him 3rd. If they had instead ranked him 2nd he'd have been tied with Borrow for #1. It also sounded like the OC's ranked him last because they more view things strictly as X's and O's and want everything to go per script. Everyone else ranted hm much higher Coaches want the processor and the most coachable of them all, Burrow is the highest level of instincts

Ya think?? Read article the other day listing the top 50 FA this year and Tampa, Rams, and KC must have had a dozen on the list betrween the, I'm thinking nothing till after the SB for the reason you mention. He'll want to do it when you don't have 200 football writers all together in one spot to dissect the entire thing. And if he does want the spotlight, again do it after the game when he could have undivided attention

Let's put it this way, if I'm not right the only likely reason is the Bills didn't offer him the OC role and maybe the not ever called plays is scaring them off or other things.

Why would Dorsey leave if it comes down to a choice between being OC in NY or Buffalo? And if offered the OC here, it then becomes a lateral move so the Bills can just say no to NY. He knows what he has in Allen, from everything written they have a close relationship.

Who was his legend DC when he took over? Hope you're not referring to Belichick as doubt most people could even spell his name when he took over. In 1983 Parcells first year as HC, Belichick was the LB coach, they didn't even have a DC as Parcells kind of saw himself in that role. In 1985 Parcells 3rd year he finally named Belichick as DC, but still he was an unknown. His father probably was more known than him and that's not saying much.

I think he'd possible sign here thinking I could be part of group to bring SB to Buffalo, his hometown. Bills need a 2nd TE so would be a good fit, likely help Knox in his development too. I'd think if Brady retires, he either also retires or goes to Buffalo assuming we'd want him. But would seem like a win/win on a one year deal.

Since we're being nostalgic, if Brady retires, would Gronk sign with the Bills?

Not much in the NFL, believe last time there was a repeat champ was as you mentioned Dallas and that was almost 30 years ago and before the effects of FA were really being felt much. NBA seems to happen alot, MLB some, NFL Be very surprised if Mahomes gets that many, not because of him, but the difficulty of keeping a great team around him and coaching. Doubt Reid will be coaching all of Mahomes career. Brady had Belichick the entire time and McD is young enough could happen in Buffalo if things fall right. Dame scheme can help. Was looking at a list of the projected top 50 FA this year, had to be a dozen between KC, Tampa, and the Rams. Will be tougher on those teams to repeat. None from the Bills (admittedly because they don't have as many top level players) Plus even if Mahomes were to win 5, doubt they'd be in a row. If KC wins this year very likely they won't next season and that better opens the door for someone like Buffalo.

Incorrect. Pro bowl voting is done by fans, players, and coaches, each group is 1/3. So yes REAL NFL people (unlike you) voted him to pro bowl You'd think something that simple that took about took 2 seconds to verify, you'd actually have your facts straight on. But hey when you have an agenda, just make stuff up as you go along. And you call GM's morons!! LOL

I want KC as it pretty much guarantees they won't be there next year. Makes it easier for the Bills. Once you win, players get overpaid, over confident and don't repeat.

You're probably right, because he is viewed much higher by actual real NFL people than the morons here.

I;ll agree with you there. Thought think I saw the article in the Syracuse paper

I assume if they hadn't given him the option, they could have still franchised him this off-season if they couldn't agree on a deal. That would have givne them another year to evaluate him.

There's only one elite coach out there, Belichick and the shine is quickly coming off him too without Brady. Reid never won till he had Mahomes, Dungy won with Manning, Payton with Brees and only one time. Even Don Shula only won 3 SB in about 40 years. Sometimes all the stars align and a team/coach comes out of nowhere to win it Gruden in Tampa Billick in Balt. etc.

I find if kind of funny the most popular choice is to trade him when you consider that it seems like about 75% of the posters here say he sucks. If so, why would any team trade for him unless they are happy getting a 6th or 7th rounder in return as that's all a guy who sucks is worth? If they don't extend him or find a trade partner they are on the hook for a $12.7 mil cap hit so realistically the only option likely is to extend him. Do think the Bills and most everyone not an arm chair GM thinks much higher of him too.

Even Nick Wright is now praising him.

May be true, but doubt McKenzie sees it that way. Likely he blames Mcd. McD's comments after the one game where he kind of called out McKenzie also didn't help. So wouldn't be surprised if he is all in on moving on even if means taking a little less money. IMO be surprised if he's back, but hope he is.

Article just the other day in some publication was about how Allen has called tails 9 straight times prior to yesterdays game and tails came up every time. Odds were 512:1. If he had won again yesterday would have been over 1000:1 in his favor. But instead he lost twice in a row.