dave mcbride

Back to the topic at hand: watching the Steelers tonight, it is abundantly clear how little talent the Bills have. The Steelers are loaded, but TN has a lot more talent than the Bills too.

Did you actually watch the week 16 game against NE? Because if you did, you wouldn’t have written what you wrote above. It was a biblical downpour and windy to boot. You are also unique in criticizing a player for a low number of attempts. Also note above what I said about that Ravens game skewing the stats and the defense they were facing. Arguably the best ever in league history.

EJ was not by "all" accounts a first round pick -- at all. Rosen and Darnold, on the other hand, are not late bloomers - they have been touted as first rounders long before their final college seasons. The same can't be said about most of the people you mention above (especially players like Weeden and Ponder). Locker, and RG III are the only ones. And let's not forget that RG III did have arguably the best rookie season for a qb in league history.

Yeah, but you kinda need a Rex to get through to a guy like that. It's one of the things he was good at (although it didn't work with Enemkpali) ...

I felt that the Bills were a very bad matchup against Jax, which outplayed the Bills in a bunch of games in that era. Bizarrely, TN had Jax's number that year despite being a worse team (Jax was hands down the best team in the AFC that season). I feel like the Bills would have struggled and probably lost in Jax no matter who was playing QB.

That's actually not really true. He played well late in the season, for one. But in his most memorable outing that year - the game against Baltimore (game 8) in which he pulled off remarkable last minute heroics to win the game despite awful statistics - he was up against a defense that most were unaware of how good it actually was (they hadn't been a great D in 1998). In short order, they became arguably the best defense in league history. His miserable stats (18/40 for 155 yds, 1 TD, and 3 picks, 32.2 rating) in that game greatly skewed his numbers overall, but bear in mind how dominant the Ravens D was already by that season: #1 overall in DVOA ( http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef1999 ). His stats after that game were actually quite good. He did perform poorly in an important game against the Giants, but they also were killed by a failed effort by Jonathan Freaking Linton to put the game away on a 4th and 1 at the Giants 36. Linton gets that, and the Bills win. Also, bear in mind that he closed his season in a ridiculous driving rainstorm in NE in which Christie kicked a FG to end it, 13-10. He was 22-35 for 212 yards in truly awful conditions and also ran 6 times for 44 yards (no turnovers). He also led the game clinching drive. In other words, it's more complicated than you suggest.

By *all* accounts, there will be multiple first-round caliber qbs next year.

This is my point! Coleman has been hanging around the far fringes of the league for four years, bouncing from practice squad to practice squad. And all of of a sudden this undrafted bum who has never done anything might actually be defense's focal point on run downs for the remainder of the season because he weighs a lot. The talent level is pathetic. yup - gotcha.

Really? They benched Losman for Trent Edwards (Losman was not out long in 2007) less than midway through 2007. They benched Edwards for Fitzpatrick early in 2009. They benched Manuel for Orton in game 5 of 2014. They benched Losman for Holcomb after 8 games in 2005. Christ, they benched RJ for Flutie in 1998, Flutie for RJ in 1999, and RJ for Flutie in 2000! Seems like it's par for the course, no?

I don't disagree. I like Taylor a lot, but he doesn't work in this offense. I think he works fine in certain systems, but the Bills don't run those. He still is good at protecting the ball, though - 2 of his 3 INTs this year were the fault of the receiver (Clay both times).

Oh yeah, it's necessarily a simplification. But as a defensive coach who has presided over some dominating defenses populated by elite players, McDermott has to be aghast.

This just doesn't cut it, and it's likely to get worse: The defense is less talented than the offense, and by a long way. The Bills o-line is at least decent, they have a decent TE, an elite RB, and a now-potentially OK group of receivers with the acquisition of Benjamin. On defense, they have one good CB, one good safety, one OK safety, and a sh*tshow on the front seven.

I'm not saying at all that they're giving up on the playoffs. As I say above at some length, I think that the defensive woes are driving a lot of the medium term decision making now. They've been absolutely dismantled a couple of weeks in a row, and they have KC and NE (twice) coming up. They're staring at an end-of-season defensive ranking of the high 20s/30.

The defense has been abysmal since the Tampa game, in which they gave up 447 yards. They got a bit lucky against the Raiders (rain; no Lynch; some lucky bounces on deflections), but it's pretty clear that they can't rush the passer and now they can't stop the run.

Can this thread be eliminated?

Josh McCown, who leads the NFL in fumbles with 9, has almost exactly the same stats as Taylor (although his team, which has better defensive talent than the Bills, has a losing record). He has a 93.7 rating and Taylor has a 91.4 rating. He has the same sack rate, but again, he leads the league in fumbles.

So there's no continuity in team management this century? Call me crazy, but I see it. Christ, this season alone is a freaking replay of four other seasons this century.

That could be the case, but I also think it's become painfully evident how bad the front-seven talent on this team is. It's really bad.

If you're committed to drafting a qb early, don't settle for the "best guy" at that slot. That's what gets you JP Losman and Paxton Lynch. Do what the big boys (Philly, Rams) do and trade up. I can almost guarantee you that the best couple of guys will be measurably better than the next two.

Cousins is a good player and he's someone to watch closely. But at the end of the day he is going to have a ton of suitors, and my bet is that he ends up back in Washington anyway. He's going to cost $25 million-plus a year too.

Front four players who can get to the QB are VERY expensive. Bear in mind that the Carolina D at its peak in 2013 was getting double digit sacks out of the LDE (Hardy) and RDE (Charles Johnson) positions. They were an overwhelming force that year. For a five-year stretch, Charles Johnson averaged 10.5 sacks/season at the RDE spot in Carolina. Look at what McDermott has now in that position. Plus look at what a player like Luke Kuechly does in comparison to Preston Brown. Night and day.

Every other Bills administration the last 30 years has acted in the same way, pretty much. Plus the guy they hired has more than a passing resemblance to another guy they hired nigh on about a decade ago - a former DB and longtime DC that went to an elite school and wants character guys who care a lot to populate his team. I'm not necessarily down on McDermott, but I've seen his type before. That other coach thought he had a gem with a Bill Walsh-endorsed mid-round pick who ran a pro offense in college too. We shall see. It's not impossible for Peterman to be the next Romo, but it's less than a 50/50 proposition. It'll be interesting to see how he performs and what his limitations are. They exist.

If they aren't panicking a little about the talent level on this defense, they're doing something wrong. Panic isn't always a bad response. The issue has to be addressed. As for "long term," this league is the not-for-long league. If they're 4-12 next season, I wouldn't bet a ton of money on them being back for season 3, and if they have a losing record in season 3, they will be gone as sure as the sun rises in the morning.

Actually, he was a 10 times better player in the late 1990s than he was in the mid-1980s. He genuinely blossomed and learned how to play in the CFL.

The simplest explanation is that the Bills will act like the Bills. Hence Occam's Razor. My assumption is that the Bills are the Bills and will act like the Bills typically act. Doesn't get any simpler than that. From the OED: "The principle that in explaining anything no more assumptions should be made than are necessary. Cf. law of parsimony n. at sense 3." You're missing my point. Taylor isn't even in this discussion. He's gone.