dave mcbride

They are NOT out of shape. Sheesh.

+1.

He basically produced exactly like jordan matthews (both were drafted within two picks of each other): good number of catches, low ypc. But the Giants are fine with that because they actually possess another receiver who can beat people over the top. Bob Woods is a similar comp and was also drafted at almost exactly the same spot. All are solid possession receivers who fill importanr roles provided they play across from a number 1. Woods and Shepherd have that now in Watkins and OBJ.

I took "better shape" to mean "better football shape," which is a whole different thing. Watkins is cut like a greek god at present, but in terms of on-field reps and hitting, I can see him being a little behind.

Early second rounder, actually.

Donohoe willingly dumped big Ted for being too fat, based on the rec of his noob coach who was wedded to a system. Tomlin wasn't given free reign, as far as I recall, and he didn't essenetially hire his own gm. That's the situation we have in Buffalo. -- McDermott HIRED the GM. That aimply can't be compared to the Steelers' situation. I actually think McDermott has potential, but the way he has started on the personnel front has me concerned. I have seen this show too many times before.

Yup!. People miss the fact that we're going to have a lousier entertainment product this year. "Wait 'til next year" is a meaningless (and indeed pernicious) philosophy w/regard to this organization. I always joke that if the Bills win the SB, I will never have to watch another sporting event again in my lifetime (and I'm not even really joking). Of course, I fully expect to hooked up to a respirator in 2050 watching them lose to the Jets and complaining on a message board about some stupid trade the team made.

Call me crazy, but I'd say the shameful refereeing was far more impactful in that Dolphins' game.

AZ will go with Drew Stanton over a guy who doesn't know the offense (AZ's scheme is very from Buffalo's). Flacco's back going out is unlikely, but if it does, yes, he might fit. But then the Bills won't have a quarterback.

That could happen, but it's highly unlikely. Also, the closer you get to the season, the less viable this solution is. If Philip Rivers goes down, I could see trading for Tyrod. But that's really the only viable possibility, at least in my opinion.

yes, and they signed a guy who knows the system inside and out. They didn't have to give up anything except for money either.

I'm not saying it's going to happen, but it is the case that seemingly every year some undertalented team gets off to a fast start (e.g., the Bills in 2007 and 2011). Then the talent problem emerges. Teams figure out what to take away, and said teams go 2-6 the rest of the way because they have players that can't overcome gameplanning that targets their deficiencies. Again, this seems to happen every goddamn year.

The Vikings starting QB suffered a catastrophic and possibly career-ending injury. It was a move made out of sheer desperation. The Ravens aren't in any sort of situation like that, and neither is any other team at present.

I don't understand your first sentence (seriously). I'm not talking about stupid Ryan quotes (your second sentence) or stupid Ryan coaching (your final sentence). My guess is that the current Bills staff is possibly good and as a baseline *competent* based on past results. Excellent talent helps teams win more than JAG talent does, assuming the coaching is NFL-competent. Having a bad coach is admittedly a spanner in the works vis-a-vis my argument, but I don't think that's the case anymore. It was the case last season, admittedly. Relatedly, Watkins was playing hurt even when he was in there. He wasn't nearly 100 percent, even in the Miami game. See my point about the coaching above. Plus: the final game shouldn't count, and last I recall, the Bills won that Miami game but were royally screwed by the refs in particularly egregious fashion - 2 blatant no-calls in in the end zone for PI (8 points surrendered) and not granting a TO to Ryan on that kick.

No one is trading for a starting QB at this point. It's too late to learn the offense.

To paraphrase Mike Lombardi, the truly talented teams bring it later in the season. The first part of the season is a testing ground. You can be like Minny last year and do it through smoke and mirrors for half a season, but the tendencies become rote and opponents figure it out. Teams win through talent. To wit: Green Bay and Pitt last season, or the Giants in 2007 and 2011. Or conversely, Buffalo in 2011 and 2007. "Now, the month of September is used to glean the strengths and weakness a team might possess. Yes, the games count toward the overall win-loss record, but what matters more is being able to accurately assess a team and then making the minor adjustments needed to win in late November and December. Think of September as the first 100 miles in the Indy 500, when the race teams make the minor adjustments to the car at the first pit stop. Hall of Fame coach Bill Walsh always wanted his assistants to play talented rookies in September knowing full well that the mistakes they made in September would help refine their habits by November and December, when mistake-free football is essential." https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/8/10/16122796/how-to-beat-patriots-bill-belichick

Not sure of your point. My point is that prior to the trades, the Bills talent level wasn't that bad, and with a little luck they had a chance to replace a team like Miami in the WC sweepstakes. Trading away top talent hurts their chances to do this. Is this even arguable?

Not all that accurate. A lot of that can and will come off the books because of roster churn and aging players.

Excellent post. What I'm about to say isn't really all that germane, but if they somehow get lucky and get to 5-3 by midseason, there is no getting around the fact that you need talent to maintain the momentum. And unlike in MLB, they won't be able to trade prospects (in the form of draft picks) for the talent that'll get them to the 10-win finish line. Also, the final 8 games - five of which are at home - add up to a pretty easy schedule, relatively speaking (Indy, NE, NO, TB, Oakland, KC, the Jets, and SD). Instead, they'll be trotting out Gaines and a truly subpar WR corps, and they're likely to perform as they always perform after a halfway decent start -- terribly.. But I guess there's always next year!

Given all of those picks, failure is by definition success. So Beane is really in a no-lose situation, right?

I'm not sure I follow the question. I think you're sort of asking whether he's injury prone. I think every NFL player is "injury prone," so I think it's the wrong question to ask (and I realize I'm putting words in your mouth). Does he have chronic injuries like bad tendinitis or spinal disc problems that are going to debilitate him long term, or does he have injuries that one can recover from and simply move on with no lasting damage? From everything I've read, he has the latter. Who knows whether he stays healthy, but you can say that about literally every player in the NFL.

I think so much depends on what happens. It's conceivable that the Rams go 10-6, KC goes 12-4, and the Bills go 7-9. Or they could go 3-13, 7-9, and 4-12. Regardless, the Bills will have a lot of picks. The issue is whether there are enough good QBs to draft and whether the Bills will have the ammo to move up. If they don't get a qb, then the trade doesn't make a whole lot of sense assuming Watkins stays healthy and performs to his ability.

Fair enough, but they just hired and fired a coach in ... less than two years. And let's not even bring up the hockey team.

He has elite quick twitch movement and is an excellent "bender." Before he got hurt last season (arm), he was on fire - the best player on the defense for the first 4-5 games. He is a headcase, but for teams on the cusp like Dallas, he'd be a very valuable piece.

Um ... you never said this.