folz

To be fair, it was more than just a couple of interceptions. In his second year (2023), Bernard had: 3 INTs, 5 PDs, 3 FRs, 9 QB hits, 6.5 sacks, 14 QB pressures, 1 Bat, 10 TFLs, and 143 tackles. That's a pretty damn good year for any LBer. Last year, for instance, only 8 LBers had more than 143 tackles (for reference; in 2023 he was actually ranked 12th in tackles). And how many of those guys with more tackles also had as many impact plays and the ability to cover the pass really well? TB had a really good year in 2023. But, it's also fair to say he hasn't played like that for a season to a season-and-a-half. But, is that due to the injuries, what he's been asked to do (assignment-wise), because he's been figured out, or because he just got lucky with one magical season, but he's just not that good really? I guess that remains to be seen. But I personally feel like the "they've figured him out" argument for any position in football is a bit overblown, just mo.

As far as his contract goes, per Spotrac, on a yearly average, Bernard is currently the 24th highest paid linebacker in the league. As far as total value of the contract, he ranks 15th. But yearly average is a more accurate number because Bernard's contract is for 4 years, while 32 of the top 40 LBs (contract-wise) have contacts of just 2 or 3 years (mostly 3). And 29 of the next 30 Linebackers' (after Bernard in average salary) contracts are up before Bernard's is. So, some of those guys will pass him in average salary over the next year or two. It may be one of those contracts that seems like a bit of an overpay at first (in totality), but looks much better (from an overall standpoint) as the contract/years wear on (even though the yearly number goes up---and provided the player is still playing well/healthy, of course). I'm hoping a healthy Bernard in Leonard's system will bring back that playmaker we saw the first couple of years. He seemed to have a knack for being where the ball was. That seemed to trail off the last season and a half or so (mostly due to the injuries, I assume---but could also be in what he was being asked to do, the players around him, other factors...). Leonard likes to use his LBs in multiple ways, a lot of the pressures and most of the sacks in his system come from the LB spot for instance. So, I'm hoping for a bit of a resurgence from Terrell in the new system, if he can stay healthy.

a couple of notes in this vain; 1. Teams who are changing coaches probably released more FAs total, and therefore may still have more available out there. 2. Each team is in a different cycle of roster growth and development. Some teams have aging vets that need to be let go, while others did that a season or two ago, and therefore have younger teams (fewer FAs released, and/or younger FAs released---who are cheaper and not aging out of the league). According to Spotrac, there are still 150 Free agents available with a market value of at least $1,000,000 (and going up to $21,000,000). The Bills have 13 FAs (played with the team last year) still available: Bosa, Samuel, Milano, Rapp, White, Jones, Davis, Phillips, Prater, Poyer, Thompson, Cooks, and Ogunjobi. [3 offense, 1 ST, 9 defense---obviously our defense is changing more than the offense with our coaching change] And as another poster (NoSaint) alluded to, Bosa has retired, and Cooks, Poyer, Davis, and Prater were all in-season additions due to injuries. Also, of the 13 players, 10 of them are 31 years old or more. So, it's not quite as bad as it seems, though we are still near the top of FAs available when including all 13 guys. But we are not alone in that by any means---22 teams (68.75% of the league) have at least 6 FAs still available. Of the top 8 teams (most FAs still available), 7 of them made a head coaching change this year (and all 10 teams that changed their HC this year made the following list---top 22). Some of it is just the nature of the business/beast. NFL teams FAs still available (# of) WAS 18 MIA 15 LV 13 BUF 13 ARZ 12 CLE 11 PIT 10 NYG 10 DET 10 DAL 9 HOU 9 IND 9 SF 8 TB 8 NE 8 KC 8 LAC 8 TEN 7 MIN 7 CAR 7 ATL 6 BAL 6

I agree that there are some fans that may lay more blame at Beane's feet than Sean's, but I haven't really seen much of that in this thread. As for Josh, I don't think anyone blames him (and I never have---we wouldn't be where we are without him), some just like to point out some mistakes he (or the offense) made to say everything that went wrong wasn't always McDermott alone. I personally have never used that argument, but I understand why others have tried it. The way I see it is everyone gets credit for the good and shares some portion of blame for the bad (if you even want/choose to lay blame). That is what TEAM is all about. You are working (hopefully) as one unit towards one goal. I have defended Beane often on this board as well (which is why I'm probably considered a Homer---I prefer optimist). Are there things Sean could have done better? Yes. Are there things Beane could have done better? Sure. But, as the head coach, does it all ultimately fall on your head, yes...which is why Sean was eventually (I know too late for some) fired. It is what it is and I can just appreciate how much fun the last 9 years have been, regardless of not making a Super Bowl. Maybe that is from going through the same thing with the 90s team (not winning a Super Bowl). Still love and respect Bill, Marv, Jim and the gang despite never winning the big one, because it was a hell of a fun ride.

This is the problem right here. You assume too much. I haven't heard anyone call McDermott a "Great" coach, or top 5 or a GOAT, etc. What the so-called pro-McDermott people are saying is, he's gone, let's stop talking so negatively about him because despite his shortcomings, he did a lot for our franchise and deserves some respect for that, not vitriol. We acknowledge his mistakes and shortcomings, but also realize that he got some bad breaks along the way as well. Most of us were ok with his firing when it happened and are ready to move on. That does seem like a rational stance to me. On the other side (and not everyone of course), it is he was a bad coach, he was below average, he was a tyrant, he had a stick up his butt, he could never win a Super Bowl anywhere with anyone, he was a choker, his defense sucked, etc., etc. You guys got what you wanted, he was fired. What is the point of continuing to disrespect him? He was fired in January, it is now June. That is like breaking up with someone and 6 months later still complaining about that person. That isn't rational, that is emotional. That is not getting over or healing any hurt you felt. And the anti-McDermott people refuse to acknowledge any of the bad breaks, bad ref calls, having to play the Chiefs 4 out of 5 years, the Damar Hamlin situation, injuries, etc. as influencing anything. No, it's just McDermott sucked, that's the only reason. But, hey, you can paint things however you want if it makes you feel better.

Honest question here. Do the refs weigh into this discussion at all for the anti-McDermott gang? It is my contention that if the Cooks catch was ruled a catch as it should have been, we obviously win in Denver, then go on to play the Pats (who we would have beat) and are in the Super Bowl last year. In 2024, AFC Championship game, if the refs gave Josh the first down on the tush-push (as they should have because he got it), and/or ruled the Worthy catch as an incompletion (as it should have been---that led to an easy TD from the 2-yard line for KC), and if they didn't continually mis-spot the ball in the Chiefs favor (one video showed they did it at least 8 times in the game), we should have won that game with ease---and have been in the Super Bowl. The idea that McDermott could never make a Super Bowl seems a bit silly when he probably should have made the last two if not for the refs. Could we have played better in both of those games? Sure. But it's a hard sell to say the refs didn't have a hand in those losses. And let me ask this. Would Peyton Manning have been in more Super Bowls if he wasn't in the same conference as the Patriots? Would Shula/Marino have made more Super Bowls if not being in the same division and conference as the Bills? The fact that people refuse to acknowledge that having to play the Chiefs 4 times in 5 years of playoffs was not only unheard of (one team having to face the best team in the league with a HOF QB that many times in a row in the playoffs), but a major factor in McD not reaching a Super Bowl (and every NFL fan knows that KC got help along the way from the refs as well---in 2024, most NFL fans felt the refs pulled the Chiefs through the whole season---that probably isn't true, but it is also silly to think that the Chiefs have not had favor from the NFL/refs over their run).

No, that means he was generally seen as a Top 10 coach for at least six years. But just to be clear, I was a McDermott supporter throughout his entire time in Buffalo, but I was also ok with his firing when it happened. I did think it was time for a change, some fresh air, a new voice and I'm excited about the changes---more aggressive style (even if I felt bad for McDermott too because he got some really bad breaks in his time in Buffalo---along with his own mistakes and shortcomings---I can acknowledge that both things are true). I'm not trying to say we should have kept McD, I'm just pushing back a bit against the group that either says he sucks, is a below-average head coach, or are kicking him on the way out the door. Love him or hate him, the guy did a lot for our franchise and demands a certain amount of respect for that, imo. And I do think he was "pretty much" achieving the ceiling for the team up until the last game of each year. And we can and have debated the reasons for those exits. But outside of not getting the #1 seed (not easy to do with K.C. in our conference getting 14-15 wins/year), the team was really, really good most of the time. The ceiling for every team is Super Bowl, but only one team reaches that each season. We didn't and that is why he is gone, but he kept them playing well despite seasons with massive injuries, or a player dying on the field, through blizzards, lack of WRs, etc.; he oversaw the drafting and development of Josh and a much-needed culture change. He brought in Beane and Brady (however you feel about them). And despite the frustrations, it has been a hell of a fun ride the last 9 years. People can fault him for what he didn't do (or didn't do well), but he also deserves a lot of credit for all that he did do. For so many posters to talk so poorly about him or act like he was the sole reason for us not reaching a SB just doesn't sit well with me. But then everyone has their own opinions and arguing probably won't change that. I agree that it is just time to move on (I think once training camp and the season starts, that should help), but it seems that it is the anti-McDermott camp that is keeping this alive by continually posting negative stuff about him, so some of us feel the need to push back a bit. But believe me, I do also understand the frustration and disappointment of the last 5-6 years as well.

True. It will be interesting to see come next coaching cycle as some of us think he will get offers and a job (and do well in that job), while some think he will only get bottom-of-the-barrel offers (teams that need a culture change, with mixed results), some think he might get a job but he'll suck with the new team, some think he'll get a job and do the same thing as in Buffalo---improve the team significantly but never win big, and some think he will never get another head coaching job at all (in the NFL). We are all speculating right now. None of us know for sure how other owners/GMs/organizations perceive Sean as a head coach. I was just responding to Mikey152 who said he was rarely ranked/considered as a Top 10 coach in rankings (which, of course, are only put out by the media, etc.). But I think if you polled non-Bills NFL fans, they too would have a higher opinion of him than the anti-McDermott Bills fans do. But again, fans don't do the hiring. I'm just saying that the majority of people (media and fans---not owners/organizations) generally perceived Sean as a Top 6-14 head coach for most of his time in Buffalo. Or on the aggregate, a Top 10 head coach.

Not sure what "coach rankings" you mean, but on a very quick and cursory Google search, I found these rankings. There is one Top 5 ranking in there (from CBS Sports in 2021), but I think it's safe to say that you are correct in saying that Coach McDermott was never seen as a Top 5 coach. However, I do think that he was consistently considered a Top 10 coach by the majority of people, for the majority of his tenure in Buffalo. And at least a Top 14 coach by all. The only rankings I saw below #14 were from 2017-2019 (when he was an unknown commodity and we tanked 2018 to purge the cap---most coach rankings come out before the season, so his 2019 rankings would be based on his 2018 season). 2025 Sharp Football ranked McD #9 CBS had Sean in Tier 1, but #12 overall Total Pro Sports ranked Sean #6 NBC Sports ranked McD #9 2024 CBS had McD #9 top coach PFN had McD ranked #10 Yardbarker had him at #8 2023 Total Pro Sports ranked McD #6 Yardbarker had McD at #10 Last Word on Sports had McD at #9 CBS had Sean at #7 2022 Gridiron Heroics ranked Sean #6 PFN had Sean at #6 CBS had Sean at #6 The Sporting News had McD at #8 Sports Illustrated ranked McD #9 Fanrankings had Sean at #7 2021 FantasyPros had McD at #7 CBS had Sean at #5 PFN had Sean at #8

I agree, those stats won't stand out AS much with the other modern/current guys included. But Josh still holds more than his own amongst his peers: Of the 11 categories listed in the original post/tweet (for their first 8 years only): Mahomes is better than Josh in 8 categories, Josh wins 3 categories (this is in 9 years for Mahomes/but similar number of games as Josh) Brady is better than Josh in 3 categories, Josh wins the other 8 categories Jackson has Josh in 3 categories, one push, Josh has the lead in the other 7 categories Burrow is better than Josh in 4 of the categories, Josh has the lead in the other 7 categories Wilson has 3 categories over Josh, one push, and Josh has the advantage in the 7 other categories Note: Burrow has only played 6 years to this point, and hard to imagine Josh matching Brady's career numbers (with the trajectory of Brady's later career and how long he played---but Josh's rushing should at least keep him in the race). So, other than Mahomes (and for their first 8 years only), Josh still ranks pretty high (1 or 2) in 2/3s of the categories listed in the original tweet. And for the other third of the categories, he's still basically top 5. The three categories where Josh is weakest amongst his peers is completion percentage, Interception percentage, and passer rating.

Ok, I'll give you that he could still be a WR1 (by default) in a few of the worst WR rooms in the league. But how does that help us? Our problem has been getting over the hump in the playoffs and Stefon has not been good in the playoffs since the end of 2021 (with two different teams). Over the last 5 years (4 years of playoffs, 10 playoff games total), Stefon has averaged 39.9 yards and 0.1 TDs (1 TD in 10 games) per playoff game. He has a career playoff catch percentage of 62.4% and 7.7 yards per reception (that is below average for WRs in the playoffs, let alone a supposed #1). And six of those games were with Josh Allen as his QB. I wouldn't call it hatred...just distrust (from how he acted at the end of his tenure with the Bills and Minny) and an awareness that a WR that will turn 33 this season is in decline (why were the Pats willing to move on after one year when they signed him for three?). Not worth the money or headache for those stats, imo. And sure, if he came to Buffalo, he might perform better (or have better stats) than Palmer, Coleman, or Bell across the season, but at this point, I'd rather see what that trio can do with another season under their belts (and hopefully healthy) come playoff time (as opposed to what Diggs brings come playoff time). And another poster brought up a good point about blocking. He's fairly willing to block, but he doesn't have the size/strength to do it well consistently. You can accept that if he's your number one receiver, but on a team that runs the ball a lot, you need your other receivers to be able to block well. I just don't think he improves our team significantly enough (if at all) at this point to warrant the money or possible issues.

In New England last year, Diggs had five 100-yard games [two vs. the horrible 3-14 Jets, one vs. us (his old team/revenge factor), one vs. 8-9 Carolina, and one vs. 8-9 Baltimore (a team that Keon Coleman had 112 yards against]. 60% of his production/yards for the Pats came in those 5 games. Stef had 16 games under 69 yards. Stef had 14 games under 46 yards. Stef had 11 games under 37 yards (as their #1 WR with by far the most targets) He had 5 total touchdowns in 21 games. That is one TD every 4.2 games. In 4 playoff games, he averaged 27.5 yards and 0.25 TDs per game. 1,003 yards sounds good, but he was a non-factor for more than 3/4s of their games (76.2%), including all 4 playoff games. And he turns 33 years old this season. The rest of the Pats receiving corps was Kayshon Boutte, Mack Hollins, Demario Douglas, Kyle Williams, and Efton Chism. Probably not too tough to be the default #1 in that group...and yet... Down the stretch (including playoffs): Diggs' last 10 games of the season he averaged 46.4 yards and 0.2 TDs per game. Mack Hollins' last 10 games of the season, he averaged 56 yards and 0.1 TDs per game. In 4 playoff games Diggs had 110 yards and 1 TD. In 2 playoff games (injury) Mack had 129 yards and 1 TD. In 4 playoff games Boutte had 168 yards and 1 TD. In 4 playoff games Douglas had 84 yards and 1 TD. No matter what team he goes to, Diggs is not a #1 WR anymore. I mean, Mack Hollins outperformed him down the stretch and in the playoffs (and in two fewer playoff games) last year. I'd rather bring back Hollins than Diggs at this point. A #1 receiver does not disappear for 3/4s of the season and the playoffs. A #1 WR does not average 27 yards per playoff game. His stats were padded last year against his former team and four lesser opponents. The rest of the year, he didn't really do much. How much would you want to pay for that production? I'm sure Stef still feels he deserves #1 or #2 WR money, yet he'd probably be 3rd or 4th at best in target shares in Buffalo and then he'd disappear in the playoffs again like he has for most of his career. And all of that doesn't even take into account how he left and screwed over our team just two years ago. Why would anyone want him back at this point? We wouldn't be getting 2020-2021 Diggs (that was 5-6 years and a torn ACL ago).

Fitz/Flutie. [Voted for Tyrod, since the above guys were not on the poll.]

This isn't an unheard of thing to say. This was something that was said about the K-gun offense often back in the 90s (particularly after Super Bowl XXV). Another team with an electric offense and a bend-but-don't-break defense. The offense scored so quickly that the defense would be on the field most of the game (time of possession would heavily favor the other team), which would lead to the defense wearing down and not always being at their best (tired) in crunch time---which wasn't great, because they were already a bit of an undersized defense to start with. Seeing it as a negative (as apparently you are) all depends on how that coach said it. Was he specifically (angrily) blaming the offense to take blame off the defense? Or was it just said matter-of-factly (as in a strategic discussion) that we need to try and keep the defense fresh by sustaining longer drives?

I always thought that the "not being able to beat elite QBs" narrative was a bit overblown. First of all, you can only play who is on your schedule...and being in the AFC East, we've seen some bad QB play, but secondly, we have quite a few wins against good to elite QBs in the McD era. Here are some of the QBs the Bills have beaten over McDermott's tenure (the number of Bills' wins against those QBs in parentheses): TIER 1 Patrick Mahomes (5 times) Lamar Jackson (5) Aaron Rodgers (4) Matthew Stafford (2) Dak Prescott (2) Jared Goff (3) Matt Ryan (2) Justin Herbert (2) Joe Burrow (1) Ben Rothlisberger (1) Russell Wilson (1) TIER 2 Drake Maye (2) Baker Mayfield (2) Tua Tagovailoa (9) Joe Flacco (2) Jay Cutler (2) Derek Carr (2) Ryan Tannehill (3) Trevor Lawrence (1) Bo Nix (1) Brock Purdy (1) Kirk Cousins (1) Alex Smith (1) Cam Newton (2) Phillip Rivers (1) Andy Dalton (1) Sam Darnold (5) Geno Smith (1) That's 65 games, which equates to 39% of our games overall and 61% of our wins (in the McD era). I'm not trying to say that all of those QBs are elite or even in the very good category...but they're all quality QBs (not garbage). And how many elite QBs does any team face in a season...not that many. Every good team beats up on bad teams/bad QBs. But, even if you take just the true elite (Mahomes, Jackson, Rodgers, Stafford, Burrow), we still had 17 wins against those guys. A far cry from never being able to beat an elite QB (sans Jackson). As far as the playoffs go, we only lost to two elite QBs: Burrow once (after the Damar Hamlin situation) and Mahomes (4 times).