folz

I'll admit that how I feel about our WR group is a bit of a projection. I think Keon is going to be very good this year, but I can understand that some are not sold on him. I don't expect Keon to be a #1 WR or anything, just improvement. He had 556 yards and 4 TDs last year. If you prorate the stats to a 17-game year (because he missed 4.5 games last year), he'd be at 756 yards and 5 TDs. That would be without any improvement, just staying healthy. And I think he can definitely improve on where he was at the end of the season, after the injury...or in the first few games of his career. I don't think it's crazy to project Keon to maybe 800-850 yards and 6 TDs. Khalil easily projects for around 800 yards and 5 TDs. [He had 821 and 4 TDs last year] I have always liked Curtis Samuel as a player, but again, I can understand that others are down on him for last year and wonder if he can stay healthy. And I don't expect Palmer or Moore to become someone they are not or haven't been, but imo, they are still an upgrade from Hollins/Cooper (based on snap counts and production from last year, as well as age and athleticism). But all of those guys have proven that they are capable of at least 600-yard seasons with a few TDs. Our RBs and TEs had 1,526 receiving yards last year. So, if Keon and Khalil come in around 800 yards each, and the other three averaged 500 yards each, that would be 4,626 yards (if the RBs and TEs stayed the same). More than Josh has ever thrown for. I'm not saying these are the best receivers he's had, or that Josh will actually reach that lofty number (hopefully we won't need to pass that much), but with how Brady runs the offense and how Josh distributes the ball, this should be a very good unit of weapons overall imo (meaning all units combined: RBs, TEs, and WRs). But, I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out. As to the ranking of our receivers vs. other teams, I don't have the energy to do a full comparison of every team myself, so I Googled it. Unfortunately, I couldn't find too many rankings: I know we don't like PFF, but they have our receivers ranked at #19 (13 teams worse: Seattle, Green Bay, Denver, New Orleans, NY Giants, Las Vegas, Carolina, LA Chargers, NY Jets, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, New England, and Cleveland). https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-2025-receiving-corps-rankings-eagles Mike Clay of ESPN gave Unit Ranking Grades. Not sure how he gets the grades, but he has five teams at 9 (his highest ranking), six teams at 8, two teams at 7, ten teams at 6, three teams at 5, four teams at 4, two teams at 3. He has the Bills WR corps at 6. That means he has 13 teams better than the Bills, 10 teams on par with the Bills, and and 9 teams worse. Provided the Bills aren't the worst of the ten #6 teams, that's pretty much right in the middle as well. [The 9 teams definitively below the Bills in his rankings are: New England, Tennessee, Dallas, Arizona, San Fran, NY Jets, Cleveland, Las Vegas, and Denver.] So, both lists have these same six teams definitively below the Bills (New England, Tennessee, Jets, Cleveland, Las Vegas, and Denver). And at least one of the lists had these ten teams below the Bills (Seattle, Green Bay, New Orleans, NY Giants, Carolina, LA Chargers, Pittsburgh, Dallas, Arizona, and San Fran). So, that is a possible 16 teams below the Bills (depending on who is doing the ranking). Again, it isn't anything definitive by any means, but I think it at least shows that we aren't complete bottom of the barrel. Again, I agree that the Bills' WR group is not a great unit by any means (in comparison to other teams), but I am looking at the overall weapons and how the Bills want to run their offense. We were 49/51 run/pass-split last year. And the offense is about scheming guys open and letting Josh make decisions, rather than forcing the ball to a stud WR. I think our unit is better than last year's unit, and despite passing yards being down overall last season, the offense still scored more points than any previous Bills offense (even with Diggs and Beasley at their peak). I don't know, I may be overly optimistic and you may be overly pessimistic---but hopefully reality will be no worse than the median between us.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the WRs and win total without Josh. I think the WR group is decent/average rather than garbage and I think the RBs and TEs with the WRs give Josh plenty of weapons. Just mo. And it is a very fair point that Josh makes both the O-line and receiving targets better. He avoids sacks that many QBs wouldn't be able to. He is accurate, can make all of the throws, and as you said, makes a lot of off-script plays. He definitely makes those groups better, I just don't think that they would be completely terrible without him. I think there is still a lot of talent on the offense, particularly the offensive line and RBs. It's just so hard to quantify how much better Josh makes them, or what they would look like with a different QB.

😁 If you include playoffs, Josh hit his 50th start in week 3 of his 4th year. Tua hit his 50th start in week 16 of his 4th year. The gap isn't as wide as it would seem because Josh didn't start the first game of his rookie year and missed 4 games due to injury that season. So, his rookie year brings his average down. Josh has started 94.8% of the games in his career. In the last 6 years (subtracting his rookie season), he has started 99% of his games (only 1 game missed). Josh is averaging 15.7 starts per season for his career*. He has averaged 16.5 games per season over the last 6 years**. (not counting playoffs obviously) Tua has started 73.8% of the games in his career. Missing 21 games over the last 5 years. Tua is averaging 12.4 starts per season. [*Note: Josh played three 16-game seasons, before the NFL went to 17 games. Tua only played in one 16-game season, before it shifted.] [Two of the last six years for Josh were only 16-game seasons, with four 17-game seasons.]

Last 50 Regular Season Starts (true perspective): Total Yards Total TDs Total Turnovers Completion % GWD Record Playoffs Josh 14,144 127 49 64.5 10 37-13 7-6 Tua 13,162 84 46 68.6 7 32-18 0-1 Josh's 50 games started week 1 of the 2022 season. Over that span (51 games), Josh has missed 1 regular season game and no playoff games (13 PO games total). Tua's 50 games started in week 8 of the 2021 season. Over that span (61 games), Tua has missed 11 regular season games and 2 of 3 playoff games. People can match up stats all they want, but 43 more touchdowns over that span equates to 301 more points, or 6 points per game. Plus Josh had almost 1,000 yards more total yards over that span, and as Augie pointed out...was always available. Not being available in the playoffs is huge. And in Tua's 1 playoff appearance, he went 20 of 39 (51.3 comp.%) for 210 total yards, 1 TD, 1 INT. Josh has averaged per game in the playoffs: 310 total yards, a 65.7 comp%, 2.5 TDs, 0.30 INTs. That X poster is trying hard to prove that Tua is as good as Josh. But I wonder if he would actually trade them head-up, player-for-player, if he were the GM of the Bills (somehow I doubt it).

I was kind of responding to two posts at once. FireChans was the one who said 4-wins. Sorry to make it appear that that was your call as well.

Yeah, I wasn't saying the defense was good last year and of course that will affect the offense. My point was that 4 of the 7 "average" QBs that I pointed out from last year didn't really have better defenses. So if we swapped them onto the Bills team, the defense wouldn't necessarily be a detriment to say how many wins they had with their respective teams last year. Plus, I was kind of looking at 2025, rather than 2024. I think the defense will be much improved from last year with all of the new additions. I assumed the question was if Josh were out this coming year, not last year. But, do you really think that this is a 4-win team if you put Stafford or Stroud on the 2025 team? I think they would at least be in the hunt for a playoff spot. Do you really think with a Stafford, Stroud, Hurts, Daniels, Cousins-type QB at the helm this team couldn't score 21 points/game? The average points per game for NFL teams last year was 22.8. Only 9 teams scored less than 20 points per game last year. Their QBs were: Will Levis, Mason Rudolph, Trevor Lawrence, Mac Jones, Derek Carr, Spencer Rattler, Jake Haerner, Caleb Williams, Gardner Minshew, Aidan O'Connell, Drake Made, Jacoby Brisett, Daniel Jones, Tommy Devito, Drew Lock, Deshaun Watson, Jameis Winston, Dorian Thompson-Robinson, Billy Zappe, Desmond Ritter, and Aaron Rodgers. That is not average QB play for the most part (giving a pass for Caleb Williams and Drake Make being rookies). Also note, that is 21 QBs that played for those 9 teams last year, so there was no stability at the position for those teams (except for the Jets and Bears). For the Bills to fall to a team that can't score 20/21 points, at least based on last year, we would need bad QBs rotating in and out. The OP's original question was with average QB play. And do you really think the Bills have/had a less-talented roster than the Jets, Saints, Jaguars, Titans, Bears, Raiders, Patriots, Giants, and Browns? As to Trubisky, yeah, I'm not confident that he could give us consistent, average QB play for a whole season either. But then again that changes the OP's original query. If Trubisky couldn't deliver average play, sure we are probably a 6-8 win team. If he did give us average play, or if we had one of the other average (not bad) QBs that I mentioned, then I say we are still a 9-10 win team fighting for the playoffs. With Josh we are a 12-14 win team. So, I would say, without Josh we lose 3-5 more games. The Bills falling to a 4-win team without Josh seems a bit ridiculous with one of the best O-lines, a top 10 RB room, above average TEs, and a decent WR room, plus an improved defense. It is almost saying that Josh wins 9-10 games a year without any help from his teammates. Yes, Josh is already an all-time great QB, but he is not doing it alone, despite the lack of other current All-Pros on the team.

As far as how the Bills would fare without Josh, well you first have to define your terms. Is it if Josh got injured early and we had to play Trubisky all year? Or is it because Josh left Buffalo or was injured in the offseason and Beane had either, or both, free agency and the draft to replace him? The OP set the terms at average QB play. Well, last year, the most average QBs were Matthew Stafford and C.J. Stroud. Player Total Yards rank TDs rank INTs rank Stafford 17th 16th 16th most INTs Stroud 16th 17th 8th most INTs So, how would the Bills fare with average QB play? Well Stafford and Stroud both led their teams to 10 wins last year. No question, the Bills currently have a better RB room, TE room, and offensive line than the Texans or Rams. While the Texans and Rams have the better WR rooms (provided they stay healthy). The Texans and Rams defenses both gave up more points than the Bills defense (and that was a down year for Buffalo). So, I see no reason why either of those two QBs couldn't still have at least 10 wins with this Bills roster. And if you think Stafford and Stroud were only average last year due to their WR injuries, well the next few guys on the list (ranking ~18-22, which would be slightly below average) and their 2024 records were: Jayden Daniels (12 wins), Caleb Williams (5 wins), Kirk Cousins (7 wins), Jordan Love (11 wins), and Jalen Hurts (14 wins). I still think most of those guys could get us to at least 9 wins. Last year, the Bills defense was 12th in points allowed. It was definitely a down year for the defense, but we should be much improved this season (imo). But, of the 7 QBs noted above, only 3 of their teams allowed fewer points than the Bills. So, our defense is stronger than most of those teams...meaning that would actually help at least 4 of those QBs to fare better in Buffalo---or at least it would even out if you think their WRs or whatever are better). But how many of those teams are overall more talented than the Bills, position-by-position? Philly and ...who? Plus McDermott took a much, much less-talented team with Tyrod Taylor as the QB (who I wouldn't even say was average) to 9 wins. Yes, it was an easier schedule than 2025 will be, but he was a first year head coach at the time and just look at the difference in overall talent between the 2017 team and the 2025 team. Our top receiver that year was Charles Clay with 558 yards. The receiving leaders in order of yards were: Clay, LeSean McCoy, Deonte Thompson, Nick O'Leary, Zay Jones, Jordan Matthews, Kelvin Benjamin, and Andre Holmes. I don't know about you, but Shakir, Palmer, Coleman, Moore, Samuel, Kincaid, Knox, Cook, Davis, Johnson, etc. looks a hell of a lot better than that 2017 mess. Yes, we had Shady, but our #2 RB was Mike Tolbert. How about Jordan Mills vs. Spencer Brown? Etc. Etc. Even on defense, a lot of the good players (Tre, Milano, Hyde, Poyer, Alexander) were rookies or in their first year with the Bills. And it was a new defense (and offense) for everyone. All new coaches, a new GM, no culture established yet, supposed star players jettisoned (Watkins, Dareus), etc. If he could make 9 wins with that mess, what's to say he couldn't do the same with a significantly better roster? Let's face it guys. The Bills are a very talented team beyond just Josh Allen. A quick look at a few 2025 O-line rankings had Bills as S-tier (elite), #2, #4, #8. Our RB room is top 5-7 in the league. Our TEs are above-average. In my opinion, this is easy a 9+ win team with or without Josh (as long as the QB play is at least league average). Now if you say we had to run the year with Trubisky...well, it would depend on if he played at league average or not. If he did, again, probably a 9- or 10-win team. If he stunk up the joint, yeah, we'd probably have a below .500 record, but that wouldn't be based on team talent, but on poor QB play. But, if the defense improves to a normal McDermott standard, even with poor-quarterbacking (provided it's not Peterman-esque 5 INTs/game) we would still at least be competitive in more than half of our games. And as others have said, what team that has a generational, future-HOF QB wouldn't see a drop-off if he were out. You can only really compare the situation to a Mahomes-, or Rodgers-type of player in their prime. The drop-off from many QBs to their backup will never be as significant as the drop-off from a HOF-type QB to his backup. And seriously, the Patriots with Matt Cassell is the exception to the rule, not the norm by any means. Cassel had 10 wins and 5 losses. He also had Belichick as his coach, with Randy Moss and Wes Welker as his top receivers, with a defense that allowed the 8th fewest points that year, on a team coming off an 18-1 year and a Super Bowl appearance (losing by 3 points to the Giants in the SB). So, looking at it that way, yes, the team still had 11 wins total in 2008 (Brady got 1 before being injured), but the drop-off from the previous year was still 7 or 8 games. A significant drop-off, despite 11-wins still being a decent season.

I was on Youtube just yesterday and a short video popped up titled, Great Moments in NFL History. I started to watch, curious what moments they selected. I watched the first two moments, and then the third was the Music City Miracle. I immediately clicked off the video and didn't watch another second. Yeah, I have never rewatched any of the Super Bowls from the '90s. Can barely stomach watching highlights from those games. Back in the old days (not sure if anyone still does it), leading up to the Super Bowl each year, one channel (probably ESPN), used to spend a day/weekend showing highlight videos of every Super Bowl back-to-back. I used to watch a lot of them. After the Super Bowl losses in the 90s, I never watched those SB highlights again, even for the SBs without the Bills in it. And yeah, I agree with Logic. 13 seconds might be the only playoff loss that I would ever rewatch (it was just such a great game---an all-time NFL classic), despite the heartache.

Sorry to get a bit philosophical on a football board, but... Let me ask this. Is a person's life meaningless unless they reach the top of their profession and are rich and famous? i.e., "win the Super Bowl" according to society's standards. Or do they instead look back on life and see all of the fun and loving interactions with their friends and family; births, weddings, small achievements by you, your spouse, or children. Do they take pride in learning and growing and becoming a better person and helping their children to do the same, pride in overcoming the obstacles and adversity that they've faced, the enjoyment of holidays and parties and vacations and great conversations, and intimate moments with the one they love, etc., etc. What is more important in the end? My second question is, when we win the Super Bowl, what then? Yes, it would be an awesome, ecstatic moment that we will all remember for a long, long time. A weight lifted off our collective shoulders. But then what? Do you stop watching football? Do you not care if the Bills stink then for the rest of our lives because at least we got one? Or does the narrative become, well we've only won one Super Bowl with Josh as our QB. A good GM/Coach would have won 3-4 with Josh. But, how does it really change how you watch the following 10-20 years of Bills games? I could care less about bragging rights, etc. And of course, that stuff fades with time anyhow, just ask the Jets. Whenever they say, "well at least our franchise has won a Super Bowl," others will respond, "yeah like almost 60 years ago, you weren't even born, so who cares." What we will remember is that moment, and that memory of sharing it with our families and fellow Bills' fans. But then the next season, it's just striving for that same goal again---and who knows how long it will take to do it again? And we have actually had tons of those types of moments, just not in the Super Bowl. But honestly, I wouldn't trade being a Bills fan for all of the Lombardis in New England and K.C. Why? Because it hasn't been easy. The life lessons that have come along with being a Bills fan (resiliency, perseverance, overcoming adversity, loyalty, compassion, true teamwork, etc.) are unquantifiable. And because of all of the heartbreak, our small victories can be as or more exhilarating or precious than those other teams reaching the peak. Let's go back to New Year's Eve 2017/2018. The drought ends. One of the best New Year's Eves of my life because of it. The joy and celebration we felt and shared with the team and Bills fans all around the country/world (just for making the playoffs) was probably as high as any team's secondary Super Bowl win (if it wasn't their first SB, or first in a long time). I mean how much true elation was there for say New England's 4th or 5th Super Bowl? Of course you're happy to win it again (especially if it was an exciting season), but the emotions felt are no where near the peak of that 1st one...or probably of making the playoffs after a 17-year drought. How about the rally in Buffalo after the first Super Bowl loss in the 90s. When the entire crowd cheered for Scott Norwood to come to the podium (after having "lost" the game for the team...as many other fans would see it). Still brings a tear to my eye. And Marv reciting the "Sir Andrew" poem to the team, after the SB loss, about getting back up to fight another day. 51-3. I don't even need to say any more and most of you know what I'm talking about. And those that are old enough to have experienced it know. I was in the stands that day and I will never forget the party that was going on in that stadium for the entire second half. Or running through the parking lot after, high-fiving every other Bills fan. The Damar Hamlin incident. How the team and community rallied together for our fallen comrade and grew closer because of it. All of the charitable donations made by Bills fans (Andy Dalton, Lamar Jackson, Damar, etc.) I could go on and on...but you all know. We have had a lot of joy and a lot of heartbreak on this journey with our beloved team, but isn't that life? And in the current era, beyond breaking the drought, we have enjoyed 93 wins (almost 65% of our games), we have dominated our division rivals, scored the most points and have the 2nd most wins last five years, getting to watch an All-time great QB---Amari lateraling the ball back to Josh for a TD in the snow vs. SF, Josh hurdling Anthony Barr to win as a 17-point underdogs, the perfect New England playoff game, the epic battles with KC (reg season and playoffs), etc., etc. I don't know about you, but I have enjoyed it all, Super Bowl or not. Yes, we all want to see the Bills win a Super Bowl, but if it all seems meaningless unless they do, then maybe it's time to get off the ride. One person can look at a roller coaster and say, that's dumb it just goes around in a circle and you don't get anywhere, so they walk away. While another person gets on and relishes the sensation of every up and down, every twist and turn. "I may be going to hell in a bucket, but at least I'm enjoying the ride." -The Grateful Dead

Am I mistaken, or is there still over 3 months (100 days) until the season opener? OTAs, off-season training program, training camp. Three months is plenty of time for a Pro-athlete to get where he needs to be to play on Sundays (barring injuries that prevent him from doing so). The Bills have very specific plans set for their guys (nutrition, training, etc.) to get them to the weight/strength they want them at. Maybe Dalton is just behind a bit because of needing to rest after the season (due to injuries), rather than being able to attack the offseason right away in February/March. Rest and rehabilitation probably took the front seat to over-working while still recovering. And I know it's not all, or just, the younger fans that seem to get impatient with young players, but back in the day (outside of maybe RBs) we got used to waiting 2-4 years for most players (even many QBs). Rookies did not play a lot at all. I know it is a different league now, but many guys still take 2, 3, 4 years to develop fully or fully acclimate to the pro-game---especially if they've had injuries that set them back---it's just today's players have to play through they're growth (if they were selected fairly high---first 2-3 rounds), rather than learning from the bench for a couple of seasons. Sure, we'd all love our rookies to come in and be studs right away. But, I'd much rather wait too long on a player than to give up on him too early. People are so quick these days to throw the "bust" label on players...when I'm not sure they even understand what a bust is anymore. For instance, a player like Ed Oliver sometimes gets that label from some. I think we all can agree that we hoped for more based on where he was drafted, but by no means is he a bust because of that. He is an above-average starter, who shows flashes of excellence. That is not a bust no matter where he was selected. You could maybe say he hasn't matched the value of his pick, but a true bust is a guy that implodes in his first 2-3 years (either: mentally, doesn't work hard enough, doesn't care enough, just wanted the money/fame, parties too hard, or just can't up his game to the NFL level, etc.). Those players are usually out of the league quickly (2-4 years), with very little to show for it. Kincaid is similar to Oliver to me at the moment, in that he has yet to reach the value of his draft pick, but imo, he has had too much production already to be considered a bust. And how many fans thought Terrell Bernard or Spencer Brown were bad picks (even going into their 2nd and 3rd years, respectively). Heck, even Beane gave up too early on Wyatt Teller. They used to say that patience was a virtue. But, unfortunately, many folks don't seem to care about virtues these days. I personally look forward to seeing Dalton, Keon, Cole, DeWayne, etc. all improve and grow this year. Hopefully they can all make big jumps (going into years 2 and 3), but even just one or two steps forward from each could affect the team in a very positive way. Call me a Homer, but...

My bad...I used ESPN stats and cross referenced with Pro-Football Reference and Football Database. They all had the same number of yards and the same ranking (9th). They did not denote anywhere that they were "net" passing yards, i.e. that it was minus sack yards (and I wasn't thinking about that). I should have just gone to NFL.com. Thanks BADOL. Anyhow, I'm updating the rankings I posted earlier, using NFL official stats (that does not subtract sack yards lost): Here is where the Bills rank in both total passing and rushing attempts and yards over the last 5 years: PASSING RUSHING YEAR Atts Yds Atts Yds 2024 26th 17th 9th 9th 2023 16th 10th 5th 7th 2022 14th 9th 20th 9th 2021 5th 10th 13th 6th 2020 11th 3rd 17th 20th And just some more data to weigh in: Buffalo Bills Total Yards and Points Last Five Years (Regular Season) YEAR Off Yards Points 2024 6,168 525 2023 6,518 451 2022 6,523 455 2021 6,659 423 2020 6,509 501 On average, we had 384 yards less of total offense than the previous four years (~22.6 yards/game), but it was also our highest scoring year. 🤷‍♂️ I guess you could chalk that up to fewer mistakes (fewer turnovers and sacks). So, again, the question is can they maintain that (or not fall too far back to the mean in those categories). It could also be a bit that we had some games where they let their foot off the gas in the 4th and/or 3rd quarters due to big leads. Without looking at every game/how many blowouts per year, I thought a quick way to get an idea if there was more of that last year than the previous four years was to look at the Bills' backup QB snap counts: 2024 = 11.22%; 2023 = 3.26%; 2022 = 2.21%; 2021 = 3.08%; 2020 = 4.57%. So, our backup QBs did play a significant more number of snaps last year in blowouts/week17 (so maybe that weighs in too a bit---re: fewer yards). Buffalo Bills Yards/Game and Points/Game (McDermott Post-Season) YEAR Yards/GM Points/GM 2024 380 29 2023 375 27.5 2022 393.5 22 2021 460 41.5 2020 358 22.7 2019 425 19 2017 263 3 [Last year was basically our second best offensive performance in the playoffs, after 2021.]

Yeah, thanks. That makes sense (regarding the rushing stats). I didn't weigh Josh into my thinking. He has run a lot less the last couple of years, and therefore helped pad the team rushing stats in '21 and '22 (despite the lower number of rushing attempts overall). And yes, we are pretty much a split fanbase when it comes to the wide receivers. Some think we still need that true #1 and some are all on board with the "everyone eats" (spread the ball around to multiple above average weapons, rather than run through a stud). I know that is a very simplified way of looking at the two sides (some of the division is also on how good we think the guys we have are), but you know what I mean. Some think it worked last year and there should be at least slight improvement in our weapons this year (FA additions/experience for younger players), so we should be fine running it back. But, believe me, I do understand the argument for having a true #1 when it comes to crunch time in the playoffs particularly. And I agree that if you are comparing WRs only with other teams, our group does look middling. But, again, that is why I look at the weapons as a whole (including the RBs). And some might consider Cook a top-end player. Shakir too (not a #1 Wr, but a top-end slot guy). I mean Josh/Cook/Shakir isn't a bad "Big Three" (even though Shakir isn't an outside receiver or have the stats of a true #1). Anyhow, I don't think anyone expects Palmer and Moore to take us to another level. We were happy with the level from last year (for the most part) and I think we are at least slightly improved from last year. Subtractions: Mack Hollins (66.72% snap count in 2024) and Amari Cooper (21.97% snap count in 2024). Those two players combined for 675 yards and 7 TDs last year. Joshua Palmer and Elijah Moore, on their respective teams last year, combined for 70.5% snap counts (each) and 1,122 yards with 2 TDs (and Moore was working with some shoddy QB play). So, I feel pretty confident that they can at least match the production that was lost. Overall, I just don't see Amari as a big loss. He played 8 regular season games last year (again less than 22% of the total offensive snaps) and only had more than 3 receptions twice. He had two TDs total on the year. He was injured for part of his time and acclimating to a new team/QB mid-season. In the three playoff games combined, he had 6 receptions for 41 yards and no TDs. And I loved Mack, but Palmer and Moore are both better receivers than he is (more athletically gifted). Other than that, the offense is completely the same as last year (with the addition of a true blocking TE also, albeit a rookie; and experience---Keon going into year two, Kincaid year 3, etc.), so I don't expect to see a drop-off in that area (as far as overall weapons). As to the mistake-free, yes Josh threw the fewest interceptions of his career last year and the offense as a whole protected the ball well. I think the reasons for that are multi-fold: part of that is Josh growing as a player, part of it is having a good offensive line, part of it is having more sure-handed receivers than we had in the past, but I also think that a big part of it is how they ran the offense last year. Heavier run game (49/51 run/pass split). A lot of short, quick throws (slants, screens, outlets to RBs). Not forcing the ball to anyone. Scheming guys open. Etc. I think we will run the offense similarly, the O-line is still good, Josh is at a point in his career where he isn't going to regress, we still have sure-handed receivers (for the most part). So, again, I don't see where we should regress that much. Josh might have a few more interceptions, but I don't think he'll fall off a cliff or anything. Plus, the defense should be better (so, I don't expect a significant drop-off in number of turnovers created---plus a better defense overall should help the offense in many ways---field position, not playing from behind and having to force things, etc.; not that we had to do that a lot in 2024). We both obviously like stats (and I'm not ignoring your yprr data), but I kind of look at it like this (obviously these are my opinions, not any type of solid data): QB: Top 3 (I'd say #1, but...) RBs: Top-5 unit O-line: Top 5-7 unit TEs: Top 10 unit WRs: ? I doubt any team is basically top 5/top 10 across the board in all offensive units. So, even if our receivers are middling as a unit, the overall offense is still very strong. Again, I do understand the WR issue from the other side too, and if the Bills were to get a #1 WR type (in the draft/FA/trade), I wouldn't say no thanks we don't need him, but I also think we can successfully run back the offense that we had last year (with slight improvements even). I don't think it is unrepeatable with what we have. Some may not think we got better/stronger on offense, but I don't really think anyone can argue that we got weaker (or less talented). Obviously, at this point, most people aren't going to change their minds in this debate. And as you said, the team is pretty well set this year (we don't expect Beane to make any big move at the WR position). So, I guess we'll just have to see how the season plays out and then reassess the situation (hoping it hasn't been a big issue/achilles heel, of course).

Here are the top 10 passing teams from 2024 (by yards): Atts Yards Yds/Att Bengals 652 4,640 7.1 Lions 551 4,474 8.1 Bucs 571 4,257 7.4 49ers 533 4,231 7.9 Falcons 559 4,068 7.3 Vikings 548 4,043 7.4 Ravens 477 4,035 8.5 Seahawks 593 4,020 6.8 Bills 520 3,875 7.5 Rams 559 3,868 6.9 Bills were also tied for 6th in passing TDs, tied for 3rd in fewest interceptions, and were number one in fewest sacks allowed.

Here is where the Bills rank in both passing and rushing attempts and yards over the last 5 years: PASSING RUSHING YEAR Atts Yds Atts Yds 2024 26th 9th 9th 9th 2023 16th 8th 5th 7th 2022 14th 8th 20th 9th 2021 5th 9th 13th 6th 2020 11th 3rd 17th 20th Not quite sure what to make of all of that. You can kind of see the flip in the rushing and passing attempts over the last two years, but the strange thing is that regardless of attempts, our overall ranking in yards has stayed pretty consistent over the last four years (2020 being the only outlier). Bills passing attempts and yards last 5 years (fyi): 2024: 520 for 3,875 2023: 579 for 4,154 2022: 574 for 4,129 2021: 655 for 4,284 2020: 596 for 4,620 Yeah Elijah Moore, and to a lesser extent Curtis Samuel, are the wild cards. I'm an optimistic fan, so I still think Samuel is a really good player and Moore is probably better than he's been able to show with the circumstances he was in (and he hasn't been a slouch as it is). It's just so hard to find enough balls to go around. Which is why I find it funny when people complain about weapons for Josh. We don't have that All-Pro #1 WR, but I think we have a ton of weapons (of course, I'm probably also higher on Keon, Kincaid, and Samuel in particular than some fans at this point). But...Shakir, Palmer, Coleman, Samuel, Moore, Kincaid, Knox, Cook, Davis, and Johnson. That's 10 guys that are already proven in the league (well not sure if you would call Keon proven yet, but...). I think it's a pretty strong and solid cast overall. With the "everybody eats" mentality, it may come down to the hot hand, whose playing best at any given time (and also designing certain games for certain players based on opponents). So, for instance, if they think speed would work better against a particular defense, then maybe Moore and Samuel get more snaps than Keon and/or Palmer that particular game. And of course, there is a chance that Moore plays well and demands more playing time. But as it is right now, my guess would be that he and Samuel will be used more situationally (so will be 4th and 5th in WR targets). But who knows. It will be fun to see how they try to use everyone this season.

Yeah, I could see that. The rookie wall is real. And hopefully he learned his lesson, i.e. it was temporary, as you said.

I expect Coleman will bounce back and basically be the starting WR2. I would think that 3 receiver sets generally will be Palmer, Coleman, and Shakir (with Samuel and Moore mixed in). But, I also don't expect Keon to have huge numbers. The Bills just have too many weapons, Josh and Brady are too good at spreading the ball around (6-8 players per game), we run a lot, and throw a lot of balls to the RBs and TEs. So, last year the Bills had around 4,000 yards passing (3,938). The previous two years we averaged about 4,300 passing yards. I think the team is happy with the run/pass balance, but I could see passing yards go up slightly, and I could also see the RBs passing targets going down a little (not too much though, it's a big part of the offense)---both because of more confidence in the receiving corps. Last year, our WRs combined for 2,400 yards exactly (amongst 7 players). So, let's bump that up slightly and say approx. 2,700 yards to the WRs this year. Last year, our WRs had 17 combined TDs. So, again, let's bump that slightly to say 20. [I understand this is all pure speculation, just taking a guess here.] So, I wouldn't be surprised if our top 3 WRs (barring injuries) are all in the 700-900 yards range with 5-7 TDs each. That would leave 300-400 yards between Samuel and Moore. So, let's say Shakir at 850 yards and 5-6 TDs, Palmer at 750 yards with 5-6 TDs, and Coleman 800 yards and 6-7 TDs. (Or reverse Palmer and Coleman.) The Tight ends combined for 800 yards last year (4 players). If Jackson Hawes is ready to play right away, I could see Knox losing some snaps---which would mean more targets for Kincaid because Hawes will be blocking more than going out on routes. I think they do really like Davidson too, but he'll still be fighting for snaps. Kincaid had 448 yards and 2 TDs last year. I would like him to be featured more, so I'm hoping his production will jump to say 700 yards and 5 TDs range. My guesses above would give our top 4 targets about 3,100 yards and 21 TDs. That would leave approx. 1,100-1,200 passing yards (based on our last 3 years averaged passing yards) between Samuel, Moore, Knox, Cook, Davis, and Johnson. Those players (minus Moore) combined for 1,295 yards last year. So, I may be a bit off somewhere...but I think it will play out similar to last year (everybody eats), but with a bit of an increase for say targets #2-#4 [with added confidence in Coleman (2nd year), Palmer (better than what we had last year), and Kincaid (3rd year/using Hawes as a blocker)]. 🤷‍♂️

And no Quaterback can improve their completion percentage from college to the NFL, right? This is just silly. There is no way that Beane thinks he blew this pick already. You don't write any player off after their rookie year as a coach or GM (or you won't have your job for long). Plus, what do the defensive players have to do with anything in relation to the speed of a WR? Also, it's called team building. #1 WR priority according to the Bills at the time was get a bigger guy who can block and get 50/50 balls. They drafted Keon. Now we have that, let's go after our second priority. A guy or some guys with speed. It's not some admission of quilt. Again, it's team building. You don't keep bringing in the same type of player over and over, you have to fill certain roles, have diversity. And it's not like 4.52 and 4.46 are blazing speeds (as far as Beane bringing in only speed players). And our team would get bullied late in the year and in the playoffs by bigger, stronger teams. There has to be a balance. In the 2024 draft, 11 wide receivers were selected in the first two rounds (the first 52 picks). Seven of those WRs were picked before Keon. Here is what the stats of all of those receivers were after week 8 of last year (just before Keon's injury): Pick Player Targets Recs Yards TDs Team (# of team passing plays) 4 M. Harrison 50 26 411 5 Arizona (543) 6 M. Nabers 94 46 498 3 NYG (591) 9 R. Odunze 44 25 391 1 Chicago (566) 23 B. Thomas 49 33 573 5 Jacksonville (546) 28 X. Worthy 39 19 235 3 Kansas City (600) 31 R. Pearsall 9 7 59 0 San Fran (533) 32 X. Legette 35 22 211 3 Carolina (547) 33 K. Coleman 36 22 417 3 Buffalo (520) 34 L. McConkey 52 35 440 4 LA Chargers (510) 37 J. Polk 27 10 78 1 New England (529) 52 A. Mitchell 31 11 118 0 Indianapolis (513) At the time of his injury, Keon's stats were not looking bad in comparison to the other rookies. especially considering: -Nine of those eleven teams threw the ball more than the Bills did overall in 2024 (Bills had a 49/51 run/pass split and 42% of our passing plays went to RBs and TEs). Plus, some of those teams do not have the number of other targets/weapons as say Buf, KC, SF. Not as many balls to go around on such teams. -The disparity in number of targets. For instance, Malik Nambers had 58 more targets than Keon in that span. Tough to compare say yards between the guys who had a lot more opportunities (targets) than the others. And yet, at that time, with the 7th fewest targets (of the 11 players), he was 4th in total yards and tied for 3rd in TDs. There was no way we were going to be able to go up and get Harrison, Nabers, or Odunze. We probably could have swung for Thomas. And obviously, we could have picked Worthy, Pearsall, Legette, McConkey, Polk, or Mitchell---but they chose Keon. And before the injury, McConkey was the only WR that we could have chosen (where we were) that had better stats than Keon. But as others have said, McConkey is more a slot and not the type of WR we wanted/needed (same for Worthy---we weren't looking for a speed guy at that time). So, I'm having a hard time seeing any other move the Bills should have made as far as WR is concerned (other than possibly moving up for Thomas---but we would have had to have a trade partner too, who knows if that was available or not). Yes, Keon struggled coming back from the injury. I think that was two-fold. First off, he was out for almost 5 games starting in week 7 (probably tough for any rookie to acclimate back after that amount of time out). But, that is also the week that Amari arrived. Curtis Samuel got healthy around week 9. And Mack's target share went up a bit also. The offense continued to roll with Keon out and Amari, Curtis, and Mack getting more targets. So, when Keon came back, there was no need to force him in. Just keep rolling with what is working. And I think a rookie coming back from his first major injury to a much smaller role may have gotten in Keon's head a bit. He may have been a bit skittish from the hit. Worried about coming back too soon. A little depressed that his role had decreased, etc. But, again, he was a rookie. Give the kid time to grow, mature, learn, get more experience. It's seems strange to me to write off a high draft-pick rookie who got injured and missed 5 games his rookie season. Have some patience guys. I personally think that he's going to come back with a fire in his belly this year. Just seems like that kind of a kid to me.

He didn't work out here in Buffalo (whatever the reasons may be), but for three years, despite the rocky ride for him, he didn't complain, or try to work the media, or cause any problems in the locker room, etc. As he said, he just kept his head down and worked hard. As a Bills fan, it would be hard to see him turn it around and be successful in Dallas...but he seems to be a really good kid and I actually hope he can do just that.

Shakir vs. Downs last two years: Player Targets Recs Yards Y/Rec TDs 1st Downs Success Rate Catch % Downs 205 140 1,574 11.25 7 70 51.65 68.35 Shakir 145 115 1,432 13.25 6 61 63.15 81.35 Downs has 142 yards, 1 TD, and 9 first downs more than Shakir over the last two years, but that was with 60 more targets than Khalil. And it's tough to beat Shakir's Success rate and Catch percentage (plus he has the higher yards per reception). I would basically agree with GunnerBill that they are pretty similar players. Josh had more opportunities, but a worse QB. But, in the end, I would give Shakir the slight nod due to the fact that he catches everything. [And just FYI: Josh Downs was selected in the third round, pick 79 overall; Khalil Shakir was selected in the 5th round, pick 148 overall---not that that matters in a comparison of players once they're in the league, just noting the value Beane got in selecting Shakir where he did.]

I know this is an old thread and an old post. But, if it hasn't been noted yet, we can see a little bit better now how the Elam trade is panning out. Dallas got: Kaiir Elam and a 6th round pick (204 overall) in the 2025 draft with which they selected OT Ajani Cornelius (Oregon) Buffalo got: 2025 5th round pick (170 overall) with which they selected CB Jordan Hancock (Ohio State), and they still get Dallas' 2026 7th round pick. Interesting to note, Buffalo also picked an OT, Chase Lundt two picks after Dallas in the 6th round (pick 206). This wasn't part of the trade, it was Buffalo's pick, but interesting to note that we still got what Dallas got with the pick we sent them, an OT (depending on which guy ends up being better), in the same range of the 6th round. [FYI: according to nfl mock-draft database, which is a consensus of 200 big boards and over 1,500 mock drafts, Lundt was mocked 31 picks higher than Cornelius.] So, as far as the Bills are concerned, it's already a good trade. Elam was going nowhere on our team. Hancock at least has potential. Beane still has a 7th next year to play with. And we still got an OT in the 6th, like Dallas did with the pick we sent them. As for Dallas, it will mostly depend on Elam. If he's a bust in Dallas too, bad trade for Dallas. If he becomes a solid starter for them (iffy), win/win for both teams. And if we were to look at just value, per the draft trade value chart: Pick 170 (2025) is worth 23.4 points, 7th rounder (2026) = 1 point. Pick 204 is worth 9.4 points. So, at this point, we can look at the trade in two ways: Buffalo got Jordan Hancock and Dallas' 2026 7th round pick for Kaiir Elam and Ajani Cornelius. Or...Buffalo got the value of pick 190 in the top half of the 6th round for Elam I wouldn't call it a fleecing (unless Elam is a total bust in Dallas as well and Hancock becomes a player), but we did at least get something (not nothing) for Elam---basically a mid-6th rounder in overall value. But if Hancock becomes a guy...

First off, I loved Mack too, he was a big part of last season, and I also wish he were still on the team. But, I think we will all miss Hollins' personality and on-field attitude more than his production. And it's tough to quantify how important a guy is in the locker room, as a teammate, etc. And I'm not discounting his blocking or special teams play either. But, I don't think he would be leading in snaps again this year. As BillsFanForever pointed out, I don't think that was the plan for Mack last year even. But with the injuries (to Samuel, Coleman, and Cooper), he was pressed into heavier service. And now with the additions of Palmer and Moore, Keon going into year two (he'll get more playing time than last year), and Samuel (hopefully healthy)---plus the amount that we throw to our RBs and TEs, there just wouldn't be much playing time or balls for Mack this upcoming season---at least on offense (42% of our passing plays last year went to RBs and TEs, not to mention that our run/pass split is already 49 run/51 pass). So, we are already a team that doesn't use their WRs as much as other teams. And you figure we'll mostly be starting Palmer, Coleman, and Shakir. Plus, we run a lot of two TEs and Jumbo packages. Then Samuel would come in as #4. So, Mack would be fighting with Moore, Shenault, Shavers, Prather, Virgil, and Hamler for WR5 snaps. How much do you want to pay for that role (even if special teams is included). Better to go with younger and cheaper. We are paying $2.5 million for Moore (we paid $2.6 million for Mack last year), and Moore brings something Mack doesn't in that role (whatever you think of his overall play). Mack got $8.4 million from NE ($3.5 million of which is guaranteed). So, even if he doesn't hit any incentives, he's still $1 million more than Moore. If he does hit incentives, he could cost 4 times as much as Moore. I won't compare him to Palmer, because Palmer is obviously the more athletically gifted...definitely an upgrade from Mack, imo. Palmer 2,287 yards and 11 TDs in 4 years; Mack 2,069 yards and 15 TDs in 8 years. And as far as Moore: 2,162 yards and 10 TDs in 4 years. Last year, fyi: Hollins had 378 yards and 5 TDs; Palmer had 584 yards and 1 TD; Moore had 538 yards and 1 TD. At his age, this could be Mack's last contract. Yes, winning a Super Bowl would be nice for any player. But, I think many older players (who haven't had huge contracts in their careers) would trade standing on the sidelines for a Super Bowl for a bigger contract that will bring his family financial security after retirement. I've seen $8.4 million everywhere, but the D&C (not sure if they are correct) said it could go up to $10.4 million max, if he hits all incentives. Mack's career earnings are $11.7 million in 8 years. He could almost double his career earnings if he plays well. Hard to turn that down, especially if the Bills were looking at WR5 money (maybe just giving him a slight boost). I mean the Bills might have been willing to go to $3.5 million for Mack, but they probably wouldn't have given him as many incentives as New England and/or he wouldn't have had as much opportunity in Buffalo to reach those incentives. So, imo, it made sense for both the player and the team to move on. But, no doubt we will all miss Mack and it's going to suck seeing him on the other side in the Pats games.

Ah yes, thanks for the correction.

Yeah, I was at that Dallas game too. The win was euphoric after what we had been through. I was sitting in the upper deck with a buddy and his dad. We had almost the entire section to ourselves. There were maybe two other guys down 7-8 rows and over 20 seats, and a couple more people maybe like 20 rows in front of us. I mean the upper deck was sparse of people. And more than a few fans at the game wore brown bags over their heads (in embarrassment of the team). No question the 17-year drought was tough and obviously longer. But, I don't think you guys appreciate how truly bad those earlier years were. 1976: We go 2-12 and coach Saban is replaced by Jim Ringo 1977: We go 3-11, and O.J. gets traded away to San Francisco 1978: We go 5-11...but there is some hope with new coach Chuck Knox. 1979: We improve to 7-9. 1980: We finally have a team, under Knox's direction, and go 11-5, making the playoffs (but losing our first playoff game in the divisional round). 1981: Success under Knox continues with a 10-6 season, a playoff berth, and our first playoff win since 1966 in the Wild Card game (lost in div round). 1982: Strike shortened year. We go 4-5. And Chuck Knox leaves Buffalo. If you youngins never lived through a strike year, let me tell you. it's not fun. Lost games, scab players, etc. A strike year alone feels like 2-3 years of the drought at least. 1983: Welcome aboard coach Kay Stevenson 🤦‍♂️. We draft Jim Kelly #14 overall and he refuses to play in Buffalo (because we're so bad). He leaves for the USFL and the Bills go 8-8. 1984: 2-14 1985: 2-14 Stevenson is dumped and we bring on coach Hank Bullough 🤦‍♂️. 1986: There is hope with the return of Jim Kelly, but we go 4-12 and change coaches mid-season, hiring some unknown coach who was a special teams coordinator for the Chiefs (Marv Levy). 1987: Marv's first (almost) full year we go 7-8, in another strike shortened year. Yes, two strikes, two shortened seasons in 6 years. [1988 would be the start of the 90s Bills team as we knew it.] So, it wasn't a playoff drought (thanks to Chuck Knox in 1980 and 1981), but it was 12 pretty rough years overall (not just two bad years). I grew up in Rochester, the stadium never sold out, so there was a TV blackout for most of the games. Which meant if you didn't go to the game, you had to listen to it on the radio. I probably heard more games than I saw during some of those years. Our winning percentage during the drought was .412%. Our winning percentage during these 12 years was .361% (despite making the playoffs 2 years). It was bad times. Six seasons with 4 or fewer wins. Seven seasons with 5 or fewer wins. Two strikes. Six different coaches in 12 years. During the drought, we only had two seasons with 4 or fewer wins. Three seasons with 5 or fewer wins (in 17 years rather than 12). Six coaches in 17 years. Both periods were rough (as was '67-'72, as OldMan pointed out, though I was not around/too young to remember those years).

Yeah, it would be too difficult to figure out the number and importance of injuries for all teams across the board and compare. So I get saying every team gets injured and should have depth anyhow, so I'm not going to weigh injuries in too much in assessing the playoff losses (or use it as an excuse for years where the injuries weren't that many or significant). But, I would say 7/8 starters out or playing through a significant injury is probably above normal for winning playoff teams (but maybe I'm wrong)---unless the other team is as beat up as you are. And I might put a fake bet down, but I would shorten the time frame to 2021-2023. I think those three seasons we might have been above the norm in significant injuries. But, as you said, ultimately who knows. (and I don't think you're being a jerk 👍.)

Injuries are not the reason we lost all of our playoff games, but no doubt they were an important factor in certain years (a couple of the losses). It shouldn't preclude us from looking at other reasons or factors in our playoff losses though (for instance, 2021/2022: coaching/talent/defense; 2024/2025: refs, etc.). Going back to Detroit last year, they had a lot of injuries...but for some reason, even the backup players got listed in articles and posts about their injuries/losses last year. That usually doesn't happen. But, as far as their playoff game, they were missing 4 players (Hutchinson, Peko, Barnes, and McNeil) who were starters at the beginning of the year. And Anzalone was recently back from injury (so probably not at his peak). But, for instance, in '23/'24 vs. Chiefs in the playoffs, the Bills were missing 5 players (Tre White, Milano, Bernard, Benford, Gabe Davis) who were starters at the beginning of the year. And Rasul Douglas was playing with a knee injury and Taron Johnson was playing through a concussion he sustained the week before. And then if you want to talk volume (in comparison to Detroit's backup players missing, etc.), the Bills were also missing both backup safeties (Rapp and Hamlin), Jordan Phillips, Baylon Spector (normally not a big deal, but with both starting LBs out...), Damien Harris, and our punter Martin was playing injured (groin if I remember correctly). And we only lost by 3 points. Not sure how some posters still don't think injuries were not a factor that year. And, again, why does Detroit get a pass for last year, but the Bills don't get a pass for '23/'24?