folz
-
Posts
1,616 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by folz
-
-
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
-
1
-
9
-
1
-
-
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...
-
1
-
-
12 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:
I think we already touched on this topic earlier in the thread but he Bills were not 9th in passing yardage.
They were 17th.
The figures you are referencing are "net" passing yards..........which subtracts sack yardage.
If you are historically great/lucky at not turning the ball over and your QB never gets sacked that's going to greatly benefit your "net" numbers.
But if you are judging the quality of talent in the passing game........remember this........the league DOES NOT subtract sack yardage from QB's individual passing yardage(or the WR's, naturally).
@Paup 1995MVP's reaction to your post reflects how misleading including sack data is. By no means was the Bills 2024 passing game an aerial circus.
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.]
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, LEBills said:
the reason our rushing stats were so good in 21 and 22 was Josh. He had over 760 yards each season and averaged over 6 yards per run.The reason people complain about weapons is because we don’t have a top end player. And even when you look at the efficiency stats, the receiving corp is middling. I’m not here to argue for an upgrade this year because our team is set. But if you look at our current weapons and their yprr (efficiency rather than volume stats). Shakir is by far our best player ranked 16th of all WR (just ahead of ARSB) in 2024.
Keon was 43rd, Palmer was 63rd (compared to Cooper at 67th - and Coopers 1.71 yprr with the Bills were equal to Palmers 1.71 year long yprr with the Chargers in 2024), Samuel was 84th, Moore was 110th (compared to Hollins at 90th)
Kincaid was 12th and Knox 37th out of all tight ends.
So the reason people are down on the group is that we did not really improve the weapons much. Just kinda swapped players that left for similar players. Anyone hoping that Palmer or Moore are going to take the team to a different level are going to be disappointed in my opinion.
The real hope for the offense will be with Shakir, Keon and Kincaid. As well as Keon did for yprr for the season. He was worse than Mack Hollins yprr when he returned from injury. So you hope he can improve but it was a very disappointing end to his rookie season.
Kincaid is our best hope imo as his efficiency actually improved from year one to year two. If he can stay healthy and figure out things with Josh, that is our most likely route to improvement. And the reason people want to see improvement from pass catchers is because despite our historic offense last year, we are skeptical we can be as meticulous and mistake free as 2024 and want better talent for Josh to make up any regression to the mean there.
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).
-
3
-
-
24 minutes ago, Paup 1995MVP said:
Thanks for the numbers Folz. That’s awesome. Our yards per attempt last year was very high. I am surprised we were that high in the league in yards. I just never thought of our team as an aerial circus. Josh didn’t seem to throw for 300-400 yards every week like Burrow and some other guys. (He certainly could have if our offense was predicated on that )
Can you give me the stats for the 8 teams above us in passing yards last year?
A big factor of late has been how defense has changed the past couple years. Lots of prevent type two deep safety looks making teams throw a lot of underneath stuff around the league. I find that boring.
I remember years ago on any 3rd and long teams would rush 6-7 guys and try knock the QB out. Now everyone lines up at the 1st down marker and plays prevent giving up 9-11 yards on 3rd and 17. That works a lot, but teams go for it on 4th down a lot more now. So you still need some tight D on 3rd down.
With the defensive schemes today, You just don’t see as much deep passing week to week.
We do have a lot of weapons. Letting Cooper go was fine. He basically sucked last year and is pretty much shot. He can’t outrun anyone. Hollins had some big plays in the AFCCG. But certainly isn’t dominating anyone week in and week out. Palmer and Moore should be upgrades.
I just can’t wait for some real football by this time of the offseason.
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.
-
3
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Paup 1995MVP said:
Thanks for responding w a nice analysis.
a couple questions:
Where do our passing numbers rank last year and over the past 3 years overall in the NFL?
What about a bigger role for Elijah Moore? The guy has been a good receiver on some teams with bad QB’s. Was a high 2nd round pick. And still may have upside to his game.
I wish we threw the ball down the field more having such a special QB in Josh Allen. But understand that our O line is a really good run blocking line. And I think the run game overall seems to be more back in vogue in the NFL.
Let’s hope for some breakout games and seasons for Kincaid and Coleman.
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.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:
If we are going to speculate on why Coleman struggled when he came back I'd say it's more likely that he had mentally checked out on the season during his recovery. Coleman is not a guy who was used to playing football in December and January to begin with. It's hard to be any good in the NFL unless you are all-in mentally and physically. I'm not directly equating the situations but Chase Claypool is the extreme example of how far you can fall in the NFL when you lose your competitive edge. I think Coleman's lapse was likely temporary but now that is part of his history that people will be watching for.
Yeah, I could see that. The rookie wall is real. And hopefully he learned his lesson, i.e. it was temporary, as you said.
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Paup 1995MVP said:
That’s quite an analysis of Coleman and the other rookie WR’s.
what kind of numbers do you hope/expect Coleman and Kincaid to put up this coming season?
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)]. 🤷♂️
-
1
-
-
On 5/16/2025 at 10:04 PM, sven233 said:
The fact is, if you can't get open in college, you are not going to get open in the NFL.
And no Quaterback can improve their completion percentage from college to the NFL, right?
On 5/16/2025 at 10:18 PM, GASabresIUFan said:By the way, Beane knows he blew the Coleman pick. (40 4.61)
Since he made that pick, all the skill players on both sides of the ball have speed.
At WR were have added Palmer (4.52 @ 6'1 210), Moore (4.35), and Prather (4.46),
AT DB & S: Bishop (4.45), Forest (4.41), Hancock (4.42), Hairston (4.28), Strong (4.50)
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).
On 5/17/2025 at 1:42 AM, Richard Noggin said:Offense seemed to SHINE with smaller, faster, better separators (and different OC). Maybe that was a specific "era" in the NFL, but Allen sure seemed to flourish with guys who got OPEN. Imagine that lol.
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.
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Haven’t read the whole thread or any of it so sorry if this has been discussed. What did we expect him to say about Dallas? “I liked the last place better.” Of course he is going to say what he said and we shouldn’t care at all.
As for Kaiir the person. He’s a fantastic human being. We know the family of Sophia. You’ve all probably seen the story whether you remember it or not but it’s all genuine. That guy would call her, show up there, I’m told that he still keeps in touch with the family. There was nothing fake or contrived about how he handled that situation and how that family feels about him. You see things like this when ESPN does “my wish” but this went on for what was left of her life (and still to this day). He’s a world class human being. We should all hope that our children grow up to be like him. https://www.wkbw.com/news/local-news/remembering-sophia-sophia-the-fierce-benintende
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.
-
5
-
2
-
-
23 hours ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:
That's strange. I keep reading that he's a top 5 slot on this board.
But he was beaten out by Josh Downs, the Colts slot receiver
23 hours ago, The Firebaugh Kid said:Downs is nowhere near as good.
22 hours ago, JakeFrommStateFarm said:Do you agree that Downs is better than Shakir?
Keep in mind that Downs had Anthony Richardson throwing to him where Shakir had Allen
12 hours ago, GunnerBill said:I think they are honestly pretty similar. I haven't focussed as much on Downs since he came into the league. I think he is a more natural route runner though.
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.]
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 3/12/2025 at 3:19 PM, Process said:
We got basically nothing and somehow we still fleeced them
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...
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, NewEra said:
Standing on the sideline as much? He led our WRs in snaps
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.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, chris heff said:
Marv was head coach of the Chiefs 1978-1982.
Ah yes, thanks for the correction.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, US Egg said:
Not a stretch to say it seemed like we had a whole section to ourselves. Game on? Hell no. Party On!
Would go down behind visitors bench in the front rows harass the opponent all game. No security to be seen.
3 hours ago, Low Positive said:They weren't lovable losers. They were just losers in a mostly empty stadium. I should know. I went to a lot of games back then as a kid because people just kept giving us tickets.
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).
6 hours ago, EasternOHBillsFan said:To be fair, losing is losing... those years after the early 2000s were absolutely terrible and the litany of QBs we had to endure. Two seasons of 2-14 pales in comparison with the worst non-playoff streak in Bills history. Every decade the Bills made the playoffs except for the 2000s. Even in the 1970s when the Bills were abysmal after Kemp retired they STILL made the playoffs and had Fergy.
1 hour ago, SF Bills Fan said:Lots of teams have bad seasons and use the draft picks to get out of it and back on track. Those 2-14 seasons helped us get together the team that went to 4 Super Bowls in a row. I'd take two terrible years followed by great success as opposed to 17 years of being bad, but not bad enough to get the top QB or impact players to get back on track. We were cursed with a range bad or mediocre 6 to 9 win seasons for 17 years. Piddled around with guys like Maybin and let the Pats roll all over us.
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).
-
4
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:
Not trying to be a jerk here, but this is the usual stuff on the board and I don't give anybody a pass. You have no idea if our injuries are more or less. Even within the context of just playoff teams, let alone the the regular season. The Lions or the _____'s or the ____'s have nothing to do with it.
The injury beating crew do it without the context of what is normal and what is not normal. How can anything be abnormal if you cant establish normal? I will place my fake bet and say the Buffalo Bills from 2020-2025 have not faced an abnormal amount of injuries comparative to the league average. Are you putting your fake bet down to say that isn't the case?
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 👍.)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mikie2times said:
But ultimately we are left with this narrative that we have been severely hamstrung by injuries. Which I don’t dismiss but has also never been verified within context. I hate that this thought lingers as one of the reasons but ultimately we have no idea.
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?
-
2
-
-
2 hours ago, Mikie2times said:
I’m curious if you think any part of it is the history of these players or who we target. As an example, would it at all be surprising to see Bernard, Benford, Rapp, or Milano go down? 2 of the 4 we just extended. We do target small players on all three levels. Many are physically maxed out. Like a Milano, who just felt like his body would just give way eventually. Even Mad Max missed several games at Kentucky this past year. I don’t know this answer but I have considered it.
I’m hesitant to draw too much from the injuries just because I don’t believe people have an intimate understanding of what other teams are going thru. Bengals playoff game they had half the offensive line out. Lions last year were completely depleted. We have never lost Josh and for the most part have sustained no significant injuries on offense in how many years? Meanwhile tons of teams have lost critical players that have basically knocked them out of even the playoffs.
I just think leaning into the injuries as a reason is a dangerous game. Do we expect to be any healthier than last year again? Do we know relative comparisons to say how disadvantaged we have been? I don’t know if it’s all that severe in the scheme of things. Not sure and I haven’t met a poster here that had the information to really shed any light on it.
The first bolded statement is a decent point. We have tended to go small on defense at certain positions (LB/Secondary) and that could be a factor in those players getting injured. And yes, we have had some injury-prone players (particularly Milano). So, no I wouldn't be surprised to see Milano or a couple of other guys injured. I do hope this is something the Bills brass has at least looked into, from all angles. But, I do think we are a much deeper team now (at most spots) that can withstand injuries a bit better than the teams from say 2020-2023.
The weird thing is that the first 3-4 years of the McBeane era, we were one of the least injured teams. Then from the end of 2020 to 2023 it felt like we were one of the more heavily injured teams. Was it a change in training/conditioning staff/methods, was it the type of players we were bringing in, was it just bad luck?
And of course, other teams have injuries too. But, there were particular games, Bills/Chiefs 2022 for instance, where we were missing a number of key players on defense (like 5 or 6 guys) and they were only missing like one starter or whatever. It does have an affect on the game. But yes, say in the Cincy game, they were banged up too. I guess we'd have to look back at each game to see how significant the difference was on the injury report, etc. and then how much we think those losses affected the outcomes. So, I get not wanting to lay too much of the blame on injuries, but no doubt they were a factor in at least some of the playoff games.
To the second bolded statement. Yes, no question the Lions were depleted by injuries last year and it played a big role in the end of their playoff run. But that's the thing, the national media talked over and over about Detroit's injuries, and posters here too have brought it up a lot. But then when some of us say, well injuries played an issue for the Bills in some years, people say, aw you're just making excuses. Why do injuries factor in for Detroit, but not for Buffalo?
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:
I don't have any argument with anything you wrote.
My only counter is 6 of the 9 GMs that passed on Mahommes were gone 4 years after that draft. I beleive only McDermott (defacto GM) and John Schneider are still with their teams. Seahawks already had Wilson.
And the GMs that drafted Mayfield, Darnold, and Rosen are all unemployed. Elway of course is gone too.
So I do not think it is much of a stretch to think that Beane would be out of a job if he had taken one of the other three guys.
Fair points. There is that possibility too.
-
9 minutes ago, billsfan714 said:
If we don't get it done again this year, I can guarantee there will be excuses on this board. Prime example will be we started a rookie, had rookies playing--it will take time for them to learn, player X got injured, etc.
That will depend on if there are legitimate excuses or not. You call them excuses, I call them factors and circumstances.
I mean, yeah, if we get to the playoffs and are missing 5 defensive starters, while the other team is healthy or say only missing one guy. Yeah, that is a factor. If Josh were to miss a playoff game and we lose, yeah, that is a factor. If the referees make a horrible call on a game changing play, or multiple bad calls that all go against Buffalo, yeah, that is a factor. Rookies are not excuses (outside of at QB). This team brings them along slowly and won't have them out there if they aren't performing well. But, yeah, I really hope there is nothing to point at this year in that vein too.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Mikie2times said:
Even worse from another view. Since 2020 we have #1 regular season offensive EPA. Now wait for it, the #2 regular season defensive EPA. Which is mind boggling to be honest. We have nearly the best offensive AND defensive units in football in the regular season since 2020. If you look at those Top 5 DVOA teams since 2020 that have had at least 2 or more top 5 finishes:
7 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:I don't think being #1 means you will finish #1. Being among the best shows that pretty clearly. Which Buffalo has consistently done more so than anybody since 2020. We do have similarities to Baltimore, but for them the answer is pretty clear. Lamar hasn't performed. With Buffalo, the regression is far worse and as I said, likely unprecedented in the time frame this type of data is available in. We are 50% worse than Dallas in our defensive regression and Dallas is 100% worse than the next closest team. The answers are far more complicated for us and we have a completely divided fan base that ranges from calling people who focus on this haters, negative fans, all this other crap. To fans that don't really acknowledge the severity of this and lean into the regular season. To me it's completely reasonable to have either take but completely unreasonable to think either are being unreasonable.
Yes, since 2020, I think we can honestly say that the Bills have probably been the best overall NFL team in the regular season. Beyond the EPAs you noted above, the Bills have also scored the most points (#1), while surrendering the fewest points (#1). We are #3 in offensive yards (just 27 yards behind #2 SF and 305 yards behind #1 KC, over 5 years). We are #2 in yards allowed by defense (only 9 yards behind #1 SF, over 5 years). We are #1 in defensive turnovers (by a good margin) and #2 in turnover differential (only 4 behind #1 Pittsburgh). Of course, we are #2 in wins. We have played 1 less game than K.C. and they have 5 more wins than us over those 5 years (but, at least as far as the regular season is concerned, we have the head-to-head with K.C. at 4-1---which makes the playoff losses seem even stranger). Bills are #2 in win percentage at .735 (KC is #1 at .786; the next closest team is Green Bay at #3 with .634, a significant drop).
What does that all mean? Well, I think all Bills fans should be in agreement that the playoffs is obviously where the problem is. But what that problem is we can't seem to agree on. I agree with Gunner to an extent about elite players. If we had even one or two more game changers that could make a play in crunch time, that would go a long way. So do we blame drafting/free agent acquisitions for that? A lot of people will put it on coaching (bad decisions, getting outcoached, bad defensive schemes). Some will put it on overall talent, or lack of talent at certain positions (WR, for example). Many agree it is the defense that has let us down, but is that talent, coaching, scheme?
I know some don't, but I personally give the team a mulligan for the 2022 playoffs. Not sure how some people act like the whole Damar situation didn't or shouldn't have affected that team. So, that is the Miami game you mentioned and the Cincy game.
And beyond having KC in front of us and the Damar incident in 2022, there is also the injury issue. The Bills have not been their healthiest (at their best), particularly on defense, for at least 3-4 of those 5 seasons. 2020: Beasley playing on a broken ankle, Diggs playing through a pretty bad knee injury. 2022/2023 our defenses were decimated with injuries. Again, some will say those are excuses, but that is also a factor in the under-performance by the defense in the playoffs, defenses will tend to underperform when they are missing a number of starters. I guess you could knock Beane for depth, but how many teams are going to be as good with a certain number of back-ups in. That's why they are back-ups. And then there is the Chiefs again. One of the best offenses in the last 20 years (for most of their run)---we have faced them 4 times in the playoffs. I would venture to guess if other playoff teams had to face the Chiefs in 4 of their playoff games, their defensive stats would look a lot worse than playing say some 9-8 team in the Wild Card round (i.e., a significant drop from their regular season stats). And lastly, you can't totally discount luck and the NFL/referees either (whether it be injuries, bad bounces of the ball, bad calls, etc.).
So, as you and others have noted, it is so many things plied into one that it is hard to put our fingers on just one or two things. But I agree whole-heartedly with your statement that I highlighted in purple. I mean, we are all just fans trying to figure out and fix the problem (from our armchair GM positions). Of course there will be people on the extremes of any discussion. But, where I think the ultimate disconnection is is between those who think since we haven't gotten it done in the playoffs, this regime never will and we should start looking for a change; while others look at the regular season success, and the good playoff games, and the circumstances of each season, and the fact that we've been soooo close in the games with the Chiefs, so they want to stay the course with McBeane.
Hopefully, with the defensive additions, and the fact that we are moving into our new stadium next year and Josh just won the MVP, we won't need to have this conversation again next offseason. 🤞 Go Bills!
[Randon Note: We are 7-5 in the playoffs since 2020. Interesting to note, playoff points for = 337; playoff points against = 267. So, we have outscored our opponents by 70 points or 6 points per game on average, despite losing 5 of those games.]
-
2
-
1
-
-
On 5/13/2025 at 8:06 AM, Ethan in Cleveland said:
If Elway took Allen instead of a LB, Beane and McDermott would have been gone a long long time ago. The entire history of the NFL would have been rewritten with Mahomes and Allen in the same division.
Beane can use whatever revisionist history he wants, but at the end of the day he needed Cleveland, Jets, and Broncos to make fatal errors.
Still wonder if it was Buffalo that leaked the text messages the day before the draft. Has anyone ever learned where that story came from?
I know Einstein's Dog already replied to this, and you responded to him, but I couldn't help myself.
First off, Elway was never going to pick Josh. That's why he says now it was a mistake. If he didn't take Chubb, he was going to trade us the pick for us to get Allen (they actually had a deal in place). Obviously we couldn't control Cleveland (being the number 1 pick). It all depended on them and they obviously were not giving up that pick no matter how much Beane offered (same goes for the NYG and the Jets). And everyone knew pre-draft that the Jets were all in on Darnold and Cleveland was either picking Josh or Baker. It was a very poorly kept secret. So, it looked like it was Josh or Baker for the Bills depending on Cleveland. Josh was absolutely the top of the Bills board. Everything that has come out since that draft points to the fact that the Bills were all in on Allen and were totally out on Rosen. No idea how they felt about Baker and Jackson. But I think they had Baker #2 or #3 (with Darnold) and I agree that Jackson may not have been what they were looking for in a QB. You can say it took 3 teams to make a mistake, but then didn't 9 teams make a mistake not picking Mahomes? Does that make the Mahomes pick by KC not really count or something? It's a silly argument. I mean K.C. gets credit for trading up to 10 to get Mahomes, but the Bills don't get credit for trading up to 7 (because someone still could have picked in front of them)? Can't you say the same thing about every QB who didn't go #1 overall? So, do GMs only get credited for a QB if they picked them #1?
And do you really think that if McBeane didn't get Josh, they would have just thrown their hands up in the air and said, well I guess were just going to roll with Nathan Peterman for the next five years?
Let's say Cleveland took Josh #1 overall. Do the Bills move up then for Baker? Or maybe Baker falls to them at 12 and we keep some of our assets (two second rounders) and pick a couple of excellent players in the second round to go with Baker. Might Baker have done better in Buffalo than he did in Cleveland in a better organization that is very good at player development? Life would have been much different, not better, but I don't think it would have been a death knell for McBeane.
Now let's say Cleveland takes Josh, the Jets take Darnold, and then Denver takes Baker. Again, I don't think the Bills wanted Rosen at all. In that scenario, we would still have all of our picks. In 2018, prior to the draft day trades, the Bills had six picks in the first three rounds: 12, 22, 53, 56, 65, and 96. At that point, we could have traded back (for even more picks) and still got Lamar. Or picked another player at 12 and still been able to get Lamar at 22, then still have 4 more picks in rounds 2 and 3. Picking Josh and Tremaine, we ended up with only 3 picks in the first 3 rounds (7, 16, and 96). In this other scenario, we could have had Lamar and 5 other picks in the top 3 rounds (12, 53, 56, 65, and 96). Don't think that scenario would have got McBeane fired either.
Worst case scenario, we do not come away with a QB in the 2018 draft (Josh, Baker, and Darnold gone---Bills don't want Rosen or Jackson). So, Beane keeps piling picks to draft one in future drafts. With two first rounders, basically three second rounders, and two third rounders in 2018, Beane could have moved back a number of times, still got a lot of good players to fill the roster, and increased his draft capital significantly in future drafts. Now in 2019, there wasn't much in the way of QB help in the draft. Kyler Murray went #1 overall to ARZ. But, no one else. So, we may have had to wait for 2020. But think of the draft capital that Beane could have built up by then to make a run for Burrow, Herbert, or Hurts (Tua and Love also went in this draft) that year. We may have been a year or two behind where we are (or were at the time), but I don't think it would have cost them their jobs. We still wouldn't have Josh (the unicorn MVP that makes everything better)---but we probably wouldn't suck either with say Burrow, Herbert, or Hurts. Of course, it means (outside of a trade) that we would have had to run with guys like Case Keenum, Mitch Trubisky, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Nick Foles, or Teddy Bridgewater in 2018 and 2019 (or stick with Tyrod), which really wouldn't have affected 2018 much (6-10 record---other than not getting to see Josh develop and leap over Anthony Barr), but obviously 2019 wouldn't have been as exciting a season as it was (we would have still been in QB limbo). Not to say that a Ryan Fitzpatrick, Tyrod Taylor, or Nick Foles couldn't have got us to the playoffs (first round loss that year w/Josh). It probably just wouldn't have been as much fun. And, we obviously would have lost a year or two of QB development.
I mean, you can suppose anything. And yes, the NFL would look much different if the Bills didn't draft Josh. But I think McBenae would have a very good chance of still being around in any of the above scenarios. All of the above scenarios, we wouldn't have Josh. But, the talent of the team around the QB we did have (Baker, Lamar, Burrow, Herbert, Hurts) would have been higher (with using our picks and accumulating more). The overall success probably wouldn't be as high without Josh, but we would not be a bad team. And you could say the same of any GM/Head Coach---if they never got a good QB, they'd probably eventually be fired. Uh, yeah. That's why they all try so hard to get one and why Beane wouldn't have given up trying to get one even if we missed on Josh.
And finally, not sure what you think is "revisionist history." I personally think Beane is a pretty straight shooter.
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Mikie2times said:
Since 2018 (I couldn't go back further with the site I used)
- Every Super Bowl winner but one has been Top 5 DVOA in the regular season (The only exception was Brady and the Patriots in 2018)
- 11 of 14 participants in the Super Bowl since 2018 were Top 5 in DVOA
Good teams are getting to Super Bowls and Winning Super Bowls
Buffalo is the best regular season team since 2020 by any measure, but they aren't winning or getting to Super Bowls. Eventually that starts to stick out at the level we have done it with.
- Buffalo has more Top 5 DVOA finishes than any team in football since 2020 with 5 and is in a tie for 5 total with KC dating back to 2018
- Teams with at least 4 top 5 DVOA finishes who have yet to make a Super Bowl include Baltimore and Buffalo
- Teams with at least 3 top 5 DVOA finishes who have yet to make a Super Bowl include Baltimore, Buffalo, New Orleans
- Teams with at least 2 top 5 DVOA finishes who have yet to make a Super Bowl include Baltimore, Buffalo, New Orleans, Green Bay, Dallas
We have had prolific success since 2020. Nobody has accomplished what we have as consistently as we have in the regular season. At the same time, nobody has underachieved more in the playoffs. The teams that have also underachieved like Baltimore, New Orleans, Green Bay, and Dallas isn't a good group you want to be associated with. I don't think any of us look at it as unlucky either.
Lamar has given games away. LaFleur has put the Packers in horrible positions. Half the board just got done trying to convince me Sean Payton is an all time playoff hack outside of his SB win. Dallas is the most paper soft team in the game.
So are we more like those teams or are we more like Kansas City, Philadelphia, San Francisco, LA Rams, etc? It seems like people are so sure we are more like the Super Bowl group. But the longer this goes, the more questions will get asked and the more we look like the ones who just won't get it done.
Good post Mikie. And I know it sounds like an excuse to some, but the one caveat I would add is Kansas City. Let's just say that over the last 6 years we swapped K.C. and San Fran. Put San Francisco in the AFC and move Kansas City to the NFC. Do you think that maybe Buffalo's and Philly's number of Super Bowl appearances and/or SB wins might be different than it is? I mean, how many more SB appearances or rings would Peyton Manning have if not for Tom Brady and the Patriots.
-
1
-
1
-
8 hours ago, eball said:
Why is this thread titled “McBean?” You know McDermott doesn’t do the scouting or drafting, right?
I would have gone back only to 2018 (not 2017) and just said "Beane's drafting..." But I was responding to another poster who asked to go back to 2017 (to show the entire tenure of the current regime). Since McDermott was in control of the 2017 draft (with Whaley's scouting), I made the title McBeane (to note that I was aware that Beane was not involved in the 2017 draft). Otherwise the first handful of posts probably would have been people reminding me that Beane wasn't part of the 2017 draft. 🙂
-
1
-
Bills games you’ve never rewatched
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
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.