folz

He could make some plays in the slot against man coverage because of his speed, but he wasn't good against the zone, finding the spots and making himself available for his QB. He didn't have that knack/feel that most good slots like Beasley, Crowder, etc. have against zone coverage. If Crowder stayed healthy, they might have been a good tandem, but McKenzie couldn't do it on his own. Teams knew how to cover/eliminate him. And I think Josh lost some faith in him as the season wore on as well.

6'5" 324, 31 years old Drafted by the Jets in the 5th round (158th overall) in 2016 draft 83 career games, 72 games started 4 years with the Jets, 2 with Seattle, 1 with Miami Started one playoff game with Seattle When healthy, he has generally garnered 90+% of the RT snaps for his teams (over the last 6 years, he's been a starting RT) But it also looks like he has missed a lot of games due to injury over his career (16 games over the last 3 seasons) Perfect depth signing. You aren't asking him to play a full season, but when he comes in, he knows how to get the job done. I keep saying it, but Beane is trying to build an injury-proof roster (after how last season went). I love the depth the team has now...and it keeps coming.

Well, we can disagree on Harbaugh. I definitely would not want that guy coaching the Bills. But he's at least a rational suggestion to my question. I think definitely as long as we are a Super Bowl contending team, McD should stay put. Where would my patience run out? It depends on circumstances, of course. But, outside of a total collapse, yes, he would still get at least 2024 for me. If we missed the playoffs this year, without multiple crazy circumstances like last year, then I would at least be open to the discussion of moving on. But, I really don't see us falling that flat this year. If we lose in the playoffs (before the AFC Championship), it would depend on to who and how. A horrible game like the Cincy game, or a bad loss to an inferior opponent, I would be really disappointed and agree that he would be on the hot seat for 2024 (but probably wouldn't move on yet). If it's the same in 2024 (no playoffs or bad playoff loss) then I would probably think it's time for another voice. So, I guess I'm saying he has earned at least two years in my book. And conversely, if the team is making it to AFC Championship games, or at worst losing close, hard fought games to say a team like KC in the divisional round, then I would still think that we're close and would probably hang on to McD longer. I just don't think there is a coach out there that will magically come in and make everything better/win the SB right away. We all want a Super Bowl, but it's just not that easy (even with a great QB). There are a handful of great QBs in the league right now. They aren't all going to win the Super Bowl next year. I would just hate to restart everything, when we still feel so close.

Everything we currently are (perennial playoff team, destination for free agents, family atmosphere, class organization, etc.) is because of Sean McDermott. And you don't get to where we are just by lucking into a QB. For instance, Ross Tucker's article praises Daboll and puts him at #8 in his rankings because he was impressed that he got a talent-starved roster to the playoffs in his first year. What about McDermott in 2017 (first year, team lacking talent, a worse QB than Jones---no Allen)? Didn't he do the same thing? Only three active NFL head coaches have a higher winning percentage than McDermott (LaFleur, Belichick, and Reid). Sean is sandwiched between Reid (.641%) and Tomlin (.638%) with a .639 win percentage. And I always seem to hear, "if it weren't for Josh Allen," when it comes to McDermott. Well, what about the other guys listed above. Why isn't it, "without 'Rodgers' 'Brady' 'Mahomes/McNabb' 'Rothlisberger,' when it comes to them? You know where McDermott does rank close to 22nd? On the NFL Head Coaching All-time winning percentage list. McDermott currently sits in 21st place...all-time. Plus, Andy Reid is generally considered a genius, HOF coach now that he has a couple of Lombardis. But how long did it take him to get the trophies and how many playoff loses before finally winning the big game? I'll tell you, he coached 20 years before winning a Super Bowl and his playoff record was 11-14. I don't point that out to say Reid isn't every bit as good as people say, but to show that even as a great coach, you need a lot of things to go your way to win the big one. I'm also not saying we should wait on McDermott for 20 years. I'm just saying have some patience. Just because McDermott hasn't gotten to or won a Super Bowl in 6 years doesn't mean he can't/won't ever do so. In fact, 14 of 33* Super Bowl winning head coaches (42.42% of them) had not won a Super Bowl by the end of their 6th season as head coach, including: Bill Belichick, Tom Landry, Andy Reid, Tom Coughlin, Pete Carroll, Chuck Noll, Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Hank Stramm, Dick Vermeil, John Madden, Gary Kubiak, and Bruce Arians. 12 of those 14 took at least 8 seasons (on up to Reid's 20 years) before winning the big game. And of the other guys who did it sooner (first six years), there are a lot of cases like Mike Tomlin. Won a Super Bowl in his 2nd year, but has since coached 14 more seasons without another win. (He did make it to the SB and lost in year 4, but that is still 12 years since his last SB appearance). And I honestly don't think there are many other coaches who could have handled the tragedies and turmoil of last season as well or as classy as Sean did. He is a great leader with a great winning percentage. Why on Earth would he be on the hot seat or ranked so low on a HC list? It just doesn't add up. One bad playoff game and two bad plays in a great, classic playoff game erases everything else he has done? Ridiculous. And if the Bills were to move on, who are you bringing in that is going to guarantee you a Super Bowl? There are only 8 active head coaches who have won a Super Bowl, and 6 of those coaches are entrenched where they are (all 7-23 years with their teams). So they aren't going anywhere. That leaves McCarthy (4th year in Dallas) and Pederson (2nd year in JAX), if you could or would want to pry them loose (not likely). Anyone else hasn't won a Super Bowl either, just like McDermott. So, there is no guarantee that they will...and a more than equally good chance that they would actually make the team worse. So, what's the problem with McDermott again? [*There are actually 35 SB winning head coaches, but I didn't include the 2 whose careers came mostly during the pre-Super Bowl era, for obvious reasons.]

Do you have a link to #101. Curious how the 6-year old girl feels about Josh's turnovers. [And can she draw a Bills logo from memory with her crayons?]

I don't know if it will be the best Bills offense ever (love the enthusiasm though), but I have a hard time understanding anyone who doesn't think they have improved from last year. Sure, no big name FA...but that's not really what we needed (or could afford). We needed players to fit certain roles. While it's great to have MJ and Pippen, you still need your Cartwrights, Paxsons, Kerrs, Rodmans, etc. to win a championship. Just look at the net gains (for an offense that was already 3rd in points last season): Losses Gains Case Keenum Kyle Allen Motor Damien Harris Latavius Murray Hines (full offseason/year with team) McKenzie Kincaid Harty Sherfield Shorter Saffold McGovern Torrence Edwards Broeker Boettger (out all last year) Keenum and Allen are a push at worst, and you could argue that Saffold and McKenzie are addition by subtraction. So, our only big loss is Singletary, replaced by Harris, Murray, Hines, and 2nd year Cook. The only other losses were receivers (none of whom played more than 6 games or did much of anything for the team last year): Cole (2 games) JB (3 games) Crowder (4 games) Kumerow (6 games) Gentry (3 games) Hodgins (2 games) Plus Dorsey going into his second year, Kromer 2nd year, Cook 2nd year, Hines full off season/regular season, etc., etc. Of course, not every addition (FA/rookie) will hit, or bust out, or whatever, but just look at the options we have now. And we don't need them all to be superstars (except Kincaid, hopefully), we just need them to play solid ball in the role that they have been brought in for. I don't know about best Bills offense ever, but I do believe this is, by far, the deepest team that we have had since the Super Bowl years (on offense and defense)...Beane and McD are trying to make sure we don't have a repeat of last season...and I am all for it. What Beane did to fill out the team/fix issues from last season with a lack of funds this year is top notch, imo.

I mean, on the one hand, who cares what the "football world" thinks. There is always so much recency bias. And we know what we have in Josh. But, as to the turnovers, here are the numbers (and no, I'm not counting fumbles not lost...stats don't show almost interceptions, or almost tackles): Player Gms INTs FMB TOs/Gm Mahomes 80 49 10 .7375 Allen 77 60 20 1.038 Burrow 42 31 9 .952 To this point in their careers, you can definitely make a case that Mahomes (besides the 2 SBs of course) separates himself from Josh when it comes to turnovers. PM has 21 fewer turnovers than Josh, having played three more games. That is really impressive. As for Burrow, well, he's played a lot fewer games at this point. But if you pro-rate his percentages out to 77 games (to match Josh), Burrow would have 57 INTs and 17 fumbles lost (not that much different than Josh's 60 and 20). Plus, let's not forget that when you run as much as Josh does, there is more of a chance for fumbling...but those extra fumbles do not outweigh the positive yardage and points he gets. Burrow 517 rushing yards (pro-rated out to 77 games, he'd still only have 948 yards) 7 TDs Mahomes 1,547 rushing yards 6 TDs Josh 3,087 rushing yards 13 TDs And of course, Josh was a much more raw prospect than the other two (and walking into a talent-depleted team, unlike PM) and thrust into the starting role as a rookie (unlike PM). So, yes, Josh was more reckless with the ball his first couple of years, but he has gotten much better. He's not perfect and never will be with his style of play, but I don't think it discounts what he does do, or knocks him down the QB rankings in any significant way. Over the last two years: Total attempts Fumbles (pass/rush) INTs lost Mahomes: 1,433 25 4 Allen: 1,459 29 8 Burrow: 1,241 26 5 And obviously more attempts means more turnovers. If you pro-rate the other two to the same number of attempts as Josh, it looks like this: PM: 25.45 INTs 4.07 fumbles = 29.52 total turnovers JA: 29 INTs 8 fumbles = 37 total turnovers JB: 30.5 INTs 5.9 fumbles = 36.4 total turnovers So, again, you can use the turnover argument with Mahomes, but not so much with Burrow.

You do realize that they have only played each other once right? One game is hardly a reason to have one QB over another. Now if Burrow was 3-0 or 4-0 against Josh (and his stats were always better), maybe you'd have a case, but he's not. He's 1-0. And we all know that Josh had a bad game vs. Cincy in the playoffs (the whole team did), and yet here are their stats for that game: [combined yds and TDs] Burrow 273 yards 2 TDs 0 INTs Allen 290 yards 1 TD 1 INT Not a huge difference. And you can hardly use the Damar game as any type of decider (or count it as an automatic Burrow/Cincy win, as many seem to do). Josh had thrown a total of 6 passes and Burrow a total of 4 passes when the game was called.

In my opinion, Josh is still #2 behind Mahomes. With a healthy elbow and better weapons, I think that will become clear to most as the season wears on. Otherwise, can't really argue much with their top 8. A QB to watch is the Steelers' Kenny Pickett. I liked what I saw from him last year and wouldn't be surprised to see him make a decent move up that list this season.

I've been kind of thinking along the same lines as Shaw66 for this year. The only question I have is who calls the defense. Is there any reason that Milano can't call the defense from the Will? If not, then why not have Milano call the defense and platoon the middle LB spot? When we face the heavy pass teams, we'll see more of Williams and Bernard; and when we see a more run-heavy team, we see more of Dodson and Klein. There is still a good chance that Williams claims the spot and is the main MLB, but Beane just doesn't want to put too much pressure on the kid (or set expectations for the fans), if he isn't able to pick-up the defense well enough to be its QB by week one (or even a starter). Now, I have no doubt that Klein or Dodson could call the defense, with their experience in the system. Bernard has a year under his belt, so maybe. And obviously Williams needs to learn. But, if you do platoon them, it doesn't seem like the optimum choice to have a different voice calling the defense from play to play or game to game? Milano definitely won't move position, but can he call the D from the Will if needed this year? Anyone (especially those who've played or coached football) know of a reason that couldn't work? Ultimately, it looks like they want their backers to be interchangeable (in the Milano, Bernard, Williams mode) to combat this pass heavy league. On Chris Long's podcast, while giving Tremaine props as a player, Beane did mention that he was a mismatch (to the negative) for them in coverage often, because of his size. We are not a traditional 4-3 defense. I don't think they want a traditional MLB. We need to keep up across the middle of the field with the Miamis, Cincis, and KCs of the league. It was a problem in the "13seconds" game and was still an issue last year. So, I think the ultimate goal (at the moment) is Williams and Milano as starters, with Bernard as the first sub for either of them, but you still have guys like Dodson and Klein if a team decides to go heavy power against you. The key to Williams over Tremaine is speed in coverage, better natural instincts, and he's a tackling machine. What we lose in size is more than compensated by those skills, as long as Williams lives up to the bill. But if his learning curve is slow, then I think we see some sort of platooning of the spot.

You are incorrect about that. Davis saw a good bit of double-teaming and/or bracketing last season also. Many opposing teams were not afraid of us doing any damage in the slot or with the run game, so they tried to take away Diggs and Davis both, and would take their chances over the middle of the field. The prior year (2021), he saw very little double teaming, because teams focused on Diggs and Beasley. Gabe Davis wasn't the problem with the offense last year, nor was Devin Singletary...it was the lack of weapons in the slot once Crowder went down (well and O-line too, but that's another discussion)). McKenzie was fast, but not good vs. zone. That's also why Josh didn't take the short/easy throws enough last year and seemed to go back to hero ball (well, lack of slot and his elbow injury). It's not because he forgot or regressed, it's because he didn't have players he could trust from that position. That's why they brought Cole back last year. And its also why Josh had to run more than they liked last year. This team self scouted, saw their biggest area of need, and addressed it with Kincaid and Deonte Harty. A big-body Cole Beasley (just meaning he knows how to play vs. zone and run great routes, great feet, great hands), and a more versatile and more consistent speedster in Harty (plus Shakir with a year under his belt now). We now have 6 players that can work the middle of the field (Harty, Kincaid, Shakir, Knox, Sherfield and Diggs). They made sure they weren't going to have the same issue as last season. And by the way, attacking the middle of the field more should also help to open up the run game, not just the boundary receivers (regardless of O-line improvement). And Cover1 (and gobills404) posted a crazy stat that like 75% of Kincaid's production from the slot went for first downs or touchdowns. That was exactly our problem last year, we couldn't move the chains over the middle consistently enough, so Josh was going for the big plays to try and hit kill shots. I think Dalton Kincaid is just what the doctor ordered. Love this pick! Go Bills!

Went to school in Bahstan, Mass. First year there, was down at Faneuil Hall with some friends looking for a good bar to go to. Ask some dudes who were passing by and one of the guys said, "Oh ya, Clocks bah is great, right around the cornah." So, we are looking for a bar, maybe with a big clock over the entrance or something. Couldn't find it. Then we saw a bar, and realized, "Oh, he was saying Clark's Bar." btw, this was pre-Brady era and there were very few Patriots fans at that time. Would go to Foxborough whenever the Bills came to town and the stadium was always less than half full. Everyone was into the Sox, Celtics, and Bruins...and could have cared less about the Pats.

Great thread OP. I wonder if it's rawness rather than age specifically (but obviously, most of the guys who are raw will probably be on the younger side and vice versa...so basically the same thing). But I'm thinking maybe Beane's first round strategy has been to pick players who have elite qualities, but who are still raw---hoping to out draft the pick they have (especially when picking lower in the first round). Most drafts there seem to be say 3-7 players at the top that appear to be studs; then maybe a second tier somewhere into the teens; and then somewhere into the 20s are the other guys who have a 1st round grade. Does Beane try to pick a player that he thinks could be in the tier above (athletically or whatever) and with the right coaching/more experience get him there, to try and maximize the team's 1st round draft position? 2018 pick 7 Josh Allen (elite arm and competitiveness/definition of raw) 2018 pick 16 Tremaine Edmunds (elite size/so young) 2019 pick 9 Ed Oliver (elite explosion off the ball/needed to switch from NT/1-tech to 3-tech due to size) 2021 pick 30 Greg Rousseau (elite size, length/only 1 year college ball/sat out COVID year) 2022 pick 23 Kaiir Elam (high-end size-length-speed ratio, NFL lineage/needed to become more proficient in zone coverage) And if that's the case, will he stick with that philosophy, as Chaos asked? Allen was obviously a home run (flashed early and often, fully bloomed in third year), Tremaine (took too long to develop), Oliver (transitioned to new position fairly well in 1-2 years, has been solid and has flashed, but has not quite reached his draft position, let alone exceed it), Greg (has flashed a bit, hoping he starts to fully blossom in year 3), Elam (tough transition year as a rookie---will see if he starts putting it together in year two). If that is Beane's strategy, I'm not necessarily opposed to it, especially when drafting in the back of the round (swing for the fences), but as Chaos posted, there is the danger that we get lower quality of play as we groom players to eventually move on as they get good. But, otherwise, I guess it just comes down to do the hits/home runs outweigh the guys that develop too slowly (or never reach that potential). Not sure the sample size is big enough yet to make a true determination, but will be interesting to see if the FO thinking has changed at all going into the year.

I find this exciting! I'm glad the division will be a dogfight. Will make for some great, old-school football to watch. And I still have confidence that our boys will finish on top. We are a very-talented, veteran team with a great QB. A team that has seen it all/been through it all over the last few seasons. I think the Bills will come into this season not just as men on a mission, but as fully bonded and battle-tested warriors on the ultimate quest! That's the stuff you don't see on paper.

Good to see you Deep Voice. ✊ [One of my favorite all-time posters.]

Unpopular opinions? 1. McDermott and Beane have done an amazing job turning this franchise around and are the right people to continue leading this team. 2. Gabe Davis was not the reason for last year's failures and is better than most give him credit for. 3. All of the on- and off-field turmoil/adversity last year did affect the team's ability to make a SB run. 4. It is not a given that the Bengals would have won the regular season matchup (the game where Damar went down). 5. We are not clearly inferior to KC and Cincy. Flame away. 🔥 😊

Whoever leaked this is trying to compare a 26-year old RB whose 3 best seasons averaged 2,080 yards and 15 TDs per against a 30-year old WR whose 3 best years averaged 1,486 yards and 9TDs? And you can't use CMC injuries as an excuse that it evens things out, when DHop has missed 15 games over the last two years due to injury/suspension (despite being healthy for most of his career prior---but he is also 30 now). No doubt these are both great players, and I would love to have DHop on the Bills, if it works out (at the right price)...but this comparison is beyond ridiculous. DHop is not worth the same as CMC in trade value...and no one is buying that.

Congrats to Tyler for actually getting me to click on and read the article, but what a waste of time. I thought that maybe he had something new or interesting to say because of his Twitter post saying, "we've been having the wrong conversation" about the Bengals game, that he talked "In depth" with Taiwan, that Dunne was going to discuss a "philosophy change" for the team, and he apparently had a quote from Taiwan saying, "We were like deer in headlights." First of all, that quote doesn't appear in the article, so did Taiwan actually say that? Why post it to your Twitter, but not have it in the article? Dunne added absolutely nothing new to the conversation about the Bengals game (same old rehash, and as much from a Bills fan as from the player he talked "in depth" to). And his philosophy change was to start scoring 50 points a game, oh and draft a WR in the first 4 rounds. Genius. And then the article ends with "Here's How." Is there more article behind a paywall, or was that it? If there is more, it isn't really that clear...and/or its a shameless cliff hanger to get people to subscribe. If not, then what a strange way to end an article. Not that I should be disappointed by an article in the off-season, but wow.

Josh and Pat both learned that lesson in 2021. As defenses adjusted to them, they then had to adjust to those defenses (specifically Cover 0). They both eventually adjusted and that's why both offenses were on fire again at the end of that season. There were two problems for Josh/the Bills last season (2022) that, imo, led to the appearance that Josh regressed or forgot to "take what the defense gives you" (i.e. shorter passes). I think we were all frustrated at first at all of the deep shots. But, there were reasons for it and I don't think that they were Dorsey or Josh being greedy or Josh regressing. 1. It came out at some point, that due to Josh's elbow injury, he felt a lot of pain on certain throws, but chucking it down the field (bombs) didn't hurt as much because it was a different motion (less angle, straight-armed, whatever.). So, some of it may have been pain/load management, rather than just being greedy (back to hero ball). And maybe if certain throws hurt, then Josh wasn't as strong or accurate with those throws at that time either, so Dorsey called fewer of them perhaps. 2. Our slot position was a mess once Crowder went down. I think by mid-season Josh didn't really trust McKenzie and/or lil' Dirty wasn't getting open consistently enough. Our slot position production was down 40% from the previous three years. I think a healthy Josh, with the new weapons will take the shorter throws when that's what the defense is allowing. And no question, we should have a stronger slant game with Harty/Shakir/Sherfield. I don't think Josh forgot the lessons he already learned. And wow...1.7 million for Harris? Beautiful! I look forward to seeing him help close out games for us in the 4-minute drives when we have the lead. This is why I'm not worried about predictability. His main use (4-minute offense, goal line, short yardage) are all times that defenses will be expecting the run anyhow. Hopefully we now have a back that can still produce those tough yards when they know it's coming.

Not a move I wanted or was expecting, but I still think it is a solid move. I think Devin is the better overall back, but Harris brings what we didn't have: a little size and toughness. Cook is going to be the lead back this year, Harris provides insurance (which is why I wanted them to retain Devin). And we don't need him to be a #1 workhorse back, we need him in short yardage...and more importantly to close out games. How many times over the last couple of years have we let teams claw their way back into games because we couldn't close them out? If Harris is an improvement (which he should be) on the goal line and in the 4-minute offense only, he will be worth it.

Yeah, I was hoping that they would bring Motor back. Don't want to spend any draft capital on a RB and don't see anyone better than Devin left in FA. But, it is what it is. He probably wasn't going to make or break this season for the Bills either way. Just liked him as insurance in case Cook doesn't take that next step. And I too thought he was better than a lot of fans gave him credit for (needed more opportunities and a better line) and I wish him nothing but the best in his career and life. He was a likable, solid player, who always put in his best and didn't mind doing the dirty work or not getting the praise. True team-first, Bills DNA. Thanks Devin! I'll still be rooting for you!

Yes, thank you. Was going to post something similar. The problem with the offense last year (besides Josh's elbow), was not Gabe Davis; it was not having any consistent play from the slot position and a burner to take the top off the defense. From 2019 to 2021, Cole averaged 813 yards from the slot position (it's also why they tried to bring him back for the playoff run last year---cause we were in trouble in the slot). Last year, we got 483 yards total from the slot (between Crowder and McKenzie). That's 40% less production from that spot. This offense needs consistent production from the slot to run properly. Also, I don't think people realize that it wasn't just Diggs who got double-teamed last year. Davis also saw a lot of double-teaming because defenses were not afraid of our slot position or the run game. Of course, Crowder was supposed to help there (and probably be the #1 slot). But once he went down, we were in trouble. Isaiah could get some wins in the slot playing against man, but he didn't have the "feel" for the slot against zone. So, teams bracketed Diggs and Davis and said try to beat us with what you have left. So, I see the current signings as many-layered. First, they are making sure they have multiple guys who can play the slot (to couch versus injuries---they aren't going to be left high and dry again); two, they got guys who aren't going to just make the short grab and go down, these players have speed and RAC to take slants to the house (or at least get more yards out of those throws---see K.C., Miami, etc.); and thirdly, as Colorado said, we now have 4 of our top 5 current WRs that can play both inside and outside (Diggs, Shakir, Harty, and Sherfield). This makes the offense a lot less predictable and gives Dorsey a lot more options to scheme and play. Not to mention that Harty and Sherfield are both big ST contributors. It is all about depth and maximizing every roster spot at this point---to get over that final hump. Plus, as others said, it frees up Hines and other players to focus on where we need them most. And Harty can take the top off the defense with his speed. Diggs and Gabe can both get deep, but they don't have that burner speed that really puts stress on opposing safeties. It was another dimension that we were missing last year. If you have Harty flying down the field (and hitting on some chunk plays), it is going to be a lot harder to bracket both Diggs and Davis. McKenzie was fast, but fly routes were not really in his bag (due to hands/tracking the ball, whatever). We don't need to spend a lot of money on WRs that are at the end of their careers (OBJ/Hopkins)---diminishing returns and steals money from other areas of need. We can draft a young guy (in case they move on from Gabe next year), and groom him for at least a year (unless they get lucky and the kid is a stud from the get---but tough to count on that where we are drafting). But, still, I am fine using a premium pick on a young WR. But, I also see how these current moves are actually addressing problem areas from last season. Sometimes you don't need the shiny new toy (that breaks a week later) on Christmas morning---you need that pair of socks that will keep your feet warm all winter.* It may not be sexy, or what you wanted, but it may turn out to be what you actually needed more. But, as always, we will have to wait and see if these moves pan out. I do seem to get their thought process though. *(idea poached from House's funny post about underwear on Christmas, just changed it to socks)

I'm thinking that maybe his tweet to BBB was that he knew he was going to get released, so he wanted Brandon to get on with it so he could try to find another team as free agency started rolling. That's why when Harty was signed and someone tweeted him about it, he responded with something like, that's exactly what I wanted. He knew that was his replacement and knew that he would finally get released. I'm guessing that he knew which way the wind was blowing at OBD. Wish nothing but the best for Isaiah and I thank him for his time here, but this is a good for everyone move. Just time to move on. McKenzie's speed makes him a great gadget guy, and he can work in the slot against man coverage, but he struggled in the slot vs. zone. Obviously he wasn't meant to be a full-time slot, he was to split time with Crowder, but when Crowder went down, it was obvious that Isaiah couldn't get the job done, full-time, on his own. And since you can't really trust him in the kicking game either and Dorsey runs a lot fewer jet sweeps, etc. than Daboll did, the writing was on the wall. He can be a very dangerous weapon for someone in a specialist role, but this team needs more versatile, all-around, consistent play to get over that final hump. Need to maximize every roster spot.

I'd be fine running it back with Motor, Cook, and Hines. It's not like we are going to turn into a run team all of a sudden. We are still going to live or die by the pass. And at this point, there isn't a significantly better player out there than Devin in FA. Why would we pay more for Sanders or Williams? Devin: 4 years, 3,151 yards and 16 TDs on 672 carries (4.7 yards/carry); 971 receiving yards, 4 receiving TDs Sanders: 4 years, 3,708 yards and 20 TDs on 739 carries (5.0 yards/carry); 942 receiving yards, 3 receiving TDs Williams: 6 years, 3652 yards and 30 TDs on 915 carries (4.0 yards/carry); 1,191 receiving yards, 8 receiving TDs And before you get too excited about Williams' TD total: he had 17 of those TDs this past season. 15 of those 17 TDs came inside the 7-yard line, 12 of 17 came within the 3-yard line (the other two were 13 yards and 51 yards). He wasn't scoring homeruns for Detroit, they were giving him the ball at the three-yard line and he was punching it in. Why should we overpay for either of those guys over keeping Devin? Sanders' stats are marginally better than Motor's, and Williams' stats are worse than Devin's overall. Now, if one of them comes significantly cheaper than Devin, I'm fine making the switch, but otherwise, no thanks. The hope would be that Cook is ready to take the next step and takes over as the #1, Devin is #2, and get Hines more involved (3rd downs, certain packages, etc.). All three of these backs are good catching out of the backfield. I think Dorsey could get creative with these guys, using them more in the passing game (even splitting them out wide at times, etc.). If Cook turns out not to be ready, then Motor is the guy (that we know has a decent floor), with Hines helping more in the passing game. If we bring in Sanders or Williams (at a decent contract) there will probably be a need to make them the #1 or at least make sure to get them their touches. Could this impede Cook's trajectory? Whereas Cook and Devin have known each other since they were kids, Devin is a team-first guy and good mentor. Devin knows our team and offense. That's a lot of pluses, imo, to Motor. And if he comes cheaper (not sure what each guy is expecting), seems a no-brainer to me. Now if Barkley, Jacobs, or Pollard didn't re-sign with their teams, I'd be up for talking free agent running backs. But those guys would obviously be an upgrade. I don't see any upgrades with what is left in free agency. P.S. And to add Zeke into the equation. Last 4 years: Zeke (yds/carry; yds/rec) Devin (yds/carry; yds/rec) 2019 4.5; 7.8 5.1; 6.7 2020 4.0; 6.5 4.4; 7.1 2021 4.2; 6.1 4.6; 5.7 2022 3.8; 5.4 4.6; 7.4

ALL PRO PO! Didn't think it was going to happen, but couldn't be happier. Losing Jordan was going to be a bigger hole to fill than some thought...from a chemistry with Micah angle and from a leadership/heart/fire angle---beyond just his play.