folz

These posts made me think about how coaching staffs in the NFL have changed over the years. It was hard to find complete information for all coaching staffs over the years (apparently it is hard to find who all the assistant coaches were back in the day, even into the 1970s---just didn't get their due I guess), but here is some information I found that gives a good overview of things. Per how things are listed, these are coaching staffs only and do not include Strength & Conditioning, trainers, medical staffs, etc. (which have all seen a sizable increase in staffs over the years too). -In the current NFL, teams average 23.7 coaches per team. The 2025 Buffalo Bills have 24 coaches on their staff currently. -In 1958, the two NFL Championship Game teams, the New York Giants and the Baltimore Colts had coaching staffs of 4 and 3 coaches respectively. So, a head coach and 2-3 assistants. -By the merger in 1960, staffs started to grow a bit. The 1960 Packers had 7 coaches total. -George Allen was the first coach to add a Special Teams Coordinator (hiring Dick Vermeil for the post in 1969). -There were no Offensive and Defensive Coordinators until sometime into the 1970s. It was a gradual process. For instance, the 1975 Steelers had a Defensive Coordinator, but no Offensive Coordinator. I wonder if maybe this started with say an offensive head coach (or vise versa), hiring a coordinator for the opposite side of the ball (once coaches started to specialize on one side of the ball or the other). But, not all teams had both OCs and DCs until the late 70s, early 80s. Using the Bills, here is a look at the size of their coaching staffs (as best as I could gather) over the decades (numbers include the head coach, but again no Training/Strength & Conditioning guys): 1960: 4 1970: 6 1980: 11 1990: 12 2000: 14 2010: 18 2020: 26 So, it looks like there was a big bump up in staff sizes in the 1970s, a small bump in the early 2000s, and the largest jump coming in the last 10-15 years.

Fair enough.

Yes, of course Josh influences everything. He makes everyone around him (other players, coaches, FO) better (or at least seem better). No question. But, as you said, how much so is almost unquantifiable. It's why the debate still goes on about whether the Patriots success was more Brady or Belichick, etc. But, as I have also pointed out in other threads before, just having an elite QB (or even a top 10 All-Time QB) does not automatically equate to playoff berths every year, let alone, say, bi-annual Super Bowl appearances or whatever. Just ask Drew Brees, Dan Marino, Aaron Rodgers, and Peyton Manning. Combined, they played 74 NFL seasons, missing the playoffs in 27 of those years, with 7 Super Bowl appearances, and 4 Super Bowl wins. That means these all-time QBs missed the playoffs for 36% of their careers and did not appear in a Super Bowl for 90.5% of their careers. No matter how good your Quarterback/Coach combo is (and those guys all had excellent coaches), you still need a lot of talent around them to win consistently. Drew Brees and Sean Payton will both be HOFers, yet in 15 seasons together, they missed the playoffs 6 times and only reached the Super Bowl once (and won). As good as Josh is, he is not doing it on his own, as some like to think. As to Free Agency...I agree that Brandon has had a lot of misses over the years, guys that barely ended up even seeing the field sometimes. But, again, we'd have to look at all of his hits and misses (and their contracts, playing time, stats, etc.) and then compare that to other GMs to get an idea of how he's doing overall. I actually have no idea where Brandon would rank if looking only at a GM's free agent success right now. But, I do agree that there is still room for improvement in that department, for sure. But again, sometimes you just get unlucky too (Von's injury). Beane has drafted in the top 10 twice. He picked Josh Allen (at 7) and Ed Oliver (at 9). So, a grand-slam homerun and a solid double or triple. Don't think you can knock those picks too harshly as a pair (though we all wish that Ed had maybe one more level to his game). For reference: according to an article I found, the bust rate for 1st round picks 6-10 is about 35%. And the positive 65% doesn't necessarily mean that they are all All-Pro studs, just that they are at least say solid 5-year starters (per the article's standards). Not sure what the division of studs vs. solid players is in that percentage, but Ed is probably at least somewhere in the middle. So, not a bad pick, just not a home run pick. But how many of that percentage are actually home runs (All-Pros/HOFers) even in that range? I'm guessing here, maybe 10%, 20%? It won't be a high number. So, Ed isn't as bad a pick at 9 as some think, just not the jackpot that you hope for. https://theriotreport.com/more-than-50-of-first-round-picks-are-busts-and-other-terrifying-draft-statistics/

First off, I'm not saying Roseman isn't doing a great job (their World Champs! Again.) and I'm not saying Brandon is better than him. I mean, we could compare them overall as GMs (taking everything into account) if we had the time, but generally winning SBs will give you the nod/edge regardless. I was just pointing out that it's not a fair comparison when it comes to drafting over the last 5 years specifically (as to how many impact players are on the teams through the draft). To say Roseman has drafted better or more impact players when he has had 3 more first round picks than Brandon and three picks in the top 13, when Brandon hasn't had a pick higher than 23, seems obvious. Swap any other two GMs into those positions and the one in Roseman's position will have "drafted better." As to the reason for those higher picks (your question), It's a combination of stuff. In 2020 and 2021, the Eagles season records were 4-11-1 and 9-8. So, in the 2021 and 2022 drafts, they picked 10th and 13th overall (sure there was probably some movement to get to those exact spots, but the reason they were up that high was because of the team's records). Conversely, the Bills records in 2020 and 2021 were 13-3 and 11-6, with the Bills picking 30th and 23rd overall. Just those two picks alone could have made a big difference (especially since one of them was Kaiir, imagine if we had a top 10 pick on the team rather than having had Kaiir?). In the 2023 draft, yes, Roseman made a lot of trades (a big one with NO, and then others) to get up to pick 9 to select Jalen Carter. Not too dissimilar to what Beane did to move up to #7 for Josh in 2018. But for Roseman, it wasn't about getting his QB, it was about going all in. So, we could debate the style of GM'ing. Now I'm sure almost every Bills fan will say I'd take a back-to-back 4-win and then a 9-win season (no playoffs) if it means we win a Super Bowl. Yet, during that two year stretch, most Bills fans would be calling for the HC's and GM's heads. They might not last that extra season to win it all. Look at Siriani, he was on the hot seat in Philly despite making two Super Bowls now. It's kind of that old debate of is it worth it to go all in and then suck for a couple of years, and then try it again? Or instead, try to remain one of the best teams each year and get more shots at it. I'm not a fan of the all in (cause if it doesn't work, you have to rebuild), but it has worked for the Rams and the Eagles at least. So, I don't know. And I guess we'll see if Roseman can keep this current Philly team together (at the top) for a while now or not. Look, the run that Roseman has had the last 8 years is amazing. Three SB appearances and 2 SB wins. That run began 8 years into his tenure as a GM. Brandon has been a GM for 7 years thus far. Roseman has also had 5 losing seasons and 6 years of no playoffs in his 15 years. Also, Philly made the playoffs in that span 3 times with 9 wins and twice with 10 wins. Not sure you're making it that way in the AFC. Again, this is in no way to disparage Roseman, he's got two Super Bowls and will probably be in the HOF because of it, just pointing out that a lot more goes into comparing GMs than just how many pro-bowlers are on the team currently. And ultimately, if we have to use the best 2-3 GMs in the league as a comparison to Beane (to try and show he's maybe not at their level), doesn't that kind of mean he must be pretty near the top of GMs too? Otherwise, why wouldn't people point to worse GMs to say, see Brandon isn't even as good as this guy.

It almost seems like you'd need to do a full team-by-team comparison of players to really determine the Bills' talent-level. As we know, and have seen recently, Pro Bowls, and yes, even MVPs and All-Pro selections, etc. can be about popularity, politics, etc. So, I'm not sure any of those are the best way to evaluate roster talent (more than just a quick picture maybe). Also, there may be a team that say has 8 elite players playing a team with 4/5 elite players and people will say the team with 8 elite players is the more talented team and should win. But, what if from players 9-53, the team with fewer elite players is more solid and/or has fewer holes/weak links elsewhere? What if the "less-talented" team is much deeper and by the end of the season is faring better because they have other guys who can step up without as much drop off? Truly evaluating the overall talent-level of an NFL team is tough and most of the times people disagree on who is or is not elite, or who is or is not the better player than the other anyhow. That's why wins, playoffs, point differentials, offensive and defensive rankings, etc. matter more to me when evaluating a coach or GM than any outside talent-evaluation or number of pro-bowlers on the team or whatever. And we have been at the top of the league in all of those categories for more than 5 years now, despite no Super Bowl appearance (but damn, we've been close). And the same goes for Beane/GMs overall. You can't look at Beane in a vacuum, you have to compare him to the job that other GMs have done/are doing. It's easy just to point out his misses or mistakes and to knock him for it, but really, you have to look at his overall batting average vs. other GMs. And take into account that we are always drafting late in the draft. A while back, I compared the first three rounds of the only three teams to make the playoffs in each of the last 5 years (BUF, KC, Tampa---in regards to drafting players when drafting late in the rounds) to see how Beane matched up in regards to the other GMs who were generally drafting in the same range as Brandon. Apples to Apples. Philly is actually a very poor comparison to use, especially when it come to drafting impact players, because in the last 5 years, the Bills' highest draft pick was #23 (with only 3 first-round selections total), while Philly has had 5 picks better than #23 in that span (6 first-round picks total), with two picks in the top 10 and another at 13. I bet if Beane had 3 more first round picks over the last 5 years (all three in the top 13), the Bills would have 1-3 more impact players on their squad currently. Not to mention, over the last 6-7 years it has been far easier to make a SB from the NFC than it has been from the AFC due to much tougher competition/better teams in the AFC. Anyhow, here is the comparison from the old thread: Buffalo (2021-2024 drafts, rounds 1-3) 12 picks overall (3 firsts, 5 seconds, and 4 thirds). Average draft pick: 59 Players: Greg Rousseau, Boogie Basham, Spencer Brown, Kaiir Elam, James Cook, Terrell Bernard, Dalton Kincaid, O'Cyrus Torrence, Dorian Williams, Keon Coleman, Cole Bishop, DeWayne Carter. Summary: 6-7 starters, 3-4 backups, 2 Busts Tampa (2021-2024 drafts, rounds 1-3) 13 picks overall (3 firsts, 5 seconds, and 5 thirds). Average draft pick: 60 Players: Joe Tryon-Shoyinka, Kyle Trask, Robert Hainsey, Logan Hall, Luke Goedeke, Rachaad White, Calijah Kasey, Cody Mauch, YaYa Diaby, Graham Barton, Chris Braswell, Tykee Smith, Jalen McMillan Summary: 7-8 starters, 4-5 backups, 1 Bust (at this point) Kansas City (2021-2024 drafts, rounds 1-3) 11 picks overall (4 firsts, 6 seconds, and 1 third). Average draft pick: 51 Players: Nick Bolton, Creed Humphrey, Trent McDuffie, George Karlaftis, Skyy Moore, Bryan Cook, Felix Anudike-Uzomah, Rashee Rice, Wanya Morris, Xavier Worthy, Kingsley Suamataia Summary: 7 starters, 3 backups, 1 Bust I'd say overall, all three teams did about the same as far as filling roles on their team. As far as impact players, K.C. probably has the edge. But, they also had one more first round pick and one more second round pick than the Bills or Bucs over that span, and KC's average pick was 8-9 spots ahead of Buffalo and Tampa. And obviously for GMs, you'd still have to compare their free agency acquisitions and contracts/cap management, etc. alongside their drafting. Could we use one or two more elite players? Sure, and maybe Bosa is one IF he can stay healthy. Would it be nice if Beane didn't have any busts and drafted more impact players early? Yes, but show me a GM that that can't be said about. All signs point to Brandon doing a very good job overall, in comparison to the league, especially in the consistency/maintaining success department. And you can say the Bills not making a Super Bowl is lack of talent (Beane) or coaching (McD), but if you think of it in a certain way, we were basically 6 points away from 2-3 Super Bowl appearances over the last 4 years. It's heartbreaking, but true. End of regulation in the last three KC playoff losses, the Chiefs had 6 more total points than us (across three games!). Sure we still would have had to get by Cinn in '21 (maybe not) and Baltimore in '23 (probably)...but that's about as close as you can get to 3 SB appearances in 4 years (without doing it). How much have we really been lacking (talent/coaching-wise) vs. how much did luck, refs, other circumstances play a part? What if the Bills get the OT coin toss in '21? What if the refs didn't work against us this year? What if one or two more starters were on the field any year in the playoffs rather than in the training room? I know some will say those are just excuses, but honestly, 3 of the last 4 years we were good enough (talent-wise and coaching-wise) to have made a Super Bowl, we just didn't.

In the world as it is today, just being a decent guy should be lauded (regardless of your profession). But, to still be a decent, down-to-earth guy when you have that level of fame and money? That is not as easy as it looks (to keep your ego in check) and it is definitely worthy of some praise, imo. Wouldn't trade Josh for anything or anyone. He is the perfect QB for Buffalo. He was built for this team. And I'm glad his new contract puts to bed the assumption by a few posters that Josh is somehow disgruntled behind the scenes with the organization/coaching staff/front office (i.e. doesn't/didn't want to stay in Buffalo).

Once again, Beane is trying to fill as many holes in FA before the draft (so we aren't desperate for anything). With that and our current depth, yeah, it will be tough to make this team. Which is why I think this is a draft that we'll see Beane moving around quite a bit (up, generally)---to maximize talent rather than picks. My guess is we come away with like 6 or 7 guys, not 10. The roster is shaping up. I'd still like to see them draft a big DT, another WR, and another Edge, but right now, CB seems to be the only gaping hole. Will we see a FA (not too many good ones left---Samuel, Hilton)? Or will that be our first round pick?

Approximating according to the draft value chart: Dallas' 5th round pick is about 23 points Buffalo's 6th round pick (if it's our 2nd or 3rd 6th rounder, not our first 6th rounder) is ~ 9 points A 7th round pick (about where Dallas should be picking next year) is ~ 1 point So, Bills value in the trade is about 15 points total, which equates to a 6th round pick (like 14th pick of the 6th round---or like pick 190 overall for Elam). Not bad value for a player that just didn't work out (despite where he was drafted). There may be more to it than this, but he just never seemed to get comfortable in zone coverage (which we have been dominant in for most of his career) and was still a bit too handsy in man-to-man coverage. Hopefully he can turn his career around in Dallas. A change of scenery and a better defensive fit may help. He's seems like a good kid. And despite how poorly things were going for him, he never seemed to make a big stink or cause any issues. Side note: Kaiir's dad played for Dallas for two years (including his rookie season).

https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/news/buffalo-bills-signing-larry-ogunjobi-to-one-year-contract-with-8-million-guaranteed-01jp5777kkw8 30 years old, has played 8 NFL seasons, originally a 3rd round pick to the Browns Spent 4 seasons in Cleveland, 1 season in Cincy, and the last 3 in Pittsburgh 361 career tackles, 27.5 combined sacks Last year: 41 tackles, 1.5 sacks, 5 TFLs, 10 pressures, 3 hurries, 7 QB hits.

His initial rookie goal was 1,000 yards and 10 TDs. Before the injury he was on pace for 886 yards and 6.4 TDs. However, he started slow in his first three games and then started coming on. In games 4-8, he had 30 for 366 and 2 TDs---73.2 yards per game. If he didn't get injured and kept that pace (73.2 yards/per game) for the rest of the year, he would have had 1,079 yards and 7 TDs. Pretty close to his goal. Yes, he then added ROTY, Super Bowl, 12 TDs, Pro Bowl, etc. You can tell how he says it that he knew those were harder to attain goals (less probable), and yes, even if he didn't get injured, he wasn't going to attain those goals this year (except maybe a Super Bowl if things went better for the Bills). But, why wouldn't you want your players shooting for big goals. It's not arrogance on Keon's part, that is what is called motivation. Personally, I want my guys shooting for the absolute best. Please stop posting this video. Smith's analysis is terrible. I dissected it in another thread a while back. Not sure if the link gets you directly to my post or just the thread. My post is at the top of page 5 in the thread, if anyone wants to read it. And what negatives did Beane and McDermott actually say? "after the injury things were a bit rocky" "I was a bit disappointed how he came back after the injury" "he was lacking a bit of physicality in his game when he came back" and Mcd "wants Keon to show that he has that drive and determination in attacking the offseason." First of all, Beane and McD have done this with young players before---try to motivate them to really attack the offseason. Now, I don't think they are lying about what they said or mischaracterizing it, but I also don't think they have lost confidence in Keon or don't expect him bounce back either. It sounds to me like maybe he was a bit skittish coming back from injury (not unusual for guys to have to get over that mental hurdle of an injury, especially such a big hit). Also, as Keon said, and I have stated in posts before, when you are out for 5 games, the offense needs to adapt and move on without you. So, I'm sure part of the issue was the lack of playing time/targets when he got back. But, he never went Diva about it. He never complained or sulked, he still celebrated with his teammates and picked them up when they got tackled, etc. I think it was the opposite. I think maybe it knocked his confidence a bit and Beane and Mcd just want him to find that fire again. These guys aren't robots---he's a 21-year old kid. You have to learn to work through adversity, just as you have to learn anything else in life. I may be in the minority, but I think Keon will overcome and have a very good season next year.

I actually agree with you NoSaint. We could not have Hollins filling in at WR2/3 again this year. I think the plan last year was Hollins as your #4 or #5, splitting time with MVS depending on circumstances. With Keon, Samuel, and Shakir ahead of them. [Remember, we were also on a serious budget last year.] But, with Samuel's TC injury, MVS not working out, and Keon being a rookie (bringing him along slowly/learning curve), Mack was pressed into playing roles that maybe didn't suit his skillset best. That is why Amari was added. Technically at that point, Mack was the #5, but again, due to injuries (Samuel, Keon, Amari), he was asked to do a lot more. So, I don't think even last year they thought of him as a #2 or #3, it's just sometimes he was forced into playing that role. And why Beane needed to focus on WR depth this year (even if we don't bring in a bonafide #1 WR). I like the Palmer signing, but by no means do I think that Beane is done (need to add at least 1 more WR in FA or the draft---probably the draft). I would have loved Mack to stick around as say a true WR5 again this season, for all of the intangibles that he brings, but yeah, I don't think the Bills were willing to pay double what they did last year for a WR5. It's just not good business when you can probably get a more talented (though less experienced) guy on a rookie deal. Just as an example, a 2nd rounder is about 8-9 million for 4 years (or 2-2.25 million per season for four years, rather than 4.2-5.2 million per for Mack for two years). And obviously, the rookie has room to grow (you're hoping he'll develop into more than a WR4/5). Mack is who he is at this point. But, having said all of that, Mack was a fun guy to have on the team, gave his all for the team, and actually came up pretty clutch at times. He definitely exceeded a lot of posters expectations of him when first signed and was a very important part of last year's success, even if his overall numbers weren't huge---big part of the running game, special teams, offense's attitude, locker room, etc. I was just pointing out with my post that we shouldn't judge new FA acquisitions too harshly because they may turn out much better than we expect (like Mack did). [Though I understand that we have had our share of bad FA acquisitions where posters were correct about their original negative assessments too.] Anyhow, I understand the decision, just sorry to see Mack go.

Interesting to see how many fans are sad to see him go when so many hated the Bills signing him last year. Maybe keep that in mind with this year's free agents. Thanks for the memories Mack. You were a lot of fun to watch as a Bill, made some clutch plays, brought a toughness to the offense, and a cohesiveness to the locker room. You will be missed. Good luck moving forward...except when you play the Bills, of course...which apparently now will be twice a year.

Cleveland now has their DE signed for 4 more years, and still have Watson on the books for two more years. Buffalo signed their own DE for 4 more years, and have Josh under contract for two more years. The Browns are paying $390,000,000 with 280,000,000 fully guaranteed for Watson and Garrett. The Bills are paying $338,000,000 with $150,000,000 fully guaranteed for Josh and Groot. As good as Garrett is, I'll take Josh and Groot all day for $52 million less ($130 million less guaranteed) than having Garrett/Watson. People think Beane overpays for talent...at least we aren't Cleveland. Stinks to not have a shot at Garrett, but it would have been tough to manage his salary at the rate Cleveland paid him. Would love to see the FO pull Hendrickson now at a reasonable contract (I mean it will be a big number of course, but reasonable compared to Garrett and Crosby). Over the last 5 years, Hendrickson only has 1.5 sacks fewer than Garrett. Garrett is still the better player (more overall tackles and pressures), but Hendrickson would be a very nice consolation prize.

Just thought that I would take a look at how Hendrickson stacks up against Garrett in the stat department: Trey Hendrickson (30) is exactly 1 year and 24 days older than Myles Garrett (29). Both players have played 8 seasons in the league. Hendrickson was a 3rd round pick and didn't start until his 4th year in the league. So, for comparison, let's look at their stats for only the last 5 years (from the time that Hendrickson became a starter). 2020-2024 Seasons Myles Garrett (80 games) Trey Hendrickson (80 games) 72 sacks 70.5 sacks 203 pressures 169 pressures 248 tackles 180 tackles 84 TFLs 65 TFLs 14 FFs 12 FFs 13 PDs 13 PDs

Congratulations on a great career Mitch. Thanks for all that you did for Josh and Buffalo! And for always doing it with such class and compassion. I won't forget how the team really leaned on him through the Damar situation, for one. Enjoy your retirement Mitch! P.S. Yeah, it must have been a real eye-opener going to Jacksonville after coming from Buffalo and K.C. In the first 9 years of his career, his teams were 103-43, made the playoffs every single year (2 wild card losses, 5 divisional round losses, 2 AFC Championship losses). Jacksonville was 4-13 this year. Previously, he had never been on a team that had fewer than 10 wins. Seven of his nine years his teams had 11-13 wins. Tough to go from two of the better run franchises in the game, to one of the worst. Organizational stability definitely matter in the NFL.

Interesting enough, although his TD totals have gone down with Geno as his QB, his yardage has been consistent over his career: with Russell Wilson: 3 years (49 games): 3,170 yards and 29 TDs with Geno Smith: 3 years (48 games): 3,154 yards and 19 TDs D.K. has averaged 1,054 yards and 8 TDs per season over his career. He is the 12th/13th highest-paid receiver currently, averaging 24 million/year. No question he is a very talented guy, but I kind of agree with ChickenBoo---not sure his production is worth the price, overall. Now, if he were the piece that put us over the top, I'm not sure anyone would be complaining about money. It's just the question is, as always, would any other area of the team (like defense where we need the most improvement) suffer with that big of a cap hit for a WR (and keep us from getting over the top, no matter how good the offense is)? Would the boost he gives us on offense (an offense that is already one of the highest scoring offenses in the league) offset or be a bigger help to the team than what we could have done with that money elsewhere? Interesting enough, over the last 5 season, D.K. is 12th in receiving yards (of all WRs)---pretty damn good and right about where he is paid (12th). But, if you look at individual years, his rankings are not quite as high as his salary would suggest, imo. 2024: 25th in rec yards, 51st in rec TDs 2023: 18th in rec yards, 12th in rec TDs 2022: 16th in rec yards, 26th in rec TDs 2021: 28th in rec yards, 4th in rec TDs 2020: 7th in rec yards, 8th in rec TDs 2019: 34th in rec yards, 19th in rec TDs So, I don't know. I would be happy and welcome D.K. with open arms if the Bills decided to and were able to sign him, but if it were my decision alone, I think I might look to build elsewhere.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure why anyone is enamored with Hollywood Brown (or would want him as a FA). Sure, his first three years he looked like he might be a player on the rise, but the last three years have not gone well for him. Over the last three years -he has only played in 28 of a possible 51 games. -he has 1,374 yards and 7 TDs (3 year totals---good for an average of 49 yards and 0.25 TDs per game---when he was on the field) -6-year career total is 3,735 yards and 28 TDs [He's 27 years old] I'm not sure how much more I'd want Kirk, but being friends with Josh does make it more interesting (would they have great chemistry?). I have always liked him as a player, I just don't know if his presence would create some redundancy in the WR room. But maybe if they keep expanding on the "everyone eats" philosophy, they could make it work. Looking at Kirk's last three years in comparison to Brown, he has certainly fared a bit better than Hollywood. Kirk's last three years: -played 37 of a possible 51 games -he has 2,274 yards and 12 TDs (good for an average of 61.5 yards and 0.32 TDs per game) -7-year career total is 5,176 yards and 29 TDs [He's 28 years old---6 months older than Hollywood] That was three years ago (he was 25 years old). Maybe 3 years in Jacksonville has changed his mind. Do you want to be warm and have fun off the field? Or do you want to have fun on the field and contend for a championship? Yes, Kirk has had a good number of injuries over his career and it's definitely something to weigh into the conversation of course, but just to correct you, he has had 3 seasons of more than 13 games played (not just one). From 2020-2022, he only missed 2 games in 3 seasons. 2021 and 2022, he did not miss any games. He's played 93 of a total 116 games in his career---missing 23 games in 7 years (or on average 3.2 games per season). Nine of those 23 games missed were last year when he broke his collarbone. [Before the collarbone injury, he had missed 14 games in 6+ seasons---or about 2.15 games per season on average.] I broke my collarbone when I was younger. It is an extremely painful injury, but it is not too long of a recovery (like 6-8 weeks and then just building your strength back) and there are really no lingering issues with the injury (so he should be pretty close to 100% at this point, if not already there). But, he did end both of the last two season on IR, so I do get the concern. Kirk injuries, last 5 seasons: 2024: broken collarbone--9 games missed 2023: groin tear--5 games missed 2022: no injuries--no games missed 2021: no injuries--no games missed 2020: groin pull--missed 2 games

I'm very happy for Saquon (to have the season he did and to get the bag) after injuries and the Giants nearly derailed his career. And I love me some James Cook, but he and his agent should not be using Saquon as any kind of reference. 2024 Barkley: 2,283 total yards, 15 TDs, 388 touches, 74% snap count Cook: 1,267 total yards, 18 TDs, 245 touches, 48% snap count Saquon just had the 13th all-time best season in yards from scrimmage in the history of the NFL. Cook was 26th in yards from scrimmage just in relation to other 2024 players. If Cook ever gets close to Saquan's numbers and starts hurdling defenders backwards, then we can talk 15-20 million. Otherwise, Saquon should not be relevant in any negotiations with Cook. Completely different stratosphere (the same for McCaffrey, when healthy). If you remove Barkley and McCaffrey from the conversation, the next 10 highest paid RBs are: Player Salary yearly avg. Year contract was signed 1. Jonathan Taylor 14.0 million 2023 2. Alvin Kamara 12.25 million 2024 3. Josh Jacobs 12.0 million 2024 4. James Connor 9.5 million 2024 5. David Montgomery 9.125 million 2024 6. Rhamondre S. 9.0 milllion 2024 7. Joe Mixon 8.5 million 2024 8. Chubba Hubbard 8.3 million 2024 9. D'Andre Swift 8.0 million 2024 10. Derrick Henry 8.0 million 2024 Obviously, no one on that list had as many TDs as Cook did this year, but 8 of those 10 players did have more scrimmage yards than James did this year. Now, in 2023, James was 3rd in yards from scrimmage for a RB (besting everyone on that list in 2023), but in 2023, he also only had 6 total TDs (as opposed to the monster number this year). And with Taylor, despite the injuries, he has still had two season better than James' best season. So, I'm not sure how much James Cook should make, and I'd love to see him remain a Bill (if they can mutually agree on a number), but I definitely think he is over-valuing himself a bit at this point and I don't want to sacrifice other areas of the team. James is very good, but would the drop off to Davis, Johnson and say a rookie with similar skills to James (even if not quite as good) be as detrimental to the team overall as would over-spending big money on Cook and possibly sacrificing elsewhere? 🤷‍♂️ Either way, the Barkley contract should not make a difference in Cook's negotiations (though I'm sure it will---every RB's agent will be using that number to up their client's contracts). But by how much? All of the guys on the list above just signed last year (except for Taylor). How much does the increased value of RBs and the Barkley contract raise the rate? Last year it was basically 8-12 million for similar players to Cook. Are we really jumping to 15+ in just one year?

Just throwing some stats into the conversation: In the first 11 games of 2024, Dorian averaged 78% of the defensive snaps at LBer. In the last 6 games of the regular season and the three playoff games (after Matt's return), Dorian averaged 17% of the snap count on defense at LBer. On the year (overall) he averaged 59% of the defensive snaps at LBer. So, the tackle total is even a bit more impressive considering he hardly played the last 6 games of the year (averaged only 11% of defensive snaps over that stretch). In the first 10 games of the year (as a starter), he averaged 9.3 tackles per game (pro-rated to 17 games that would be 158 tackles---which would be good for a third place tie in the league in 2024, for reference). Also in those 10 games, he had 5 TFLs, 1 Forced Fumble, 2 Fumble Recoveries, 6 QB pressures, 1 QB hit, 2 QB knockdowns (no sacks, ints, or pds). As to defending the pass, let's compare his stats to Terrel's and Matt's to get a better idea: 2024 Recs allowed Targets Comp. % Yds allowed yds/rec yds/tar YAC allowed % of Yac yds PD INTs TDs allowed Rating* Dorian 43 59 72.9 390 9.1 6.6 246 63 0 0 3 107.3 Terrel 38 59 64.4 379 10.0 6.4 227 59.9 3 2 2 79.7 Matt 5 8 62.5 60 12.0 7.5 --- --- 0 0 0 85.4 *Lower rating is better Hard to compare Matt with such a small sample size. The only real difference between Terrel and Dorian, statistically in 2024, were Terrel's 3 PDs, 2 INTs, and 1 less TD allowed. But, that is 6 big plays across the year that could help decide outcomes of games. Now, if we compare a few key stats between Dorian's 2024 and Matt's and TB's season averages (over their starting careers), it does appear that Dorian still has some work to do in that department. Season averages (over their career) Comp. % yds/tar PD INTs TDs allowed Rating Terrel 68.3 6.4 5 2.5 2 79.9 Matt 61.8 5.1 5 1.25 1.14 71.0 2024 Dorian 72.9 6.6 0 0 3 107.3 That's about 8-9 plays across a season that Matt and TB will make in the passing game that Dorian did not in 2024 (granted, he also only started 11 of the 17 games and he's still young---not that Terrel isn't too). So, I guess the question is, does Dorian have the ability to make those splash plays in the passing game (with more time/experience)? Or, if not and if you were to move on at some point from Matt or Terrel, can you live with that slight downgrade in the passing game (as he seems to be pretty solid in the rest of his game). Either way, I'm very comfortable with him as our backup for now and he is at least a very capable starter when called upon. And I guess we'll see if he can keep the arrow pointing higher than that.

Regular Season Total Yds TDs Targets Recs Yards/Rec Yards/Targ Yards/Game Long Most yards/game 1st downs 1st down % Xavier Worthy 638 6 98 59 10.8 6.5 37.5 54 79 36 61.0 Keon Coleman 556 4 57 29 19.2 9.8 42.8 64 100 22 75.9 Worthy and Coleman were 7th and 8th in rookie receiving yards. And remember, Keon played 3 games fewer than Xavier (and then was working himself back from the injury) and he also had 31 fewer targets. As far as stretching the field, both Worthy and Keon had 3 receptions over 30 yards on the year. Worthy: 31, 35, and 54 yards. Coleman: 49, 57, and 64 yards. Keon had 12 receptions of 20+ yards. Xavier had 4 receptions of 20+ yards. [Again, with Keon playing three fewer games too.] Looking at those numbers and his yards/rec and yards/target, I'm not sure how well Worthy was actually stretching the field vertically (unless maybe as a decoy). Keon's yards/rec and yards/target ranked 4th and 23rd in the league respectively (of all receivers). Worthy's yards/rec and yards/target ranked 109th and 174th in the league this year. Yes, Worthy had the three big receptions at the end of the Super Bowl (after Philly was already up 34-0), but he really didn't do that much in the playoffs up to that point. Look, we all wished we saw more from Keon and hoped that he'd develop down the stretch better than he did. And I think it is fair enough to say that he didn't have a big impact. But I'm not sure how people can say in the same breath that Worthy did have a BIG rookie season/did have a big impact? imo, the numbers just do not agree with the perception that there is some vast gulf between how their rookie years went (with Worthy some rising star and Keon a cross your fingers he's not a bust guy). I don't think anything definitive can be said about either guy or how they compare as of yet. It will take another season or two. btw, I voted hell no on trading Cook to K.C. too.

The article posted today is a tiny fluff piece with no data to back it up. Just one guy saying the Bills need a new coach (...nothing to see here). But, I missed this thread when it came around the first time. Looking at the poll, it is pretty interesting. It looks like most of the votes were made between 1/27 and 1/29, just after the loss in the Championship game. Exactly 300 Bills fans responded to the poll and if I condense all of the poll options into just two categories---those that think McD should stay and those who think its time for a change---it seems that the Mafia is split right down the middle, with 50.67% of voters thinking McD should stay and 49.33% thinking its time for a change. If this poll is a true representation of the larger Bills fandom (and opinions haven't changed with a little distance from the loss), then we are truly a divided nation.

Top 10 Legit Reasons for the Bills not yet reaching a Super Bowl: 1. The Kansas City Chiefs 2. The Kansas City Chiefs 3. The Kansas City Chiefs 4. The Kansas City Chiefs 5. Luck (just one play this way or that in any of the last three KC matches) 6. Injuries and unforeseen circumstances (injuries, snow storms, Damar Hamlin incident, etc.) 7. NFL Officiating 8. Lack of talent at a key position (most often CB vs. KC) 9. Execution (penalties and lack of the big play in crunch time, particularly on the defense) 10. Coaching Yeah, Josh ain't the problem (the whole world knows that). But I don't think, overall (excluding the 13 seconds game), it's really coaching either. With football, the blame either seems to go to the QB or the coach (or both). But answers aren't always as simple or black-and-white as replace the QB or fire the coach, imo. You make it sound as if junior assistant/little brother McDermott falls apart against his daddy/big brother Reid. And yet, at the end of regulation in the last three playoff matchups against K.C., the Chiefs had a combined 6-point lead. Only six points across three games at the end of regulation. You do realize how close that is, correct? We are talking one play in each game that could have swung things the other way. In two of the games, it came down to a field goal attempt. If Butker missed his and Bass made his, we'd be 2-2 vs. KC in the playoffs. It's not like we're getting totally out-classed and out-coached every time. And let's face it, the referees heavily influenced the other two games (both AFC Championship games).

My top 5 favorite vs. their ranking of the same plays. #1 is the same. My rank: Their rank: #1 Amari pitch back to Josh for the TD in the snow vs. San Fran #1 #2 Ty Johnson sliding catch on the end line vs. Denver (Wild Card) #3 #3 Josh's long, pin-balling TD vs. K.C. #2 #4 Josh's crazy sideline throw to Shakir vs. Baltimore Tied #6 #5 Shakir splitting the defenders twice for the TD vs. Rams #8

Yeah, this is pretty interesting. I hadn't paid too much attention to what the Rams have done. But looking at it, it is an unusual situation. In 7 of the last 8 years, the Rams did not have a first round pick in the draft. And in two of those years, they also had no second round pick. So, they were missing 9 of their top 16 picks over the last 8 years. Over that span, they have made two Super Bowls, winning one. They have made the playoffs in 6 of 8 years. The two off-years both came after their Super Bowl appearances (2019, 9-7; 2022, 5-12). So, only one losing season, two years without playoffs. Obviously they are doing something right over there. First off, they have a very good coach. But is their draft strategy (using first rounders for trades rather than rookies) innovative and the reason for their success, or have they been successful despite that strategy? Here is where their top picks were spent: 2016 and 2017 1st rounders, two second rounders, and two third rounders to draft Jared Goff. 2018 first rounder traded for Brandin Cooks 2019 first rounder was used to trade back and acquire more picks 2020 and 2021 first rounders traded for Jalen Ramsey 2022 and 2023 first rounders, Jared Goff, plus a third given up to get Stafford in a trade. So, 7 first rounders, 2 second rounders, 3 third rounders, and a 4th rounder for: Jaren Goff, Brandin Cooks, Jalen Ramsey, and Matthew Stafford. I mean, Stafford and Ramsey helped them win a Super Bowl, but that's 12 premium picks spent on 4 players (two who are no longer on the team, and one who has just been granted the ability to seek a trade). You can't knock the success they've had, but I'm not sure it's due to how they allocated their first rounders (unless you say they don't have a Super Bowl without Stafford). Over the last 8 years, they have had a lot of draft picks overall (despite trading away a lot of their premium picks). The Rams have averaged 9.6 draft picks in each of the last 8 drafts. That's a lot of picks in rounds 3-7. Since 2018, the Rams players to make the Pro Bowl have been: Aaron Donald (6X), Jared Goff (1X), Jalen Ramsey (1X), Cooper Kupp (1X), Todd Gurley (1X), and their rookie 2024 1st round pick Jared Verse (picked 19th overall---their first 1st round pick in 9 years, since drafting Jared Goff in 2016). [Just as a base for say stud players on the team---obviously, Ramsey was not drafted by the team.] 16 of the Rams 25 starters came through the draft. They did find some later-round guys (Puka and Kyren Williams in the 5th, for example). But half of those picks (8 of 16 starters) were selected in the first three rounds (7 of them coming in rounds 2 and 3). So, it's not like they are killing it late in the draft or anything. They are finding like 1 starter per year in the later rounds (4-7). They have also had their share of misses. Their first three picks in 2020 and 2021 were Cam Akers, Van Jefferson, and Tutu Atwell (albeit without a first round pick in either year). So, I don't know, it's hard to tell what has actually worked for the Rams. Did the big trades do it? Renting players (like Von in the Super Bowl year)? Their volume in the draft (because their drafting hasn't been stellar overall, outside of a few big hits---but they have filled out their roster with it---64% of their starters came from the draft). Rookie first-rounder Jared Verse and 3rd rounder Cooper Kupp are their only draft picks still on the team that have made a Pro Bowl. Obviously Puka is a stud too...and Ramsey has made the Pro Bowl (but he wasn't a draft pick). But, it's not like they are overloaded with talent overall (a handful of very good players and a lot of solid players). Is it coaching? I mean, looking at their moves and drafts in a vacuum, I wouldn't have guessed that they would make two Super Bowls from it...but they did. Maybe it's just magic...or a softer conference, good coaching, and a little bit of luck along the way. Anyone have any thoughts on the Rams' success?

Josh literally did an interview about a month ago (I'm not going to search for it) where he said the main goals for his career are to bring a Super Bowl to Buffalo and to retire as a Buffalo Bill. Obviously, people can change their mind...but I think leaving the team is the furthest thought from his mind right now. And I highly doubt that Josh sees their playoff failures the same way that some fans do (i.e. it's all due to our crappy head coach and his horrible defense---a defense that has actually been statistically the best defense in the NFL over the last 5-6 years---I know, I know...playoffs). But, I bet Josh blames himself (and maybe the refs, though that isn't really Josh-like either) as much as he does the coaches or other players. Gonna be a long offseason.