folz

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.

I just think that there is a greater chance that if we made a change we end up with something worse. Why drop a winning coach for a very BIG maybe. I mean, where are all these magical coaches who can just step in and win a Super Bowl right away? There are currently 9 Super Bowl winning coaches active in the league: Reid, Bellichick, McVay, Pederson, Carroll, Harbaugh, McCarthy, Payton, and Tomlin. I don't see any of them leaving their current positions any time soon, unless it is for retirement. Maybe Pederson or McCarthy if things don't go well in Jax and Dallas, but that's it. The only other Super Bowl winning coach out there that isn't well retired is Gary Kubiak. How confident are you that Kubiak, Pederson, or McCarthy even could automatically win a Super Bowl here, even if they were available? And anyone else is in the same boat as McDermott (never won a SB). So, people can believe another coach (say a young, upcoming assistant) has that killer instinct to win a Super Bowl (that apparently they believe McDermott does not have), but there is no proof to that fact. Plus there would be growing pains with that candidate as he learns to be a HC. I guess I just feel, as the old saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. And I'm speaking about now...sure if after two more years the team is imploding or going backwards, then it might be time to move on. But if McD still has us as a SB contenders, reaching championship games, then I say stick with it till we win one. If you take Belichick out of the equation (as he is an anomaly), and add up the tenure of the other 8 Super Bowl winning coaches divided by the number of Super Bowls won by them, then you get a Super Bowl win every 12.77 years of their careers. Even coaches who won it all don't do it every 5-6 years. Reid: 2 SBs in 24 years as HC Tomlin: 1 SB in 16 years as HC Carroll: 1 SB in 17 years as HC McCarthy: 1 SB in 16 years as HC Harbaugh: 1 SB in 15 years as HC Payton: 1 SB in 15 years as HC McVay: 1 SB in 6 years as HC Pederson: 1 SB in 6 years as HC And I know, people will say, yeah, but McDermott has Josh Allen. But, Payton had Drew Brees; Tomlin had Rothlisberger; Reid had McNabb and Mahomes, Carroll had Wilson, etc. Heck, Aaron Rodgers is a sure fire 1st ballot HOF QB and only has 1 SB in an 18-year career; Drew Brees (future HOFer) had 1 SB win in a 20-year career; even Peyton Manning (one of the best to ever do it) only won 2 in 18 years. It's just not as easy as some make it out to be to win a Super Bowl. I just think we have as good a chance with McDermott as we would with anyone else. And I rarely hear McDermott's detractors put forward a name that they think could come in and automatically be better than Sean.

Sean McDermott has a .639 winning percentage as a head coach in the NFL. That is currently good for 21st ALL-TIME (out of 196 head coaches per Pro Football Reference---link below). He is just behind Andy Reid (.641) and just ahead of Mike Tomlin (.636) and Sean Payton (.631). He's only six spots behind Belichick (.662). There are only 3 active coaches with a higher winning percentage than Sean: LaFleur, Belichick, and Reid (and LaFleur has coached 33 fewer games than McDermott). Yes, McDermott's sample size is still on the lower end obviously, but there are 8 head coaches ahead of him on the list that coached fewer games than Sean. And there are coaches that some McDermott detractors would probably want over him that compare pretty evenly: Sean McDermott 62-35 (.639) Sean McVay 60-38 (.612) https://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/ And don't tell me it's all Josh Allen, unless you are willing to then acknowledge that Belichick is all Brady, Reid is all Mahomes, Walsh was all Montana, etc. Not many (if any) coaches win consistently without a top QB. And yes, Sean is a good guy/great leader...and that matters to me. As a fan, I like to root for good people. But regardless of that, it just seems crazy to me that people would want to move on from such a winning coach because of one playoff mistake (KC game)---as if no other coach (even Super Bowl winning coaches) have ever made a mistake in a big game---and because he couldn't muster his team this year (that had been so beaten down over and over physically and emotionally) to beat the Bengals. Be careful what you wish for fellas.

😁😉

I still can't figure out how the compensatory pick for losing a minority coach is supposed to influence/fix anything. So, there is no incentive for hiring a minority coach unless you think a guy is so good that he will get poached from your staff in a couple of years. If that is the supposed incentive behind this, then 1. you're only going to hire guys that are good enough to get poached, and those guys were always going to get hired anyways (because they are good and experienced); or 2. You plan to wait for that incentive, 3, 4, 5 years, while you groom a young guy on your staff. But is a third round pick four years from now worth you choosing someone over maybe another guy you liked more (especially when the average coaching tenure in the NFL is 3.3 years)? I truly can't figure out where the incentive is in this that helps more minority coaches get hired, if that is the goal. Does anyone see any logic behind this? Plus, the system is broken when a Super Bowl caliber team is getting 7 extra picks, 3 in the third round. What happened to competitive balance? How does it feel to be Seattle (with 0 comp picks) and your division getting: SF (7)-three 3s, a 5th, a 6th, and two 7ths; the Rams (4)-three 5ths and a 7th, and the Cardinals (3)-a 3rd, a 5th, and a 6th?

Did a quick Google search to try and find articles ranking the drafting success of NFL teams, just out of curiosity. There was less than I thought there would be (or my search terms maybe weren't catching everything). It's only 4 articles that were somewhat current (linked below), so take it with a grain of salt, but the Bills ranked 3rd, 4th, 12th, and 16th per these articles (the #12 ranking is over the last ten years, the others are more focused to 2017-2021). I think this very small sample size shows at least two things: 1. Ranking draft success is still a very subjective matter. Everyone can agree on the major hits and busts, but everything in between seems to be ranked somewhat on a personal scale. Or it's based on playing time, how long they stayed with a team, etc. which doesn't necessarily tell you exactly how good or impactful that player actually was. 2. Under the current regime, the Bills have not been bad at drafting (probably somewhere in the top third of the league), but they also haven't been great at drafting (consensus top 5 say). Outside of drafting Josh, I doubt any Bills fans would say we have been one of the best drafting teams over the last six years (definite room for improvement), but I also don't think you can say that they have been bad, by any means (in comparison to the rest of the league, they are definitely above average). We may not have drafted as many studs as we would have liked, but we have got a lot of production/minutes from our draft picks (Tre, Dion, Matt, Josh, Tremaine, Harrison, Taron, Siran, Ed, Devin, Dawson, Gabe, Tyler, Dane, A.J., Greg, Boogie, Spencer, Damar, Doyle, Kaiir, Jimbo, Christian, Khalil---and then there is Wyatt and Isiah too, of course). That equates to just over 4 productive players per draft, which I would assume across the league is pretty good. Where we have obviously been lacking is finding Studs...but you also have to remember that four of our six first round picks over that span came in the bottom half of round one. Only Josh at #7 and Ed at #9 were top 15 picks. Most studs are found at the top of the first round. And then it's obviously the same for each subsequent round, we generally are picking at the bottom of the 2nd round, bottom of the third round, etc. Which needs to be taken into account when say comparing it to a team who has been drafting high in the rounds. We may not be one of the best drafting teams (hope that improves), but they ARE pretty darn good at overall team building thus far. And obviously, rankings can change quickly. For instance, if we get studs with say two of our top three picks this year, and/or one or more of Ed, Groot, Boogie, Elam, Shakir, or others raise their gameplay, our drafting success will look a hell of a lot better and we'd probably be considered one of the best drafting teams over the last 7-8 years. But, if our first two picks this year bust or are just mediocre (and none of our young guys take that next step), we would all of a sudden look like a below average drafting team. It's kind of a fluid thing. But, here's to hoping for some big hits this year! ESPN: Teams' overall drafting since 2012 ranked. Bills ranked 12th. [Article is from April 2022] https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/33297949/nfl-draft-which-teams-gotten-best-value-2012-rank-all-32 This site ranks for the last 5 years (2017-2021) and has the Bills ranked 3rd. [Article is from April 2022] https://www.the33rdteam.com/category/nfl-draft/which-teams-have-been-best-at-drafting/ This site has Bills at #16 over the last 5 years (2017-2021). [Article is from April 2021] https://nypost.com/2021/04/17/nfl-draft-analysis-ranking-teams-five-year-history/ PFF ranking drafts from 2017-2020 [article from Feb 2021]. Bills rank 4th. https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-historical-draft-success-for-all-32-nfl-teams

Some posters seem to poo-poo some of the teams' achievements, as if these things are common or easy, but they are not. How many of the 32 NFL teams went to the playoffs in each of the last four years? Answer is 2 (KC, BUF) How many teams won their division at least 3 of the last 4 years? Answer is 3 (KC, BUF, GB) [KC took their division all 4 years; BUF and GB 3 out of 4] The Bills have the second best record in the NFL over the last 4 years, winning 72.3% of their regular season games (just two games behind KC and a half game ahead of Green Bay]. And we have proven we can hang with and beat KC (the undisputed best team in the league over the last 4 years).We are 2-3 against them over the last 3 years with 4 out of 5 games being played in KC and the 13 second game being as close as you can get to a tie. So, we have almost played them even across the board...they just won the two most important ones. The Bills are 50% in the playoffs (4-4) over that span, with two wacky games that just as easily could have gone the Bills way. In essence, the Bills were 2 plays away from having at least a 6-2 playoff record. We only got solidly beat twice in the playoffs, the Championship game against KC (we just weren't ready yet/KC was better...and the refs let them maul our already banged up WR corps) and Cincy this year [where no matter how many of you want to deny it, that team was physically and emotionally out of gas and understandably so---in fact, I don't think there are many coaches who could have navigated the ups and downs of last season (the injuries, the tragedies, etc.) as well as Sean did.] McD has already brought us some now all-time Bills memories: "breaking the drought on New Year's Eve," "drafting Josh," "the perfect playoff game vs. the Pats," and complain all you want about the 13 seconds, but that is still one of the greatest NFL playoff games ever, etc. Not to mention that they have built a team of players I like to root for. The family atmosphere and being united with the city and fan base does matter to me (I know it doesn't to all). I mean, what are we complaining about here? Some want to throw all of those positives away because of a handful of plays that didn't go our way in the playoffs (be they mistakes or not)? I originally voted "met expectations," but heck, I think they've actually exceeded expectations overall, despite not bringing a Lombardi home yet. Of course, winning a championship is always the goal and what we all want, but it's just not as easy as some seem to think. You need a lot of things to bounce your way. We just haven't caught the bounces yet. To state the obvious: 96.96% of head coaches do not win a Super Bowl in any given year 93.75% of head coaches do not make it to a Super Bowl in any given year In the 54 years of the Super Bowl era, only 21 head coaches total have won a Super Bowl. Falling short of a Super Bowl appearance does not automatically equate to inadequacies or diminish the chances of that coach making a Super Bowl in the future. But the fact that only 21 guys have ever done it points to both how difficult it actually is to do, and to the slim chances of just automatically finding someone else who can do it (if we moved on from McDermott). We hated when Jauron said it, but it's true, it's not easy to win in the NFL. And yet, McD has had the Bills as a Top 3 team consistently over the last four years. That's a lot of wins we've been able to enjoy. And one of these years with Josh and McD, things will fall our way and it will be our time, but until then, appreciate what we have and enjoy the ride.

I constantly see posters say that Sean and Brandon have focused too much on the defensive side of the ball when it comes to drafting and free agency. This just is not true. But, of course, once something is believed, it is hard to get people to see differently. So, this idea just keeps getting bandied about. The only thing that could be said/griped about is maybe that the Bills have spent too many first round picks on defense. But that's it. You can't even say too many premium (or Day 1 and Day 2 picks), as you will see below. The first round is the only place where you can say the Bills have gone defensive heavy, but people say it like it has been a rule across all drafts, all rounds, and every year of free agency (as a whole). Since 2017, the Bills have drafted 44 players: 21 on defense, 22 on offense, and 2 STers. So, overall, the Bills have drafted 1 more offensive player than defensive players over the last six years. Below is a breakdown by round: Round 1: 5 on defense, 1 on offense (though we should note that another 1st round pick was used on Stefon Diggs, so technically 2 on offense) Round 2: 2 on defense, 4 on offense Round 3: 2 on defense, 4 on offense Round 4: 1 on defense, 1 on offense Round 5: 3 on defense, 5 on offense Round 6: 5 on defense, 4 on offense, 2 STs Round 7: 3 on defense, 3 on offense So, yes, 5 defensive players to 1/2 offensive players in round one. But rounds 1-3 combined, it's 9 defensive players to 9 offensive players. Rounds 1-5 combined, it's 13 defensive players to 15 offensive players. And how about free agency? [It was hard to get exact FA numbers as some sites include rookie free agents that made the team and some did not, some included the Bills resigning their own low-tier free agents and some did not. I tried to focus on free agents coming from other teams to the Bills in a particular off-season...but by no means are these numbers definitive.] But, to the best of my quick researching ability, since 2017, the Bills have brought in 33 defensive free agents, 47 offensive free agents, and 2 Special Teamers. [Special Teamers in my numbers are kicking specialists only, for players like Taiwan and Tyler M, they were listed as either offense or defense depending, despite really being STs] So, since Sean McDermott arrived, the Bills have brought in (approx) 54 defensive players total, 69 offensive players total, and 4 Special Teamers total. I'm guessing that this assumption of being defensive-heavy is coming from the disparity in the first round picks, and the Bills going heavy defensive line the last two years. But again, overall, the Bills have not over-focused on defense when you look at their full tenure, it has only been in regards to first round picks. And I'm sure it doesn't help the perception that those first round picks on defense (outside of Tre White), didn't come in as dominant players right away (Tremaine, Ed, Greg, Kaiir), if they had, I doubt anyone would be complaining that they are over-drafting defense. But, then again, when you are drafting in the bottom-half of round one, it is tough to get one of those guys that just comes in as a rookie and shines right away, so they have drafted a bit for potential (knowing that these players would need grooming time). You can totally question the Bills draft/FA strategy or the individual players they are bringing in (I want more offensive line help too), but this idea that they only focus on defense is as the thread title states, a myth. Go Bills!

Just saying, it's not a given, even with a top QB. Nine QBs threw for over 4,100 yards this year, and only 3 of their 9 teams had their WR #2 go over 1,000 yards. And those players' stats were: Tee Higgins: 1,029 yds and 7 TDs [on 109 Targets] Chris Godwin: 1,023 and 3 TDs [on 142 targets] Tyler Lockett: 1,033 and 9 TDs [on 117 Targets] Gabe Davis had 836 and 7 TDs [on 93 Targets] Diggs [154 targets] took more opportunities away from Davis than did the other three players' counterparts: Chase [134 targets], Evans [127 targets], Metcalf [141 targets]. If you pro-rated Gabe's stats to the number of targets that the other three players got, it would look like this: with Higgins # of targets: 980 yards and 8 TDs with Godwin's # of targets: 1,276 yards and 10.65 TDs with Lockett's # of targets: 1,052 yards and 8.775 TDs And again, 6 of the 9 teams didn't have two 1,000 yard receivers to begin with. It isn't the norm, even with the top passing QBs in the league. As far as TDs go, Six QBs threw at least 29 TDs. Here are their top two TD receivers' totals: Mahomes: Kelce (TE) 12 and McKinnon (RB) 9 - [His top 2 WRs only had 5 TDs combined] Allen: Diggs 11 and Davis 7 Burrow: Chase 9 and Higgins 7 Smith: Lockett 9 and Metcalf 6 Cousins: Jefferson 8 and Thielen 6 Goff: St. Brown 6 and Chark 3 So, expecting more than 7 TDs from your number two WR is also a lot to ask, even from a prolific passing team.