-
Posts
10,371 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Recent Profile Visitors
BillsVet's Achievements

All Pro (7/8)
2.2k
Reputation
-
This is the first draft review thread I've seen in a long time that emphasizes it takes 3 years to judge a draft class. As true as that is, this sentiment only gets mentioned if the class wasn't all that impressive. Then again, we're in year 2 of the 2023 draft and that one doesn't really appear much better. Their last few drafts are really similar in they've been about building depth/rounding out the roster with low positional value selections. The last time they drafted dominant physical players was 2021 when they took Rousseau and then Brown. And even then, they were drafting at the bottom of the round, so it shouldn't be viewed as unlikely to find players.
-
Let's be honest, Josh probably has 5 good seasons left
BillsVet replied to Steptide's topic in The Stadium Wall
Let's be honest...people create their own anxiety/crises better now than at any point in human history. -
It's not a narrative, it's an opinion and for the cost of 1 top-10 1st, a later 1st, and 2 mid-2nd round picks they still don't have an impactful DL. Rousseau I'd argue is their best DL and at times he disappears. Just because OBD prioritizes DL doesn't mean they have the right ones. Or, that their scheme, coaching, and game-planning is getting the most out of those players.
-
When is the last time the Bills under McBeane acquired/drafted "nasty" DLinemen? 8 off-seasons and aside from perhaps drafting Rousseau and signing Von Miller the DLines they've built have not held up when it mattered most. It's mostly lunchpail types who underwhelm. Point is, when McBeane tell you their solutions are just that, I'd be skeptical it's not repackaging what hasn't worked. Because I'm not convinced they're that good evaluating talent and will spin the wheel to ensure it winds up on "we need more defense." Which invariably means, the offense will get by with lesser expenditures.
-
There's a strong debate being made not to re-sign any of the 2022 draft class. The highly picked RB that comes off the field, an undersized LB who gets nicked up, a good slot only WR and Benford who's an injury concern. That said, they got some good value for the Day 3 picks. Yet, from a positional value standpoint Buffalo has used their last 7 RD2/3 picks on low positional value selections: 2022: RB, LB 2023: G, LB 2024: WR, S, DT I count Coleman as low positional value as a WR because it's clear he's not a boundary receiver yet.
-
Shakir, Benford, Cook and Bernard: Who Gets a Contract Extension?
BillsVet replied to NoName's topic in The Stadium Wall
This reminds me of the debate on Edmunds couple years ago. Lot of people here said Buffalo had to re-sign him to a huge contract because they didn't have anyone else on the roster to fill the position. Didn't hear much about it after Bernard took the job and almost immediately showed that Edmunds actually wasn't worth keeping. There are trade-offs to not re-signing players who have produced, namely the uncertainty about who'll replace them. Mr. Wizard, Beane, has gotten away with re-signing their own because his drafting hasn't been that great. But if they're ever going to get some cap room it's going to take not keeping all of your own and finding similar type players in UFA or especially the draft who won't get paid big money. -
On all of your asterisks: I really don't care Margaret.
-
You can really see after so many years together that OBD conducts their football business consistent with the personalities of the HC and GM. It's pretty conservative: in the offensive and defensive schemes they run, game-planning, player personnel decisions, and assistants largely promoted from within. This entire thread has become a yearly occurrence, albeit louder this year. They're not really improving under the current leadership and have become stale. Ironically, the boldness they exhibited to move up and draft Josh hasn't been there since 2018 save for trading for Diggs and signing Miller in 2022. They've had some pedestrian off-seasons the last couple years that patched up holes or threw the equivalent of deck chairs off the Titanic. I still find it ironic the GM talks about finding dynamic players and the HC is firing again firing a coordinator as though these are immediate reasons for their stagnation. I think we'll know a lot about who the 2025 Bills are after the first week of UFA. If there's some audacity on display, perhaps they've abandoned their predictable and safe ways. If not, they just replicated their approach in previous off-seasons.
-
The blitz I'll always remember from McD came at the end of the Broncos home game last season and the subsequent FG. Didn't go quite as well. McD's feel for the game on defense leaves something to be desired. On the other side, he certainly has never fully embraced a modern passing game, nor allowed them to develop one these last few seasons.
-
Prepare For The Bills To Go International Regularly
BillsVet replied to corta765's topic in The Stadium Wall
It's funny that people every off-season point to the inevitable salary cap increase without understanding the league growing revenue is mostly what permits this. Whether that's television, merchandise, whatever...yeah, it's contingent on growing the game. Continuous improvement seems like a concept lost to some who want things to remain the same. I get it that losing a home game stinks, but then again, part of that benefit might be the ability to fit another UFA under the cap when the ceiling goes up 5M. -
Maybe we should copy the Seahawks old approach?
BillsVet replied to SoonerBillsFan's topic in The Stadium Wall
It's not cost-effective to maintain with significant investment an entire defensive unit. Those Seattle teams had so many high picks, UFAs, and contract extensions, yet only offered a 5 year window even with Russell Wilson, who admittedly was not easy to scheme an offense with. Every year we discuss addressing what was weak the previous season and this off-season is no different. Secondary, DL, perhaps LB's. Then, at playoff time the offense is scrambling to score points in the Divisional Round and later as the defense struggles. Their solution in 2024 was to slow the offense down to keep the defense off the field which worked well through the Wild Card Round matchup. Patching holes isn't cutting it anymore and they need a course correction in overall strategy. I doubt it'll happen, but they did it their way and came up short again. I'd also consider that their franchise QB is coming up for a contract after 2025 and keeping him is an absolute necessity. -
As you noted previously, those 2 completions to Cooper in the regular season KC game were absolutely paramount to sustaining those drives. When they played the Championship game, they had to go to Hollins and Shakir...neither of whom I'd trust on those throws. To their credit they made those catches. Perhaps Cooper was hurt and not capable, but that points to having another receiver who can be depended on to run intermediate to deeper routes. Regardless, it's easy to see the benefits of a ball control style with short throws, notably winning time of possession, the turnover battle, and field position. The cost which remains difficult to quantify is how a more risk-averse offense inhibits play-calling unpredictability. If Beane and McDermott are truly committed to being open-minded to reviewing their last loss and finding solutions, they'd largely scrap the offensive scheme they went with this year. It'll be hard because they don't have the WR/TE group right now to run a more explosive offense, but the benefits will out-weigh the costs.
-
It would be great to have difference makers on both sides, yes. Going about that in terms of cap, etc. is the tricky part. But that's for another day.
-
You are watching another team. That regular season offense was supplanted by one versus Baltimore and KC. In the AFC CG, I saw a team that had 14 third downs and needed to go for it 6 times on 4th down. Looking back in the 4 losses to KC, the closest they've been to winning was 13 seconds...when they'd out-scored them. These 3 point losses weren't really that close because they clearly were scraping by hoping to keep the margin within a score. I get that Garrett is an attractive player and people want him. He still doesn't help improve their offense though, which the later it goes in the playoffs the more their WR/TE issues show up. Going all in on defense without an offensive acquisition doesn't provide the value some assume.
-
We're back to the quality of the WR group again. What they went into the season at that position was personnel malfeasance and led to Josh being concussed, the injured hand, more short yardage situations requiring QB plunges, and one of the most ineffective games of any NFL QB's career at Houston. The drops were an issue...again because the talent isn't all that great at WR and TE. The offense is not good when it needs to out-score an opponent. You can't expect the defense to keep things down, even with Garrett, given how the game is called now. It's fools gold to expect that. I certainly don't hope it happens, but continuing to cheap out and make bad WR/TE picks will lead to an outcome no one wants here. You can anticipate what I'm talking about. No one saw the Diggs trade coming 5 years ago. Just because you can't see a forthcoming acquisition doesn't mean it's not possible.