Shaq Lawson on roster bubble

[Bing Bong]

9 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

And it did....the D improved and we made the playoffs.

 

I know ppl dont like to talk about it but we are in fact in the middle of a soft rebiuld.....when you do this you are not even supposed to make the playoffs yet we did find a way.

 

 This is the hard year because of all the dead money.....yet if the draft ends up being strong we may STILL end  up being competative.

right we went with a scheme McD knew, but certainly different from the defense we see in Carolina. Made the playoffs babee!

 

Point is the season, and grand scheme of things in a "rebuild" are totally different mindsets. A championship caliber coach is always trying to win, using scheme that works with the players he has. Has nothing to do with a rebuild. That's the GMs problem. The coach gets a few more gadgets to work with next season that he wants to use based on his shortcomings the year before, and again.. uses a scheme to work with the players he have. McDermott is not rebuilding. He's coaching winning football, if he's trying to do any less than I don't want him there. Beane is rebuilding.

 

For McDermott, every season should be a vacuum where he makes the most out of the 53 he is given. Players and coaches with any sort of competitive nature don't give a damn about a rebuild when it's week 10, 5-5 having poured so much work, sacrificed bodies, to get there, and having so much left to go and prove.

[John from Riverside]

34 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

right we went with a scheme McD knew, but certainly different from the defense we see in Carolina. Made the playoffs babee!

 

Point is the season, and grand scheme of things in a "rebuild" are totally different mindsets. A championship caliber coach is always trying to win, using scheme that works with the players he has. Has nothing to do with a rebuild. That's the GMs problem. The coach gets a few more gadgets to work with next season that he wants to use based on his shortcomings the year before, and again.. uses a scheme to work with the players he have. McDermott is not rebuilding. He's coaching winning football, if he's trying to do any less than I don't want him there. Beane is rebuilding.

 

For McDermott, every season should be a vacuum where he makes the most out of the 53 he is given. Players and coaches with any sort of competitive nature don't give a damn about a rebuild when it's week 10, 5-5 having poured so much work, sacrificed bodies, to get there, and having so much left to go and prove.

I am not quite sure what the discussion is then....because obviously McD is doing that.

 

I do think that he knows what he has....he has even said in interviews that ppl should temper expectations.   You can slowly see the team transform into more of his vision of what he is looking for in players......primodonnas are dissapearing off the books being replaced by "process" guys.

 

I think this will end up being a interesting year because of all the dead cap and not being aggressive improving the offensive side of the ball.

[Bing Bong]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

I am not quite sure what the discussion is then....because obviously McD is doing that.

We disagree that Ragland would have been a solid piece to keep. That's fine. 

 

If we're both agreeing that coaches, coordinators should adapt to personnel than that's what I (and I believe Hapless too if I can speak for him) was just trying to get across.

 

This Ragland trade was one thing that worried me about McD's mindset which brought all this up. He didn't have character problems and was a good LB last year. Goes back to using Personnel. We disagree if he would have been capable not a big deal. I just hope it's not an indication he can't adapt to what he's given.

[Bing Bong]

 

I don't like seeing people we trade away for marginal returns do well as is the case with Ragland and Dareus. Don't need choir boys on the team. If Dareus can perform back to his capability than we've seen 2 coordinators (McD and Rex) that failed and 2 (Schwartz and Jags dude) that proved capable of managing high maintenance talent.

 

Character issues can be trouble to the locker room, but that's a reflection of a coach that can't manage it too. Rebuilding for the sake of removing problem players is the easy way, easy excuse for the reality that you couldn't bring out the best in someone when others have.

 

Many of the greatest coaches are the ones that can babysit a guy, get him to buy into a winning style of play.

 

Unless what I just said contradicts THE PROCESS. I do not speak ill of THE PROCESS. Please don't ban me mods. ?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

And it did....the D improved and we made the playoffs.

 

Why do you feel the D improved?

I feel they overperformed. 

 

But by most metrics, we either stayed about the same or got worse last year.

 

What is the evidence that the D improved between 2016 and 2017?

[Threedollabills]

20 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

We did not have them.

I think part of the point is, we had nothing better.

 

Perhaps McD is correct in His Method of Defense.
But he had some skills sets to work with. he should have played a hybrid 3-4 heavy downs one and 2 and used safeties as a package. He had the players including Dareus.
We can see he is building his Defense, and that might well be the Cats Pajamas. But maybe he should have worked with what he had for a season. actually thats my opinion i just put forth

Uh, you mean the panther's pyjamas. I don't agree because there are guys on D who got a lot of work in last year on THIS D. Secondary should lead the league in INTs as Vontae will pick it up quickly and the rest already know it. Shaq will have a good year. McD loves to rotate the line so he can have fresh guys in the 4th and I think Shaq will thrive. Word.

2 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

 

I don't like seeing people we trade away for marginal returns do well as is the case with Ragland and Dareus. Don't need choir boys on the team. If Dareus can perform back to his capability than we've seen 2 coordinators (McD and Rex) that failed and 2 (Schwartz and Jags dude) that proved capable of managing high maintenance talent.

 

Character issues can be trouble to the locker room, but that's a reflection of a coach that can't manage it too. Rebuilding for the sake of removing problem players is the easy way, easy excuse for the reality that you couldn't bring out the best in someone when others have.

 

Many of the greatest coaches are the ones that can babysit a guy, get him to buy into a winning style of play.

 

Unless what I just said contradicts THE PROCESS. I do not speak ill of THE PROCESS. Please don't ban me mods. ?

McD wants die hard soldiers...no stupid children allowed. Dareus was my fav player and the best draft pick we've made since he was drafted. If he could become a soldier  he'd still be there. He is Dick Marrone's problem now.  I hope Shaq can become a soldier for real.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Threedollabills

[3rdand12]

17 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Rex

not rex. he outsmarted everyone. including Bills defense and himself

5 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

right we went with a scheme McD knew, but certainly different from the defense we see in Carolina. Made the playoffs babee!

 

Point is the season, and grand scheme of things in a "rebuild" are totally different mindsets. A championship caliber coach is always trying to win, using scheme that works with the players he has. Has nothing to do with a rebuild. That's the GMs problem. The coach gets a few more gadgets to work with next season that he wants to use based on his shortcomings the year before, and again.. uses a scheme to work with the players he have. McDermott is not rebuilding. He's coaching winning football, if he's trying to do any less than I don't want him there. Beane is rebuilding.

 

For McDermott, every season should be a vacuum where he makes the most out of the 53 he is given. Players and coaches with any sort of competitive nature don't give a damn about a rebuild when it's week 10, 5-5 having poured so much work, sacrificed bodies, to get there, and having so much left to go and prove.

I am surprised at myself.

 I am really startin' to like your posts.

Please continue : )

[3rdand12]

5 hours ago, John from Riverside said:

I am not quite sure what the discussion is then....because obviously McD is doing that.

 

I do think that he knows what he has....he has even said in interviews that ppl should temper expectations.   You can slowly see the team transform into more of his vision of what he is looking for in players......primodonnas are dissapearing off the books being replaced by "process" guys.

 

I think this will end up being a interesting year because of all the dead cap and not being aggressive improving the offensive side of the ball.

Hard to tell what to make of the Bills this coming season.

I cannot expect to be surprised because, then it would not be a surprise would it ?

Temper my expectations again this year is wise. Told my friends i I asked for last year was progress, steady progress. And Team building. Rex had destroyed any chemistry or confidence i felt.
 looks like we have ourselves a bona fide NFL Football Team. and perhaps relevant as well.
Patience is still the mantra though for me.

 

[3rdand12]

4 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

We disagree that Ragland would have been a solid piece to keep. That's fine. 

 

If we're both agreeing that coaches, coordinators should adapt to personnel than that's what I (and I believe Hapless too if I can speak for him) was just trying to get across.

 

This Ragland trade was one thing that worried me about McD's mindset which brought all this up. He didn't have character problems and was a good LB last year. Goes back to using Personnel. We disagree if he would have been capable not a big deal. I just hope it's not an indication he can't adapt to what he's given.

I was having the same commentary as well. Could McD not run a 3-4 with Preston and Ragland. Could have picked up a hybrid S/LB for the nickel and dime. a good one.

[Bing Bong]

6 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

am surprised at myself.

 I am really startin' to like your posts.

Please continue : )

Nah u give me your thoughts

5 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

I was having the same commentary as well. Could McD not run a 3-4 with Preston and Ragland. Could have picked up a hybrid S/LB for the nickel and dime. a good one.

Or keep how about just keep Ragland over Humber lol. Enlighten me.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

We disagree that Ragland would have been a solid piece to keep. That's fine. 

 

If we're both agreeing that coaches, coordinators should adapt to personnel than that's what I (and I believe Hapless too if I can speak for him) was just trying to get across.

 

This Ragland trade was one thing that worried me about McD's mindset which brought all this up. He didn't have character problems and was a good LB last year. Goes back to using Personnel. We disagree if he would have been capable not a big deal. I just hope it's not an indication he can't adapt to what he's given.

 

You are speaking for me correctly.

 

I was shocked at the timing of the Dareus trade and the return we got, but I recovered from it after a few games (just like our remaining D).  He's talented, but at this point he's a shadow of what he was back in 2014.  And as I've said elsewhere, the highest paid players have to be the leaders, the ones who buy in most fully, come early, stay late, play hard on every down. That wasn't Dareus.  So I didn't like it but I saw the point - we got salary cap relief 2019-forward and a minor pick, OK.

 

What bothered me more was Ragland, Darby, and to some extent Sammy.   The former two were young guys on their first contract who had no "knocks" against them for lack of work ethic or getting in trouble in the league.  It may be part of some big plan, or it may be lack of adaptability/flexibility on the part of the coach, time will tell.

[JohnC]

8 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

You are speaking for me correctly.

 

I was shocked at the timing of the Dareus trade and the return we got, but I recovered from it after a few games (just like our remaining D).  He's talented, but at this point he's a shadow of what he was back in 2014.  And as I've said elsewhere, the highest paid players have to be the leaders, the ones who buy in most fully, come early, stay late, play hard on every down. That wasn't Dareus.  So I didn't like it but I saw the point - we got salary cap relief 2019-forward and a minor pick, OK.

 

What bothered me more was Ragland, Darby, and to some extent Sammy.   The former two were young guys on their first contract who had no "knocks" against them for lack of work ethic or getting in trouble in the league.  It may be part of some big plan, or it may be lack of adaptability/flexibility on the part of the coach, time will tell.

Especially Ragland he was not a fit for the scheme that  McDermott's was going to run. The LB profile that is accentuated in his defense is an ability to cover. Ragland was a rugged thumper who was more suited in a 3-4 that emphasized run stopping. Also, Darby was not a good fit for McDermott's  backfield scheme that emphasized zone play and an ability to tackle. Darby was more of a man to man cover DB. The issue here is not whether they are good players but rather are they suitable for your defense. 

 

The recent historical problem for this organization is that has been subjected to a constant state of flux. The constant churning of coaching staffs and changing philosophies has been detrimental to building a stable roster. That certainly was manifested when Rex arrived and changed the defense to the scheme he was married to. The results were disastrous. 

 

It's my belief that McDermott is going to have the time to bring in players that suit his approach to the game. Sticking with a plan instead of constantly lurching back and forth on both sides of the ball will be beneficial in establishing a direction and steadily moving forward in a more coherent way. 

 

 

 

 

[3rdand12]

2 hours ago, JohnC said:

Especially Ragland he was not a fit for the scheme that  McDermott's was going to run. The LB profile that is accentuated in his defense is an ability to cover. Ragland was a rugged thumper who was more suited in a 3-4 that emphasized run stopping. Also, Darby was not a good fit for McDermott's  backfield scheme that emphasized zone play and an ability to tackle. Darby was more of a man to man cover DB. The issue here is not whether they are good players but rather are they suitable for your defense. 

 

The recent historical problem for this organization is that has been subjected to a constant state of flux. The constant churning of coaching staffs and changing philosophies has been detrimental to building a stable roster. That certainly was manifested when Rex arrived and changed the defense to the scheme he was married to. The results were disastrous. 

 

It's my belief that McDermott is going to have the time to bring in players that suit his approach to the game. Sticking with a plan instead of constantly lurching back and forth on both sides of the ball will be beneficial in establishing a direction and steadily moving forward in a more coherent way. 

 

 

 

 

This ties back to the single argument that Coaches make best use of Talent via scheme. Your points are solid.
 

McBeanes have a recipe they are going to stick to , generally speaking. i do like where it is going. But i had to watch the season unfold before i felt that way.

12 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

Nah u give me your thoughts

Or keep how about just keep Ragland over Humber lol. Enlighten me.

I am not one for making a case. More of an observer. why i enjoy some of the great " back and forth"  here from most of you good Folks !
 

I just wrote a note ^ that may explain my view points.
 

PS  Humber and  Ragland are very different players of course.

 Humber ? a special teams ace and back up LB who is athletic and smart enough
Keeping Ragland might have been as effective on Teams and as run down backer.
 

[ColoradoBills]

I for one am glad the McDermott did not change his entire defensive philosophy (4-3 to 3-4) because of Reggie Ragland.

For the record, I don't think Wade Phillips would change his entire defense for a guy who was IR'd his entire rookie season

and had, to that point, never taken a snap in an NFL regular season game.

 

I guess, I'm missing something here.  I feel much better with Edmunds in McDermott's 4-3 than Ragland starting in a

forced McDermott 3-4.

[BringBackOrton]

23 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

We disagree that Ragland would have been a solid piece to keep. That's fine. 

 

If we're both agreeing that coaches, coordinators should adapt to personnel than that's what I (and I believe Hapless too if I can speak for him) was just trying to get across.

 

This Ragland trade was one thing that worried me about McD's mindset which brought all this up. He didn't have character problems and was a good LB last year. Goes back to using Personnel. We disagree if he would have been capable not a big deal. I just hope it's not an indication he can't adapt to what he's given.

What does this mean?  How do you "adapt" to Ragland in McD's scheme?

[CommonCents]

3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

What does this mean?  How do you "adapt" to Ragland in McD's scheme?

Weight loss pills, a time machine and take the bricks off of his feet.

[BringBackOrton]

2 minutes ago, Commonsense said:

Weight loss pills, a time machine and take the bricks off of his feet.

I guess some folks wanted to run a variation of Rex's scheme on 15% of our defensive plays, so Ragland could see the field every once of a while and we could pat ourselves on the back that we "adapted" while allowing a 60 yard run.

[3rdand12]

5 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

I for one am glad the McDermott did not change his entire defensive philosophy (4-3 to 3-4) because of Reggie Ragland.

For the record, I don't think Wade Phillips would change his entire defense for a guy who was IR'd his entire rookie season

and had, to that point, never taken a snap in an NFL regular season game.

 

I guess, I'm missing something here.  I feel much better with Edmunds in McDermott's 4-3 than Ragland starting in a

forced McDermott 3-4.

You did notice how bad Bills were against the run ? 

  I do not think the point is adapting to just one player Colorado.  just a matter of flexibility by Coach. Could he have ?

 

 Wade Phillips is the King of tuning a defense . And sets the bar IMHO.

 

 If McDermott decided to run a andjusted form of his defenses and needed new payers to do that ? Thats fine.
Just trying to suggest he made a conscious decision to rebuild

14 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

I for one am glad the McDermott did not change his entire defensive philosophy (4-3 to 3-4) because of Reggie Ragland.

For the record, I don't think Wade Phillips would change his entire defense for a guy who was IR'd his entire rookie season

and had, to that point, never taken a snap in an NFL regular season game.

 

I guess, I'm missing something here.  I feel much better with Edmunds in McDermott's 4-3 than Ragland starting in a

forced McDermott 3-4.

Keep in mind Bills did not have Edmunds when they relieved Ragland of his duties, They had Brown. another thumper. whom they let go. before they had Edmunds.
 

[BringBackOrton]

1 minute ago, 3rdand12 said:

You did notice how bad Bills were against the run ? 

  I do not think the point is adapting to just one player Colorado.  just a matter of flexibility by Coach. Could he have ?

 

 Wade Phillips is the King of tuning a defense . And sets the bar IMHO.

 

 If McDermott decided to run a andjusted form of his defenses and needed new payers to do that ? Thats fine.
Just trying to suggest he made a conscious decision to rebuild

All due respect 3rd, but Wade and BB are in a class among themselves.  They get praised for their scheme versatility so much because it is so rare and hard to do. 

 

I'm going to come right out and say it.  McD isn't as good of a defensive mind as BB and Wade.  That's okay. I think he knows that too.  And that's the most important thing.  Coaches who outsmart themselves never succeed.

19 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

I for one am glad the McDermott did not change his entire defensive philosophy (4-3 to 3-4) because of Reggie Ragland.

For the record, I don't think Wade Phillips would change his entire defense for a guy who was IR'd his entire rookie season

and had, to that point, never taken a snap in an NFL regular season game.

 

I guess, I'm missing something here.  I feel much better with Edmunds in McDermott's 4-3 than Ragland starting in a

forced McDermott 3-4.

Hey man, this is the NFL.  Defensive coordinators regularly change their entire schemes for the sake of a rookie player, drafted by a different GM for a different coach, who is coming off an ACL tear.  Wake up!

[3rdand12]

1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said:

All due respect 3rd, but Wade and BB are in a class among themselves.  They get praised for their scheme versatility so much because it is so rare and hard to do. 

 

I'm going to come right out and say it.  McD isn't as good of a defensive mind as BB and Wade.  That's okay. I think he knows that too.  And that's the most important thing.  Coaches who outsmart themselves never succeed.

Thank you for the generous message of respect !
Yes they are. You were correct to mention the one i cannot name as well.
 I cannot type or say  his names for fear of him appearing. 

 Huge fan of Wade Phillips

 Loathe and despise every and any thing Patriots

 

 Fair point on McD. Young and learning OTJ. Nothing wrong with that. as they say " he's got potential "

 and yes Rex was one to do just that.