The True reason to fire McDermott

[mannc]

47 minutes ago, JerseyBills said:

That would make sense and all , except the defense he inherited 1.5 years ago only has 3 of the same starters, Kyle, Jerry and Lorax. We already rebuilt the defense

Reports that the Bills have a top-tier NFL defense may have been greatly exaggerated.  That defense just got its ass handed to it by the mighty Indianapolis Colts.  I am terrified by what’s likely going to happen on Monday.

[iinii]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Yup. He engineered a rebuild, and this is what rebuilds look like this early.

 

It is painful, but that's the way these things go. We'll see over the next few years how good a job they've done.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, we've been really bad for a long time.

 

No, the vast majority of that isn't the new regime's fault. 

 

Yes, some fans have been very patient. Of course, some have screamed, moaned and whined for the whole 18 years, but let's look past that.

 

But no, the fact that we've been patient for a long time doesn't mean more patience isn't needed. 

 

"No matter how great the talent or efforts, some things just take time. You can't produce a baby in one month by getting nine women pregnant."   - Warren Buffett

 

Rebuilds are one of those things that just take time.

My response was in reference to someone’s attempt to defend McDermott. They said this isn’t whAt he wanted. He helped crash the car, so if he didn’t want it he shouldn’t have been instrumental he purging talent and creating so much dead cap space. 

Cant have it both ways. 

We all know what a rebuild looks like. The Bills have been at it for 18 years now. Why are some teams perineal contenders without ever doing the dreaded rebuild? 

Just because OBD has all that “free” money and Draft capital they are like  lottery winners. They will overpay and draft some duds along with some hits. McDermott is somewhere between Williams (a misguided authoritarian) and Rex Ryan (a defensive “genius”)

Maybe we should go back to the days of Moulds and Henry getting nine women pregnant.

[Maybe Someday]

16 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

Maybe hire a coach & GM that will actually go out and make obtaining these players the top priority, instead of wasting time drafting DBs. 

 

I agree with all of the Allen points, however... maybe time, draft capital, and cap resources should have mostly been poured into the offense, so that the very-limited rookie QB that is literally going to make or break this franchise has a solid group to work with from day 1. 

 

Between the situation they dropped their most important asset into & the bizarre devotion to Peterman, I think very serious discussions concerning McD & B's future with the team are absolutely warranted. If I'm the owner -- It's game over for McD & B unless there are several legitimate signs of improvement between now and January.

 

They made cleaning up the bad contracts/cap and getting a QB the top priority.  Fixing those 2 things first allows us more freedom in the future, as much as it sucks to watch now.  It amazes me how this franchise was in cap hell for so long while not paying a franchise QB.  We should finally be out of that hole.  

 

Wasting time drafting DBs??  Are you saying that Tre White or even Johnson were wasted picks in a pass happy league?  IMO you can never have too many good DBs.

 

I want to be clear, I'm not a blind follower of the McBeane Regime, they have made some choices that I do not agree with.  Mainly, I'll never understand how they went into the season with only Allen and Peterman on the roster.  Not even someone on the practice squad in case of the inevitable injury?  Why didn't they bring in some other vet once McCarron was traded...or even sooner if the rumors are true that he was not the vet leader that they thought they were getting?  Did they really need to hold out so long for Anderson??? 

 

That being said, I still don't think it would be smart to fire McD or Beane after only 2 & 1 years on the job unless the team just clearly quits on them or they haven't been honest with Pegula about "the process".  They started the rebuild, I think they should be given an adequate opportunity to complete it.  Another big reason I feel we need to keep them around is that I don't think we'll be able to hire the next up and coming HC unless we just happen to unearth that diamond in the rough.  Having 3 head coaches in a row last only 2 years each is a huge organizational red flag.  Why would anyone worth a damn want to sign on to deal with that instability and a lackluster roster?  We'd probably end up with another retread or shot in the dark who says they can build off of the players we do have and we all have to hope that's true. 

 

16 hours ago, twoandfourteen said:

 

I wonder if those numbers have anything to do with the defense being more concerned with trying to prevent 350 yards passing & 4 TDs, plus the fact that the best offenses are more likely to be running out the clock at the end of games. 

 

Everything revolves around the passing game now. 

 

Those quick hitters for 5-7 yds are the new "running game". Guys like Edelman & Thielen have replaced the workhorse RB. Snap, take a step, throw. 

 

Stupid teams smash the ball right into the middle of the line for a yard or two half the game. Smart teams get the ball downfield.

 

I can't say for sure but from the few times that I've been able to watch KC or the Rams this year, Hunt and Gurley both appear to be big parts of those offenses from the start.  IMO, it's the ability to both run & pass that makes them so dangerous.

 

Stupid teams try to do what everyone else is doing despite the fact that they do not have the personnel to do it.  Smart teams play within themselves, even if it's not popular.

[Jasovon]

Ask the falcons if they would like a defense. Scoring huge amounts of points only works if you can stop the other team sometimes 

[Fadingpain]

1 hour ago, Maybe Someday said:

 

They made cleaning up the bad contracts/cap and getting a QB the top priority.  Fixing those 2 things first allows us more freedom in the future, as much as it sucks to watch now.  It amazes me how this franchise was in cap hell for so long while not paying a franchise QB.  We should finally be out of that hole.  

 

Wasting time drafting DBs??  Are you saying that Tre White or even Johnson were wasted picks in a pass happy league?  IMO you can never have too many good DBs.

 

I want to be clear, I'm not a blind follower of the McBeane Regime, they have made some choices that I do not agree with.  Mainly, I'll never understand how they went into the season with only Allen and Peterman on the roster.  Not even someone on the practice squad in case of the inevitable injury?  Why didn't they bring in some other vet once McCarron was traded...or even sooner if the rumors are true that he was not the vet leader that they thought they were getting?  Did they really need to hold out so long for Anderson??? 

 

That being said, I still don't think it would be smart to fire McD or Beane after only 2 & 1 years on the job unless the team just clearly quits on them or they haven't been honest with Pegula about "the process".  They started the rebuild, I think they should be given an adequate opportunity to complete it.  Another big reason I feel we need to keep them around is that I don't think we'll be able to hire the next up and coming HC unless we just happen to unearth that diamond in the rough.  Having 3 head coaches in a row last only 2 years each is a huge organizational red flag.  Why would anyone worth a damn want to sign on to deal with that instability and a lackluster roster?  We'd probably end up with another retread or shot in the dark who says they can build off of the players we do have and we all have to hope that's true. 

 

 

I can't say for sure but from the few times that I've been able to watch KC or the Rams this year, Hunt and Gurley both appear to be big parts of those offenses from the start.  IMO, it's the ability to both run & pass that makes them so dangerous.

 

Stupid teams try to do what everyone else is doing despite the fact that they do not have the personnel to do it.  Smart teams play within themselves, even if it's not popular.

This may be true, but remember, our team is what it is because our coach and GM made it that way.

 

It might be a good idea to design the team to be able to play the more effective type of football.

 

 

[DuckyBoys]

On 10/22/2018 at 12:55 PM, The Real Buffalo Joe said:

Gailey's offense was lightyears better  than this team in every position besides running back. I don't think he's trying to build a defense first team, so much as he inherited a team that already had most of the defensive pieces in place, and doesn't really need to be rebuilt like the offense does. 

Agreed, the defense was closer to being a good unit so they invested heavily into it.   Remains to be seen if Beane is a good judge on the other side of the ball  Next year will tell

[clayboy54]

18 hours ago, Buffalo03 said:

Because the team has existed for 58 years and has been just as bad as it is now and sometimes worse under Ralph. By saying that the team is not the same team under Pegula is like saying that this team didn't exist for the first 54 years and we were an expansion team in 2014 which makes no sense. New ownership doesn't mean new team it's still the "Buffalo Bills". 

 

If Robert Kraft sold the Patriots and the new owner came in and got rid of Belichick, all of his coaches and the whole front office and started over with someone else but they still continue to dominate the league and win multiple Super Bowls over the next 10 years, would you say "The Patriots have only been good for 10 years"? You shouldn't because it makes no sense. They would be dominating for 30 years at that point. It's still the "New England Patriots". 

 

Another way to look at it is for 17 years we waited for the Bills to make the playoffs but we had like 7 different regimes and were constantly told to have patience under each regime because the current regime is not the last one ehich is true but it doesn't mean that all those other years they didn't make the playoffs didn't count. The "team" didn't make the playoffs for 17 years. Under your logic you would be saying every time we got a new regime "we haven't made the playoffs in 3 years" which is incorrect

Okay, I get your logic. However, it has been made very clear that this time, under new ownership, they are going to build a consistent winner over time. Ralph and his cronies never once said that since 1960. Don't you honestly think we owe it to them to give them a fair chance? Not over 50 years mind you, but a fair chance like 5-years?

[Maybe Someday]

25 minutes ago, Fadingpain said:

This may be true, but remember, our team is what it is because our coach and GM made it that way. 

 

It might be a good idea to design the team to be able to play the more effective type of football.

 

 

 

Yes they did, in large part to either get out from under some bad contracts signed by previous regimes or to avoid signing some new bad ones of their own.  We haven't had the personnel to consistently throw the ball down the field in forever.  It's not like we just dismantled some high octane offense for this, we've been a run 1st and play defense type of team long before McBeane came on the scene. 

 

Agreed and it's my opinion that they are still working towards that.  I'm not willing to give a final grade on an unfinished product like so many others have.  I'd like McBeane to have at least 1 more year to have a chance to finish what they started. 

[Buffalo03]

7 hours ago, clayboy54 said:

Okay, I get your logic. However, it has been made very clear that this time, under new ownership, they are going to build a consistent winner over time. Ralph and his cronies never once said that since 1960. Don't you honestly think we owe it to them to give them a fair chance? Not over 50 years mind you, but a fair chance like 5-years?

Yeah, I'm all for giving them the chance. But if that doesn't work then a new coach and regime come in here, preach the same thing and it's the same thing all over again and then we hear again "just give them time. Gotta have patience".

[Cmdjr85]

mcdermott will be fired halfway thru next season. 

[Thurman#1]

On ‎10‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 1:19 AM, Avisan said:

... but in a nutshell we underperformed relative to previous years on both sides of the ball last year but the way things shook out we made the playoffs anyway, and now the complete gutting of the roster is kicking in, yielding the atrocity we now see on the field

 

 

Again, that's nonsense that we underperformed on the field last year. Complete crap, from the guy who said this about the 2017 Bills earlier in this thread:

 

 

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2018 at 2:21 AM, Avisan said:

 

Buffalo consensus and national musings were that we were good coaching and competent QB play away from being annual contenders for the playoffs,

 

 

I just googled the 2017 preseason power rankings. Here are the first 20 I found:

 

 

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2017/9/5/16255238/2017-nfl-power-rankings-curated-week-1

 

This was the most complete one, a compendium of five and here are the five listings of where they ranked in pre-season power rankings:

SB Nation 30th

Yahoo 29th

NFL 26th

ESPN 26th

CBS 27th

 

Of the next 19 I found, 

 

https://buffalowdown.com/2017/07/12/buffalo-bills-power-rankings-not-friend/  (Mediocre, in the 5th of 6 categories:  1) Super Bowl contenders, 2) Playoff contenders, etc. And the Bills fell into the 5th of 6th tiers, Mediocre)

 

https://thecomeback.com/nfl/2017-nfl-preseason-rankings-no-24-buffalo-bills.html (#24)

 

http://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nfl/list/nfl-power-rankings-2017-preseason-cowboys-packers-raiders-seahawks/1plnhfw1tgz4z1dtnbqfz31qu0/slide/24       (#24)

 

https://www.metro.us/sports/nfl-preseason-power-rankings-to-kick-2017   (#27)

 

https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/lists/15441/2017-nfl-power-rankings-preseason-edition/16-buffalo-bills-0-45-nerd-17     (#16)

 

https://whbl.com/blogs/sports/6680/nfl-power-rankings-2017-preseason-rank-of-all-32-nfl-teams-1/  (#27)

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2730051-nfl-power-rankings-2017-examining-pecking-order-after-week-3-of-preseason   (#29)

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2017/09/05/2017-nfl-power-rankings-the-new-patriots-have-lapped-the-field/?utm_term=.bef96d7bd18f      (#30)

  

https://kfgo.com/blogs/power-rankings/6680/nfl-power-rankings-2017-week-1-1/    (#27)

 

http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2017/09/nfl_power_rankings_which_teams.html    (#27)

 

http://theunderdogsports.com/2017-nfl-preseason-power-rankings-25-32/    (#29)

 

https://ninernoise.com/2017/09/01/nfl-power-rankings-2017-week-1/8/    (#26)

 

https://lastwordonprofootball.com/2017/07/21/pre-preseason-power-rankings/ (#24)

 

https://www.ctpost.com/technology/businessinsider/article/NFL-POWER-RANKINGS-Where-all-32-teams-stand-11339889.php

  (#30)

https://www.atlantafalcons.com/news/matt-tabeek-s-wildly-important-nfl-power-rankings-patriots-falcons-begi-19319759  (#30)

 

https://www.betitbest.com/sportsnews/de/news/pft-preseason-power-rankings-no-23-buffalo-bills-5544830   (#23)

 

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/preseason_nfl_power_rankings/s1__23081    (#22)

 

https://sconniesportstalk.com/2017/09/05/nfl-week-1-power-rankings/    (#28)

 

https://thepowerrank.com/introducing-2017-nfl-win-totals-report/   (#28)

 

Those were the first twenty I found. Do you notice any trends about where the Bills were ranked, Avi? For me, the words, "expected to suck" leapt to my mind.

 

"Underperformed," my ass.

 

Did you find, in any of those, the phrase, "good coaching and competent QB play away from being annual contenders for the playoffs" as you wrote? Or anything like that? But hey, maybe I slanted things and didn't link to all the tsunami of positive expectations you have insisted was out there. 

 

So this is my third time to challenge you to come up with all the positive expectations you referenced. Still waiting, Avi.

 

Edited October 25, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

17 hours ago, iinii said:

My response was in reference to someone’s attempt to defend McDermott. They said this isn’t whAt he wanted. He helped crash the car, so if he didn’t want it he shouldn’t have been instrumental he purging talent and creating so much dead cap space. 

Cant have it both ways. 

We all know what a rebuild looks like. The Bills have been at it for 18 years now. Why are some teams perineal contenders without ever doing the dreaded rebuild? 

Just because OBD has all that “free” money and Draft capital they are like  lottery winners. They will overpay and draft some duds along with some hits. McDermott is somewhere between Williams (a misguided authoritarian) and Rex Ryan (a defensive “genius”)

Maybe we should go back to the days of Moulds and Henry getting nine women pregnant.

 

 

Well, if they said it wasn't what McDermott wanted, I agree with them. I'm sure if there was a legit, high-odds way to take a team with sub-mediocre talent, no QB and serious salary cap trouble and turn it around without a painful rebuild, they probably would have tried it. There isn't. They didn't want this. They accepted that it was a necessary though painful part of a turnaround.

 

And that's nonsense that we've been rebuilding for 18 years. They've been below average for 18 years. There's a difference. For most of those 18 years they kept kidding themselves that they were close and reloaded and reloaded and reloaded again and again. Very few rebuilds during that time.Which is why we kept having draft picks of #9 and #11 and #14 and couldn't come up with a decent QB.

 

You're right that having the cap space and draft capital doesn't mean they'll be successful. We can definitely agree that far. They have a ton to prove. But at least they have started the process intelligently. There's no particular reason to think they will overpay. That's not their philosophy. They want to build through the draft and fill in with FAs. Which is how the teams with long-term success achieve it.

 

They'll draft some duds and some hits? Um, yeah. So will all 32 teams. So far their drafts look pretty damn good, though. Tre White at #27? Zay Jones has taken a while but actually shows signs of becoming good over the last two or three games, or as good as a WR can be with these QBs. Dion Dawkins? Matt Milano in the 5th? Josh Allen is still a question mark. No way to know what he'll be. I wanted Mayfield, Rosen or Darnold myself, but Allen still might turn out to be a good one, or not. Too early to say. But Tremaine Edmunds, Harrison Phillips in the 3rd and Taron Johnson in the 4th look like a very nice draft on their own for a team that found it had to sacrifice having a 2nd round pick to get their future QB hopeful.

 

But there's no Gregg Williams in McDermott, that's nonsense. He doesn't brook nonsense and he will cut you if you don't meet expectations but there's nothing out there showing him as a screamer or a disciplinarian. If anything he's been shown to communicate really clearly and well. Not that that guarantees success, nothing does, really. But there's no reasonable comparison with Gregg Williams and his airhorns at 6:00 a.m.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Thurman#1

[entropyrules]

On 10/22/2018 at 12:59 PM, Wayne Arnold said:

LMAO at the posters who think this is exactly what McDermott wants.

 

Did you eat paint chips as a child?

oh shoot you mean all that lead isn't good for you?

[Thurman#1]

5 minutes ago, entropyrules said:

 

 

oh shoot you mean all that lead isn't good for you?

 

 

It makes you an excellent choice as a sinker for someone's fishing gear.

 

Plus Superman can't see through you.

Edited October 25, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Avisan]

2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Again, that's nonsense that we underperformed on the field last year. Complete crap, from the guy who said this about the 2017 Bills earlier in this thread:

 

 

 

 

I just googled the 2017 preseason power rankings. Here are the first 20 I found:

 

 

https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2017/9/5/16255238/2017-nfl-power-rankings-curated-week-1

 

This was the most complete one, a compendium of five and here are the five listings of where they ranked in pre-season power rankings:

SB Nation 30th

Yahoo 29th

NFL 26th

ESPN 26th

CBS 27th

 

Of the next 19 I found, 

 

https://buffalowdown.com/2017/07/12/buffalo-bills-power-rankings-not-friend/  (Mediocre, in the 5th of 6 categories:  1) Super Bowl contenders, 2) Playoff contenders, etc. And the Bills fell into the 5th of 6th tiers, Mediocre)

 

https://thecomeback.com/nfl/2017-nfl-preseason-rankings-no-24-buffalo-bills.html (#24)

 

http://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nfl/list/nfl-power-rankings-2017-preseason-cowboys-packers-raiders-seahawks/1plnhfw1tgz4z1dtnbqfz31qu0/slide/24       (#24)

 

https://www.metro.us/sports/nfl-preseason-power-rankings-to-kick-2017   (#27)

 

https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/lists/15441/2017-nfl-power-rankings-preseason-edition/16-buffalo-bills-0-45-nerd-17     (#16)

 

https://whbl.com/blogs/sports/6680/nfl-power-rankings-2017-preseason-rank-of-all-32-nfl-teams-1/  (#27)

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2730051-nfl-power-rankings-2017-examining-pecking-order-after-week-3-of-preseason   (#29)

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2017/09/05/2017-nfl-power-rankings-the-new-patriots-have-lapped-the-field/?utm_term=.bef96d7bd18f      (#30)

  

https://kfgo.com/blogs/power-rankings/6680/nfl-power-rankings-2017-week-1-1/    (#27)

 

http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2017/09/nfl_power_rankings_which_teams.html    (#27)

 

http://theunderdogsports.com/2017-nfl-preseason-power-rankings-25-32/    (#29)

 

https://ninernoise.com/2017/09/01/nfl-power-rankings-2017-week-1/8/    (#26)

 

https://lastwordonprofootball.com/2017/07/21/pre-preseason-power-rankings/ (#24)

 

https://www.ctpost.com/technology/businessinsider/article/NFL-POWER-RANKINGS-Where-all-32-teams-stand-11339889.php

  (#30)

https://www.atlantafalcons.com/news/matt-tabeek-s-wildly-important-nfl-power-rankings-patriots-falcons-begi-19319759  (#30)

 

https://www.betitbest.com/sportsnews/de/news/pft-preseason-power-rankings-no-23-buffalo-bills-5544830   (#23)

 

https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/preseason_nfl_power_rankings/s1__23081    (#22)

 

https://sconniesportstalk.com/2017/09/05/nfl-week-1-power-rankings/    (#28)

 

https://thepowerrank.com/introducing-2017-nfl-win-totals-report/   (#28)

 

Those were the first twenty I found. Do you notice any trends about where the Bills were ranked, Avi? For me, the words, "expected to suck" leapt to my mind.

 

"Underperformed," my ass.

 

Did you find, in any of those, the phrase, "good coaching and competent QB play away from being annual contenders for the playoffs" as you wrote? Or anything like that? But hey, maybe I slanted things and didn't link to all the tsunami of positive expectations you have insisted was out there. 

 

So this is my third time to challenge you to come up with all the positive expectations you referenced. Still waiting, Avi.

 

Oh Thurman.  Just couldn't let it go.  Never can.  Thinks he's so smart, but fails to grasp some pretty basic aspects of the conversation because he's, you know, standard intelligence.  Nothing wrong with that, but you should at least know it, Mr. Dunning-Kruger.

 

Team Rankings O/D/ST

 

Check out those ranks.  Average defense.  Atrocious offense.  And we didn't underperform relative to previous Bills' seasons with better performances?  We've hit 9-7 in the past as well.  This team backed in the playoffs off of lucky bounces and good fortune (about darn time, tbh).  I'm thrilled about having gotten the monkey off our back, but we didn't earn that spot with our top-12 play on the field.

 

Let's pick out some quotes from the linked articles here:

The Bills appear to be tanking. They traded away Sammy Watkins for a second-round pick. They traded away a second-round pick from last year in Reggie Ragland for a fourth-round pick. As Brandon Beane takes over at GM and Sean McDermott takes over at head coach, Buffalo appears to be looking for a fresh start.

 

This feels too low for Buffalo until the exodus of talent in Spring and Summer is remembered. Zach Brown, Stephen Gilmore, Reggie Ragland, and Ronald Darby were all already gone before the news that Sammy Watkins got shipped out (maybe not Darby? Call it a tie.) We don’t know why they decided on rebuilding in Buffalo, but they clearly did.

 

Having shipped off their top receiver in Sammy Watkins as well as losing their top two corners in Ronald Darby and Stephon Gilmore through trade and free agency respectively, it appears the Bills are throwing the towel in for the foreseeable future. LeSean McCoy should keep the offense afloat, but don’t expect much from Buffalo.

 

You're right that nobody expected much from the 2017 season, but that's because we'd already begun the teardown, and people were unsure about the rookie HC and FO.  You'll notice a common theme of "who knows why they decided to do *x*" amongst the articles that happen to have explanations for their rankings.  Expectations were low because the team was clearly not trying to go far leading into last season.

[iinii]

5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Well, if they said it wasn't what McDermott wanted, I agree with them. I'm sure if there was a legit, high-odds way to take a team with sub-mediocre talent, no QB and serious salary cap trouble and turn it around without a painful rebuild, they probably would have tried it. There isn't. They didn't want this. They accepted that it was a necessary though painful part of a turnaround.

 

And that's nonsense that we've been rebuilding for 18 years. They've been below average for 18 years. There's a difference. For most of those 18 years they kept kidding themselves that they were close and reloaded and reloaded and reloaded again and again. Very few rebuilds during that time.Which is why we kept having draft picks of #9 and #11 and #14 and couldn't come up with a decent QB.

 

You're right that having the cap space and draft capital doesn't mean they'll be successful. We can definitely agree that far. They have a ton to prove. But at least they have started the process intelligently. There's no particular reason to think they will overpay. That's not their philosophy. They want to build through the draft and fill in with FAs. Which is how the teams with long-term success achieve it.

 

They'll draft some duds and some hits? Um, yeah. So will all 32 teams. So far their drafts look pretty damn good, though. Tre White at #27? Zay Jones has taken a while but actually shows signs of becoming good over the last two or three games, or as good as a WR can be with these QBs. Dion Dawkins? Matt Milano in the 5th? Josh Allen is still a question mark. No way to know what he'll be. I wanted Mayfield, Rosen or Darnold myself, but Allen still might turn out to be a good one, or not. Too early to say. But Tremaine Edmunds, Harrison Phillips in the 3rd and Taron Johnson in the 4th look like a very nice draft on their own for a team that found it had to sacrifice having a 2nd round pick to get their future QB hopeful.

 

But there's no Gregg Williams in McDermott, that's nonsense. He doesn't brook nonsense and he will cut you if you don't meet expectations but there's nothing out there showing him as a screamer or a disciplinarian. If anything he's been shown to communicate really clearly and well. Not that that guarantees success, nothing does, really. But there's no reasonable comparison with Gregg Williams and his airhorns at 6:00 a.m.

So purging talented players to the point of having the worst offense ever is only indicative of what?

Has Belichick ever cut his own throat?

Edited October 25, 2018 by iinii

[Thurman#1]

21 hours ago, iinii said:

So purging talented players to the point of having the worst offense ever is only indicative of what?

Has Belichick ever cut his own throat?

 

 

We weren't that talented. We had managed to put together a roster that was sub-mediocre and yet wildly expensive. I've already answered this question about four times, but what's it indicative of? It's indicative that we're in the second year of a near-complete rebuild. The second year of a near-complete rebuild will suck. That's what it does.That's who it is.

 

Has Belichick ever cut his own throat? No. But that's not what we have done here either.

 

Has Belichick ever cut talented players because they didn't fit his scheme or they were too expensive ... even when he only had less talent behind that guy?  Yeah. He does it every single year. He cut Richard Seymour, Chandler Jones, Nate Solder, Jamie Collins, Terry Glenn off the top of my head ... any list of the players he's cut when he had worse as replacements would probably go into triple figures. 

 

Has Belichick done a rebuild? Yeah. Not a full rebuild like ours but he churned that Pete Carroll roster very quickly indeed. Look at the 1999 Pats roster the year before he arrived. Then look at his roster the next year. With one quick look I think I see 11 starters gone.

 

Look at what he did in Cleveland. Kosar gone, Webster Slaughter, Ozzie Newsome. He inherited a worse roster in Cleveland than he did in NWE and he cut and purged to his heart's content ... something he still does in New England to this day.

[Avisan]

10 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

We weren't that talented. We had managed to put together a roster that was sub-mediocre and yet wildly expensive.

(Citation needed)

 

We've had elite defenses and solid offenses with roughly the same quality of personnel as we had at the end of the 2016 season.  The team had been mediocre because various coaching combinations have been ineffective on either side of the ball, not because the core of the offense or defense was fluctuating wildly in talent.

 

If you for whatever reason believe this to be the case despite the several seasons' worth of evidence to the contrary it certainly explains your resistance to the idea that the Bills were close to being perennial playoff contenders (not Superbowl) a la the Bengals, but now we'll never know.

[Avisan]

To continue along this point, here's the team stats from 2014, where it was widely accepted that Hackett's inexperience as an OC was hurting the offense on top of our lack of reliable QB play.

 

Our stats from 2016 demonstrate the consensus at the time as well-- bad game-day decision-making was amplifying the issues of an outdated defensive scheme (see Ryan Bros' struggles the last few years of their careers despite reasonable talent on defense), leading to an underperformance by the Bills despite finally having returned to having a solid offense.

 

The cap situation wasn't ideal, but it was certainly manageable without a total teardown.  Better game-day decision making would have kept us in the neighborhood of 9-7 every year, and finding an efficient passer would have cemented our contention for a wildcard spot.  The other pieces were in place already and were roughly sustainable until the cap room opened back up in 2020, in time to re-sign the next wave of core pieces.

 

Instead we jettisoned all of our talent and opted to neglect the offensive side of the ball to the point that it's historically bad.  We're suffering blowout losses at an unprecedented rate.  If the current regime's drafting and FA haul isn't WELL above average next year, we're screwed.

Edited October 26, 2018 by Avisan

[Thurman#1]

On 10/25/2018 at 8:02 PM, Avisan said:

Oh Thurman.  Just couldn't let it go.  Never can.  Thinks he's so smart, but fails to grasp some pretty basic aspects of the conversation because he's, you know, standard intelligence.  Nothing wrong with that, but you should at least know it, Mr. Dunning-Kruger.

 

Team Rankings O/D/ST

 

Check out those ranks.  Average defense.  Atrocious offense.  And we didn't underperform relative to previous Bills' seasons with better performances?  We've hit 9-7 in the past as well.  This team backed in the playoffs off of lucky bounces and good fortune (about darn time, tbh).  I'm thrilled about having gotten the monkey off our back, but we didn't earn that spot with our top-12 play on the field.

 

Let's pick out some quotes from the linked articles here:

 

You're right that nobody expected much from the 2017 season, but that's because we'd already begun the teardown, and people were unsure about the rookie HC and FO.  You'll notice a common theme of "who knows why they decided to do *x*" amongst the articles that happen to have explanations for their rankings.  Expectations were low because the team was clearly not trying to go far leading into last season.

 

 

As always, you talk, but you never make the point you think you make. It's a weird kind of underachievement, but even when the Bills don't underachieve, you do.

 

You try first to say we didn't underachieve by pointing out the after-season rankings ... ONE rankings. More, the rankings you point out, if they're totally factual and we don't challenge them at all prove precisely the opposite of what you're trying to prove.

 

When you average out those ranking scores - the ones in your own link - they come out to 20.7 ... they say the Bills average out at between the 20th and 21st best team in the league.

 

And yet, the 20 links you're trying so sadly and unsuccessfully to answer predicted before the season that the Bills would average out at 26.47. Meaning they were predicted to end up between 26th and 27th and they actually ended up 20th and 21st if we completely believe your link. What a joke, Avi. 

 

You proved they over-achieved. And crowed about it, thinking you'd done the opposite. What a joke.

 

 

 

 

As for your second point, of course they'd begun the teardown. They'd inherited a sub-mediocre roster that was paid as if they Super Bowl contenders.

 

But it was you who used the word under-achieved. You don't underachieve this year with last year's roster. It makes no sense. You under-achieve or over-achieve based on who is on your team. Judging it by people who aren't on your team is ... what? ... under-imagined-achievement? Imaginary-achievement-guessing?

 

And the 2016 Bills team didn't underachieve much either. They weren't especially talented.

 

Offensive starters: Tyrod Taylor, LeSean McCoy, Marquise Goodwin, Sammy Watkins, Robert Woods, Charles Clay, Cordy Glenn, Richie Incognito, Eric Wood, John Miller and Jordan Mills.

 

Defensive starters: Adolphus Washington, Kyle Williams, Marcell Dareus/Corbin Bryant, Preston Brown, Lorenzo Alexander, Zach Brown, Jerry Hughes, Ronald Darby, Stephon Gilmore, Corey Graham, Aaron Williams/Ihedigbo

 

And with that lineup they'd put themselves in cap trouble. Pitiful. 

 

The decent players there are either still here (McCoy, Clay, Kyle Williams, Lorax, Hughes), or off the team due to salary cap decisions (Gilmore (performing very well), Watkins, Goodwin, Dareus (perhaps as much a result of not showing up to meeting as a cap decision but these three are still underperforming their contracts), Robert Woods (having a terrific year, the real major loss of these cap casualties), not scheme fits (Darby, who's having a bad year but I think will be fine down the road).

 

Or retired due to injury or craziness (Aaron Williams, Eric Wood, Incognito).

 

The rest are nonentities. 

 

That was a mediocre lineup that was being wildly overpaid ... to win a mediocre seven games.

 

[Avisan]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

As always, you talk, but you never make the point you think you make. It's a weird kind of underachievement, but even when the Bills don't underachieve, you do.

 

You try first to say we didn't underachieve by pointing out the after-season rankings ... ONE rankings. More, the rankings you point out, if they're totally factual and we don't challenge them at all prove precisely the opposite of what you're trying to prove.

 

When you average out those ranking scores - the ones in your own link - they come out to 20.7 ... they say the Bills average out at between the 20th and 21st best team in the league.

 

And yet, the 20 links you're trying so sadly and unsuccessfully to answer predicted before the season that the Bills would average out at 26.47. Meaning they were predicted to end up between 26th and 27th and they actually ended up 20th and 21st if we completely believe your link. What a joke, Avi. 

 

You proved they over-achieved. And crowed about it, thinking you'd done the opposite. What a joke.

 

 

 

 

As for your second point, of course they'd begun the teardown. They'd inherited a sub-mediocre roster that was paid as if they Super Bowl contenders.

 

But it was you who used the word under-achieved. You don't underachieve this year with last year's roster. It makes no sense. You under-achieve or over-achieve based on who is on your team. Judging it by people who aren't on your team is ... what? ... under-imagined-achievement? Imaginary-achievement-guessing?

 

And the 2016 Bills team didn't underachieve much either. They weren't especially talented.

 

Offensive starters: Tyrod Taylor, LeSean McCoy, Marquise Goodwin, Sammy Watkins, Robert Woods, Charles Clay, Cordy Glenn, Richie Incognito, Eric Wood, John Miller and Jordan Mills.

 

Defensive starters: Adolphus Washington, Kyle Williams, Marcell Dareus/Corbin Bryant, Preston Brown, Lorenzo Alexander, Zach Brown, Jerry Hughes, Ronald Darby, Stephon Gilmore, Corey Graham, Aaron Williams/Ihedigbo

 

And with that lineup they'd put themselves in cap trouble. Pitiful. 

 

The decent players there are either still here (McCoy, Clay, Kyle Williams, Lorax, Hughes), or off the team due to salary cap decisions (Gilmore (performing very well), Watkins, Goodwin, Dareus (perhaps as much a result of not showing up to meeting as a cap decision but these three are still underperforming their contracts), Robert Woods (having a terrific year, the real major loss of these cap casualties), not scheme fits (Darby, who's having a bad year but I think will be fine down the road).

 

Or retired due to injury or craziness (Aaron Williams, Eric Wood, Incognito).

 

The rest are nonentities. 

 

That was a mediocre lineup that was being wildly overpaid ... to win a mediocre seven games.

 

Yeah, this is why I don't do this with you

 

The team underperformed relative to previous years by every objective measure, and you got hung up on a semantic glitch because that's what you do, despite it being pretty clear what I was talking about, and you proceeded to do what you always do, which is making ridiculously long-winded arrogance-laden posts because somewhere in your mind you think devoting more time to winning arguments on the internet makes you smarter

 

You're an absolute toxic presence, and masking it in long-windedness and verbosity only exacerbates the way you make every discussion you enter an exercise in exhaustion

 

You don't learn, you don't change your mind, your sole reason for existence on these forums is to tell people they're wrong with a higher word count than anyone feels like dealing with

[Thurman#1]

On 10/23/2018 at 2:21 AM, Avisan said:

 

Buffalo consensus and national musings were that we were good coaching and competent QB play away from being annual contenders for the playoffs,

 

 

 

Fourth time now I've asked you for all these national musings you reference here. 

 

Fourth time I've asked you for any article mentioning "being annual contenders for the playoffs" or anything like it.

 

And strangely enough ... I'M STILL WAITING, AVI!!!!!

[Avisan]

1 minute ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Fourth time now I've asked you for all these national musings you reference here. 

 

Fourth time I've asked you for any article mentioning "being annual contenders for the playoffs" or anything like it.

 

And strangely enough ... I'M STILL WAITING, AVI!!!!!

Keep waiting

 

I don't care enough to dig up every radio or TV segment I listened to or every article I read several years ago

 

It just isn't worth my time and you'll move the goalposts anyway, because you're not actually here to do anything but stroke your own ego

 

You literally pointed to over a dozen links to post-regime-change power-rankings in a discussion regarding the state of the team pre-McDermott because being right on the internet is more important to you than staying on task

 

My original post was challenging the notion that it was a given that the team needed a total makeover, because very few people thought that in 2016.  I stand by that idea, and I'm content to leave it at that.  See a couple posts up for the 2014 and 2016 stats/context for that belief.  Cheers, and stop clogging up threads.

[Thurman#1]

1 minute ago, Avisan said:

Yeah, this is why I don't do this with you

 

The team underperformed relative to previous years by every objective measure, and you got hung up on a semantic glitch because that's what you do, despite it being pretty clear what I was talking about, and you proceeded to do what you always do, which is making ridiculously long-winded arrogance-laden posts because somewhere in your mind you think devoting more time to winning arguments on the internet makes you smarter

 

You're an absolute toxic presence, and masking it in long-windedness and verbosity only exacerbates the way you make every discussion you enter an exercise in exhaustion

 

You don't learn, you don't change your mind, your sole reason for existence on these forums is to tell people they're wrong with a higher word count than anyone feels like dealing with

 

 

You don't do this with me because I don't engage with you except when you say something that doesn't make much sense, and because of that you nearly always lose the arguments.

 

You're losing the argument here and you don't respond with a single specific.

 

Again, still waiting for all those national musings about "being annual contenders for the playoffs" you talked about. 

[Thurman#1]

On 10/23/2018 at 8:44 PM, Thurman#1 said:

 

Yeah, we backed in, but let's see some links of a bunch of forecasts mentioning "being annual contenders for the playoffs."

 

 

25 minutes ago, Avisan said:

Keep waiting

 

I don't care enough to dig up every radio or TV segment I listened to or every article I read several years ago

 

It just isn't worth my time and you'll move the goalposts anyway, because you're not actually here to do anything but stroke your own ego

 

You literally pointed to over a dozen links to post-regime-change power-rankings in a discussion regarding the state of the team pre-McDermott because being right on the internet is more important to you than staying on task

 

My original post was challenging the notion that it was a given that the team needed a total makeover, because very few people thought that in 2016.  I stand by that idea, and I'm content to leave it at that.  See a couple posts up for the 2014 and 2016 stats/context for that belief.  Cheers, and stop clogging up threads.

 

 

Ah, the sound of a man surrendering while still trying to insist he's right.

 

The goal posts aren't moving, Avi. I've challenged you five times now, in pretty much the same exact words each time. You aren't coming up with any because there aren't any.

 

 

 

 

But hey, let's make sure the goal posts aren't moving. I challenge you again, in exactly the same words I used in the first challenge. I'll just copy it right to here. You said this:

 

On 10/23/2018 at 2:21 AM, Avisan said:

This is absolutely revisionist, FYI

 

Buffalo consensus and national musings were that we were good coaching and competent QB play away from being annual contenders for the playoffs, and we backed into the playoffs with a 9-7 record (not our first time) due to a miracle play by the Bengals.

 

 

And on Tuesday at 8:44, I said this:

 

 

On 10/23/2018 at 8:44 PM, Thurman#1 said:

 

If his is revisionist, that puts it on the same footing as yours.

 

Yeah, we backed in, but let's see some links of a bunch of forecasts mentioning "being annual contenders for the playoffs."

 

 

Goalposts ain't moving, Avi. You just don't have a football to kick through them.

 

Still waiting.

Edited October 26, 2018 by Thurman#1

[BillsMafia13]

31 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Ah, the sound of a man surrendering while still trying to insist he's right.

 

The goal posts aren't moving, Avi. I've challenged you five times now, in pretty much the same exact words each time. You aren't coming up with any because there aren't any.

 

 

 

 

But hey, let's make sure the goal posts aren't moving. I challenge you again, in exactly the same words I used in the first challenge. I'll just copy it right to here. You said this:

 

 

And on Tuesday at 8:44, I said this:

 

 

 

 

Goalposts ain't moving, Avi. You just don't have a football to kick through them.

 

Still waiting.

Deep breathes big guy, its just a topic about a game

[Avisan]

10 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

Ah, the sound of a man surrendering while still trying to insist he's right.

 

The goal posts aren't moving, Avi. I've challenged you five times now, in pretty much the same exact words each time. You aren't coming up with any because there aren't any.

 

 

 

 

But hey, let's make sure the goal posts aren't moving. I challenge you again, in exactly the same words I used in the first challenge. I'll just copy it right to here. You said this:

 

 

And on Tuesday at 8:44, I said this:

 

 

 

 

Goalposts ain't moving, Avi. You just don't have a football to kick through them.

 

Still waiting.

Eh, I'm going to try to give you the benefit of the doubt for a second here and pretend you're posting in good faith.

 

You live(d) in Japan, right?  You're overly reliant on print media relative to the average Bills fan.  Few people outside of Buffalo care enough to write a serious, non-comedic, autopsy about the Bills with much knowledge, we're not a particularly relevant team.  Radio/TV segments mentioning the Bills in passing or a national-level figure making a guest appearance in local media is about the best we get.  A "musing" is not a wave of print articles, it's a pondering, or a contemplation, which is where you've moved the goalposts already.

 

Those of us who were around under the Rex regime were exposed to more non-print discussion of the status of the team, and his performance with the roster we had.  I'm not the only poster to ever point out the fallacy of this team "needing" a rebuild.  That idea is routinely challenged, and outside of a few dogmatic posters, is rarely doubled down on, because people who lived here know it isn't true.  You'll note the poster I actually quoted isn't the one defending himself tooth and nail here.

 

My post, however, and the viewpoint it represents, challenged your perception of the team at said point in time, so you jumped in.  I said something that "didn't make sense" to you, so you couldn't help yourself.  I could, if I wanted to, spend hours digging through the internet archives to find relevant media segments to support the specific claim of musings.  They're there.  I know they're there, because I heard them and saw them.  Most posters here have been exposed to them, too.  The idea of a bloated Whaley roster is relatively recent-- the power rankings you yourself posted almost universally express puzzlement at the rebuild decision!

 

But that would take hours of digging, and as I said, it's not even a little bit worth it to me.  You jumped into the conversation, and when I opted not to fully engage with you, you rebumped the thread.  My point was made to those it was intended to be made to, and I'm content with my post regarding 2014 and 2016 stats and the context behind them as a proxy support of my claim.  I don't need to prove myself right to you.  Again, I could, but the time investment isn't worth it to me, and everyone else got the memo.

 

I don't expect you to accept this.  You'll chalk this one down as a W and get whatever temporary psychological boost you need out of feeling that way.  You do you, man.  This conversation is utterly unproductive, nobody else cares about it, and I've hit my effort limit for it.  Cheers.

[Maybe Someday]

14 minutes ago, Avisan said:

Eh, I'm going to try to give you the benefit of the doubt for a second here and pretend you're posting in good faith.

 

You live(d) in Japan, right?  You're overly reliant on print media relative to the average Bills fan.  Few people outside of Buffalo care enough to write a serious, non-comedic, autopsy about the Bills with much knowledge, we're not a particularly relevant team.  Radio/TV segments mentioning the Bills in passing or a national-level figure making a guest appearance in local media is about the best we get.  A "musing" is not a wave of print articles, it's a pondering, or a contemplation, which is where you've moved the goalposts already.

 

Those of us who were around under the Rex regime were exposed to more non-print discussion of the status of the team, and his performance with the roster we had.  I'm not the only poster to ever point out the fallacy of this team "needing" a rebuild.  That idea is routinely challenged, and outside of a few dogmatic posters, is rarely doubled down on, because people who lived here know it isn't true.  You'll note the poster I actually quoted isn't the one defending himself tooth and nail here.

 

My post, however, and the viewpoint it represents, challenged your perception of the team at said point in time, so you jumped in.  I said something that "didn't make sense" to you, so you couldn't help yourself.  I could, if I wanted to, spend hours digging through the internet archives to find relevant media segments to support the specific claim of musings.  They're there.  I know they're there, because I heard them and saw them.  Most posters here have been exposed to them, too.  The idea of a bloated Whaley roster is relatively recent-- the power rankings you yourself posted almost universally express puzzlement at the rebuild decision!

 

But that would take hours of digging, and as I said, it's not even a little bit worth it to me.  You jumped into the conversation, and when I opted not to fully engage with you, you rebumped the thread.  My point was made to those it was intended to be made to, and I'm content with my post regarding 2014 and 2016 stats and the context behind them as a proxy support of my claim.  I don't need to prove myself right to you.  Again, I could, but the time investment isn't worth it to me, and everyone else got the memo.

 

I don't expect you to accept this.  You'll chalk this one down as a W and get whatever temporary psychological boost you need out of feeling that way.  You do you, man.  This conversation is utterly unproductive, nobody else cares about it, and I've hit my effort limit for it.  Cheers.

 

That would be me...Thurman's been doing it for me so I didn't feel the need to lol.  He and I are more on the same page regarding the topic at hand so I figured I'd let him take the reigns...especially after it seemed to go from a discussion to an argument.  We all have differences in opinion but arguing with someone on a chat board isn't my style.  I think it's time for us all to just agree to disagree.  You and many others obviously don't like McD or Beane and want them gone less than halfway into year #2.  That's your right to feel that way.  I see that as being counterproductive and would be utterly shocked if it actually happened.  I think there's a better chance of me winning the Mega Millions tonight than McD or Beane getting fired this year. 

 

My final thoughts on the subject...

 

We've had regime after regime think that they could come in, add a few pieces and win now but it's never worked.  I don't recall hearing any of those prior regimes speak of building an organization (not just the team) from the foundation up with the goal of building a perennial winner.  That is what makes McBeane different to me.  They didn't come in saying they could win now, they said the opposite.  They set the expectation that they wanted to build the franchise into one that truly is in the playoff discussion year after year...by more than just a few talking heads here and there on TV.  Some like to point out how it's because we've only hired bad coaches.  My question to them is what caliber of coach do you think we'll be able to hire if our 3rd straight coach only lasts 2 years?  That would only add to the perception that I believe exists around the league that we're an unstable, joke of a franchise.  IMO, we'd have no shot to get the next offensive mastermind unless they absolutely love Allen more than any other QB on a team with a HC opening, which is doubtful.  Even if we do, it's not like we'll suddenly be good  I also don't understand how so many can already conclude with such certainty that McBeane cannot build an offense just because it hasn't happened yet. 

 

So I'm not having patience just to have patience like many of us have done in the past.  I'm having patience because I like that we finally have a regime that is not doing the same old thing as all the others have in the past.  I think they deserve a chance to continue moving forward based on the 9 wins last year and what appears to be 2 solid drafts.  This season sucks so far but I expected it to from the start, maybe not quite to this degree but we're playing so many young players that are still learning that it's not a total shock to me.  I'm more worried about the young guys getting experience and developing than I am about wins this year.  If we see no changes by this time next year, then I'll be on board with you, I'm just not there yet. 

 

Cheers Avi!!

[Avisan]

57 minutes ago, Maybe Someday said:

 

That would be me...Thurman's been doing it for me so I didn't feel the need to lol.  He and I are more on the same page regarding the topic at hand so I figured I'd let him take the reigns...especially after it seemed to go from a discussion to an argument.  We all have differences in opinion but arguing with someone on a chat board isn't my style.  I think it's time for us all to just agree to disagree.  You and many others obviously don't like McD or Beane and want them gone less than halfway into year #2.  That's your right to feel that way.  I see that as being counterproductive and would be utterly shocked if it actually happened.  I think there's a better chance of me winning the Mega Millions tonight than McD or Beane getting fired this year. 

 

My final thoughts on the subject...

 

We've had regime after regime think that they could come in, add a few pieces and win now but it's never worked.  I don't recall hearing any of those prior regimes speak of building an organization (not just the team) from the foundation up with the goal of building a perennial winner.  That is what makes McBeane different to me.  They didn't come in saying they could win now, they said the opposite.  They set the expectation that they wanted to build the franchise into one that truly is in the playoff discussion year after year...by more than just a few talking heads here and there on TV.  Some like to point out how it's because we've only hired bad coaches.  My question to them is what caliber of coach do you think we'll be able to hire if our 3rd straight coach only lasts 2 years?  That would only add to the perception that I believe exists around the league that we're an unstable, joke of a franchise.  IMO, we'd have no shot to get the next offensive mastermind unless they absolutely love Allen more than any other QB on a team with a HC opening, which is doubtful.  Even if we do, it's not like we'll suddenly be good  I also don't understand how so many can already conclude with such certainty that McBeane cannot build an offense just because it hasn't happened yet. 

 

So I'm not having patience just to have patience like many of us have done in the past.  I'm having patience because I like that we finally have a regime that is not doing the same old thing as all the others have in the past.  I think they deserve a chance to continue moving forward based on the 9 wins last year and what appears to be 2 solid drafts.  This season sucks so far but I expected it to from the start, maybe not quite to this degree but we're playing so many young players that are still learning that it's not a total shock to me.  I'm more worried about the young guys getting experience and developing than I am about wins this year.  If we see no changes by this time next year, then I'll be on board with you, I'm just not there yet. 

 

Cheers Avi!!

Cheers bud, thanks for chiming in.

 

I think Marrone was the best HC we've had in a while.  I think Hackett was still taking his lumps, and Saint Doug is a colossal a-hole on a personal level, but he was a really solid overall coach and I think his Jags performance bears that out.  Not great, but solid.  I wish he'd stuck around.

 

Rex was a tire fire, and I think the Ryan Bros are the perfect example of how a league can pass someone by.  Neither one of them are particularly detail-oriented, and you can't get away with that in the modern NFL.  Losing Schwartz in the process was some unfortunate salt in the wound.  The struggle to find a HC that can manage both sides of the ball has been maddening.

 

While I certainly don't think the rebuild was necessary for the reasons I've outlined, the idea of a unified HC and FO forming a complete team in their image is certainly appealing due to our 21st century futility. I'm skeptical of this rebuild in part due to the inexperience of its executors and mainly because of the massive talent disparity between the old crew and the new crew on offense.  We need two or three new starting lineman, a completely new WR corps (maybe Zay can continue to find a role?), a new TE, and our QB is a major question mark.  It's a rough look moving forward, and in the time it takes to rebuild it we'll likely lose K. Williams, J. Hughes, and a few other pieces.  I'm just really disappointed, because even if everything goes perfect we're still 2+ seasons off from being competitive.  Even moves like ditching Kerley bug me because he's forged a successful career on being unimpressive but reliable.  I really hope you're right and they pull this off, and for now we'll just have to wait and see.

 

TL;DR While I like the idea of a minor rebuild, the execution concerns me.

[billsfan89]

On 10/22/2018 at 1:02 PM, Avisan said:

Is this a joke?????

 

Our TEs were what, Scott Chandler?  Starting WRs were Donald Jones and David Nelson.  Stevie meshed well with Fitz but washed out of the league shortly after he left.  Our offensive line consisted of stalwarts like Demetress Bell and Geoff Handgartner and whatever bums we skimmed off of a practice squad to play guard any given week.  Wood ended up being a solid center once he moved over but we had NO offensive talent.

 

Pretty much ever single skill player we had under Chan is no longer in this league.

 

To be fair the O-line did have Eric Wood and Andy Levitre two very good interior players they also had Urbik who was pretty good for a hot minute. Stevie only faded because he got hurt the last year he was here even David Nelson was playing well until he got hurt. I think the O-line was a bit better although the skill positions were mostly comparable. The one major difference in the 2011 offense to now is the QB play. Fitz got off to a super hot start and even subpar Fitz is an upgrade over what the team has now (A super raw rookie and outright garbage.) 

 

That being said I am not sure how bad the scheme is vs. how bad the QB play and supporting talent it honestly. I would venture to say it is all bad.

[Avisan]

1 hour ago, billsfan89 said:

 

To be fair the O-line did have Eric Wood and Andy Levitre two very good interior players they also had Urbik who was pretty good for a hot minute. Stevie only faded because he got hurt the last year he was here even David Nelson was playing well until he got hurt. I think the O-line was a bit better although the skill positions were mostly comparable. The one major difference in the 2011 offense to now is the QB play. Fitz got off to a super hot start and even subpar Fitz is an upgrade over what the team has now (A super raw rookie and outright garbage.) 

 

That being said I am not sure how bad the scheme is vs. how bad the QB play and supporting talent it honestly. I would venture to say it is all bad.

The O-line was probably about 60% complete with Fitz, and he marked a lot of its deficiencies via the speed with which he got rid of the ball.  Even during FJ's monster season he was only averaging like 1.5 yards before contact and had a stupid high YAC average.  Dude was unstoppable before he got hurt that season, that season's implosion was extra tough to watch.

 

Nelson's big thing was his sure hands, he got a case of the dropsies even before the injury and the injury mostly just cemented things.  The Goon Squad years were certainly entertaining, though, I'd take that Chan Gailey offense in a heartbeat over the current iteration.  Here's to hoping Josh Allen manages to put it together somehow.

[billsfan89]

2 minutes ago, Avisan said:

The O-line was probably about 60% complete with Fitz, and he marked a lot of its deficiencies via the speed with which he got rid of the ball.  Even during FJ's monster season he was only averaging like 1.5 yards before contact and had a stupid high YAC average.  Dude was unstoppable before he got hurt that season, that season's implosion was extra tough to watch.

 

Nelson's big thing was his sure hands, he got a case of the dropsies even before the injury and the injury mostly just cemented things.  The Goon Squad years were certainly entertaining, though, I'd take that Chan Gailey offense in a heartbeat over the current iteration.  Here's to hoping Josh Allen manages to put it together somehow.

 

Chan's offense did the best it could masking the general deficiencies of the players and maximizing what the players could do well. The scheme was masterful in building the calls and play design around the talent. With the Jets in 2015 Chan had a good degree of success (However the Jets had a much higher level of talent in 2015 than the Bills did in 2011, Brandon Marshall and Eric Decker were a good WR 1 and WR 2 combo and their offensive line was nasty and Ivory was a solid running back) but in 2016 when the talent level regressed the offense was among the worst in the league. So its not like everytime Chan was able to take crap and make it serviceable even in 2010 with the Bills that offense was hot garbage.