John Wawrow on the QB situation

[BuffaloHokie13]

1 minute ago, john wawrow said:

keep in mind, the Pegulas have now gone through that with the Sabres, staying the course after watching a team thoroughly under-achieve last year and seeing encouraging returns this year.

now, this Bills team this year isn't exactly under-achieving entirely, because this was always going to be a transitional year, and we're seeing the lumps result from it. that said, a case can be made that the offense is not playing up to even modest expectations.

 

this leads to the upcoming offseason and seeing what happens now that the BIlls are fully in a position to start adding talent.

can't judge Beane and/or McDermott entirely until that happens.

 

jw

I think the production is understandable, to an extent, since they're on QB#3 and have signed QBs #4 & #5 (:lol:) in Barkley and Pryor. The biggest issue for me is that QB#3 is the guy they thought could be QB#1 for 4-6 games. That's some seriously terrible evaluation skills.

[Delete This Account]

Just now, BigBuff423 said:

 

To the bold statement, I completely agree. IMO, their fortunes with the Bills rise and fall based on 2019. 

 

Tim Murray failed in his rebuild and it cost him.

Botterill is making far more headway, and so is Housley, who has gone from being on the hotseat to showing he is capable of learning from last season, and deserving a longer leash.

 

jw

 

[K-Apps]

25 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

 

Mr. Wawrow, I will explain in my opinion why they mishandled the situation. I get Tyrod’s contract was a big reason why he was traded away, but if the plan was to let Allen and learn this season than they needed to go after a better option than AJ McCarron. I know Teddy Bridgewater’s reps did not release his medicals, but I felt he was the best option available besides McCown and perhaps Bradford. I watched McCarron in 2015 with a talented Bengals roster and largely unimpressed especially in that playoff game vs Pittsburgh. His very average performance overshadowed by Burfict being Burfict, but I felt he cost them that game more than Burfict. To me the McCarron singled they hoped he would be a solid stopgap this season without any proof he would legitimately do it. Hopefully, this off-season they take having a good back-up QB with more importance. 

[dave mcbride]

34 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

John:

I appreciate the good info (esp re Bridgewater); thanks. That said, they are on the road to having the worst offense in the history of DVOA measurements, which begins in 1986 (32 years ago). How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad, and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. Teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

Edited November 5, 2018 by dave mcbride

[Reed83HOF]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

John:

They are on the road to having the worst offense in the past 32 years measured by DVOA. How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad. and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

 

This in a year where they drafted a rookie QB in round 1 who was the rawest of all and needed time to learn. Couple this with the choice for a QB coach who hasn't coached QBs (in college none the less) since Bruce was the #1 pick of the draft. 

[Delete This Account]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

John:

They are on the road to having the worst offense in the past 32 years measured by DVOA. How could one not conclude that they bungled the QB position? They could have kept Taylor and had a qb cap hit totaling $20.3 million, which is not bad. and as you know cap money can always be moved around creatively. Sure, teams with good young qbs on rookie contracts have far lower hits, but the Bills aren't one of those teams at present. teams with any decent vet are above that number (e.g. and randomly, the Redskins at $22 million), and while $16 million is too much for a solid backup (which is what Taylor is), the alternative is turning out to be pretty awful. Yeah, they acknowledged that they messed up, and I like that they did that. But they didn't have to be historic-level bad on offense: 32nd in points scored, 31st in turnovers given up, 32nd in collective passer rating, 32nd in net passing yards per attempt, 31st in INTs thrown, 32nd in points per drive, 31st in yards per play, 31st in yards, and a staggering -41 in passer rating differential vs. their opponent.

 

this is my only time I'll respond to this:

Tyrod was not interested in redoing his deal. his entire salary was on the books for this year. it was immovable.

they gained a valuable draft pick.

and, in the end, exactly how much better of a record would the Bills have with Taylor running this offense?

 

let's be real. they weren't making the playoffs with Aaron Rodgers behind center.

 

jw

I'm leaving this discussion, as I've said my piece.

 

jw

[K-9]

13 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

Question regarding Darby fitting the defense:

 

Isn't it fairly easy for a man to man cover corner to transition to a zone than the other way around?

Not necessarily, there isn’t a hard and fast rule. Zone coverage ability does require a stronger conceptual understanding of passing schemes and how OCs utilize various personnel to attack a defense. Discipline in drop angles and depths is important. Also, taller, longer players are preferable to many coaches who use zone coverages predominantly. Ideally, a CB would be great at both man and zone coverage, but that’s more rare than we might think.

[dave mcbride]

3 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

this is my only time I'll respond to this:

Tyrod was not interested in redoing his deal. his entire salary was on the books for this year. it was immovable.

they gained a valuable draft pick.

and, in the end, exactly how much better of a record would the Bills have with Taylor running this offense?

 

let's be real. they weren't making the playoffs with Aaron Rodgers behind center.

 

jw

I'm leaving this discussion, as I've said my piece.

 

jw

That's fine, and I get that. But there's a big difference between "not making the playoffs" and worst offense in league history. The scenario I presented assumed that he wouldn't restructure his one-year-and-one-year-only $16 million cap hit.

Edited November 5, 2018 by dave mcbride

[jkirchofer]

McDermott and Beane mishandled the quarterback situation by not keeping a veteran quarterback on the roster. They mishandled it by not having an actual QB coach on the staff. Most of all, McDermott mishandled the quarterback situation by valuing culture over talent.

[Peter]

21 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

me, too, but it appears some were confused by it.

perhaps, i should have typed slower.

 

?

 

jw

 

Did it make sense to you to trade AJ (for a 5th round pick) when he was the only other guy who knew the offense?

 

Did it make sense to surround the QB (any of them) with inferior talent?

 

Did it make sense to have someone other than an experienced QB coach be the QB coach for our very raw rookie QB?

 

Wouldn't have been wise to make sure that our very, very raw rookie QB had a good offensive line. 

 

Instead, McBeane made it worse by, for example, trading Cordy.

 

While I agree that some in the Buffalo media can be lazy, it would be tough to argue that the QB situation was managed like a well oiled machine.

 

P.S. The above is without even mentioning (until now) that McCoach outsmarted himself by trading the pick that could have been used to select Mahomes (which also would have saved us from giving up all of the assets we gave up to select a guy who was not even selected for first team Mountain West.

Edited November 5, 2018 by Peter

[GG]

22 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

me, too, but it appears some were confused by it.

perhaps, i should have typed slower.

 

?

 

jw

A few caps also help once in a while

2 minutes ago, Peter said:

 

Did it make sense to you to trade AJ (for a 5th round pick) when he was the only other guy who knew the offense?

 

Did it make sense to surround the QB (any of them) with inferior talent?

 

Did it make sense to have someone other than an experienced QB coach be the QB coach for our very raw rookie QB?

 

Wouldn't have been wise to make sure that our very, very raw rookie QB had a good offensive line. 

 

Instead, McBeane made it worse by, for example, trading Cordy.

 

While I agree that some in the Buffalo media can be lazy, it would be tough to argue that the QB situation was managed like a well oiled machine.

 

P.S. The above is without even mentioning (until now) that McCoach outsmarted himself by trading the pick that could have been used to select Mahomes (which also would have saved us from giving up all of the assets we gave up to select a guy who was not even selected for first team Mountain West.

Again, missing the point of the tweetstorm.  

 

jw wasn't defending the process. 

[Peter]

1 minute ago, GG said:

A few caps also help once in a while

Again, missing the point of the tweetstorm.  

 

jw wasn't defending the process. 

 

Then I missed the point because I thought that he was based on what others have said.

 

Nevertheless, my thoughts on the "process" remain the same.  I am glad that JW is not defending it.

[GG]

Just now, Peter said:

 

Then I missed the point because I thought that he was based on what others have said.

 

Nevertheless, my thoughts on the "process" remain the same.  I am glad that JW is not defending it.

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

[Peter]

Just now, GG said:

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

 

Thanks for letting me know.

[Mr. WEO]

40 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

Late to this party, but let's clear up some things.

If several members of the media are going to follow this lazy and tired narrative in accusing the Bills if completely mishandling the QB situation, then perhaps they should at least ask a question or two to at least be fair. There was one asked on Tuesday, which is what sparked my thread.

 

And rather than simply following the tired narrative, someone needs to explain to me how else the quarterback situation needed to be handled.

 

One valid point made through the discussion on Twitter was the Bills needed to bring in another quarterback immediately after trading McCarron. Beane has acknowledged that as being a mistake.

Otherwise, I've yet to hear any valid rundown on how the quarterback situation has played out since March.

 

And no, don't respond to me about what about Tyrod?

That ship sailed because Tyrod refused to restructure his contract; the Bills would be handcuffed under the cap with it; and they got a valuable draft pick out of it that allowed them more room to trade up on draft day.

 

WEO, of course, is trying too hard to over-think things and reading far too much into this as usual.

I'm hardly surprised.

 

jw

 

Hardly need to  overthink this one.

 

It's really disingenuous to criticize your colleagues for not offering McD prompts in a news conference as to why he didn't go after this guy or that.  All they should have to ask, as I said, is how he, McD, came to the decisions that led to a backup roster of Peterman (was his Week 1 starter!), Anderson, and now Barkley.  "Hey, what else was I supposed to do"...is not a strong reply.

 

Everyone and his mother, on this site and likely others similar, has authored thousands of suggestions, whynots and howabouts regarding the QBs they didn't go for or get.  What else is there to ask of the posters here?  McD knows all of the options.  Does the press really have to help him explain his decisions? 

 

You seem to be answering the questions for him, such as Keenum, TT, etc.  It's an odd position for an objective reporter to take, let alone chastise colleagues over. 

[LSHMEAB]

43 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

McDermott's philosophy is CBs, for the most part, are interchangeable. That was proven out last year when two guys, including Gaines, filled in for Darby's loss.

There was also a belief, from what I remember, that Darby didn't exactly fit the defense.

 

jw

 

 

If his overarching philosophy is that CB's are interchangeable, why in the world would his first draft pick be a CB?

 

That makes no sense.

[dave mcbride]

2 minutes ago, GG said:

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

[JohnC]

16 minutes ago, john wawrow said:

 

 

keep in mind, the Pegulas have now gone through that with the Sabres, staying the course after watching a team thoroughly under-achieve last year and seeing encouraging returns this year.

now, this Bills team this year isn't exactly under-achieving entirely, because this was always going to be a transitional year, and we're seeing the lumps result from it. that said, a case can be made that the offense is not playing up to even modest expectations.

 

this leads to the upcoming offseason and seeing what happens now that the BIlls are fully in a position to start adding talent.

can't judge Beane and/or McDermott entirely until that happens.

 

jw

This regime made the decision (starting with the McDermott hire) to rebuild the roster and restructure the cap. They shed some of their best players such as Watkins and a laggard Dareus knowing that in the short run that it was going to set the team back. They deliberately were eschewing the Whaley incremental approach toward adding players and contracts. The NFL analysts certainly weren't surprised that this team was going to slide back because there was almost a unanimity in their prognostications that the Bills were going to be bad. That opinion was predictable when the organization decided to absorbed the cap hits in one year instead of stretching it out over the next few years. 

 

Beane has acknowledged a mistake in not securing Derek Anderson sooner after the McCarron trade. But in the grand scheme of things does it really matter who was going to start with those caliber of qbs and with the already depleted roster. The Bills were going to struggle no matter what. The upside is that although Josh Allen was forced to start sooner than what the staff really wanted it probably will work out better in accelerating his development. 

 

I'm very confident that the Pegulas' were not only aware of McDermott's rebuild strategy when they hired him. In fact that was why he was hired. So although the play on the field has been excruciatingly ugly it shouldn't come as a surprise to them. As you noted what happens this offseason with respect to the utilization of the cap and how well they work the draft will determine the standing of McDermontt and Beane. 

 

Again, as you noted Terry Pegula has witnessed that a smartly run offseason in hockey can result in a major improvement in the team. So I'm sure that he is counting on the same leap forward after this offseason. When one decides to take on a major rebuild there is going to be some unavoidable tough times. The owner wasn't satisfied with the Whaley incremental approach so he hired someone who had a more comprehensive plan to follow. This year is about Josh Allen and getting ready for the offseason. 

 

 

[GG]

3 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

 

You are addressing the latter portion of the tweets, after jw got sucked into the discussion of what options were available.  Even on that, he threw a bone out.

 

The main crux of the point, and counter to the polite Canadian nature, was jw taking a rightful shot at the whiny reporters who don't have the courage to ask the hard questions when they are in the prime position to ask the hard questions.  

 

If you have a pen or a microphone and you slam the organization for their management of the team, you should have enough of a backbone to ask those questions directly. 

[nedboy7]

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

This regime made the decision (starting with the McDermott hire) to rebuild the roster and restructure the cap. They shed some of their best players such as Watkins and a laggard Dareus knowing that in the short run that it was going to set the team back. They deliberately were eschewing the Whaley incremental approach toward adding players and contracts. The NFL analysts certainly weren't surprised that this team was going to slide back because there was almost a unanimity in their prognostications that the Bills were going to be bad. That opinion was predictable when the organization decided to absorbed the cap hits in one year instead of stretching it out over the next few years. 

 

Beane has acknowledged a mistake in not securing Derek Anderson sooner after the McCarron trade. But in the grand scheme of things does it really matter who was going to start with those caliber of qbs and with the already depleted roster. The Bills were going to struggle no matter what. The upside is that although Josh Allen was forced to start sooner than what the staff really wanted it probably will work out better in accelerating his development. 

 

I'm very confident that the Pegulas' were not only aware of McDermott's rebuild strategy when they hired him. In fact that was why he was hired. So although the play on the field has been excruciatingly ugly it shouldn't come as a surprise to them. As you noted what happens this offseason with respect to the utilization of the cap and how well they work the draft will determine the standing of McDermontt and Beane. 

 

Again, as you noted Terry Pegula has witnessed that a smartly run offseason in hockey can result in a major improvement in the team. So I'm sure that he is counting on the same leap forward after this offseason. When one decides to take on a major rebuild there is going to be some unavoidable tough times. The owner wasn't satisfied with the Whaley incremental approach so he hired someone who had a more comprehensive plan to follow. This year is about Josh Allen and getting ready for the offseason. 

 

 

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

[JohnC]

7 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

Taylor was as much in the plans of this regime as he is now in the plans for Cleveland. It doesn't matter where TT plays he is not a franchise qb and never will be. That is now a dead issue for us and for Cleveland. 

2 minutes ago, nedboy7 said:

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

If you want to give me a summary of the link I will respond. I'm not reading that long link. 

[nedboy7]

3 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Taylor was as much in the plans of this regime as he is now in the plans for Cleveland. It doesn't matter where TT plays he is not a franchise qb and never will be. That is now a dead issue for us and for Cleveland. 

If you want to give me a summary of the link I will respond. I'm not reading that long link. 

 

Cant summarize a short article. Is that considered long now?  It talks bout the BS behind the word rebuild. 

[dave mcbride]

5 minutes ago, GG said:

 

You are addressing the latter portion of the tweets, after jw got sucked into the discussion of what options were available.  Even on that, he threw a bone out.

 

The main crux of the point, and counter to the polite Canadian nature, was jw taking a rightful shot at the whiny reporters who don't have the courage to ask the hard questions when they are in the prime position to ask the hard questions.  

 

If you have a pen or a microphone and you slam the organization for their management of the team, you should have enough of a backbone to ask those questions directly. 

That's a fair point. I'm not at those press conferences, so I have no idea.

[Búfalo Blanco]

Wawrow brings up great points concerning the choices this offseason... Keenum, $36 million, $25 million guaranteed over 2 years. He’s really tearing it up for that, isn’t he..? I’d have been fine keeping Tyrod one more year.. But at what? 16-18 million, most if not totally guaranteed..? He also brought a 3rd which then helped the move up to get Allen, correct? Bridgewater was not allowing physicals after his major injury? Kaepernick? I mean, besides the baggage he opted out of his contract in SF and turned down Denver? And who the hell says he’d have chosen Buffalo after those two gigs? Who else...? Matt Moore? Trade for Eli..? It takes 2 to tango and who knows what the trade price would be with other front offices for various QBs. The armchair GMs think they’ve got this stuff figured out easily... Despite their massive egos, they don’t.

[dave mcbride]

4 minutes ago, JohnC said:

Taylor was as much in the plans of this regime as he is now in the plans for Cleveland. It doesn't matter where TT plays he is not a franchise qb and never will be. That is now a dead issue for us and for Cleveland. 

If you want to give me a summary of the link I will respond. I'm not reading that long link. 

I think it's pretty clear by now that a competent backup is a very valuable asset in the NFL, especially if you're going with a raw rookie qb from a small-time program and with an injury history. It's not about the "being the man" going forward with regard to Taylor, which was never the issue. It's about not fielding the worst offense in modern NFL history. It astounds me that some people haven't woken up to how bad it all is and instead talk about cap numbers and "the future." 

[Reed83HOF]

11 minutes ago, Búfalo Blanco said:

Wawrow brings up great points concerning the choices this offseason... Keenum, $36 million, $25 million guaranteed over 2 years. He’s really tearing it up for that, isn’t he..? I’d have been fine keeping Tyrod one more year.. But at what? 16-18 million, most if not totally guaranteed..? He also brought a 3rd which then helped the move up to get Allen, correct? Bridgewater was not allowing physicals after his major injury? Kaepernick? I mean, besides the baggage he opted out of his contract in SF and turned down Denver? And who the hell says he’d have chosen Buffalo after those two gigs? Who else...? Matt Moore? Trade for Eli..? It takes 2 to tango and who knows what the trade price would be with other front offices for various QBs. The armchair GMs think they’ve got this stuff figured out easily... Despite their massive egos, they don’t.

 

Fitz

1- year $3.3 million with the Bucs signed on March 10 2018

[Coach Tuesday]

36 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I just read the thread (including his responses) and while I woudn't say John is outright "defending" the process, he does come across to me at least as someone who, by asking repeatedly for people to (I'm paraphrasing) "tell me what YOU would do," is sorta-kinda defending the process. He dismisses out of hand the idea of keeping Taylor, which was not an impossibility even if they didn't restructure (caps can ALWAYS be manipulated). Is his position defensible? Yes -- we did get a solid pick for Taylor and we avoided a $16 million cap hit. We also didn't know that McCarron would wash out, and he seemed like a credible backup on signing. But we also have the worst offense in modern league history at present, and it didn't have to be that way. The buck should stop with management when things get this bad. JW avoids that issue, which to me is the heart of the matter. He seems to think it was an impossible situation (apologies if I'm misreading), but I just differ with him on that. A backup who doesn't turn the ball over much and makes the running game look better (as we're all realizing now) is a moderately valuable asset who can prevent you from losing. Sorry to harp on a point. I'm a fan of JW's work and just mildly disagree with him on this issue.  
 

 

Yes.  Thank you.

[BringBackOrton]

On 11/1/2018 at 7:35 PM, BringBackOrton said:

I think Wawrow is saying the press isn't giving the Bills the chance to defend their decision making process by refusing to actually ask them the question.

 

It's not so much a commentary on the story, but the press' reaction.

 

54 minutes ago, GG said:

That's why this thread is a hilarious hijack.  Par for the tsw course.  

I tried so hard.

[Búfalo Blanco]

27 minutes ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

Fitz

1- year $3.3 million with the Bucs signed on March 10 2018

Really? You think Fitz would want to come back to Buffalo after how he was treated here? What makes you think he’d have signed? And the contract would have been higher if he’d been brought back as the starter. 

[K-9]

On 11/2/2018 at 1:41 PM, Gugny said:

 

"So far this season, the Bills’ three quarterbacks have combined to throw just three touchdown passes and 13 interceptions. The season is half over, so the Bills are on pace to finish with six touchdown passes and 26 interceptions. That is simply, unbelievably, awful."

 

I like to think of it as the season is half begun.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

I think it's pretty clear by now that a competent backup is a very valuable asset in the NFL, especially if you're going with a raw rookie qb from a small-time program and with an injury history. It's not about the "being the man" going forward with regard to Taylor, which was never the issue. It's about not fielding the worst offense in modern NFL history. It astounds me that some people haven't woken up to how bad it all is and instead talk about cap numbers and "the future." 

I don't need you to tell me how bad the offense. It's obvious to all. Taylor was not in the plans for this regime as a starter or backup. He is a dead issue. So I don't know what the point is in bringing him in this discussion. Beane has been clear that he made a misjudgment in not bringing in Derek Anderson sooner after the trade of McCarron. But in the grand scheme of things whether we are talking about Peterman, McCarron or Anderson or whoever mediocre qb it really doesn't matter. Josh Allen and how he develops is the consequential issue and the rest of the action around the qb position is unadulterated BS. 

 

I submit that not having a credible backup on hand when we should have will actually in the long run work out better for this franchise because it gave the organization an opportunity to play him. Of course he is going to struggle but for next year his earlier than expected playing time will I believe enhance more than detract from his development. 

 

You and others are trying to look back and come up with reasons why this season has been such a failure. What you don't want to admit is that what is playing out (to a major extent) was inevitable. I agree with the tough decision to absorb the cap hit in one year. It certainly had painful consequences related to the talent on the roster for this year. But next year, and the year after, this team is in a good position to add more talent sooner rather than later. 

 

If you want to strive for mediocrity then support continuing on with the incremental approach that has been done here for a long time. I'm aware that it is painful to digest but I would rather take the bad medicine in one gulp than stretch it out. If you can't handle this gruesome process for the short term then I recommend that you take a break and wait for the better times. 

 

 

1 hour ago, nedboy7 said:

 

Cant summarize a short article. Is that considered long now?  It talks bout the BS behind the word rebuild. 

I'm simply not interested in reading that article. 

 

Whether you want to admit it the Bills are rebuilding. That's the reality. 

 

 

Edited November 5, 2018 by JohnC

[dave mcbride]

28 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't need you to tell me how bad the offense. It's obvious to all. Taylor was not in the plans for this regime as a starter or backup. He is a dead issue. So I don't know what the point is in bringing him in this discussion. Beane has been clear that he made a misjudgment in not bringing in Derek Anderson sooner after the trade of McCarron. But in the grand scheme of things whether we are talking about Peterman, McCarron or Anderson or whoever mediocre qb it really doesn't matter. Josh Allen and how he develops is the consequential issue and the rest of the action around the qb position is unadulterated BS. 

 

I submit that not having a credible backup on hand when we should have will actually in the long run work out better for this franchise because it gave the organization an opportunity to play him. Of course he is going to struggle but for next year his earlier than expected playing time will I believe enhance more than detract from his development. 

 

You and others are trying to look back and come up with reasons why this season has been such a failure. What you don't want to admit is that what is playing out (to a major extent) was inevitable. I agree with the tough decision to absorb the cap hit in one year. It certainly had painful consequences related to the talent on the roster for this year. But next year, and the year after, this team is in a good position to add more talent sooner rather than later. 

 

If you want to strive for mediocrity then support continuing on with the incremental approach that has been done here for a long time. I'm aware that it is painful to digest but I would rather take the bad medicine in one gulp than stretch it out. If you can't handle this gruesome process for the short term then I recommend that you take a break and wait for the better times. 

 

 

 

I believe -- and have long believed -- that they should have kept Taylor as an insurance policy. The fact that they believed otherwise only tells me that they were wrong, not that my thinking is irrelevant. Based on recent track, Taylor is a much better player than Derek Anderson too. I also believe that bottoming out to the deepest abyssal level is not a recipe for success going forward. As I've said elsewhere, bad often stays bad if it gets bad enough. And then at a certain point, it's on to new management.  And -- no offense -- I'm going to ignore your advice. I'm in for the long haul no matter what happens. 

Edited November 5, 2018 by dave mcbride

[John from Riverside]

1 hour ago, Reed83HOF said:

 

Fitz

1- year $3.3 million with the Bucs signed on March 10 2018

Now THAT ends up looking like a good investment!

[Reed83HOF]

4 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Now THAT ends up looking like a good investment!

A little bit huh? He would have been perfect for a rookie QB, knew how to make the reads, change he plays etc - he just didn't have the arm...I am sure he would have no problem grooming rookie either. 

[BADOLBILZ]

18 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I believe -- and have long believed -- that they should have kept Taylor as an insurance policy. The fact that they believed otherwise only tells me that they were wrong, not that my thinking is irrelevant. Based on recent track, Taylor is a much better player than Derek Anderson too. I also believe that bottoming out to the deepest abyssal level is not a recipe for success going forward. As I've said elsewhere, bad often stays bad if it gets bad enough. And then at a certain point, it's on to new management.  And -- no offense -- I'm going to ignore your advice. I'm in for the long haul no matter what happens. 

 

Do people forget that we had a 4-12 tank team to begin this decade in 2010?   Then 6-10 teams in 2011 and 2012?

 

Draft pick positioning has not been why they haven't ascended into the elite.

 

Poor decisions hiring coaches and at the QB position are why they've wallowed in mediocrity...........and those don't just stop happening because you get REALLY bad.

 

 

[nedboy7]

49 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't need you to tell me how bad the offense. It's obvious to all. Taylor was not in the plans for this regime as a starter or backup. He is a dead issue. So I don't know what the point is in bringing him in this discussion. Beane has been clear that he made a misjudgment in not bringing in Derek Anderson sooner after the trade of McCarron. But in the grand scheme of things whether we are talking about Peterman, McCarron or Anderson or whoever mediocre qb it really doesn't matter. Josh Allen and how he develops is the consequential issue and the rest of the action around the qb position is unadulterated BS. 

 

I submit that not having a credible backup on hand when we should have will actually in the long run work out better for this franchise because it gave the organization an opportunity to play him. Of course he is going to struggle but for next year his earlier than expected playing time will I believe enhance more than detract from his development. 

 

You and others are trying to look back and come up with reasons why this season has been such a failure. What you don't want to admit is that what is playing out (to a major extent) was inevitable. I agree with the tough decision to absorb the cap hit in one year. It certainly had painful consequences related to the talent on the roster for this year. But next year, and the year after, this team is in a good position to add more talent sooner rather than later. 

 

If you want to strive for mediocrity then support continuing on with the incremental approach that has been done here for a long time. I'm aware that it is painful to digest but I would rather take the bad medicine in one gulp than stretch it out. If you can't handle this gruesome process for the short term then I recommend that you take a break and wait for the better times. 

 

 

I'm simply not interested in reading that article. 

 

Whether you want to admit it the Bills are rebuilding. That's the reality. 

 

 

 

Here is an interesting article about how the concept of rebuilding is BS 

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

[John from Riverside]

51 minutes ago, JohnC said:

I don't need you to tell me how bad the offense. It's obvious to all. Taylor was not in the plans for this regime as a starter or backup. He is a dead issue. So I don't know what the point is in bringing him in this discussion. Beane has been clear that he made a misjudgment in not bringing in Derek Anderson sooner after the trade of McCarron. But in the grand scheme of things whether we are talking about Peterman, McCarron or Anderson or whoever mediocre qb it really doesn't matter. Josh Allen and how he develops is the consequential issue and the rest of the action around the qb position is unadulterated BS. 

 

I submit that not having a credible backup on hand when we should have will actually in the long run work out better for this franchise because it gave the organization an opportunity to play him. Of course he is going to struggle but for next year his earlier than expected playing time will I believe enhance more than detract from his development. 

 

You and others are trying to look back and come up with reasons why this season has been such a failure. What you don't want to admit is that what is playing out (to a major extent) was inevitable. I agree with the tough decision to absorb the cap hit in one year. It certainly had painful consequences related to the talent on the roster for this year. But next year, and the year after, this team is in a good position to add more talent sooner rather than later. 

 

If you want to strive for mediocrity then support continuing on with the incremental approach that has been done here for a long time. I'm aware that it is painful to digest but I would rather take the bad medicine in one gulp than stretch it out. If you can't handle this gruesome process for the short term then I recommend that you take a break and wait for the better times. 

 

 

I'm simply not interested in reading that article. 

 

Whether you want to admit it the Bills are rebuilding. That's the reality. 

 

 

Shoop on WGR just said the bills are not rebiulding......so it must be so

[nedboy7]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

Shoop on WGR just said the bills are not rebiulding......so it must be so

 

Here is a different opinion. 

 

https://www.fieldgulls.com/2018/6/1/17415246/what-is-an-nfl-rebuild-anyway-seahawks-browns-cardinals-astros

Edited November 5, 2018 by nedboy7

[JohnC]

Just now, John from Riverside said:

Shoop on WGR just said the bills are not rebiulding......so it must be so

Shoop admits that he doesn't even like football. I'm ever more confident in my position. 

31 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I believe -- and have long believed -- that they should have kept Taylor as an insurance policy. The fact that they believed otherwise only tells me that they were wrong, not that my thinking is irrelevant. Based on recent track, Taylor is a much better player than Derek Anderson too. I also believe that bottoming out to the deepest abyssal level is not a recipe for success going forward. As I've said elsewhere, bad often stays bad if it gets bad enough. And then at a certain point, it's on to new management.  And -- no offense -- I'm going to ignore your advice. I'm in for the long haul no matter what happens. 

The Bills moved on from TT just as the Brown moved on from him. The only difference is that they came to a quicker decision. It's a dead issue. 

[Bill from NYC]

On ‎11‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 6:02 PM, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Do people forget that we had a 4-12 tank team to begin this decade in 2010?   Then 6-10 teams in 2011 and 2012?

 

Draft pick positioning has not been why they haven't ascended into the elite.

 

Poor decisions hiring coaches and at the QB position are why they've wallowed in mediocrity...........and those don't just stop happening because you get REALLY bad.

 

 

I know that they are heavily tied into the qb position, but I want to toss piss poor drafts into the equation. For decades they have been passing on good to even great players at positions of need and drafting secondary and running backs, many of whom were too small and/or injured.