Does it seem like the Bills are adding FA more selectively and with more purpose this year as opposed to previous years?

[Doc]

58 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Actually they are being far less selective. Beane is making volume moves and hoping he hits a few. That is not a criticism. Its a perfectly fine strategy and it is what Belichick did in his first couple of years with Patriots.

Beane has added 5 OL only one of which was a full time starter last year, Morse. The rest are journeymen that we have to hope are better than Miller, Mills, and Teller while improving the overall depth of talent. I'm more worried about RT than any other spot. I really don't think they have improved over Mills so far, but I also think they will draft OT relatively high in the draft.

The OL success may be mostly determined by Morse though. Did he overpay? Depends on how you frame the question. Beane likely paid market value but I doubt even this board thinks Morse is the #1 center in the league as he is now being paid. If i'm Beane I keep Bodine. He was adequate and they have the cap room to keep him.

As for WR. He added speed and slot guys but they still don't have a true #1. I'm perfectly fine with that. I think both strategies can work. A dominant #1 like AB, AJ, or Julio works just as effectively as a group with multiple threats. I can't wait to see Foster, Brown, and Beasely line up in a bunch formation. Add a star TE and the group can be much better than last year.

 

Long was a full-time starter last year and has been one for all but his rookie year.  Both he and Morse represent significant upgrades over what was here last year and Dawkins has proven he can play at a high level when motivated and not next to a scrub.  I knew nothing about Nsekhe but after watching his play and reading more about him after they signed him, he should prove to be a significant upgrade as well.  Again the only real concern for me is the other OG spot, but I think they'll find a good player to fill that as well, either from someone already on the team (Teller, Boettger), signed (Feliciano), about to be signed (Spain, a post-draft cut) or a draftee.

[ColoradoBills]

11 minutes ago, Logic said:

I agree. Except I think the bolded leads to some people going overboard on the pessimistic outlooks. Why wouldn't they? The Bills have been so bad for so long that many Bills fans are conditioned to expect the worse, even when there are signs that optimism may be warranted.

I believe that what we're looking at now is the beginning of the 3rd year of a complete teardown and rebuild. Year 1 they jettisoned bad contracts and players and began to build a defense. Year 2 they identified and selected a quarterback and continued to bolster the defense (it finished 2nd in the league). Year 3 is all about building around Allen and making sure he's the franchise QB they think he is. In years 4 and 5, we'll start to see contract extensions for homegrown stars. I also think we'll start to see bigger free agent contracts handed out, being that they are projected to be in the top 5 in cap space again NEXT offseason. 

So yeah, we're still toward the beginning end of a complete rebuild. As such, big dollars have yet to really be committed across the roster. Right now, the team hasn't proven anything and has to be considered below average at worst, average at best. Anything above that, they must prove on the field. But as for the cap dollars the Bills are spending? They look exactly like they SHOULD look for a team in this stage of a rebuild. As always, I am cautiously optimistic. I understand why some choose pessimism, though, whether consciously or subconsciously.
 

 

Well said and I also agree with the "plan" and how the years are going.

As for some posters who don't agree with this, I would say to wait until the final cuts to see who is on the 53 roster to start the season and

THEN compare to the team they fielded in 2018.

[Doc]

41 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

According to who, what, the narrative?  

 

I don't think that they are.  I just added to my post, reread it and tell me where you disagree.  

 

I'm interested as to why you, not anyone else, thinks that they're a whole lot better than what we have? 

 

As well, allow me to put it another way, suppose that all of these new players start.  Do you really think that they represent an above average team?  

 

I'm happy to go thru them one-by-one with you, pick one and we'll start.  But I can tell you that if Brown and Beasley are our #'s 1 & 2 WRs, well, I'm not exactly thinking division winners here, or even playoffs based on that.  

 

Sorry, but no, I'm not seeing how a pair of WRs that have one 1,000-season between 'em, and barely at that, and that have each averaged a mere 3-4 TDs/season are somehow our Smith-Shuster/AB or Woods/Cooks tandem.  Seems to me that Foster just did that and Jones too, and neither of them are good pending whether Foster's three good games can translate to an entirely good season.  Either way, you're talking about free-agents, not what's here.  If I had my choice I'd pick Foster over Brown and take my lumps.  

 

As to Morse, do you not think that there's an injury risk for a player that's missed nearly half of his games the past two seasons due to injury? 

 

Half of the playoff teams last year had WRs who caught over 1,000 yards (the Rams had 2).  You don't need 1,000 yards receivers to make the playoffs or even win the SB (Cheaters didn't have a 1,000 yard receiver).

Edited March 23, 2019 by Doc

[Nextmanup]

3 hours ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

It has occurred to me over the last few days that Beane has taken a very strategic approach to the FA's that he has signed.  None of them just scream "camp fodder" to me. They all seem to address an obvious need.  Under previous regimes, we were signing players that didn't address an obvious need and that most of us knew would not make the final 53 or the practice squad.  Am I just drinking the Kool-Aid or has there really been a change?

I don't know that I'd call most of the signings "camp fodder" either, but make no mistake, these are mostly depth signings that are likely to not move the needle very much.

 

I think they are trying to get a more competitive atmosphere on the team, which is good, but some of these guys aren't going to make it and the ones that do may not have much of an impact in the final analysis.  We have to wait and see.

 

Here's the thing: this organization has been so ineptly run, for so long, that anything approaching basic competence seems like brilliance.

 

 

[stinky finger]

3 hours ago, Marv's Neighbor said:

Money/cap flexibility makes all the difference.

 

Which was by design. ?

3 hours ago, nedboy7 said:

They seem to be making pretty smart decisions. Draft should be fun. 

 

Nice to hear you upbeat about the organization. You’ve been rather skeptical. ?

[Ethan in Cleveland]

43 minutes ago, Logic said:

The below chart makes very clear what the Bills are doing. They have less money committed on big contracts than any team in the league. Why is this? I would postulate it ties into why they have only been signing average to slightly above average players to no more than modest contracts: They are planning to do the majority of their spending on the retention of their own young core in the coming years: Milano, Edmunds, White, Allen, Dawkins, [Edge draftee], etc, etc.

Rather than spending big chunks of their cap on overpaid free agents, they are meticulously and intelligently allocating their money in a way that will allow them to retain all of their own home grown talent, rather than be forced to watch anyone walk away because the Bills can't afford their contract demands.

It's a breath of fresh air and a massive change from the way things were done under Whaley.
 

16 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Long was a full-time starter last year and has been one for all but his rookie year.  Both he and Morse represent significant upgrades over what was here last year and Dawkins has proven he can play at a high level when motivated and not next to a scrub.  I knew nothing about Nsekhe but after watching his play and reading more about him after they signed him, he should prove to be a significant upgrade as well.  Again the only real concern for me is the other OG spot, but I think they'll find a good player to fill that as well, either from someone already on the team (Teller, Boettger), signed (Feliciano), about to be signed (Spain, a post-draft cut) or a draftee.

 

Long started at center last year and was one of the worst in the NFL. He has played a bunch of games at OG in the past. Is he any better than Miller? No one knows. If he is the backup plan for  center that is not good.

Agree Dawkins is an adequate LT. He took a step back last year but there is no reason to think he cant get better. Im not in the camp that he should be moved to OG, but I would still draft OT high this year.

[1st&ten]

39 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

..NOT bashful or cheap.....cleaned out all of the errant wankers from the organization.....to borrow GMC's slogan, Pegulas are "professional grade"......dopey Brandon's indiscretions cost him his" 5 year, $10 mil contract"...and now his underlings have been terminated...NONE will EVER work in Buffalo again.....let's say "unofficial ban"...the Pegulas mean business in fielding a perrenial winner.....as TP said in inner circle, "the Bills are Kim's baby"......she is the driving force (league wide respected as well) behind "draining the swamp"...good for her...we will ALL benefit...stay tuned.........

 

Yes and when the Bills start winning the narrative with the national media will change----they'll jump on the bandwagon & the Buffalo bashing will stop. The NFL will want to highlight Kim, makes for good PR----much better than the image of stoned out Robert Kraft & all the other violent incidents by NFL players making headlines.

[Doc]

4 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Long started at center last year and was one of the worst in the NFL. He has played a bunch of games at OG in the past. Is he any better than Miller? No one knows. If he is the backup plan for  center that is not good.

Agree Dawkins is an adequate LT. He took a step back last year but there is no reason to think he cant get better. Im not in the camp that he should be moved to OG, but I would still draft OT high this year.

 

Long played OG and C well for the Redskins, prompting the Jets to sign him to a good-sized contract.  He got injured and that affected his play. 

[Logic]

14 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Long started at center last year and was one of the worst in the NFL. He has played a bunch of games at OG in the past. Is he any better than Miller? No one knows. If he is the backup plan for  center that is not good.

Agree Dawkins is an adequate LT. He took a step back last year but there is no reason to think he cant get better. Im not in the camp that he should be moved to OG, but I would still draft OT high this year.

I mean...how good of a backup center do you think MOST teams have? As it is, the Bills' current backup centers are Russell Bodine and Spencer Long. Both are guys that have started a lot of games in this league. If you look around the NFL, you're not going to find a lot of teams with really high quality backup centers. I think Bodine/Long is as strong of a backup center situation as you're likely to find anywhere in the league. As for Morse, he seems to be a consensus top 10 center in the NFL.

Furthermore, I expect Long to compete to start at GUARD, a position at which he performed well when he was a Redskin. No one expects him to be a candidate for starting center, so I'm not sure why that's even a discussion.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

Just now, Logic said:

I mean...how good of a backup center do you think MOST teams have? As it is, the Bills' current backup centers are Russell Bodine and Spencer Long. Both are guys that have started a lot of games in this league. If you look around the NFL, you're not going to find a lot of teams with really high quality backup centers. I think Bodine/Long is as strong of a backup center situation as you're likely to find anywhere in the league. As for Morse, he seems to be a consensus top 10 center in the NFL.

Furthermore, I expect Long to compete to start at GUARD, a position at which he performed well when he was a Redskin. No one expects him to be a candidate for starting center, so I'm not sure why that's even a discussion.

Bodine would be a very solid backup C and I posted I would keep him for 2019.

[klos63]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

I don't know about "selectively" because they've added a ton of FA's, but they're good adds.  But that's what tons of cap room will do for you.

plus a crappy Oline, only 1 TE and little at WR.

[Doc]

2 minutes ago, klos63 said:

plus a crappy Oline, only 1 TE and little at WR.

 

Yes.  The cap room has allowed them to address all those properly.

[billsfan89]

They have the money to. Last year the team had 2 signings of over 7 million AAV this year they had 4. They also added a lot of players between 3 to 6 million AAV an Avenue last year that was only filled by 2 players. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

9 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Long played OG and C well for the Redskins, prompting the Jets to sign him to a good-sized contract.  He got injured and that affected his play. 

You may know more than me, but what I have read is Long never won the G and C positions in Washington and started due to injuries of others. Then he had his own injury issues. Even the Washington newspaper reviews didn't think that much of him. 

At this point just have to hope he is better than Miller was.

[Warcodered]

25 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

Long started at center last year and was one of the worst in the NFL. He has played a bunch of games at OG in the past. Is he any better than Miller? No one knows. If he is the backup plan for  center that is not good.

Agree Dawkins is an adequate LT. He took a step back last year but there is no reason to think he cant get better. Im not in the camp that he should be moved to OG, but I would still draft OT high this year.

Didn't he have a broken hand last year?

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

18 minutes ago, 1st&ten said:

 

Yes and when the Bills start winning the narrative with the national media will change----they'll jump on the bandwagon & the Buffalo bashing will stop. The NFL will want to highlight Kim, makes for good PR----much better than the image of stoned out Robert Kraft & all the other violent incidents by NFL players making headlines.

 

..."under the radar W's" are just fine with me.....eff the national urinalists......as if the frauds would ever retract their now "mea culpas" about the woeful Bills....ONE with bawls would step up to say, "Jesus, guess I underestimated the skills of McBeane and his staff as far as rebuilding Bflo".....THAT ain't happenin' PERIOD......

[Billsguy]

If you plotted the free agents that have been signed so far on a spectrum from "camp fodder" to "All Pro", I think it would be fair to say most are somewhere in the middle. Basically, the signings are average on balance. There are a couple slightly above average, but there are also some purely speculative and others based on wishful thinking. Several are basically mediocre career back-ups.  

 

I can always sense the optimism when the Bills management does anything! Just because the Bills have done something this off-season shouldn't automatically lead to the conclusion that it will pay off. However, I do like the emphasis being paid to the offensive line. I'll give positive marks for addressing this area of desperate need! Whether the signings succeed remains to be seen.

 

It is also important to consider the dismal state of affairs at seasons' end. A team that had a 6-10 record has tremendous room for improvement. The bar is very low. As a long time Bills fan, I've seen this story many times before. Don't forget to consider, the opposition is trying to improve as well. I would guess the Jets are even more optimistic than the Bills.

[LSHMEAB]

21 minutes ago, Ethan in Portland said:

You may know more than me, but what I have read is Long never won the G and C positions in Washington and started due to injuries of others. Then he had his own injury issues. Even the Washington newspaper reviews didn't think that much of him. 

At this point just have to hope he is better than Miller was.

I'm not enamored with free agency, but Long graded out pretty well as a guard. He was terrible last year at center, which some attribute to injury. Who knows?

 

He is definitely better than Miller IMO.

[TigerJ]

He's been very clear about his philosophy of team building: "Fill needs in free agency, draft BPA."  He's got the cap space, so he went into free agency thinking, I need this, this, and this.  As is normal the professional personnel department had done their research on who would be available in free agency.  Beane looked for good quality at a reasonable price.  I don't think he has any qualms about paying out big money, but he clearly doesn't want to over pay if he can get reasonable quality at a good price.  I think the choice of offensive tackles reflects that.   Morse wasn't cheap, but Buffalo assured themselves of relative stability at the position for several years out at a time when Josh Allen absolutely needs some quality lined up in front of him.

[Chandler#81]

Op, I think your drinking kool-aid. Sure, we’ve already signed more FAs than the last few years combined, but it’s only because the FO made so many spots available following the season. I don’t recall a Bills FO that didn’t go after a specific need in the FA era, whether we got the guy we wanted or not. W just always seemed to have far more specific needs than most teams.. At the end of the season, every team had 53 guys on the active roster and 7 on PS. Only the number of injured players was team specific. Every team heads to training camp with 90, so everybody is going to have 30 more players than they ended with. Rookies, returning injured players and those not lost to FA only make up some of that. Expiring contracts and post season cuts have more to do with how many new players get added every offseason. 

What I think is different, is Beane’s approach -building core through the Draft and adding short term FAs until Drafted players come of age in the League. It’s exciting to be sure, but it’s only because the FO knows the cupboard is bare by design. jmo.

[machine gun kelly]

Yes

[LABILLBACKER]

Beane and McDermott so far have done a great job chosing a selective and practical strategy that includes positional priority while factoring in character and contract value. Props to them. Stay the course.

[klos63]

1 hour ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

..."under the radar W's" are just fine with me.....eff the national urinalists......as if the frauds would ever retract their now "mea culpas" about the woeful Bills....ONE with bawls would step up to say, "Jesus, guess I underestimated the skills of McBeane and his staff as far as rebuilding Bflo".....THAT ain't happenin' PERIOD......

Let's wait til the Bills give them a regular season reason to praise McBeane, not just an offseason one.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

15 minutes ago, klos63 said:

Let's wait til the Bills give them a regular season reason to praise McBeane, not just an offseason one.

 

...we shall see...respecting differing opinions is the ONLY way this place will work.....I'm "all in" on respect including how we may agree or differ along the way....

[#34fan]

I like maybe two pickups they've made in FA...   I see alot of cash being spent and a lot wet paper being thrown at the wall with hope that something sticks. 

 

April 25-28 reveals the true plan. (If there is one)

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

Think the difference with Beane is he's not scout and didn't come up that route.  He has a handle on all phases of the job and has been involved wit hall the parts up to and including getting coffee for other coaches etc.  Think it's easier for a GM to rely on others for the scouting and concentrate on the financial part of the job as opposed to be heavy into the scouting yourself as likely if you're a scout you think anyone can do the financial part of the job.   While I suspect someone with Beanses background is goign to know he needs input from the scouts.

[bkep32]

90mil in cap space doesnt hurt either 

[PromoTheRobot]

10 hours ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

It has occurred to me over the last few days that Beane has taken a very strategic approach to the FA's that he has signed.  None of them just scream "camp fodder" to me. They all seem to address an obvious need.  Under previous regimes, we were signing players that didn't address an obvious need and that most of us knew would not make the final 53 or the practice squad.  Am I just drinking the Kool-Aid or has there really been a change?

 

The players fit a profile: young but experienced, with some starts under their belts. I also assume Beane sees higher ceilings too.

[BobbyC81]

10 hours ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

It has occurred to me over the last few days that Beane has taken a very strategic approach to the FA's that he has signed.  None of them just scream "camp fodder" to me. They all seem to address an obvious need.  Under previous regimes, we were signing players that didn't address an obvious need and that most of us knew would not make the final 53 or the practice squad.  Am I just drinking the Kool-Aid or has there really been a change?

 

I  think that’s what Beane meant by being judicious 

[Buddo]

As it seems we are going with a major makeover of the O-Line, I think it's important to note that two of the signings there, have 'previous' with our new O-Line coach.

 

I'm guessing that he also had significant input into some of the other signings for the O-Line. That is something to be optimistic about, as again, it shows there's a plan in place.

 

While it goes without saying that the O-Line guys are literally hungry, for many of the signings made, I'd say it's a figurative one as well. Some of these guys have been good backups, stuck behind better players, who are desperate for a genuine chance to start. They are going to get that opportunity with the Bills, and the competition will be fierce. I also think that that level of competition has the chance to raise the level of play of the group as a whole. Dawkins better not be giving anything less than his best effort, as he could find himself on the bench PDQ.

 

Regarding the other signings at WR, well Brown was a guy they wanted from the year before, as they want speed on the field to get the most out of Allen's arm. In other threads, people have pointed out that while Flacco was still QB, Brown was on pace for his best season, numbers wise. Once Jackson took over, that fell off a cliff, mainly due to a lack of a passing game.

 

Beasley is a receiver whose speciality is getting you another set of downs. I don't care about his numbers, if all he does is convert 3rd downs. Beane specifically referenced this in talking about Beasley.

 

Sometimes I think people lose sight of the 'team' part of football, and get obsessed by the numbers game. No matter which side of the ball you are talking about, you need guys to be complementary to each other, to work as a unit. The NFL is littered with people who put up big numbers for their respective positions, but have won sweet FA, mainly due to the other parts of the teams they were on, simply not working.

 

Having said all of that, while I'm cautiously optimistic for the coming year, these guys haven't set foot on the field yet, so there's an awful long way to go.  I have confidence that they will be an improvement, however, the bigger question is by how much, and will it be enough?

[BarleyNY]

21 hours ago, NewEra said:

We have lots of cash.  Of course

 

This. We aren’t clearing cap space this year, we’re filling holes on the team. 

[SoTier]

20 hours ago, RPbillsfan said:

The NFL has a huge gap in even average offensive lineman, the Bills have added depth and with cap space they can hold onto guys like Ducasse and Bodine until after the draft and see if they can trade them for late round picks in 2020.

 

its all about building depth at as many positions as financially possible.

 

Nobody is going to trade for Ducasse or Bodine.

 

20 hours ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...just trying to antagonize the "fire McBeane and McDermott now!" crowd??.....j/k......McBeane assembled his "Gang of 17 (staff)" made up of several NFL VP's of Player Personnel and Directors of Pro Player Personnel execs ALL on Pegula's nickel.....guessing a $5+ mil payroll including McBeane....McDermott has orchestrated the long awaited and long needed "culture cleanup"......like the "either you're in or you're out...NO exceptions" inference......this gang beats the snot out of ANY "F Troop" misfits running the show post Polian...AND....could even exceed the Polian era....stay tuned.....

 

ROTFLMAO!   The Beane/McDermott regime resembles the wonderful duo of Brandon/Jauron from 2006-2009 far more than Polian/Levy.

 

19 hours ago, Logic said:

The below chart makes very clear what the Bills are doing. They have less money committed on big contracts than any team in the league. Why is this? I would postulate it ties into why they have only been signing average to slightly above average players to no more than modest contracts: They are planning to do the majority of their spending on the retention of their own young core in the coming years: Milano, Edmunds, White, Allen, Dawkins, [Edge draftee], etc, etc.

Rather than spending big chunks of their cap on overpaid free agents, they are meticulously and intelligently allocating their money in a way that will allow them to retain all of their own home grown talent, rather than be forced to watch anyone walk away because the Bills can't afford their contract demands.

It's a breath of fresh air and a massive change from the way things were done under Whaley.
 

 

 

The  "breath of fresh air" will come when the Bills start winning  9 or more  games in a single season more than once or twice a decade.  Until McDermott and Beane produce a team that can do that, they are not any better than their predecessors.

 

18 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

Well said and I also agree with the "plan" and how the years are going.

As for some posters who don't agree with this, I would say to wait until the final cuts to see who is on the 53 roster to start the season and

THEN compare to the team they fielded in 2018.

 

You may be happy with winning the off-season/pre-season but the last time I looked regular season and playoff wins are generally considered the measures of success or failure of any regime.

 

18 hours ago, 1st&ten said:

 

Yes and when the Bills start winning the narrative with the national media will change----they'll jump on the bandwagon & the Buffalo bashing will stop. The NFL will want to highlight Kim, makes for good PR----much better than the image of stoned out Robert Kraft & all the other violent incidents by NFL players making headlines.

 

Well, don't hold your breath waiting for this winning to happen ... the Sabres haven't sniffed the playoffs since the first year Pegula owned the team -- before Pegula had a chance to put his losing touch on the team.

[Doc]

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

ROTFLMAO!   The Beane/McDermott regime resembles the wonderful duo of Brandon/Jauron from 2006-2009 far more than Polian/Levy.

 

Considering they made the playoffs, they resemble the latter more than the former.

 

5 minutes ago, SoTier said:

The  "breath of fresh air" will come when the Bills start winning  9 or more  games in a single season more than once or twice a decade.  Until McDermott and Beane produce a team that can do that, they are not any better than their predecessors.

 

See above.  Time will tell whether they continue with the success but they're already better than their predecessors. 

[oldmanfan]

55 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Nobody is going to trade for Ducasse or Bodine.

 

 

ROTFLMAO!   The Beane/McDermott regime resembles the wonderful duo of Brandon/Jauron from 2006-2009 far more than Polian/Levy.

 

 

The  "breath of fresh air" will come when the Bills start winning  9 or more  games in a single season more than once or twice a decade.  Until McDermott and Beane produce a team that can do that, they are not any better than their predecessors.

 

 

You may be happy with winning the off-season/pre-season but the last time I looked regular season and playoff wins are generally considered the measures of success or failure of any regime.

 

 

Well, don't hold your breath waiting for this winning to happen ... the Sabres haven't sniffed the playoffs since the first year Pegula owned the team -- before Pegula had a chance to put his losing touch on the team.

I find it sad that a fan can be so incessantly negative

[Cripple Creek]

23 hours ago, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

It has occurred to me over the last few days that Beane has taken a very strategic approach to the FA's that he has signed.  None of them just scream "camp fodder" to me. They all seem to address an obvious need.  Under previous regimes, we were signing players that didn't address an obvious need and that most of us knew would not make the final 53 or the practice squad.  Am I just drinking the Kool-Aid or has there really been a change?

No change, more money=more options.

[Ronin]

20 hours ago, Logic said:

I agree. Except I think the bolded leads to some people going overboard on the pessimistic outlooks. Why wouldn't they? The Bills have been so bad for so long that many Bills fans are conditioned to expect the worse, even when there are signs that optimism may be warranted.

I believe that what we're looking at now is the beginning of the 3rd year of a complete teardown and rebuild. Year 1 they jettisoned bad contracts and players and began to build a defense. Year 2 they identified and selected a quarterback and continued to bolster the defense (it finished 2nd in the league). Year 3 is all about building around Allen and making sure he's the franchise QB they think he is. In years 4 and 5, we'll start to see contract extensions for homegrown stars. I also think we'll start to see bigger free agent contracts handed out, being that they are projected to be in the top 5 in cap space again NEXT offseason. 

So yeah, we're still toward the beginning end of a complete rebuild. As such, big dollars have yet to really be committed across the roster. Right now, the team hasn't proven anything and has to be considered below average at worst, average at best. Anything above that, they must prove on the field. But as for the cap dollars the Bills are spending? They look exactly like they SHOULD look for a team in this stage of a rebuild. As always, I am cautiously optimistic. I understand why some choose pessimism, though, whether consciously or subconsciously.
 

 

Great post Logic!  Very engaging.  

 

As to your bolded part allow me to add some perspective there.  There always seems to be a boolean (aka binary) association with things of this nature.  I'm sure that I speak for a bunch of people when I say that they aren't necessarily pessimistic, rather simply not optimistic, largely for reasons that you stated.  So in short, it's possible to be neither over team "news" or player signings.  

 

As for me, I'm simply not seeing any upgrades with the exception of Morse, and there again, he's missed almost half of his games the past two seasons, so if he continues that trend we can't really say that it was a great signing.  Presumably you would agree.  So that one's on ice and IMO that's the best signing we've made.  Otherwise, as someone has already opined, I view it more of a rearranging of the deck chairs.  

 

Now the signings of marquee/premier/impact players are cause for optimism, but A, there are none in the bunch we've signed, and B, again, to McBeane's credit, there really weren't many in free-agency available on offense. 

 

Antonio Brown would have been such a signing, but again, and partial credit to McBeane, it's good to have avoided him.  Mr. "Play by My Rules" isn't exactly what a developing QB that's struggling with his passing game needs at this point.  I can easily see that acquisition having derailed Allen's develoopment.  The absolutely last thing that Allen needs right now is a prima donna rambling in his ear constantly what he should be doing.  So on that end I'm a little surprised that they were even considering Brown.  

 

Here's where we differ on their philosophy:  Their attempt at a rebuild, offensively anyway, actually began last year.  But they swung-n-missed on just about every one of their offensive acquisitions, which frankly, were very similar to what they're doing this year.  Coupled with the fact that McD is a defensive-oriented coach and Beane, quite frankly, is still largely in OJT/Unknown mode, this isn't exactly cause for optimism.  

 

Lastly, the big thing, namely what's going to determine their futures here in Buffalo, perhaps beginning as early as this season but next for sure, is Allen's own progression.  I keep reiterating that, and the narrative is that all of Allen's faults, not talking merely areas required for development common among QBs, but actual faults per se, are all resultant from a "lack of weapons/tools" which IMO is tremendously faulty to assume.  

 

Allen's going to have to take a huge leap in his own rite, HUGE!  Again, as a passer last season his short-medium game was bottom-dwelling, worse than all other rookies.  That can't all be because of a lack of tools, particularly since his fellow rookies for the most part, besides Mayfield perhaps, also didn't have much better talent, if better at all, at their disposal.  Consider too that Jackson had John Brown who's now here.  So if we're going to apply the same standard across teams, then couldn't it also be said that Jackson's play was hindered due to the same "lack of weapons?"  The answer to that is of course it is despite the fact that the narrative here will be that it was all Jackson there for whatever reasons.  But then, why should we be optimistic about Brown here?  Pessimistic not necessarily, but what's the cause for optimism?   I see none.  

 

Think about all of their offensive moves since they arrived, McBeane that is.  How many have worked out?  Any?  I see none, at least not to the level that's going to move us forward and into playoff  competitiveness mode.  That's not a good sign for them.  

 

Having said all of that, IMO, I see absolutely no way that they can avoid drafting an OT with the 9th overall, or preferably trading down in the 1st for more day-1/2 picks yet still getting an OT.  

 

Thoughts?  

[NoSaint]

On 3/23/2019 at 9:42 AM, Florida Bills Fanatic said:

It has occurred to me over the last few days that Beane has taken a very strategic approach to the FA's that he has signed.  None of them just scream "camp fodder" to me. They all seem to address an obvious need.  Under previous regimes, we were signing players that didn't address an obvious need and that most of us knew would not make the final 53 or the practice squad.  Am I just drinking the Kool-Aid or has there really been a change?

 

Who are the examples from previous regimes that were signed early in free agency and were major camp fodder? Like more than an OT signed to play TE camp fodder?

 

hes definitely addresses some needs but it feels like you are creating a storyline 

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

I find it sad that a fan can be so incessantly negative

 

....CERTAINLY has carved out one helluva niche, hasn't he?.........

[Ronin]

21 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Half of the playoff teams last year had WRs who caught over 1,000 yards (the Rams had 2).  You don't need 1,000 yards receivers to make the playoffs or even win the SB (Cheaters didn't have a 1,000 yard receiver).

 

You sure about that?  Let's finish that analysis.  Making the playoffs is one thing, being playoff competitive is entirely another.  

 

First of all, I count only 4 of 12 teams, not half, but a third, that did not have a 1,000-yard WR unless we include the Pats, but see below there. 

 

Otherwise, of the four teams that you mention:  

 

Dallas had a 2,000 yard-from-scrimmage RB, the 6th ranked scoring D, and the 7th-ranked red zone D.  We have nothing close to a 2,000-YFS RB, we had the 18th ranked scoring D, and the 30th ranked RZ D.  Dallas wasn't a strong playoff team notwithstanding, they were a good, hardly great team, in a largely mediocre division.  

 

Chicago did not win games because of their offense.  In fact, they were 0-4 when they allowed opponents to score more than 22 points (below NFL average) where they were 12-1, their "1" being their playoff loss to a mediocre Philly (a 9-7 playoff team) where they could only muster 15 offensive points, 9 coming from FGs.  10 of their wins involved holding opponents to 17 or fewer points.  Needless to say they could not advance to the CG.  

 

Seattle was similar, they were 8-2 when holding opponents to average scoring (24 ppg) or fewer.  They were 6-0 when allowing 17 or fewer.  In short, they didn’t do it via offense either.  They were 2-5 when allowing 25 or more points.  

 

Baltimore was a carbon-copy of Chicago.  They were 1-6 when allowing opponents more than 21 points, they were 9-1 when allowing 21 or fewer, 8-1 when allowing 17 or fewer and had the 2^nd ranked scoring D in the league a mere 4 points behind Chicago.  Ergo, they didn’t do it via offense either and were not championship caliber as a result either.  Defense no longer wins championships. Brown was their leading WR with 715 yards and 5 TDs, two 100-yard games and 10 games of 28 or fewer yards.  

 

 

Side notes:  

 

Philly had one in Ertz, but Jeffries was on pace for 1,000 but only played 13 games.  

 

Of the four teams that advanced to the Conference Championships, LA had two 1,000-yard WRs.  

NO had Thomas who had over 1,400 but then also had arguably the best dual-threat RB in the league who logged over 700 yards, and Brees. 

KC had two 1,000-yard WRs as well along with last season's most prolific QB.  

NE had Brady, which means everything.  But otherwise, no WRs (or Gronk) played all 16 games on that team except for Hogan and Dorsett.  Edelman would have had well over 1,000 but was suspended for 4 games. White, a RB in a role-playing mode with only 3 starts, had 751 receiving yards.  Gordon & Gronk both started only 11 games and were otherwise on pace for over 1,000.  Hogan, in only 7 starts as a role-player logged nearly 600.  

 

So yes, good receivers are in fact required to win SBs these days.  In Brady’s case he elevates the level of any given WR by at least one notch, not much argument there.  There's nothing "magical" about 1,000 yards, but there is a difference between WRs that routinely only put up 600, 700, or 800 yards and 3-6 TDs, such as those littering our roster, and those referenced above.  

 

Having said all that, the big hope from this free-agency period so far is Brown who logged 715 yards last season and 5 TDs.  His TDs in distance were 7, 9, 14, 21, and 33, something that hardly fits the “deep game” narrative for Allen.  He had two (2) 100-yard games.  10 of his 16 games he posted 10 games of 28 or fewer receiving yards for an average of 18.5 yards in those 10 games.  

 

 

[Doc]

1 hour ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

You sure about that?  Let's finish that analysis.  Making the playoffs is one thing, being playoff competitive is entirely another.  

 

First of all, I count only 4 of 12 teams, not half, but a third, that did not have a 1,000-yard WR unless we include the Pats, but see below there. 

 

Otherwise, of the four teams that you mention:  

 

Dallas had a 2,000 yard-from-scrimmage RB, the 6th ranked scoring D, and the 7th-ranked red zone D.  We have nothing close to a 2,000-YFS RB, we had the 18th ranked scoring D, and the 30th ranked RZ D.  Dallas wasn't a strong playoff team notwithstanding, they were a good, hardly great team, in a largely mediocre division.  

 

Chicago did not win games because of their offense.  In fact, they were 0-4 when they allowed opponents to score more than 22 points (below NFL average) where they were 12-1, their "1" being their playoff loss to a mediocre Philly (a 9-7 playoff team) where they could only muster 15 offensive points, 9 coming from FGs.  10 of their wins involved holding opponents to 17 or fewer points.  Needless to say they could not advance to the CG.  

 

Seattle was similar, they were 8-2 when holding opponents to average scoring (24 ppg) or fewer.  They were 6-0 when allowing 17 or fewer.  In short, they didn’t do it via offense either.  They were 2-5 when allowing 25 or more points.  

 

Baltimore was a carbon-copy of Chicago.  They were 1-6 when allowing opponents more than 21 points, they were 9-1 when allowing 21 or fewer, 8-1 when allowing 17 or fewer and had the 2^nd ranked scoring D in the league a mere 4 points behind Chicago.  Ergo, they didn’t do it via offense either and were not championship caliber as a result either.  Defense no longer wins championships. Brown was their leading WR with 715 yards and 5 TDs, two 100-yard games and 10 games of 28 or fewer yards.  

 

 

Side notes:  

 

Philly had one in Ertz, but Jeffries was on pace for 1,000 but only played 13 games.  

 

Of the four teams that advanced to the Conference Championships, LA had two 1,000-yard WRs.  

NO had Thomas who had over 1,400 but then also had arguably the best dual-threat RB in the league who logged over 700 yards, and Brees. 

KC had two 1,000-yard WRs as well along with last season's most prolific QB.  

NE had Brady, which means everything.  But otherwise, no WRs (or Gronk) played all 16 games on that team except for Hogan and Dorsett.  Edelman would have had well over 1,000 but was suspended for 4 games. White, a RB in a role-playing mode with only 3 starts, had 751 receiving yards.  Gordon & Gronk both started only 11 games and were otherwise on pace for over 1,000.  Hogan, in only 7 starts as a role-player logged nearly 600.  

 

So yes, good receivers are in fact required to win SBs these days.  In Brady’s case he elevates the level of any given WR by at least one notch, not much argument there.  There's nothing "magical" about 1,000 yards, but there is a difference between WRs that routinely only put up 600, 700, or 800 yards and 3-6 TDs, such as those littering our roster, and those referenced above.  

 

Having said all that, the big hope from this free-agency period so far is Brown who logged 715 yards last season and 5 TDs.  His TDs in distance were 7, 9, 14, 21, and 33, something that hardly fits the “deep game” narrative for Allen.  He had two (2) 100-yard games.  10 of his 16 games he posted 10 games of 28 or fewer receiving yards for an average of 18.5 yards in those 10 games. 

 

Only 6 playoff teams had a 1,000 yard WR (the Rams had 2).  And true Jeffrey would probably have eclipsed 1,000 yards, but barely.  I chose 1,000 yards because it's a nice number but in reality I could and should have chosen 1,200 yards, which is more true #1 territory.