John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[Boca BIlls]

2 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Saints have been in cap hell for years.... they went 13-3 and 11-5 the last two seasons.?

If Beane doesn't release/trade some of those guys there isnt massive amounts of dead cap.?

 

 

Yea they got out of cap hell in 2017  when they went 11-5. Just admit you were wrong 

[Phil The Thrill]

2 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

I didn't zig zag around anything.

 

Simply stated facts. They inherited a less than stellar cap situation, but cap hell? Not even close.

 

You compared Beanes approach to Donahoes.... as if his approach was the correct way to go about things when it netted them one winning season in 5 years as GM.? 

 

They've made their fair share of good moves and their fair share of bad ones. Year 3 is big for them. Need to see at least 9 wins and the massive amount of blow out losses needs to stop, IMO. 

 

I'll save the ball washing for when the results are actually seen on the field.??

 

John is spot on here

[Phil The Thrill]

3 hours ago, john wawrow said:

 

Ah, yes, ScottLaw is one to take the narrowest view approach to support his wonderful theory of how teams go from being non-contenders to contenders virtually overnight.

of course, this effort requires ScottLaw -- who has accused me of being a "ball-washer" -- to take some convenient shortcuts in his mathamaticing by ignoring the 10 previous seasons in which the Rams won no more than seven games. somehow, this doesn't fit the equation of overnight success, so why even make note of it, ScottLaw believes.

 

no different than the Bears, this team that has been a juggernaut for lo all these many seasons. all the way back to, well, 2018 to be exact.

let's omit the fact Chicago won a grand total of 19 games in its previous four years, and simply note they made this jump from just one season to the next.

 

hey, by your math, if the Bills win their opener, next season, they'll be 100, nay, 1000 percent better than, they were a year ago.

 

of course, the narrow view is ScottLaw's final chance to make his point, because otherwise, he'd have to finally admit, he has none to make.

 

sad, ScottLaw. sad.

 

jw

 

TKO.....done

[BullBuchanan]

On 4/30/2019 at 11:01 AM, Gugny said:

 

Nick Foles is still Nick Foles.  If he wasn't still Nick Foles, he'd still be an Eagle.

So, he's a very good QB capable of leading a team to win a SB? I agree. He was elite with the eagles when he was younger. He's not a world beater, but with a good team, he won't be the weak link. That's all the jags need with their defense.

[Phil The Thrill]

1 minute ago, BullBuchanan said:

So, he's a very good QB capable of leading a team to win a SB? I agree. He was elite with the eagles when he was younger. He's not a world beater, but with a good team, he won't be the weak link. That's all the jags need with their defense.

 

Jacksonville Jags in the Super Bowl this February!  Doug Marrone!  FTW

[BullBuchanan]

On 4/30/2019 at 10:46 AM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

The thing is, football games aren't played on paper

 

3-13  10-6  5-11 last 3 years

 

It's a question of what one thinks as the reason. 

-Was Fournette a 1-hit wonder who fell off a cliff?

-They had a lot of churn on OL, including losing their LT on IR to an ACL early in the season, losing a LG to FA (then trying to re-sign him and plug him back in, didn't work).  They released their RT go this year.  Was that the reason their run game fell off a cliff and Bortles took 50% more sacks/threw 30% fewer touchdowns?

 

If so, have they fixed the line?

 

Or is it just a case of a team over-performing one year, then regressing to the mean as teams got tape on their plays with Fournette?

The thing about Foles is that outside the Superbowl, he's a mixed bag at QB.  I personally maintain that his crap year with the Stl Rams wasn't his fault - it was "dysfunction junction" and the guy he had as his OC was fired midway through the season and hasn't worked as an OC since.  But it's clear Foles won't work well with any coach and any system.  He needs  guys who will work with him to keep his bad tendencies in check and maximize his strengths, as Shurmur and Musgrave and then Pederson, Reich, and DeFillipo did.

 

I do not think that Marrone and Hacket are quite the same as Shurmur or Pederson and Co. 

 

But I could be wrong.  Maybe Foles/Wentz is the new remake of Brees/Rivers and Marrone is the new Sean Payton. 

 

I'm kind of thinking "no", but could be.

 

 

 

I don't believe Foles is going to all of a sudden take the league by storm, but I absolutely do believe he's Alex Smith 2.0 which is good enough to destroy teams until January. That makes them a massive threat to the Bills near-term.

[Gugny]

5 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

So, he's a very good QB capable of leading a team to win a SB? I agree. He was elite with the eagles when he was younger. He's not a world beater, but with a good team, he won't be the weak link. That's all the jags need with their defense.

 

I guess we'll see.  He did well in a couple abbreviated seasons in PHI as a backup.  He's never done well as an established starter.

[LSHMEAB]

21 hours ago, john wawrow said:

 

It’s quite evident that you missed the 17-year playoff drought in your “it’s so easy” equation.

Or did I somehow miss that in all your zigging and zagging around my points.

Admit it, this hole you’ve dug is pretty deep.

 

I’ll patiently await your illogical response.

 

jw

I'm not quite sure how the Bills futility is anything other than failed HC's, players, etc. It doesn't have anything to do with the difficulty or ease of winning in the league.

 

It's easier to win a playoff game than it is to go 17 years without a playoff appearance. The drought is actually pretty remarkable in that you really have to screw the pooch MULTIPLE times to accomplish that kind of failure.

 

We shouldn't base our expectations on one of the most futile periods in history for an NFL franchise IMO. Let's just hope we have the right guys in place. The proof will be in the pudding.

[Phil The Thrill]

4 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

I'm not quite sure how the Bills futility is anything other than failed HC's, players, etc. It doesn't have anything to do with the difficulty or ease of winning in the league.

 

It's easier to win a playoff game than it is to go 17 years without a playoff appearance. The drought is actually pretty remarkable in that you really have to screw the pooch MULTIPLE times to accomplish that kind of failure.

 

We shouldn't base our expectations on one of the most futile periods in history for an NFL franchise IMO. Let's just hope we have the right guys in place. The proof will be in the pudding.

 

You are right about the odds.  The probability of going 17 years w/o playoffs is minuscule.

 But the Bills did it!!!!

[Nihilarian]

On 4/27/2019 at 6:46 AM, BuffaloBill said:

The truth will come from the W-L record but man does Wawrow seem to be right.  I can’t remember an offseason where there has been so much momentum going into the season.  The Bills had a tough year last year but emerged from it with Josh Allen taking steps forward.  With the exception of a true #1 WR on the roster they have addressed gaps and in many cases with more than one potential starter.

 

WR aside, as I think they will get production out of the group they have, the only real question remaining after last season is will special teams improve?  The Bills were flat out awful at ST’s last season.  The flip side of this is that the D returns nearly intact and should only be better with Oliver at the 3T.  This D has the potential to be scary good.

While I agree with most posted here i don't think the ONLY real questions is will special teams improve. I have more faith in this new ST coach and the added players to make that unit better.

 

KR/PR/WR Andre Roberts, signed a two-year, $5 million deal with the Bills. He joins Buffalo after having a Pro Bowl season as a returner with the New York Jets. He led the NFL in kickoff return yards and punt return average. He scored two return touchdowns — one kick return and one punt return. He provides the Bills with firepower at the return position, something the team has lacked. This player alone should help make a big impact to the ST unit!

 

Offense: The other questions in my view is the run game with the RBs in being able to control the clock, maintain possession and make first downs. The QB should need to play HB and be the one making the first downs because the O line didn't hold up in protections. Just as Roberts will do for ST, the added free agents and #2 draft pick in Cody Ford should drastically improve both the run game and pass game. 

 

 

Defense: What worries me is while the 2018 Buffalo Bills were the #1 team in the NFL in pass defense. That same defense was also atrocious at times against the run and in the red zone. That Colts and Patriots games come to mind. While I like Ed Oliver as a smaller, penetrating DT in getting into the backfield and rushing the passer as he is replacing an all pro who played well last season and yet the defense still had those run stop problems. 

 

The other aspect of the defense that worries me is the Bills pass rush. Buffalo was 26th last year in sacks with just 36 sacks total. Only 6 teams were worse. 

 

These two issues are still to be addressed as I don't see great improvement in those two areas so far. Run stopping, pass rush. This FO fixes these two concerns and they could very well have a dominant defense this year. JMHO

[Augie]

I look back on how eagerly we awaited the draft. There was such a dearth of Bills football! I did LOVE the draft, and now............I have that same painful yearning for an actual football game! To tell you how serious it is, PRESEASON is sounding awesome to me! 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 hours ago, Gugny said:

I guess we'll see.  He did well in a couple abbreviated seasons in PHI as a backup.  He's never done didn't do well as an established starter on a highly dysfunctional Rams team

 

FIFY.  I believe that Foles is a system guy, but he did OK in 2014 in Philly as the starter.   A regression from his amazing 2013 season, but they'd shipped his favorite target out of town. 

 

I don't think it's "starter" or "fill in" that is the issue, I think it's whether he has a coach and offensive system that will work with and for him, and the right player support.

 

1 hour ago, Augie said:

I look back on how eagerly we awaited the draft. There was such a dearth of Bills football! I did LOVE the draft, and now............I have that same painful yearning for an actual football game! To tell you how serious it is, PRESEASON is sounding awesome to me! 

 

Only what, 9 days until rookie minicamp?  That should help.

[Boca BIlls]

6 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

They had $7 million entering the 2017 offseason, before the 2017 season in which they went 11-5..... all that extra cap space really got them over the top that year.?

They got out of it in 2017, I cannot believe you cannot admit you are wrong ever. Oh well everyone here knows you are wrong and it is documented in posts so that is all that is needed. Pathetic...

 

https://www.canalstreetchronicles.com/2016/9/17/12950486/salary-cap-hell-has-come-gone-for-new-orleans-saints

 

 

Enjoy everyone knowing your wrong and being the only person thinking you are right.

 

Your little laugh emojis remind me of the scene in Tropic Thunder "Farting in the bathtub laughing your ass off"

Edited May 2, 2019 by Boca BIlls

[JoeF]

Wawrow:  After two decades, things appear different and there is a reason for hope.

 

ScottLaw:  After two decades, I have presented evidence and opinion that things are not that different and I want to be vindicated when the inevitable failure happens.

 

Instead of being reduced to name calling and questioning a reporters objectivity in what is at least partly an opinion piece, just stick to the damn arguments.  It's simple.  It's not degrading and its something we can look back on after the results are in and say John had some legitimate observations or ScottLaw was correct -- it was the Same Old *****.  

 

Not that hard unless you really want to take Internet banter personally...which is really dumb...

Edited May 2, 2019 by JoeF

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 5/1/2019 at 5:31 PM, john wawrow said:

 

Keep in mind, Beane wasn't making a majority of the decisions in 2017 free agency. And neither was Whaley.

McDermott was essentially serving in a stop-gap role and wasn't, at that point, going to gum up the works before the next GM arrived.

And the decision was made early on that the Bills weren't going to get into a bidding war early to tie up too much money in Woods. Of all the players McDermott didn't want to lose, it was Woods. And yet, circumstances helped dictate his departure.

 

Don't shoot the messenger on this one. I'm merely stating what I know of the Bills state of mind at that time.

 

jw

 

On the contrary, I appreciate the gouge.  But there's a distinction - making a decision "we aren't going to get into a bidding war and tie up too much money in this guy" is not the same thing as "the Bills can't afford to keep him", right?

 

[JohnC]

31 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

On the contrary, I appreciate the gouge.  But there's a distinction - making a decision "we aren't going to get into a bidding war and tie up too much money in this guy" is not the same thing as "the Bills can't afford to keep him", right?

 

I understand the distinction you are making. However, if an organization places a value on a player (or any player) and makes a decision not to go beyond it then the net effect is basically the same as not being able to afford the player/s. In either scenario because of the established parameter you are not going to keep that player. The organization that is the most accomplished in making decisions based on cost/benefit is New England. It appears that under McBeane that cost/benefit approach to contracts relative to talent is now the standard of operation. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

I understand the distinction you are making. However, if an organization places a value on a player (or any player) and makes a decision not to go beyond it then the net effect is basically the same as not being able to afford the player/s. In either scenario because of the established parameter you are not going to keep that player. The organization that is the most accomplished in making decisions based on cost/benefit is New England. It appears that under McBeane that cost/benefit approach to contracts relative to talent is now the standard of operation. 

 

I understand what you're saying but I completely disagree.

 

The assertion that has been made (and was made earlier in this thread, to which I was responding) was that the Bills wanted to keep Woods but simply couldn't afford him because of their cap situation.   I don't think that's true, and I've had a pretty deep dive into the cap at the time and what they spent on other WR afterwards.

 

I have no quarrel with setting a value on a player and making a decision not to go beyond it.  In particular, the Bills had a big unknown - they needed a QB.  Did they want to make a play for one of the pending FA QB such as Cousins? If so, they had a motivation to keep as much cap clear as possible  If that's what the Bills did, it would appear they under-valued Wood relative to his abilities.  I'm not saying that was a wrong decision on their parts all things considered, but it was a decision on their parts.

 

And yes, teams get themselves into situations where they simply CAN'T keep all the players they want to, because cap, and that's very different from a cost/benefit approach.

 

[LSHMEAB]

6 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I understand what you're saying but I completely disagree.

 

The assertion that has been made (and was made earlier in this thread, to which I was responding) was that the Bills wanted to keep Woods but simply couldn't afford him because of their cap situation.   I don't think that's true, and I've had a pretty deep dive into the cap at the time and what they spent on other WR afterwards.

 

I have no quarrel with setting a value on a player and making a decision not to go beyond it.  In particular, the Bills had a big unknown - they needed a QB.  Did they want to make a play for one of the pending FA QB such as Cousins? If so, they had a motivation to keep as much cap clear as possible  If that's what the Bills did, it would appear they under-valued Wood relative to his abilities.  I'm not saying that was a wrong decision on their parts all things considered, but it was a decision on their parts.

 

And yes, teams get themselves into situations where they simply CAN'T keep all the players they want to, because cap, and that's very different from a cost/benefit approach.

 

The only player they couldn't afford to keep was Gilmore. And this was while they were paying the starting QB. They made these decisions. Although in the case of Woods, I believe they would have had to pay him quite a bit more than the Rams. 

 

It's fine if you place a value on a player and don't exceed that number. That seems like a reasonable approach. That being said, they will ultimately judged by how well they do and how quickly they get there.

 

Don't get me wrong; I like the trajectory of the franchise. I simply don't have the same reverence for plans as I do success.

 

People can p&m about their decisions on Woods/Gilmore/Glenn/Watkins/Dareus or they can applaud "cleaning house." None of it matters. Results are the only thing that matter. 

[JohnC]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I understand what you're saying but I completely disagree.

 

The assertion that has been made (and was made earlier in this thread, to which I was responding) was that the Bills wanted to keep Woods but simply couldn't afford him because of their cap situation.   I don't think that's true, and I've had a pretty deep dive into the cap at the time and what they spent on other WR afterwards.

 

I have no quarrel with setting a value on a player and making a decision not to go beyond it.  In particular, the Bills had a big unknown - they needed a QB.  Did they want to make a play for one of the pending FA QB such as Cousins? If so, they had a motivation to keep as much cap clear as possible  If that's what the Bills did, it would appear they under-valued Wood relative to his abilities.  I'm not saying that was a wrong decision on their parts all things considered, but it was a decision on their parts.

 

And yes, teams get themselves into situations where they simply CAN'T keep all the players they want to, because cap, and that's very different from a cost/benefit approach.

 

The difference with paying the amount that Woods could get on the market is that although they could have signed him at that amount it wouldn't have fit in with their strategy of reworking the cap structure for the roster for the upcoming years.

 

I agree with you that if the organization were determined to keep him they could have done so. They decided not to because they made the overarching decision to create more cap space in the near future  highlighted by the fact that they absorbed a major cap hit last year in order to get more cap flexibility this year. 

 

Again, they could have kept Woods but because of their cap and roster strategy they decided not to retain him. That was by choice. 

[Thurman#1]

On 5/2/2019 at 8:23 PM, ScottLaw said:

What am I wrong about?

 

The Saints started winning because they got out of cap hell? That's ridiculous. 

 

 

The cap is a flexible entity. The Saints have been manipulating their cap space FOR YEARS with restructuring of contracts. 

 

Tell me, who did the Saints sign in that 2017 offseason that helped get them from 7-9 to 11-5? 

 

The signing of Kamara was a very good addition.... but he was a draft pick.

 

 

 

"The cap is a flexible entity"? Yeah, but that doesn't help your argument any. Crocodiles and rattlesnakes are flexible too and the cause plenty of harm as well. Yes, the Saints manipulated their cap space for years. But when you do that, you only push the problem down the road and make it more severe when it finally hits. Which it did. The cap is flexible, but that flexibility has limits.

 

Who did the Saints sign in 2017? Four starters, two on offense and two on defense, and a number of platoon guys, guys who saw time and depth guys. They were able to do that because they got the cap under control. No, getting their cap under control wasn't the only reason they got better. But yes, it was a major factor.

 

The cap can absolutely cause major damage to teams chances. It does every year. And teams that handle it well can help their chances.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, LSHMEAB said:

The only player they couldn't afford to keep was Gilmore. And this was while they were paying the starting QB. They made these decisions. Although in the case of Woods, I believe they would have had to pay him quite a bit more than the Rams. 

 

It's fine if you place a value on a player and don't exceed that number. That seems like a reasonable approach. That being said, they will ultimately judged by how well they do and how quickly they get there.

 

Don't get me wrong; I like the trajectory of the franchise. I simply don't have the same reverence for plans as I do success.

 

People can p&m about their decisions on Woods/Gilmore/Glenn/Watkins/Dareus or they can applaud "cleaning house." None of it matters. Results are the only thing that matter. 

 

 

Results are the only thing that matters, yes. But results are a result of tactics. Bad tactics produces bad results. Tactics matter. Same for your other way of putting the same thing. Success comes as a result of plans and tactics.

 

And that's nonsense that the only player they couldn't afford to keep was Gilmore. There was a guy or two they cut because they didn't fit, most particularly Dareus. But all the other cuts there were for two reasons, cap cuts and draft capital to get a QB. It wasn't a mistake that those two reinforced each other.

[LSHMEAB]

18 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

And that's nonsense that the only player they couldn't afford to keep was Gilmore.

They carried 12 mil of cap space into the season. 

[BillsFan4]

Love all the info @john wawrow. Thanks for sharing! 

[eball]

33 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

They passed on Mahomes and Watson the year before. Had they taken either none of those trades are necessary.

 

 

Draft decisions are made in the present, not in hindsight. The Bills didn’t have Watson and Mahomes valued as highly and moved forward with their plan. Why are you so insistent upon living in the past? There were a number of ways McD and Beane could have gone about building the team. Clearly you don’t approve of the one they chose, as you mention it in EVERY. SINGLE. POST. 

 

Move on. 

[BADOLBILZ]

On 5/1/2019 at 5:42 PM, john wawrow said:

 

As I've noted here and/or on the tweeter before.

The Bills, a year ago, were handcuffed in their plans to upgrade the offense for several reasons.

1. They never anticipated losing Wood and Incognito. Once both were gone, they couldn't afford spending much money on their replacements. As Beane told me, simply signing Bodine, meant the Bills had something like $11 million committed to the center position Wood/Bodine.

2. They did take a run at several receivers, including John Brown. The uncertainty at QB -- remember Bills only had Peterman and McCarron under contract at start of free agency -- led the receivers they desired to go elsewhere.

3. Redoing Incognito was part of the plan. That he went sideways after agreeing to the deal is not the Bills' fault.

4. And they were committed to only spending only so much in free agency, because the objective was to free up as much room under the cap as possible.

5. If you go all the way back to Woods, Bills were very much interested in re-signing him. The trouble began when they looked at the price-tag and determined there was no way they would be able to afford what he was going to get on the market.

6. This of course led them to acquire Jordan Matthews and Kelvin Benjamin on essential trial deals. They would've been ahead of the game had one or both worked out. Neither did and the Bills didn't give up much in acquiring either.

 

I agree, the WRs this year have some question marks. Fewer, however, than in years past.

 

We'll see.

 

jw

 

 

John has it ever been explained to you by anyone in the Bills organization why the team didn't hire Beane in January of 2017????   I am sure there was a reason but there certainly wasn't a good excuse for it.   The only positive out of trading away the pick that became Patrick Mahomes is that Beane isn't saddled with it on his resume.    Of course.....coincidentally......all the Bills early picks in that draft(White,Jones, Dawkins) were guys who visited Beane in Carolina.  

 

As for your numbers:

 

1.IMO, that's some cash-to-the-cap level nonsense if that's really how Beane rationalized the lack of attention paid to the OL.    The cap is malleable.   Your rookie QB's brain stem....not so much.  Until Allen started running wild he had his head dribbled off the turf against Cinci in preseason and missed games to injury from unblocked pass rushers in Houston. 

2.They also didn't draft a WR in either 2018 or 2019.

3. Incognito was a pro bowl guard...........why did they need him to take a pay-cut from his already cheap deal?   

4. Cash-to-the-cap.  An entirely self imposed limit is a choice......not a limit.

5. They could afford Star Lotulelei.......who amazingly made only ONE play behind the LOS last year....that's hard to do on that many snaps.   But they couldn't "afford" Bob Woods who put up 2,000 receiving yards since he left?  Here's what happened.......they determined that they DID NOT WANT to spend that.  Important distinction.

6. If you recall the Eagles struggled for months to find any takers for Matthews for any kind of draft capital.    The league was moving away from "lumbering" WR's as HOF WR James Lofton characterized Matthews.   Beane was behind the curve on this.   And the primary pick that he spent on Benjamin was just 29 picks later than the one they acquired for Watkins.  So if they "didn't give up much" in acquiring KB I guess they didn't get much more for Watkins either.  

[Big Turk]

On 5/1/2019 at 9:50 PM, BullBuchanan said:

So, he's a very good QB capable of leading a team to win a SB? I agree. He was elite with the eagles when he was younger. He's not a world beater, but with a good team, he won't be the weak link. That's all the jags need with their defense.

He's a QB that can go on incredible hot streaks at times but also a QB just as likely to go on incredible "meh" streaks for just as long...He's a QB that can go on incredible hot streaks at times but also a QB just as likely to go on incredible "meh" streaks for just as long...basically when he plays for long stretches of time you are left wondering why he isnt capable of doing more...

Edited May 17, 2019 by matter2003

[Gugny]

7 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

He's a QB that can go on incredible hot streaks at times but also a QB just as likely to go on incredible "meh" streaks for just as long...He's a QB that can go on incredible hot streaks at times but also a QB just as likely to go on incredible "meh" streaks for just as long...basically when he plays for long stretches of time you are left wondering why he isnt capable of doing more...

 

Sounds like you're talking about my man Ryan Fitzpatrick!  And that's what Foles is and what we will see he is this season.

[Big Turk]

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Sounds like you're talking about my man Ryan Fitzpatrick!  And that's what Foles is and what we will see he is this season.

Well we know why Fotz isn't capable...he lacks the physical tools so when defenses start squatting on routes he can't make them pay for it regularly to force them to stop.

 

Files is a different conversation...not sure why he is so up and down...there are times he looks like the best QB in the NFL

[Punching Bag]

14 minutes ago, matter2003 said:

Well we know why Fotz isn't capable...he lacks the physical tools so when defenses start squatting on routes he can't make them pay for it regularly to force them to stop.

 

Files is a different conversation...not sure why he is so up and down...there are times he looks like the best QB in the NFL

 

You put the two QBs names in a blender.

[Thurman#1]

3 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

They passed on Mahomes and Watson the year before. Had they taken either none of those trades are necessary.

 

 

 

Yeah, um, no. That's simply wrong.

 

Yeah, they wouldn't have had to get draft capital together to get a QB.

 

But yes, they still would have had to get the horrendously screwed up cap in order.

 

 

[Thurman#1]

4 hours ago, LSHMEAB said:

They carried 12 mil of cap space into the season. 

 

 

Correct. But doesn't make your point. They, the Bills and Panthers both, go into each year with $7 - $10 mill available for emergencies, knowing that unspent money simply gets carried over. Yeah, you could spend every penny, and further burden yourself with more money due over the next few years. That is NOT what smart teams do.

 

If I have several thousand dollars in savings and have expenses and income that will put me in roughly the same spot or a bit worse next year ... yeah, I could spend the thousands and hope things change. But it would be stupid. It's not what the smart households do, though it may well be what the majority do. The smart ones plan several years down the road. They create a system that will leave them flexibility consistently. And they sure as hell don't get hemmed in years when they're not even getting close to their goals (the best I could do as an analogy for being in a Super Bowl window).

 

Whaley not only did a crappy job by getting them in cap trouble. He did it with a team that wasn't even close to competing. He hamstrung this team with poor cap management.

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2018/08/29/buffalo-bills-training-camp-josh-allen-sean-mcdermott-brandon-beane

 

(from training camp in 2018)

 

 

"Lord knows the temptation was there for Sean McDermott. The 44-year-old Bills coach and GM Brandon Beane snapped the franchise’s 18-year playoff drought last fall, their first in Buffalo, and got there by winning four of their final six.

 

"The arrow was pointing up, without question. Which makes their discipline all the more laudable in resisting the natural inclination to ride the momentum into 2018.

 

“ 'Yeah, that’s the near-sighted view, though,' McDermott said, heading off the field on Monday following a walkthrough and his team’s ugly Sunday showing against Cincinnati. 'I understand that. But where I came from in Carolina and before that in Philadelphia, we were able to build and do it the right way. We were able to build a strong, solid foundation. And once we did that, we were able to sustain the success.'

 

"Then, McDermott let himself go a little.

 

“ 'Heck yeah, you want to go out and spend money,' he added. 'But the draft picks, there were only so many left from before we got here. That’s a challenge—we’re not able to depend on those players; they aren’t here anymore. And the cap wasn’t in good shape in order to go out and spend and do some things we wanted. And you don’t want to mortgage, because then you keep having to pay the debt on that mortgage.'

 

"McDermott and Beane haven’t. And they won’t.

 

"That’s why around here this summer, there’s a feeling almost like this is Year 1 2.0. Gone are mainstays like left tackle Cordy Glenn, guard Richie Incognito, center Eric Wood and quarterback Tyrod Taylor. In their places, as everyone saw on Sunday, is a whole lot of the unknown around rookie quarterback Josh Allen.

 

"After last year, that might be tough for Bills fans to swallow. For Beane and McDermott, it’s exciting. And it’s not that they wanted to go through the process of deconstructing the winning team they built in 2017. It’s that they’re moving closer to what they’ve been looking to establish from the start—a foundation that won’t be fleeting.

 

“ 'You gotta be honest with yourself,' Beane said. 'What did we do well, and what are we struggling with? Right off the bat, one thing we struggled with was stopping the run, and we tried to address our front, again not deviating from our plan to get out of this cap situation. We said all along, it’s at least a two-year process—I said two to three, depending on how quickly we could out from underneath some of the bigger deals.' ”

 

 

 

 

 

You would have spent the money, LSHMEAB? Fine, whatever. They couldn't have done that and follow their plan. Which involved getting the cap in excellent order by this year.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Thurman#1

[North Buffalo]

On 4/27/2019 at 8:11 AM, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...Josh between the pipes??..........

no Tre, have you seen his goalie school?

[billsfan89]

On 4/27/2019 at 7:23 AM, ScottLaw said:

Love what they've done with the offensive line.

 

The recievers and pass rush still concern me, not sure they have enough there, more so at reciever, but assuming Allen continues to progress there should be no reason this team isnt competing for a playoff spot come late December.

 

Ed Oliver should be a help to the pass rush. 

[JerseyBills]

McBeane will be here a decade +

[Shortchaz]

It’s the off-season, so of course the Bills are better ?.

 

not to be Debbie downer, but this is part of the pattern for NFL teams and it’s by design. The team is trying to sell tickets. Everything is going in the right direction yet we’re projected to win 6.5 games. 

 

As a fan of football it’s hard to not be excited about the unknown, but if I’ve learned anything from being a fan of the Bills, my expectations, which have historically been based on what is put forward by the front office and repeated by the press, rarely match reality when the season starts, e.g. the first two games of last season.

 

 It’s fun to talk about and excitement will continue to grow until the season, but my expectations for this season are 6.5 wins. I’ve moved to the “show me” stage of my fandom.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Shortchaz

[teef]

9 minutes ago, Shortchaz said:

It’s the off-season, so of course the Bills are better ?.

 

not to be Debbie downer, but this is part of the pattern for NFL teams and it’s by design. The team is trying to sell tickets. Everything is going in the right direction yet we’re projected to win 6.5 games. 

 

As a fan of football it’s hard to not be excited about the unknown, but if I’ve learned anything from being a fan of the Bills, my expectations, which have historically been based on what is put forward by the front office and repeated by the press, rarely match reality when the season starts, e.g. the first two games of last season.

 

 It’s fun to talk about and excitement will continue to grow until the season, but my expectations for this season are 6.5 wins. I’ve moved to the “show me” stage of my fandom.

Yet another poster that’s tons of fun. 

[JaCrispy]

4 hours ago, JerseyBills said:

McBeane will be here a decade +

That would be nice 

[SoTier]

On 5/1/2019 at 5:42 PM, john wawrow said:

 

As I've noted here and/or on the tweeter before.

The Bills, a year ago, were handcuffed in their plans to upgrade the offense for several reasons.

1. They never anticipated losing Wood and Incognito. Once both were gone, they couldn't afford spending much money on their replacements. As Beane told me, simply signing Bodine, meant the Bills had something like $11 million committed to the center position Wood/Bodine.

2. They did take a run at several receivers, including John Brown. The uncertainty at QB -- remember Bills only had Peterman and McCarron under contract at start of free agency -- led the receivers they desired to go elsewhere.

3. Redoing Incognito was part of the plan. That he went sideways after agreeing to the deal is not the Bills' fault.

4. And they were committed to only spending only so much in free agency, because the objective was to free up as much room under the cap as possible.

5. If you go all the way back to Woods, Bills were very much interested in re-signing him. The trouble began when they looked at the price-tag and determined there was no way they would be able to afford what he was going to get on the market.

6. This of course led them to acquire Jordan Matthews and Kelvin Benjamin on essential trial deals. They would've been ahead of the game had one or both worked out. Neither did and the Bills didn't give up much in acquiring either.

 

I agree, the WRs this year have some question marks. Fewer, however, than in years past.

 

We'll see.

 

jw

 

This list smacks of simply repeating excuses circulated by the Bills FO to cover their collective backsides for making poor decisions. 

 

Don't give me this "They never anticipated losing Wood and Incognito" BS.   Yes, Wood's force retirement was an unexpected blow, but Incognito was 36 years old.   A competent FO anticipates that 36 year old OLers just might not be around too much longer ... or, heaven forbid, OLers might get injured.   Despite losing Incognito and with John Miller having struggled in 2017 and Vlad Ducasse being a career bottom-feeder OG, the Bills finally got around to drafting their one and only 2018 OLer at the end of the fifth round.

 

Technically, the Bills had Tyrod Taylor and Nathan Peterman on the payroll at the beginning of free agency, and then traded Taylor to the Browns a day after the FA began.   McCarron was signed after Taylor was traded.   If FA WRs chose to sign elsewhere because of the QB situation, that's on Beane/McDermott for choosing to have such inexperienced/incompetent (Peterman) QBs on the roster.

 

Saying that "they were committed to only spending only so much in free agency, because the objective was to free up as much room under the cap as possible" says that they -- Beane, McDermott, Pegula, all the bean-counters at OBD -- were perfectly okay with spending huge amounts of draft capital to get a first round QB but weren't really interested in seeing him succeed.  How is that significantly different from the way that the Donahoe or the Brandon/Levy/Jauron or the Brandon/Nix/ Whaley regimes operated -- exciting the fan base with individual FA signings or draft picks but never building a quality team to make those signings worthwhile?

 

As for re-signing Woods, I doubt that the Bills ever had any expectations of doing so.   Woods was simply too good to settle for whatever the Bills were willing to offer him.  The last top class WR that the Bills drafted and re-signed for the current market rate for #1 WRs was Eric Moulds.  While Lee Evans was also re-signed, he had never played as well as expected.  

 

It wasn't a case of they couldn't "afford" to re-sign Stephon Gilmore, either.  It's that they chose to not to do so because that's been the Bills practice for decades: draft first round DBs, develop them into top players, and let them walk away in FA rather than pay them.  Only first rounder Leotis McKelvin, who was never more than a competent DB, was re-signed.  Winfield, Clements, Whitner, and Gilmore all left because the Bills decided to draft their replacements rather than pay them.  

 

One of the big reasons that I'm not sold on the Beane and McDermott regime being any more successful than their predecessors is that they've done so many things the same way they've been done in the past.  They seem to be carrying on the tainted legacy of Russ Brandon of putting the making more profit ahead of winning more games.  Before he was hired by the Bills, Brandon's claim to fame was gutting the Florida Marlins the year after they won the 1997 World Series (Fire Sale ).   That shouldn't be surprising since they were both hired while he was in charge of the team, so it's likely they share his views about paying for players.  From your post, it certainly sounds that way, which to my mind doesn't bode well for building a winning franchise on their watch.   The way the entire QB situation was handled in 2018, from not providing Allen with an experienced QB coach to the get-go to keeping Peterman on the roster long after it became clear that the team wouldn't play for him to waiting a month for Anderson and to finally getting around to signing a somewhat competent backup QB only after Anderson got injured doesn't scream "this organization is going to do whatever it needs to do to win games".  It says just the opposite.

 

I hope I'm wrong, but I'm not jumping on this bandwagon until it proves itself.  I've been fooled too many times before by the Bills.

[JohnC]

23 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

The conversation is about the past. Thurman made it seem like it was a necessity to trade all those players for draft picks. It wasn't. 

 

Obviously they didn't value Mahomes and Watson as much otherwise one of them would be here. 

 

Stop getting so butt hurt dude. It's a message board. It's conversation about the Bills. Critical thinking isn't a bad thing.??

McDermott, and later with the hiring of Beane, made the decision to deconstruct not only the roster and cap structure but also the organization. They could have taken a more incremental approach but that wasn't what they wanted to do. Just look at how much they cleaned house and brought in their own players. That was their plan and that is exactly what they did. 

 

I would rather have had McDermott draft either Mahomes or Watson in his first draft but my sense was that he didn't trust Whaley and his scouting staff to make that evaluation and judgment. The trade down within the context of him remaking the roster and recalibrating the cap structure made sense because he gained more picks to bring in players to replace the players he was going to dispatch. 

 

There is a good case to be made that it wasn't necessary to demolish most of what was done prior to the new regime's arrival. But the clapping coach was hired by the owner because he had specific plan that was counter to what was done prior to his installation. And looking back and at the present that is exactly what he is doing: implementing his plan. 

[Bill from NYC]

8 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

Whaley not only did a crappy job by getting them in cap trouble. He did it with a team that wasn't even close to competing. He hamstrung this team with poor cap management.

 

Indeed.