John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[oldmanfan]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You make such compelling arguments.

 

 

 

 

From the head coach:

 

When you look at the position he plays, and you’ve heard me say this before, it’s the most unselfish position on the football field, the defensive tackle position, in particular the one-technique, which is typically where he plays,” McDermott said. “A lot of the time he frees up, the way the game works is he frees up the linebackers to make plays by absorbing and taking on double teams and what not. I thought our run defense inside, which is where Star works, was mostly solid [Sunday]. Outside, we could’ve done some things better but inside, I think for the most part he played a solid game.”

[Augie]

34 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

I just don’t believe any of this.

 

You can have that belief, without being a jerk. That’s a step above. 

[Gugny]

4 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Sammy had 114 yards on 8 targets in the championship game.... It's just a matter of staying healthy with him. 

 

There is no perhaps. He'd be the best WR on this roster by a mile.

 

He'd be the most talented.  The best would play through discomfort.  Sam is a selfish prick who COULD be a great WR.

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

He'd be the most talented.  The best would play through discomfort.  Sam is a selfish prick who COULD be a great WR.

 

I’ll wish the best for everyone, including Sammy. I hope his words after leaving the Bills are sincere. I hope he can realize all his potential. 

[Gugny]

4 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

I’ll wish the best for everyone, including Sammy. I hope his words after leaving the Bills are sincere. I hope he can realize all his potential. 

 

Potential.  That's what he's been since he was drafted.  He quit on the Bills vs. the Jags in London.  He was crap to me since then.  Glad he's gone.

[Augie]

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Potential.  That's what he's been since he was drafted.  He quit on the Bills vs. the Jags in London.  He was crap to me since then.  Glad he's gone.

 

For mentioning the Bills vs Jags in London, I wish that Royale’s brother will mistake you for his GF.......if you know what I mean.....

 

 

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Cripple Creek said:

No, it is one reason.

 

And the others are? 

[Royale with Cheese]

47 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

You make such compelling arguments.

 

 

 

 

 

You brought up hypotheticals.

I brought up they haven’t done anything to replace him.  

 

We needed DT help last year...we draft Phillips.  

 

Jordan Phillips gets put out on the street.  Comes to Buffalo at week 5.  Plays 26% of the plays on defense.  Gets a 1 year $4.5 million dollar contract.  That’s not who they are pushing to take snaps away from Star.

 

Star is going to start and play roughly 50% of the snaps.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Royale with Cheese

[Gugny]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And the others are? 

 

I hate to speak for CC, but I'm sure he's in bed by now.  I think his point is that - no matter how great a young QB looks after his first couple seasons, a lot can change/happen.

 

Injuries are obviously one thing.  But perhaps after a year or two of tape, other teams figure out how to effectively defend them.  Maybe the QB's team loses high quality receivers and replaces them with less talent.  Maybe the O line changes.  Or the defense.  Or the coaching staff.

 

It's not unfair to say that, in order for most QBs to be successful, some stars have to align.  I think Mahomes is the real deal, but let's face it - he had a LOT of talent (players and coaches) supporting him last year.

 

I may not be accurately representing what CC is trying to say, but that's how I feel.

 

 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

5 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Because he was paid half of what Dareus made, 5 years later...

 

Star clogs holes, that’s his job.  Dareus at a shade below $100 million is supposed to be a wrecking ball.  Did you think they made the same money or something?

 

I remember hearing the same stuff about Dareus before and after the draft that I’m hearing about Star now. His impact won’t always show up on the stat sheet. Dareus was clearly traded for attitude reasons. He is a better player than star though. 

[Patrick Duffy]

6 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

The nonsense was you attacking another poster for daring to rate the Bills current WR corps as being of significantly lesser stature than most other teams' WR groups before the season starts.  NOBODY knows how anything in the upcoming season is going to turn out but EVERYBODY makes predictions, you included, and it's all based on taking what teams/coaches/players have done in the past and guessing what they'll do in the future.  I'm sure that if the poster had claimed that the Bills had a top ten WR corps now that they added Beasley and Brown, you wouldn't complain that "they can't be [one of the best] in the league in a season that has not started."  

 

The Bills WRs were so poor last year that they could improve significantly and still be in the bottom third of the league.  Beasley and Brown could both have career years and the WR corps as a whole could still be a bottom feeder unit if Jones and Foster don't play well.

 

 

 

If the Bills had chosen to keep Cordy Glenn, they would have had two decent OTs.  They could have played Glenn at LT and put Dawkins at RT, but McDermott and Beane either never expected that without Incognito next to him, Dawkins' play would plummet or they didn't care.  They could have also invested more than 1 late fifth round pick and some UDFA and waiver wire refugees in the OL in the 2018 draft.

 

They might have also tried to work with Incognito ... like not demanding he take a pay cut. It seems to me that they might have wanted to push incognito out the door once Wood was gone.  Maybe they only kept him because he was Woods' buddy.   "Encouraging" Incognito to retire might have very well been the right call but not doing so could have been a possibility. 

 

FTR, the Bills did not have a "terrible cap problem" in 2017 until they traded Dareus, lost Wood to injury/retirement, and then traded Glenn and had to eat the remainder of the guaranteed portions of those contracts.    They might have incurred dead cap money because of trading Taylor, too.  I think it would have been pretty hard for Beane to promise to "fix" a problem that didn't exist when he was interviewing for the GM position.

 

 

 

 Again, saying ***** that didn't happen. What is it with posters like you? Amazing!. The person you say I "attacked" DID NOT MAKE A PREDICTION. He sated it as a FACT that referred them in the bottom THIS season that HAS NOT STARTED YET. If it would have been just a prediction then I wouldn't have pointed it out in the 1st place. Of course we all make predictions, but you can't call a prediction a "fact" when it has not even happened yet.

 

And YES you were comparing those WR,s you listed, or implying that I was comparing the two, which again is nonsense jibberish that never happened. Do you even read what you type? Serous question. Hard to believe that you do with some of the stuff I see you post.

 

Looks like that seems to be very hard for you to understand for some reason. Maybe the caps can help you read it better, and it's sad that you go making stuff up to try and justify your silly, nonsense of a pitiful argument.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Patrick_Duffy

[Nihilarian]

7 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Because he was paid half of what Dareus made, 5 years later...

 

Star clogs holes, that’s his job.  Dareus at a shade below $100 million is supposed to be a wrecking ball.  Did you think they made the same money or something?

 

 He was the No. 3 overall pick in 2011, and in his six-plus years, he did not live up to his draft status. Dareus was a good player for Buffalo, and he was selected to two Pro Bowls, but he was never the difference-maker the Bills hoped he would be, and then he became a drain on the budget when former general manager Doug Whaley stupidly gave him a $96 million contract extension that included $60 million in guaranteed money.

 

Trading Dareus enabled the Bills to offload his massive salary, and while they ate some dead cap money, they rid themselves of a player who just didn’t seem totally bought into Sean McDermott’s process, nor his defense. Oh, and there was the off-field nonsense they would no longer have to be worried about. 

 

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/sports/2018/01/05/buffalo-bills-marcell-dareus-trade-jacksonville-jaguars-nfl-playoffs/1005697001/

 

 

[Cripple Creek]

7 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And the others are? 

Time, games, success. Greatness is defined over time.

[Royale with Cheese]

5 hours ago, Chemical said:

 

I remember hearing the same stuff about Dareus before and after the draft that I’m hearing about Star now. His impact won’t always show up on the stat sheet. Dareus was clearly traded for attitude reasons. He is a better player than star though. 

 

So what you hear means it’s the truth or something?

 

The reason Dareus was paid twice as much 4 years ago is because he was supposed to be a 2 dimensional player.  He blows up plays in both the run and the pass.  Since he signed his huge contract, he just fills holes.  

Now Dareus had to restructure that deal to a two year, $20 million dollar contract with just $5 million guaranteed.

 

Before his big contract, he was a top 2-3 DT in the league.... Now, he’s not even in the top 25.  He was traded for attitude and lack of production with the money he was making.

 

Dareus and Stars roles aren’t the same so comparing them is apples to oranges.

 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

13 hours ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

First off, I never said that "you" said it, you quoted me about the subject so I explained. Secondly, the poster that I was originally referring  to once again ,stated it as a fact. 

 

To answer your IMO awkward question, a draft is held for teams to get better and younger players,  depending on needs and how much cap room they have (amazed I am explaining this). The other part about passed performances is players change, they get better and they get worse (thought that was quite obvious also)

 

Don't know how you manage to get picking names out of a hat with my previous post, I'm baffled by that one. Anyways, I don't know where your trying to go with this because my previous post was about the poster who stated the WR core was already bottom of the league when the season hasn't started. I made that perfectly clear, all this other stuff you're talking about, I have no idea how you got that out of my post.

 

Anyways, feel like I'm just repeating myself and talking to air. So I'm going to move and and just let you spin your tires here. Have a good 1.

 

I don't know what planet you're from, but here on earth people do use the past to predict the future with a decent amount of certainty in many cases.  Your whole argument with the other poster is you that just because they were lousy last year, until they play this season, you have no idea how they'll be.  So teams draft players based on how they played the prior season with a different set of rules and a playing in a completely different environment.  But they still somehow use that data to draft.  Based on your comments though past performance means nothing so then as I suggested why not just pick names from a hat.  Just as much chance as getting it right according to you.

 

In January you turn on the TV and listen to the weather and they say a high of 23, do you think we don't know that, it could be 90 today.  Granted a much higher change of it being cold in January than the Bills receivers not improving some. Though I'd say there's a better chance of having a warm day in January than the current Bills receivers finishing the year in the top 5.

 

I don't recall the exact words the poster said that you are arguing he stated it as a fact, but that's a stretch.  It's hard for anyone to say more than 2 words about anything without it coming out as if they are stating a fact, but in reality 90% of the time it is more of an opinion so really no all that bothered by him stating it as a "fact".  Just like the weatherman who states it will be 23 today and he's stating in a factorial manor and instead it's 25, does that mean he's completely clueless, I don't think so.  Do I think the group will improve yes, top 5 no, and honestly would be less surprised to see no improvement than top 5.

 

So enjoy your time on whatever illogical planet you're from that uses no past history to predict the future.  Good luck with that!

[Cripple Creek]

5 minutes ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

 

I don't know what planet you're from, but here on earth people do use the past to predict the future with a decent amount of certainty in many cases.  Your whole argument with the other poster is you that just because they were lousy last year, until they play this season, you have no idea how they'll be.  So teams draft players based on how they played the prior season with a different set of rules and a playing in a completely different environment.  But they still somehow use that data to draft.  Based on your comments though past performance means nothing so then as I suggested why not just pick names from a hat.  Just as much chance as getting it right according to you.

 

In January you turn on the TV and listen to the weather and they say a high of 23, do you think we don't know that, it could be 90 today.  Granted a much higher change of it being cold in January than the Bills receivers not improving some. Though I'd say there's a better chance of having a warm day in January than the current Bills receivers finishing the year in the top 5.

 

I don't recall the exact words the poster said that you are arguing he stated it as a fact, but that's a stretch.  It's hard for anyone to say more than 2 words about anything without it coming out as if they are stating a fact, but in reality 90% of the time it is more of an opinion so really no all that bothered by him stating it as a "fact".  Just like the weatherman who states it will be 23 today and he's stating in a factorial manor and instead it's 25, does that mean he's completely clueless, I don't think so.  Do I think the group will improve yes, top 5 no, and honestly would be less surprised to see no improvement than top 5.

 

So enjoy your time on whatever illogical planet you're from that uses no past history to predict the future.  Good luck with that!

Are you sure you're in the right thread? @Mike in Horseheads does provide daily weather reports.  Maybe you should talk to him.

[Thurman#1]

14 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

If the Bills had chosen to keep Cordy Glenn, they would have had two decent OTs.  They could have played Glenn at LT and put Dawkins at RT, but McDermott and Beane either never expected that without Incognito next to him, Dawkins' play would plummet or they didn't care.  They could have also invested more than 1 late fifth round pick and some UDFA and waiver wire refugees in the OL in the 2018 draft.

 

They might have also tried to work with Incognito ... like not demanding he take a pay cut. It seems to me that they might have wanted to push incognito out the door once Wood was gone.  Maybe they only kept him because he was Woods' buddy.   "Encouraging" Incognito to retire might have very well been the right call but not doing so could have been a possibility. 

 

FTR, the Bills did not have a "terrible cap problem" in 2017 until they traded Dareus, lost Wood to injury/retirement, and then traded Glenn and had to eat the remainder of the guaranteed portions of those contracts.    They might have incurred dead cap money because of trading Taylor, too.  I think it would have been pretty hard for Beane to promise to "fix" a problem that didn't exist when he was interviewing for the GM position.

 

 

 

 

Yes, as you point out, if they'd kept Cordy Glenn he might well have started. But as I have pointed out again and again and again ... no matter how much you want to pretend that we didn't have a cap problem, we did. You want to put your hands over your ears and say, "Nonny, nonny, nonny, not listening, no cap problem," that's fine. But we did. Choose to miss the point if you must, but we did, and that's the main reason Glenn was traded.

 

That and of course one of the main reasons we were rebuilding was because we were in pathological need of a possible franchise QB, and the Glenn trade put us in a much better position to get Josh Allen.

 

And yeah, they might have worked with Incognito. If they'd wanted to take on a guy who was showing signs of a massive breakdown. They didn't. Pretty much everyone here but you is fine with that decision.

 

The cap problem was hanging over this team like a thunderhead from Whaley's term here. He'd spent like a team in the last year of a Super Bowl window to produce a mediocre roster that managed seven wins.

 

And I'm not guessing that Beane promised that in the interview. It's been widely reported that he promised to fix the cap at his interview. Again, you want to hide your head in the sand about their cap problems, that's fine, but you'll miss stuff, as you are now, and it will be very obvious to everyone around you.

Edited June 15, 2019 by Thurman#1

[Mike in Horseheads]

4 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said:

Are you sure you're in the right thread? @Mike in Horseheads does provide daily weather reports.  Maybe you should talk to him.

You can call me Al

 

 

[GunnerBill]

4 hours ago, Cripple Creek said:

Time, games, success. Greatness is defined over time.

 

And nobody has yet defined them as great. You said you were suspicious. That suggests you have seen something to believe their performance levels won't last. When I have questioned you on that your answer was "they might get injured." So beyond that what gives you pause to be suspicious? 

[BADOLBILZ]

11 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

You brought up hypotheticals.

I brought up they haven’t done anything to replace him.  

 

We needed DT help last year...we draft Phillips.  

 

Jordan Phillips gets put out on the street.  Comes to Buffalo at week 5.  Plays 26% of the plays on defense.  Gets a 1 year $4.5 million dollar contract.  That’s not who they are pushing to take snaps away from Star.

 

Star is going to start and play roughly 50% of the snaps.

 

 

What I brought up was Lotulelei's anemic production and untenable contract..........that's not a hypothetical........it happened.

 

And btw.........yet again you stumble over statistics in this thread...........Phillips played 39% of his teams defensive snaps in 2018(versus Star's 47% and Phillips 38%).    You literally pointed out that he didn't start playing for Buffalo until week 5 then cited the % of snaps he played out of Buffalo's 16 games?    I'm not even sure what your point was bringing it up but........again you just don't seem to understand how stats work and what they mean.

 

My take is this.........Lotulelei is the most one dimensional and least productive of the Bills top 3 veteran DT's......and the other two aren't that good.

 

The only thing he does well at this point is not miss games to injury..........but barring significant injuries if he doesn't play a lot better he could start missing games due to lack of impact.   Which would be an absurdly poor result for a 2018 free agent pickup with a fully guaranteed $11.5M cap hit in 2019.