Has Sean McDermott's Bills met your personal expectations over the last four season?

[PrimeTime101]

On 3/2/2023 at 7:44 PM, Mike in Horseheads said:

Are you ever going to stop your personal vendetta against the guy?

I think it is a fair question to ask at this point.. And I am by no means a hater of McD.

[PBF81]

9 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

I think it is a fair question to ask at this point.. And I am by no means a hater of McD.

 

My only problem with the question is that everyone's expectations are different.  People simply wanting entertaining football, as some have even said as a standard, will be satisfied.  Those of us that sat in the cold for the '90s playoff games walking into the games expecting to win them all, and we did, at home, have a different expectation, one that's at least as lofty as it was back then.  Allen > Kelly.  To whom more is given, more is expected.  

 

A better question would be, Has McDermott done what he's said he would do?  

 

McD's expectations were to have won a Championship by now as well.  So were mine given Allen.  In fact, I dare say, or perhaps ask, how many people responding in this poll as the beginning of the season had the expectation of winning it all this year prior to the season starting?  Those people, unless they answered "fell short," aren't being honest.  

 

My question would be, ... Have McD & Beane left the team on the field this coming season consistent with their own rhetoric and narratives when they started here, or have they fallen short?  If short, then why.  

 

[PrimeTime101]

11 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

My only problem with the question is that everyone's expectations are different.  People simply wanting entertaining football, as some have even said as a standard, will be satisfied.  Those of us that sat in the cold for the '90s playoff games walking into the games expecting to win them all, and we did, at home, have a different expectation, one that's at least as lofty as it was back then.  Allen > Kelly.  To whom more is given, more is expected.  

 

A better question would be, Has McDermott done what he's said he would do?  

 

McD's expectations were to have won a Championship by now as well.  So were mine given Allen.  In fact, I dare say, or perhaps ask, how many people responding in this poll as the beginning of the season had the expectation of winning it all this year prior to the season starting?  Those people, unless they answered "fell short," aren't being honest.  

 

My question would be, ... Have McD & Beane left the team on the field this coming season consistent with their own rhetoric and narratives when they started here, or have they fallen short?  If short, then why.  

 

So what? so we are all individuals with right to different opinions.

 

I think people are judging expectations more of what we do in the playoffs than getting there. 

 

13 seconds... I am over it but that says enough that we should of won at least 1 AFCC

 

But different people different expectations different answer. so what!  

[Einstein]

On 3/2/2023 at 7:26 PM, LeGOATski said:

Yep. I wanna watch quality football. Playoffs every year. Consistently contending.

 

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

[Beast]

Just now, Einstein said:

 

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

Fairytale time?

[Chaos]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

My only problem with the question is that everyone's expectations are different

This is the whole point.  Somewhere between 99.99% and 100% of the people posting on TBD are posting praise or criticisms from their own personal set of expectations.  No one is ever persuading anybody with a different set of expectations on either what they have witnessed happening or expect to happen next.  I ran the poll because I did not really know the split.  And its pretty even, with nothing approaching a majority.  So it is perfectly reasonable and should be expected for more people to disagree with whatever view you have on almost any Bills subject than to agree with you.  The one thing everyone can control is to not act like their own personal expectations are the only set that is reasonable. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by Chaos

[Chaos]

28 minutes ago, Beast said:

Fairytale time?

Mike Tomlin and John Harbaugh have had lengthy careers on the principle that one is enough.  

[LeGOATski]

55 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

No, I'll take continuous winning seasons and a SB

[ChasBB]

I didn't vote, but I would have if there was a 4th choice that read "He exceeded my expectations for three of past four seasons, but fell short of my expectations this past season"

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, PrimeTime101 said:

So what? so we are all individuals with right to different opinions.

 

I think people are judging expectations more of what we do in the playoffs than getting there. 

 

13 seconds... I am over it but that says enough that we should of won at least 1 AFCC

 

But different people different expectations different answer. so what!  

 

To address your "So What?" ... 

 

That then depends upon what the purpose of posing the question was.  Was it merely to stir up dissent amongst posters?  Because as I see it, that's about all that it's done.  

 

You're absolutely correct, ... 

Quote

we are all individuals with right to different opinions.

 

... which was at the root of my point.  So we agree there.  

 

And yes, also at the heart of my implications is exactly what else you said .... 

Quote

 I think people are judging expectations more of what we do in the playoffs than getting there. 

 

Well, exactly, which again, feeds into my statement as well.  You seem to be unintentionally validating what I said.  

 

So allow me to ask, is it reasonable to base our expectations more on "what we do in the playoffs than getting there," or not?  

 

Seems to me that for someone answering no, they're likely to be a lot more approving as to whether or not McD has met their expectations, no?  

 

Visa versa as well, for someone answering yes, that playoff performance means more, doesn't it stand to reason that they're more likely to claim that McD has not met their expectations?   Unless of course being routinely outplayed and ousted in them is their specific expectation that is.  

 

I'm a little confused as to the point of your response.   

 

 

 

 

[PBF81]

38 minutes ago, Chaos said:

This is the whole point.  Somewhere between 99.99% and 100% of the people posting on TBD are posting praise or criticisms from their own personal set of expectations.  No one is ever persuading anybody with a different set of expectations on either what they have witnessed happening or expect to happen next.  I ran the poll because I did not really know the split.  And its pretty even, with nothing approaching a majority.  So it is perfectly reasonable and should be expected for more people to disagree with whatever view you have on almost any Bills subject than to agree with you.  The one thing everyone can control is to not act like their own personal expectations are the only set that is reasonable. 

 

Why not simply have asked "What were your expectations for the team to date under McDermott as head coach?"  

 

A.  I expected to merely regularly win the division. 

B.  I expected to make the playoffs every season, but not to advance much in them.  

C.  I expected us to challenge for AFC Champions regularly.  

D.  I expected us to have won a Super Bowl/Championship by now.  

E.  I expected an up-and-down campaign with little if any consistency or continuity.  

F.  I had no expectations of even making the playoffs regularly.  

 

Or add in whatever other option you wanted.  That would tell you exactly what peoples' expectations were from McDermott, rather than posing the question with the backdrop that McD has either fulfilled or not fulfilled them, which necessarily will give you false responses by the supporters of McD.  Think about it, someone that had greater expectations, but that supports McD thinking that he's not the reason for our problems, something difficult to believe, is likely to answer in favor of McD.  There are many divisions amongst fans here with some complexities.  Some support McD, Beane, Dorsey, and Frasier (now gone I realize, and not likely to return ever imo).  Some support McD but not Beane.  Some support one or the other or both Coordinators but not McD.  Some support McD but not one or both Coordinators.  Some Support Beane but not McD.  

 

Anyway, the question as I posed it takes a good part of that bias from McD apologists out of the mix.  I think you'd have gotten more honest and therefore accurate answers by asking the question that way.  

 

That's all I'm saying.  Personally I don't care, it's not like I have an axe to grind or a dog in the fight as it were.  I realize that my opinions mean nothing in the grand scheme.  I'm just pissing into the wind like everyone else here.  LOL  

It can be a fun distraction to discuss, with people that enjoy discussing.  Some take this stuff way too seriously in their lives.  : / 

 

 

 

 

[Chaos]

23 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

Why not simply have asked "What were your expectations for the team to date under McDermott as head coach?"  

 

A.  I expected to merely regularly win the division. 

B.  I expected to make the playoffs every season, but not to advance much in them.  

C.  I expected us to challenge for AFC Champions regularly.  

D.  I expected us to have won a Super Bowl/Championship by now.  

E.  I expected an up-and-down campaign with little if any consistency or continuity.  

F.  I had no expectations of even making the playoffs regularly.  

 

Or add in whatever other option you wanted.  That would tell you exactly what peoples' expectations were from McDermott, rather than posing the question with the backdrop that McD has either fulfilled or not fulfilled them, which necessarily will give you false responses by the supporters of McD.  Think about it, someone that had greater expectations, but that supports McD thinking that he's not the reason for our problems, something difficult to believe, is likely to answer in favor of McD.  There are many divisions amongst fans here with some complexities.  Some support McD, Beane, Dorsey, and Frasier (now gone I realize, and not likely to return ever imo).  Some support McD but not Beane.  Some support one or the other or both Coordinators but not McD.  Some support McD but not one or both Coordinators.  Some Support Beane but not McD.  

 

Anyway, the question as I posed it takes a good part of that bias from McD apologists out of the mix.  I think you'd have gotten more honest and therefore accurate answers by asking the question that way.  

 

That's all I'm saying.  Personally I don't care, it's not like I have an axe to grind or a dog in the fight as it were.  I realize that my opinions mean nothing in the grand scheme.  I'm just pissing into the wind like everyone else here.  LOL  

It can be a fun distraction to discuss, with people that enjoy discussing.  Some take this stuff way too seriously in their lives.  : / 

 

 

 

 

You don't understand the purpose, and I can't explain it differently than before. Don't take it personal. 

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, Einstein said:

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

 

Given the team and leadership we now have?  ... in a NY second.  

 

I could die a happy man with just one Championship.  More would be great, none is unacceptable.  LOL  

 

They've had 6 seasons (McD) and 5 seasons (Beane) to get us to a Super Bowl, something that our team with a notably lesser QB did four straight years, and they've failed.  

 

Now we've got a ton of holes, Miami and the Jets, of all teams, breathing up our ass and with already splitting with them with a superior team this past season, and of course the team that simply won't die, the Pats, even if they will hover around .500 and fail to make the playoffs for the foreseeable future, they're still a threat to take a regular season game.  

 

I don't know how much Pegula cares about optimizing the performance of this team given the talent that we do have, but depending upon how this coming season goes, I can envision changes in coaching and management ahead.  

 

I don't think we'll have any losing seasons in the near future, I can't even envision that with Allen at QB, but I can see us not winning the division, going in as a Wild Card, and of course our playoff performance to date raises serious questions as to whether McD is even capable of winning the three or more likely four games in the playoffs required to win it all.  The failures in coaching prowess in those games have not been merely simple miscues, they've been cataclysmic oversights taht fall well into the "WTF was he thinking" category.  Unless it's a trash QB, our defense doesn't even play well when we win, and we're likely losing Edmunds and Poyer and who knows who else.  

 

If we're even close to the #1 D in the regular season this forthcoming season I'll be thoroughly impressed with McD given the current lack of talent on the unit should Edmunds and Poyer leave, and barring some completely unexpected major moves on D.  Those are two huge losses.  I wouldn't pay huge money to keep either for reasons, but the dropoff from them to the "next man up" in both cases is sizeable.  I mean who steps in for Edmunds?  This talk of Bernard taking his place is laughable, and he's arguably the "best option."  

 

 

11 minutes ago, Chaos said:

You don't understand the purpose, and I can't explain it differently than before. Don't take it personal. 

 

Fair enough, apparently not.  Likewise, I never mean anything personally.  Always trying to engage.  

[Dopey]

Why try to make this more complicated than what it is? Simple poll that gave me a better feeling about fans here on TBD. Why? The number of voters who are disappointed or have not had their expectations met are outnumbered by a 2:1 margin. I always felt it was a minority, no matter how vocal. 

Edited March 5, 2023 by Dopey

[PBF81]

1 hour ago, Einstein said:

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

 

BTW, Levy immediately went downhill after Polian was fired.  Everyone knows that the reason for our success back then had far more to do with Polian than with Levy.  We went to one more Super Bowl on Polian's residual talent, a roster that he himself described as a special collection of players.  After that fourth Super Bowl Levy only won the division once in the next and his last four years here.  In that season we lost in the Divisional round.  We posted only two of four winning seasons and went 1-3 in those playoffs.  We got hammered by the O'Donnell-led Steelers and lost to the Brunnell-led Jags to end our playoffs those two seasons.  

 

Levy, after going 49-15 (.766) to bring us to the Super Bowl in those four regular seasons, then went 33-31 (.516) in the next and his last four.  

 

I'm expecting a similar although not quite as drastic trend here now.  Beane is nowhere close to Polian in terms of drafting.  We'll see how McD does this season.  Beane's rookie classes have produced next to nothing in their rookie years.  Beane has said that we're not doing anything significant in free agency and we have little room to do much there.  So we're essentially taking this team into next season.  Will the Jets and/or Fins improve?  The Pats?  Will Jones make a big leap in his third season like some other QBs and like Allen did?  We don't know yet.  

 

In looking at our current roster defensively, if we had to take that into this regular season without Poyer, with White having played poorly upon his return thus far, with Edmunds gone and only Milano as a starting quality LB in there, with no proven pass-rushers on the DL w/o Von Miller in the lineup, and with Von Miller unlikely to ever return to anything close to what he was, I'm more than a little concerned.  I can easily see us falling well into the average range defensively, McD's forte`.  

 

It's unwise to expect much from a rookie WR drafted where we'll have access.  Singletary may be gone too, and he's our best all-around RB.  We'll see how Cook pans out I suppose, but our use of RBs is suspect as well.  Our offense won't be "as good" if our defense doesn't play as it has.  

 

One of the quite relevant things that I haven't seen anyone discuss here is turnovers.  

 

This past season with our #2 D we had 27 Takeaways to go with out 27 Giveaways.  

Last season and our #1 D, we had 30 Takeaways to pair with our 22 Giveaways.  

 

In the playoffs however, this past postseason we had only 2 Takeaways, both against Miami.  None against Cinci.  

Last year, 2021, we also had 2 Takeaways, both against NE, all four of those were INTs against Thompson and Jones.  

 

The point, we rely heavily on turnovers/takeaways, but more importantly, the defensive pressure that accompanies them, which seems to be absent against the better teams (i.e., teams with average or better QBs unlike Thompson or Jones) in the playoffs.  

 

 

[Ga boy]

2 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

My only problem with the question is that everyone's expectations are different.  People simply wanting entertaining football, as some have even said as a standard, will be satisfied.  Those of us that sat in the cold for the '90s playoff games walking into the games expecting to win them all, and we did, at home, have a different expectation, one that's at least as lofty as it was back then.  Allen > Kelly.  To whom more is given, more is expected.  

 

A better question would be, Has McDermott done what he's said he would do?  

 

McD's expectations were to have won a Championship by now as well.  So were mine given Allen.  In fact, I dare say, or perhaps ask, how many people responding in this poll as the beginning of the season had the expectation of winning it all this year prior to the season starting?  Those people, unless they answered "fell short," aren't being honest.  

 

My question would be, ... Have McD & Beane left the team on the field this coming season consistent with their own rhetoric and narratives when they started here, or have they fallen short?  If short, then why.  

 

JK12’s teams > JA17’s teams.  What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him.  That’s the brutal facts.  

[SinceThe70s]

I can't answer this poll. I had no expectations for Sean when he got hired - he was pretty much an unknown to me.  I had hope he'd be a part of turning the franchise around and from that perspective he's succeeded. 

 

This past year was the first season hope turned into expectation for me. And the team collectively fell short. Sean owns a part of that - but I'm in the camp that thinks the unusual circumstances the team faced played a bigger role. Doesn't mean I'm dismissing his part in 13 seconds - he owns most of that.

 

 

 

 

[gobills404]

He’s FAR exceeded the expectations I had 4 years ago, but now those expectations have changed.

Edited March 5, 2023 by gobills404

[Dopey]

30 minutes ago, Ga boy said:

JK12’s teams > JA17’s teams.  What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him.  That’s the brutal facts.  

A big reason that team was better was Kelly himself.

Can you name a team who loses a top 3 qb who wouldn’t see a big drop off in wins? One of the dumbest statements ever.  It’s not like we’re lucky he fell in our lap. We traded up to draft him and we developed him. He wasn’t the Josh you know now when he came out of college. 

[PBF81]

44 minutes ago, Ga boy said:

JK12’s teams > JA17’s teams.  What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him.  That’s the brutal facts.  

 

MUCH greater!  Polian >>> Beane too.  In fact, IMO Beane's among the less impressive of our GMs over the years, and that's saying something.  

 

Can you imagine Allen behind the OL of Ballard, Ritcher, Hull, and Woolford?!  OMG ...

 

I even threw out the OL of Wood, Levitre, Peters, and a few others the other day.  I think that this is the worst OL we've had since the pre-Kelly days.  

 

[PBF81]

5 minutes ago, Dopey said:

Can you name a team who loses a top 3 qb who wouldn’t see a big drop off in wins? One of the dumbest statements ever.  

 

Sure, all of our teams since the Kelly era you probably could have swapped out QBs arbitrarily and have had it made no more than a 1+/- game difference season to season.  

 

I'm pretty sure that you could have taken the QBs of the Jets or Fins and interchanged them over the past 20+ years and it also wouldn't have made the kind of difference that you reference.  

 

Here's the problem that I have with people using that line of reasoning in defense of Beane or McD, that put that same QB, Allen, on pretty much any of the teams of "The Last 20 Years," and you also have a playoff contender and perhaps even a division winner during the Brady era.  

 

I mean swap Bledsoe for Allen, and we're making the playoffs and winning playoff games.  We had better overall WRs, RBs, OL and even defense back then.  

 

So if we're going to use that, then let's use it entirely for the entire time of the "Last 20 Years" then too.  McBeane defenders won't allow that tho.  

[SirAndrew]

13 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Would you trade 3 upcoming losing seasons, for 1 Super Bowl win next year?

I wouldn’t because I can’t imagine it. QB’s like Josh Allen don’t have three straight losing seasons. That’s left for teams who win a title under freak circumstances. Allen is a franchise QB who should win at least one title in his career. That’s my issue with this “as long as we compete” mentality. Allen is a top QB, this franchise should win a title with him. Anything less is a failure. People who claim just competing is all you can ask for are correct, you can’t guarantee titles. Brees had one title with the Saints, but nonetheless he brought one home. I don’t expect a Super Bowl every year, but let’s not make excuses for this franchise if they can’t figure it out at least once during Allen’s career. 

[SirAndrew]

11 hours ago, Ga boy said:

JK12’s teams > JA17’s teams.  What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him.  That’s the brutal facts.  

Agree, this team has a lot of overrated talent. I often wonder how incredibly wasted Allen’s career would be without the Diggs trade. 

[Donuts and Doritos]

21 hours ago, Blah Blah said:

Fact is, McDermott is actually Murdaugh.

https://nypost.com/2023/03/03/alex-murdaugh-shaves-head-for-latest-mugshot-after-double-life-sentence/

 

No, that's those are words of George Steinbrenner, just look it up.

 

I was kidding. Sorry, I'll do better next time. 😉

Edited March 5, 2023 by Donuts and Doritos

[Dopey]

11 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

Sure, all of our teams since the Kelly era you probably could have swapped out QBs arbitrarily and have had it made no more than a 1+/- game difference season to season.  

 

I'm pretty sure that you could have taken the QBs of the Jets or Fins and interchanged them over the past 20+ years and it also wouldn't have made the kind of difference that you reference.  

 

Here's the problem that I have with people using that line of reasoning in defense of Beane or McD, that put that same QB, Allen, on pretty much any of the teams of "The Last 20 Years," and you also have a playoff contender and perhaps even a division winner during the Brady era.  

 

I mean swap Bledsoe for Allen, and we're making the playoffs and winning playoff games.  We had better overall WRs, RBs, OL and even defense back then.  

 

So if we're going to use that, then let's use it entirely for the entire time of the "Last 20 Years" then too.  McBeane defenders won't allow that tho.  

Ga boy wrote:“What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him. “ 

This is what I was commenting on. Any team that loses a top 3 qb in the league will lose more. KC without Mahomes, Cincy without Burrow, Philly without Hurts will not win nearly as many games. Maybe you missed my intent, but all of this “Last 20 year “ stuff you wrote was like listening to Charlie Brown’s teacher talk. 
Since you brought it up, Kelly, in his prime would have those same teams as contenders. Just like Josh would. Kelly was always a better passer than Josh. Josh is bigger and is a better runner. Kelly had a gun and was way more accurate. Off the top of my head, I can name 3 qbs who would have thrived like Josh if they played now: John Elway, Steve Young and Vick. If these guys played in today’s game where qbs are treated with kid gloves, they would have been MVP players. Even Warren Moon. Back then they ran less because they could get the snot knocked out of them with little to no repercussions. If you touch one now…

Qbs we’re pocket passers back then. It’s a different game due to those protections for qbs now. His legs are his big advantage over Kelly and the rules today make it so. 

[Kirby Jackson]

My opinion is that he is a great program builder. If your organization is a mess he can stabilize. That was what he originally came here to do and did it well. 
 

I worry that there is a ceiling with him. He isn’t a great game coach and for the last 3 or 4 years he had a team that was good enough to win a Super Bowl. He has been to 1 conference championship game. He may not be the guy to get to the promised land.

 

I voted “met expectations” because he made the Bills matter. He hasn’t elevated them beyond their talent level.

[NoSaint]

On 3/2/2023 at 6:06 PM, Chaos said:

Has Sean McDermott's Bills met your personal expectations over the last four season? 

I think the phrase “met my expectations” is too vague? 
 

my expectations for him or the team? My expectations as they evolve or at hire?

 

he has exceeded what I thought he would do at hire. He is probably in the ballpark for what I expect a franchise to use as its baseline for success. He has not reached the pinnacle though.

[Chaos]

6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

I think the phrase “met my expectations” is too vague? 

Fair question. My intent was for each of the last four seasons, your expecation at the beginning of the season vs the result for the season.  So four separate expecations. 

[frostbitmic]

The Bills are fun to watch again for the first time since Son of Bum was on the sidelines, therefore they've exceeded my expectations.

 

This year I had higher expectations that went unfulfilled, I should know better.  

 

 

[PBF81]

4 hours ago, Dopey said:

Ga boy wrote:“What’s amazing about Allen is he has won a lot with a team that would be maybe 7 wins without him. “ 

This is what I was commenting on. Any team that loses a top 3 qb in the league will lose more. KC without Mahomes, Cincy without Burrow, Philly without Hurts will not win nearly as many games. Maybe you missed my intent, but all of this “Last 20 year “ stuff you wrote was like listening to Charlie Brown’s teacher talk. 
Since you brought it up, Kelly, in his prime would have those same teams as contenders. Just like Josh would. Kelly was always a better passer than Josh. Josh is bigger and is a better runner. Kelly had a gun and was way more accurate. Off the top of my head, I can name 3 qbs who would have thrived like Josh if they played now: John Elway, Steve Young and Vick. If these guys played in today’s game where qbs are treated with kid gloves, they would have been MVP players. Even Warren Moon. Back then they ran less because they could get the snot knocked out of them with little to no repercussions. If you touch one now…

Qbs we’re pocket passers back then. It’s a different game due to those protections for qbs now. His legs are his big advantage over Kelly and the rules today make it so. 

 

I think I partially did miss your intent.  Also, I did take some liberties re: your "top-3" comment.  I appreciate the back-n-forth.  

 

Your point seems to be defending McD & Beane.  Am I off?  

 

As to your points, ... Kelly was a better passer simply because he knew how to take advantage of, and did, the high-percentage passing game, which is what propels all QBs to greatness in this league.  Allen was much better at it last season, this season he took an injury and we're told by a "doctor" that his injury prevents him from doing that.  So if true, is that his fault?  But if anything, that is the shortcoming in his game and why there's any doubt that he may not be as good as Mahomes or Burrow as a passer.  

 

As to your comments on Elway, Young, Vick, and "today's game" vs. yesteryear's game, the difference to the QBs was not in how the pressure got to QBs generally speaking, it's been in what those defenders could/could-not do to the QB once they got past their respective OL counterparts.  There's an important difference as it relates to what we're talking about here.  IOW, the OL is still of paramount importance in the mix.  

 

Put Kelly on this team and he's running for his life like he, literally, never knew.  The difference in our OLs today vs. '90-'93 is pronounced.  The same can be said althought not as extremely, between today's OL of ours and pretty much any of our OLs since then.  I mean is anyone really going to positively compare Ballard, Ritcher, Hull, and Woolford to Dawkins, Bates, Morse, Boettger, and Brown?  Hardly.  

 

I would quickly add it's the same for the rosters otherwise also similarly.  We've pretty much always had better RBs than we've had now.  Knox is nothing special and comparable to past TEs.  Some of our defenses, I pointed one out specifically the other day, were worlds better than then one we have now.  There was above-average talent in most positions, not merely in a few spots.  

 

Kelly didn't have Allen's escapability either.  He was far from immobile, but if he had to run for his life like Allen regularly does, no way he performs well like he did.  Kelly also had massive support from a running game featuring Thurman, Davis, and several different bruiser FBs that could get the short yardage when necessary, something that this team doesn't have apart from Allen.  

 

Completely disagree on Vick BTW.  Vick wasn't any better than Taylor.  In the few seasons that both started, Taylor outplayed Vick in passing and didn't turn the ball over nearly as much either.  

 

A great exercise on this BTW, would be to put up the rosters throughout the years and compare them.  I think it would clear things up considerably.  I've already done that informally and keep saying to myself, that if Allen had even the OL of Wood, Levitre, and Glenn for example, better than any three we have now by a long shot.  Some continuity as well which Allen has zero of.   In fact, I'll do that for one year below for the OLs and defense.  

 

Anyway, if you're point was that without Allen we win only 6 or 7 games a season, I'm in full agreement with that.  But at the same time, if we're comparing teams, to take say an average QB, and presumably we can agree that for example David Carr or Andy Dalton are pretty average QBs, if we were to replace Allen with Dalton or Carr, we still wouldn't win more than 6/7 games and we'd be in the AFCE basement.  How would we win them?  

 

If however, KC or Cinci had to go with Carr or Dalton from Mahomes and Burrow, I still see them being competitive, despite not winning 14 or 12 games, I still see them winning 9, 10, or 11 games and making the playoffs.  Cinci already did it with Dalton.  Why?  Because they're better coached than we are, plain and simple.  That's the McD part of it.  They also have more talent elsewhere on the team that steps up, particularly in the big playoff games.  That's the Beane part of it.  

 

IMO McD has run his course, so has Beane.  Could I be wrong?  Of course.  We'll see what this Draft brings, but given the results to date, the odds of one of our rookies stepping up to make a difference is nonexistent.   It would be a first for Beane.  As to McD, he won't have nearly to work with what he's had to date.  White may be finished after his surgery, he certainly wasn't good when he returned this year.  Poyer gone.  Even drafting a WR at 27th isn't going to cut it.  There hasn't been a WR drafted after 11th in either of the last two drafts that has put up starting #2 numbers or even close.  Cinci's improving, KC's still KC, Miami and the Jets are breathing down our necks and each took one from us this past season.  We can never rule NE out.  Lawrence and Jax seem to be coming on and we couldn't beat them last time we played them when they sucked.  

 

But the elephant sitting in the kitchen sink is that come playoff time none of our players steps up.  Diggs our moneyman has been terrible the past two seasons in the playoffs and hasn't had a playoff TD in our last five playoff games.  Against Cinci and KC he posted a combined 7 grabs for 42 yards this and last season, and he's our money guy.  Everyone's complaining about Davis, but at least he shows up come playoff time as our best overall WR in the last two season's playoffs.  Singletary and Cook haven't done anything.  Defensively we don't have anything even approaching a Bruce Smith, Aaron Schobel, or Kyle Williams.  In his 8 total playoff games Oliver's had 2 total sacks and 4 TFL.  That's ridiculous for a 9th overall pick.  What does one even say about a secondary that permits nearly twice the passing yardage against Cinci than Baltimore did, and nearly a hundred yards more than KC with its 19th ranked yardage passing D and 32nd ranked TD passing D.  

 

Our rushing game is below average.  

Our OL is average on a good day. 

Our WRs clearly aren't cutting it.  

Our TE shows up a few times a season but that's it.  

There's not a single impact player on our DL that shows up regularly besides Poyer and Milano neither of which Beane drafted.  

Our LBs, ... LOL, that should be singular, not plural, our LB, Milano, is great, but then there's nothing if Edmunds leaves.  Milano's not Beane's pick.  

As to our secondary, if the playoffs are the indication, there's not much positive to say.  

 

OK, so per above, let's compare rosters between this past season's and that of Mularkey's first of two seasons in Buffalo, and I'll swap QBs on the roster.  Tell me what you'd have expected for both teams.  Mularkey's team went 9-7 that season, led by Bledsoe, missing a Wild Card by a game to the Jets (Pennington) and Denver (Plummer), hardly household names in historical QBs.  

 

Last year's unit (13-3) here was our OL:  

 

LT:  Dawkins 

LG:  Saffold 

C :  Morse 

G:  Bates 

RT:  Brown   

 

2004 (9-7):  

 

LT:  Jennings 

LG:  Ross Tucker 

C :  Teague 

RG:  Villareal 

RT:  Mike Williams 

 

Last season:

DL:  Rousseau, Oliver, Jones, Lawson 

LBs:  Edmunds, Milano 

DBs:  Poyer, Jackson, Hamlin, Johnson, and White 

 

2004:  

DL:  Kelsay, Adams, Williams, Schobel 

LBs:  Posey, Fletcher, Spikes 

DBs:  McGee, Clements, Milloy, Reese  (backups:  Wire, Vincent, 

 

Bledsoe, who couldn't move out of his own way, had 37 sacks.  Allen had 33 last season, and you've agreed that it's easier for QBs now.  So switch the two.  How would each team have fared?  

 

The 2004 team lost four games by an average of 3 points.  Just those four games alone would have put them at 13-3.  If we could have taken one from NE too we'd have won the division against Brady.  Bledsoe on last season's team would have been a disaster.  

 

Which roster would you rather have with Allen, last season's, or 2004's?  That's an easy one for me.  IMO with that defensive roster and OL & McGahee, if we couldn't have won a Super Bowl it will never happen.  With Bledsoe on this team we'd have been lucky to win 6 games.  BTW, our WRs then were Moulds & Evans, the latter whom as a rookie posted almost exactly what Davis did last season but with two more TDs.  

 

 

17 hours ago, Dopey said:

Why try to make this more complicated than what it is? Simple poll that gave me a better feeling about fans here on TBD. Why? The number of voters who are disappointed or have not had their expectations met are outnumbered by a 2:1 margin. I always felt it was a minority, no matter how vocal. 

 

Well, what will be interesting is posing this same exact poll following this upcoming season and then if necessary after the 2024 season. 

 

Somehow I see that margin flipping decisively.  The question then becomes, why are people satisfied now, but not then should that end up being the case.  I mean same coach.  Same "Process."  Same excuses for giving him more [undefined] time, what, 5 years more, 10?   What will have changed in the perceptions of McD or Beane if that happens?  Will they both have gotten worse than they are now and have been, mysteriously?  

 

I suspect that the outcome at that time will depend upon whether or not we make a legitimate run at winning the AFC.  But right now we can't play well against the top two challenging teams requiring monumental offensive efforts to overcome our defensive failures.  We struggled, at home, against a QB that won't ever start in the NFL and nearly lost to a team with the most novice and inexperienced QBs in the playoffs.  

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we do not win the division this season.  Suppose that happens, say one of the following happens: 

 

A. Win the division, but lose again in the WC or D round;    

B.  Don't win the division and if we make the playoffs but lose in the WC or D rounds; 

C.  Don't make the playoffs  

 

How do you think the poll responses will look then?   I don't know, I'm seriously asking.  All I can do is guess.  But we've underachieved with a better roster than we'll have this coming season.  If Milano, Dawkins, or Diggs gets hurt, do you see us winning many games?  These are all rhetorical, but get to the point.  

 

Even if it's for injury to Allen, that would likely befall Beane anyway, for not protecting our multi-hundred million dollar investment.  

 

 

[PrimeTime101]

1 hour ago, PBF81 said:

 

I think I partially did miss your intent.  Also, I did take some liberties re: your "top-3" comment.  I appreciate the back-n-forth.  

 

Your point seems to be defending McD & Beane.  Am I off?  

 

As to your points, ... Kelly was a better passer simply because he knew how to take advantage of, and did, the high-percentage passing game, which is what propels all QBs to greatness in this league.  Allen was much better at it last season, this season he took an injury and we're told by a "doctor" that his injury prevents him from doing that.  So if true, is that his fault?  But if anything, that is the shortcoming in his game and why there's any doubt that he may not be as good as Mahomes or Burrow as a passer.  

 

As to your comments on Elway, Young, Vick, and "today's game" vs. yesteryear's game, the difference to the QBs was not in how the pressure got to QBs generally speaking, it's been in what those defenders could/could-not do to the QB once they got past their respective OL counterparts.  There's an important difference as it relates to what we're talking about here.  IOW, the OL is still of paramount importance in the mix.  

 

Put Kelly on this team and he's running for his life like he, literally, never knew.  The difference in our OLs today vs. '90-'93 is pronounced.  The same can be said althought not as extremely, between today's OL of ours and pretty much any of our OLs since then.  I mean is anyone really going to positively compare Ballard, Ritcher, Hull, and Woolford to Dawkins, Bates, Morse, Boettger, and Brown?  Hardly.  

 

I would quickly add it's the same for the rosters otherwise also similarly.  We've pretty much always had better RBs than we've had now.  Knox is nothing special and comparable to past TEs.  Some of our defenses, I pointed one out specifically the other day, were worlds better than then one we have now.  There was above-average talent in most positions, not merely in a few spots.  

 

Kelly didn't have Allen's escapability either.  He was far from immobile, but if he had to run for his life like Allen regularly does, no way he performs well like he did.  Kelly also had massive support from a running game featuring Thurman, Davis, and several different bruiser FBs that could get the short yardage when necessary, something that this team doesn't have apart from Allen.  

 

Completely disagree on Vick BTW.  Vick wasn't any better than Taylor.  In the few seasons that both started, Taylor outplayed Vick in passing and didn't turn the ball over nearly as much either.  

 

A great exercise on this BTW, would be to put up the rosters throughout the years and compare them.  I think it would clear things up considerably.  I've already done that informally and keep saying to myself, that if Allen had even the OL of Wood, Levitre, and Glenn for example, better than any three we have now by a long shot.  Some continuity as well which Allen has zero of.   In fact, I'll do that for one year below for the OLs and defense.  

 

Anyway, if you're point was that without Allen we win only 6 or 7 games a season, I'm in full agreement with that.  But at the same time, if we're comparing teams, to take say an average QB, and presumably we can agree that for example David Carr or Andy Dalton are pretty average QBs, if we were to replace Allen with Dalton or Carr, we still wouldn't win more than 6/7 games and we'd be in the AFCE basement.  How would we win them?  

 

If however, KC or Cinci had to go with Carr or Dalton from Mahomes and Burrow, I still see them being competitive, despite not winning 14 or 12 games, I still see them winning 9, 10, or 11 games and making the playoffs.  Cinci already did it with Dalton.  Why?  Because they're better coached than we are, plain and simple.  That's the McD part of it.  They also have more talent elsewhere on the team that steps up, particularly in the big playoff games.  That's the Beane part of it.  

 

IMO McD has run his course, so has Beane.  Could I be wrong?  Of course.  We'll see what this Draft brings, but given the results to date, the odds of one of our rookies stepping up to make a difference is nonexistent.   It would be a first for Beane.  As to McD, he won't have nearly to work with what he's had to date.  White may be finished after his surgery, he certainly wasn't good when he returned this year.  Poyer gone.  Even drafting a WR at 27th isn't going to cut it.  There hasn't been a WR drafted after 11th in either of the last two drafts that has put up starting #2 numbers or even close.  Cinci's improving, KC's still KC, Miami and the Jets are breathing down our necks and each took one from us this past season.  We can never rule NE out.  Lawrence and Jax seem to be coming on and we couldn't beat them last time we played them when they sucked.  

 

But the elephant sitting in the kitchen sink is that come playoff time none of our players steps up.  Diggs our moneyman has been terrible the past two seasons in the playoffs and hasn't had a playoff TD in our last five playoff games.  Against Cinci and KC he posted a combined 7 grabs for 42 yards this and last season, and he's our money guy.  Everyone's complaining about Davis, but at least he shows up come playoff time as our best overall WR in the last two season's playoffs.  Singletary and Cook haven't done anything.  Defensively we don't have anything even approaching a Bruce Smith, Aaron Schobel, or Kyle Williams.  In his 8 total playoff games Oliver's had 2 total sacks and 4 TFL.  That's ridiculous for a 9th overall pick.  What does one even say about a secondary that permits nearly twice the passing yardage against Cinci than Baltimore did, and nearly a hundred yards more than KC with its 19th ranked yardage passing D and 32nd ranked TD passing D.  

 

Our rushing game is below average.  

Our OL is average on a good day. 

Our WRs clearly aren't cutting it.  

Our TE shows up a few times a season but that's it.  

There's not a single impact player on our DL that shows up regularly besides Poyer and Milano neither of which Beane drafted.  

Our LBs, ... LOL, that should be singular, not plural, our LB, Milano, is great, but then there's nothing if Edmunds leaves.  Milano's not Beane's pick.  

As to our secondary, if the playoffs are the indication, there's not much positive to say.  

 

OK, so per above, let's compare rosters between this past season's and that of Mularkey's first of two seasons in Buffalo, and I'll swap QBs on the roster.  Tell me what you'd have expected for both teams.  Mularkey's team went 9-7 that season, led by Bledsoe, missing a Wild Card by a game to the Jets (Pennington) and Denver (Plummer), hardly household names in historical QBs.  

 

Last year's unit (13-3) here was our OL:  

 

LT:  Dawkins 

LG:  Saffold 

C :  Morse 

G:  Bates 

RT:  Brown   

 

2004 (9-7):  

 

LT:  Jennings 

LG:  Ross Tucker 

C :  Teague 

RG:  Villareal 

RT:  Mike Williams 

 

Last season:

DL:  Rousseau, Oliver, Jones, Lawson 

LBs:  Edmunds, Milano 

DBs:  Poyer, Jackson, Hamlin, Johnson, and White 

 

2004:  

DL:  Kelsay, Adams, Williams, Schobel 

LBs:  Posey, Fletcher, Spikes 

DBs:  McGee, Clements, Milloy, Reese  (backups:  Wire, Vincent, 

 

Bledsoe, who couldn't move out of his own way, had 37 sacks.  Allen had 33 last season, and you've agreed that it's easier for QBs now.  So switch the two.  How would each team have fared?  

 

The 2004 team lost four games by an average of 3 points.  Just those four games alone would have put them at 13-3.  If we could have taken one from NE too we'd have won the division against Brady.  Bledsoe on last season's team would have been a disaster.  

 

Which roster would you rather have with Allen, last season's, or 2004's?  That's an easy one for me.  IMO with that defensive roster and OL & McGahee, if we couldn't have won a Super Bowl it will never happen.  With Bledsoe on this team we'd have been lucky to win 6 games.  BTW, our WRs then were Moulds & Evans, the latter whom as a rookie posted almost exactly what Davis did last season but with two more TDs.  

 

 

 

Well, what will be interesting is posing this same exact poll following this upcoming season and then if necessary after the 2024 season. 

 

Somehow I see that margin flipping decisively.  The question then becomes, why are people satisfied now, but not then should that end up being the case.  I mean same coach.  Same "Process."  Same excuses for giving him more [undefined] time, what, 5 years more, 10?   What will have changed in the perceptions of McD or Beane if that happens?  Will they both have gotten worse than they are now and have been, mysteriously?  

 

I suspect that the outcome at that time will depend upon whether or not we make a legitimate run at winning the AFC.  But right now we can't play well against the top two challenging teams requiring monumental offensive efforts to overcome our defensive failures.  We struggled, at home, against a QB that won't ever start in the NFL and nearly lost to a team with the most novice and inexperienced QBs in the playoffs.  

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we do not win the division this season.  Suppose that happens, say one of the following happens: 

 

A. Win the division, but lose again in the WC or D round;    

B.  Don't win the division and if we make the playoffs but lose in the WC or D rounds; 

C.  Don't make the playoffs  

 

How do you think the poll responses will look then?   I don't know, I'm seriously asking.  All I can do is guess.  But we've underachieved with a better roster than we'll have this coming season.  If Milano, Dawkins, or Diggs gets hurt, do you see us winning many games?  These are all rhetorical, but get to the point.  

 

Even if it's for injury to Allen, that would likely befall Beane anyway, for not protecting our multi-hundred million dollar investment.  

 

 

seriously take a deep breath man. you are ALL OVER the place... and because you are ALL OVER the place, half the people in here won't even bother reading all the jumbo mumbo stuff. A little of this is a real good read and the rest is yawn.  The other posters are right man. your over complicating this and your just trying to out do people without sticking to main facts.

Edited March 5, 2023 by PrimeTime101

[PBF81]

45 minutes ago, PrimeTime101 said:

seriously take a deep breath man. you are ALL OVER the place... and because you are ALL OVER the place, half the people in here won't even bother reading all the jumbo mumbo stuff. A little of this is a real good read and the rest is yawn.  The other posters are right man. your over complicating this and your just trying to out do people without sticking to main facts.

 

I know

 

I am very interested in the thought processes of people however.    

Edited March 6, 2023 by PBF81

[Kirby Jackson]

7 hours ago, Chaos said:

Fair question. My intent was for each of the last four seasons, your expecation at the beginning of the season vs the result for the season.  So four separate expecations. 

If it is ONLY the last 4 seasons (I should have read more carefully) it has to be falls short. Only the Covid year could you argue that they made it as far as they could’ve/should’ve. 

[newcam2012]

8 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

My opinion is that he is a great program builder. If your organization is a mess he can stabilize. That was what he originally came here to do and did it well. 
 

I worry that there is a ceiling with him. He isn’t a great game coach and for the last 3 or 4 years he had a team that was good enough to win a Super Bowl. He has been to 1 conference championship game. He may not be the guy to get to the promised land.

 

I voted “met expectations” because he made the Bills matter. He hasn’t elevated them beyond their talent level.

Spot on here. 

[Chaos]

8 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I voted “met expectations” because he made the Bills matter. He hasn’t elevated them beyond their talent level.

Has he achieved "at their talent level", or is this team not talented enough to make it further than the divisional round in the playoffs? 

Edited March 6, 2023 by Chaos

[Not Applicable]

The number of people who think it is fine to chronically underachieve today just because the Bills had a playoff drought that ended over five seasons ago is ridiculous. Let's be real here...McDermott backed into the playoffs at 9-7 in 2017 (same record we had in 2014 and 2004 - two markedly better teams that simply didn't luck into the postseason), was abysmal in 2018, and then the QB they likely settled for morphed into possibly the most naturally-gifted talent ever seen at the position. 

 

You think Rex Ryan or Doug Marrone or Chan Gailey aren't making yearly playoff trips with Allen? Marrone went to the AFCCG with Blake Bortles and Ryan went there twice with Mark Sanchez.

 

This losers' attitude that we should be grateful just to be in constant playoff contention is the type of thought process that led Cincinnati to waste a decade with Marvin Lewis.

[newcam2012]

3 hours ago, PBF81 said:

 

I think I partially did miss your intent.  Also, I did take some liberties re: your "top-3" comment.  I appreciate the back-n-forth.  

 

Your point seems to be defending McD & Beane.  Am I off?  

 

As to your points, ... Kelly was a better passer simply because he knew how to take advantage of, and did, the high-percentage passing game, which is what propels all QBs to greatness in this league.  Allen was much better at it last season, this season he took an injury and we're told by a "doctor" that his injury prevents him from doing that.  So if true, is that his fault?  But if anything, that is the shortcoming in his game and why there's any doubt that he may not be as good as Mahomes or Burrow as a passer.  

 

As to your comments on Elway, Young, Vick, and "today's game" vs. yesteryear's game, the difference to the QBs was not in how the pressure got to QBs generally speaking, it's been in what those defenders could/could-not do to the QB once they got past their respective OL counterparts.  There's an important difference as it relates to what we're talking about here.  IOW, the OL is still of paramount importance in the mix.  

 

Put Kelly on this team and he's running for his life like he, literally, never knew.  The difference in our OLs today vs. '90-'93 is pronounced.  The same can be said althought not as extremely, between today's OL of ours and pretty much any of our OLs since then.  I mean is anyone really going to positively compare Ballard, Ritcher, Hull, and Woolford to Dawkins, Bates, Morse, Boettger, and Brown?  Hardly.  

 

I would quickly add it's the same for the rosters otherwise also similarly.  We've pretty much always had better RBs than we've had now.  Knox is nothing special and comparable to past TEs.  Some of our defenses, I pointed one out specifically the other day, were worlds better than then one we have now.  There was above-average talent in most positions, not merely in a few spots.  

 

Kelly didn't have Allen's escapability either.  He was far from immobile, but if he had to run for his life like Allen regularly does, no way he performs well like he did.  Kelly also had massive support from a running game featuring Thurman, Davis, and several different bruiser FBs that could get the short yardage when necessary, something that this team doesn't have apart from Allen.  

 

Completely disagree on Vick BTW.  Vick wasn't any better than Taylor.  In the few seasons that both started, Taylor outplayed Vick in passing and didn't turn the ball over nearly as much either.  

 

A great exercise on this BTW, would be to put up the rosters throughout the years and compare them.  I think it would clear things up considerably.  I've already done that informally and keep saying to myself, that if Allen had even the OL of Wood, Levitre, and Glenn for example, better than any three we have now by a long shot.  Some continuity as well which Allen has zero of.   In fact, I'll do that for one year below for the OLs and defense.  

 

Anyway, if you're point was that without Allen we win only 6 or 7 games a season, I'm in full agreement with that.  But at the same time, if we're comparing teams, to take say an average QB, and presumably we can agree that for example David Carr or Andy Dalton are pretty average QBs, if we were to replace Allen with Dalton or Carr, we still wouldn't win more than 6/7 games and we'd be in the AFCE basement.  How would we win them?  

 

If however, KC or Cinci had to go with Carr or Dalton from Mahomes and Burrow, I still see them being competitive, despite not winning 14 or 12 games, I still see them winning 9, 10, or 11 games and making the playoffs.  Cinci already did it with Dalton.  Why?  Because they're better coached than we are, plain and simple.  That's the McD part of it.  They also have more talent elsewhere on the team that steps up, particularly in the big playoff games.  That's the Beane part of it.  

 

IMO McD has run his course, so has Beane.  Could I be wrong?  Of course.  We'll see what this Draft brings, but given the results to date, the odds of one of our rookies stepping up to make a difference is nonexistent.   It would be a first for Beane.  As to McD, he won't have nearly to work with what he's had to date.  White may be finished after his surgery, he certainly wasn't good when he returned this year.  Poyer gone.  Even drafting a WR at 27th isn't going to cut it.  There hasn't been a WR drafted after 11th in either of the last two drafts that has put up starting #2 numbers or even close.  Cinci's improving, KC's still KC, Miami and the Jets are breathing down our necks and each took one from us this past season.  We can never rule NE out.  Lawrence and Jax seem to be coming on and we couldn't beat them last time we played them when they sucked.  

 

But the elephant sitting in the kitchen sink is that come playoff time none of our players steps up.  Diggs our moneyman has been terrible the past two seasons in the playoffs and hasn't had a playoff TD in our last five playoff games.  Against Cinci and KC he posted a combined 7 grabs for 42 yards this and last season, and he's our money guy.  Everyone's complaining about Davis, but at least he shows up come playoff time as our best overall WR in the last two season's playoffs.  Singletary and Cook haven't done anything.  Defensively we don't have anything even approaching a Bruce Smith, Aaron Schobel, or Kyle Williams.  In his 8 total playoff games Oliver's had 2 total sacks and 4 TFL.  That's ridiculous for a 9th overall pick.  What does one even say about a secondary that permits nearly twice the passing yardage against Cinci than Baltimore did, and nearly a hundred yards more than KC with its 19th ranked yardage passing D and 32nd ranked TD passing D.  

 

Our rushing game is below average.  

Our OL is average on a good day. 

Our WRs clearly aren't cutting it.  

Our TE shows up a few times a season but that's it.  

There's not a single impact player on our DL that shows up regularly besides Poyer and Milano neither of which Beane drafted.  

Our LBs, ... LOL, that should be singular, not plural, our LB, Milano, is great, but then there's nothing if Edmunds leaves.  Milano's not Beane's pick.  

As to our secondary, if the playoffs are the indication, there's not much positive to say.  

 

OK, so per above, let's compare rosters between this past season's and that of Mularkey's first of two seasons in Buffalo, and I'll swap QBs on the roster.  Tell me what you'd have expected for both teams.  Mularkey's team went 9-7 that season, led by Bledsoe, missing a Wild Card by a game to the Jets (Pennington) and Denver (Plummer), hardly household names in historical QBs.  

 

Last year's unit (13-3) here was our OL:  

 

LT:  Dawkins 

LG:  Saffold 

C :  Morse 

G:  Bates 

RT:  Brown   

 

2004 (9-7):  

 

LT:  Jennings 

LG:  Ross Tucker 

C :  Teague 

RG:  Villareal 

RT:  Mike Williams 

 

Last season:

DL:  Rousseau, Oliver, Jones, Lawson 

LBs:  Edmunds, Milano 

DBs:  Poyer, Jackson, Hamlin, Johnson, and White 

 

2004:  

DL:  Kelsay, Adams, Williams, Schobel 

LBs:  Posey, Fletcher, Spikes 

DBs:  McGee, Clements, Milloy, Reese  (backups:  Wire, Vincent, 

 

Bledsoe, who couldn't move out of his own way, had 37 sacks.  Allen had 33 last season, and you've agreed that it's easier for QBs now.  So switch the two.  How would each team have fared?  

 

The 2004 team lost four games by an average of 3 points.  Just those four games alone would have put them at 13-3.  If we could have taken one from NE too we'd have won the division against Brady.  Bledsoe on last season's team would have been a disaster.  

 

Which roster would you rather have with Allen, last season's, or 2004's?  That's an easy one for me.  IMO with that defensive roster and OL & McGahee, if we couldn't have won a Super Bowl it will never happen.  With Bledsoe on this team we'd have been lucky to win 6 games.  BTW, our WRs then were Moulds & Evans, the latter whom as a rookie posted almost exactly what Davis did last season but with two more TDs.  

 

 

 

Well, what will be interesting is posing this same exact poll following this upcoming season and then if necessary after the 2024 season. 

 

Somehow I see that margin flipping decisively.  The question then becomes, why are people satisfied now, but not then should that end up being the case.  I mean same coach.  Same "Process."  Same excuses for giving him more [undefined] time, what, 5 years more, 10?   What will have changed in the perceptions of McD or Beane if that happens?  Will they both have gotten worse than they are now and have been, mysteriously?  

 

I suspect that the outcome at that time will depend upon whether or not we make a legitimate run at winning the AFC.  But right now we can't play well against the top two challenging teams requiring monumental offensive efforts to overcome our defensive failures.  We struggled, at home, against a QB that won't ever start in the NFL and nearly lost to a team with the most novice and inexperienced QBs in the playoffs.  

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we do not win the division this season.  Suppose that happens, say one of the following happens: 

 

A. Win the division, but lose again in the WC or D round;    

B.  Don't win the division and if we make the playoffs but lose in the WC or D rounds; 

C.  Don't make the playoffs  

 

How do you think the poll responses will look then?   I don't know, I'm seriously asking.  All I can do is guess.  But we've underachieved with a better roster than we'll have this coming season.  If Milano, Dawkins, or Diggs gets hurt, do you see us winning many games?  These are all rhetorical, but get to the point.  

 

Even if it's for injury to Allen, that would likely befall Beane anyway, for not protecting our multi-hundred million dollar investment.  

 

 

"IMO McD run his course, so has Beane.  Could I be wrong?  Of course.  We'll see what this Draft brings, but given the results to date, the odds of one of our rookies stepping up to make a difference is nonexistent.   It would be a first for Beane.  As to McD, he won't have nearly to work with what he's had to date.  White may be finished after his surgery, he certainly wasn't good when he returned this year.  Poyer gone.  Even drafting a WR at 27th isn't going to cut it.  There hasn't been a WR drafted after 11th in either of the last two drafts that has put up starting #2 numbers or even close.  Cinci's improving, KC's still KC, Miami and the Jets are breathing down our necks and each took one from us this past season.  We can never rule NE out.  Lawrence and Jax seem to be coming on and we couldn't beat them last time we played them when they sucked."

 

Really well thought out and written. I concur with everything you said here. A sad and discouraging read but as accurate as could be. 

4 minutes ago, Patrick Fitzryan said:

The number of people who think it is fine to chronically underachieve today just because the Bills had a playoff drought that ended over five seasons ago is ridiculous. Let's be real here...McDermott backed into the playoffs at 9-7 in 2017 (same record we had in 2014 and 2004 - two markedly better teams that simply didn't luck into the postseason), was abysmal in 2018, and then the QB they likely settled for morphed into possibly the most naturally-gifted talent ever seen at the position. 

 

You think Rex Ryan or Doug Marrone or Chan Gailey aren't making yearly playoff trips with Allen? Marrone went to the AFCCG with Blake Bortles and Ryan went there twice with Mark Sanchez.

 

This losers' attitude that we should be grateful just to be in constant playoff contention is the type of thought process that led Cincinnati to waste a decade with Marvin Lewis.

I really think it's time to move on from McD and Beane. They should move to a mediocre team that needs a build. They are great at turning around a losing organization. It's clear they can't get over the hump. McD consistently gets his butt waxed come playoff time. Besides Allen, Beane has way more misses than hits. 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, Chaos said:

Has he achieved "at their talent level", or is this team not talented enough to make it further than the divisional round in the playoffs? 

If it is the last 4 years, he has failed. They have had 4 years of Super Bowl talent. I’m not naive enough to think that means 4 championships. At the same time, 1 conference title appearance is a failure. 

[mead107]

Best coach ever 

 

[Doc Brown]

2019 - Exceeded expectations.  Going from 6-10 to 10-6 was impressive given we didn't have a true #1 WR yet.  

2020 - Exceeded expectations.  Offense came out of nowhere.  Two playoff wins.  No shame in losing to the best Chiefs roster in Reid's tenure.

2021 - Fell below expectations.  Especially the defense.  Going 11-6 and then the 13 seconds debacle despite being mostly healthy was disappointing.

2022 - Met expectations given the injuries and unprecedented off the field issues.  If we were as healthy as we were in 2021 then we would've won the whole thing.