Bernard, Torrence and Benford all officially starters

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, BillsShredder83 said:

I just don't think there's anyway to know that without us seeing practice.

 

The record on this staff of giving a position to a young guy because of the benefit of the doubt is non existent. 

 

Maybe it did here, but track record says it didn't, and a 3rd rder in year 2 is a weird place to start. Only way I see it is if staff has made a fundamental change to that approach, which is welcomed by many.

 

IF we did do that, we can't complain the young guys never see the field, and complain that a young guy got the nod to start. Again, that's a big if

When did he practice?  Not much, and when he did he was only splitting reps with the 1s.  The reality is that Dodson had the chance to run away with the job and he blew it.  Spector and Klein, too, could have been in the mix, but they apparently were worse than Dodson.  
 

I hope Bernard seizes the job and plays great.  Based on the samples with him—he didn’t deserve to make the team coming out of camp last year—I have my doubts.  So I have a hard time seeing how he affirmatively won that job—in camp, throughout the offseason as a whole, or otherwise. 

[BillsFanForever19]

7 hours ago, Warriorspikes51 said:

https://x.com/chrisbrownbills/status/1699453423643418862?s=46&t=tTOAq-q5QQ5yQ1o1mKnDgA
 

McDermott: Terrel Bernard is our starting MLB. We’re excited about what he brings to the position and he’ll take it one play at a time. #Bills
 

so..:..play 2 Kirksey?!

 

Well, you handled it better than I expected 😆

 

Bernard is the starter and will be the starter until if/when he proves he can't handle the job. The plan was always to see if he could handle the job after spending a 3rd on him last season. 

 

Kirksey is going to be brought along slowly and eased in. He's not going to start unless Bernard flames out. And honestly, we shouldn't be hoping for that. 

[Success]

11 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:

He may be good, who knows.

 

But to this point from what we have seen and heard (I know little sample size) , what makes you optimistic about him at this point?

 

I'm not. But I'm not a pessimist about him either.

 

I do trust Beane, McD & the rest of the staff, though - and I think they have earned that to this point.  If they think he can start, I'm all in.

 

[NoName]

9 hours ago, Virgil said:

In all due respect to Bernard, I hope he's not on the field a lot and we run with three safeties.  

He's not much bigger than some of the strong safeties in the league.  

[Buffalo_Stampede]

3 minutes ago, NoName said:

He's not much bigger than some of the strong safeties in the league.  

Funny because we had the biggest MLB in the league and fans absolutely hated Edmunds here.

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, NewEra said:

Sorry, when I say “we” I mean each individual person can only discuss what they have seen to date. Whether it be play on the field, in scouting reports, analysis from others etc.  

I’m not saying anyone’s opinion is incorrect.  Where did I say that?  If you disagree, please point out where I’ve said that.  I’m just giving my opinion and stating that the only thing we can discuss is what we’ve seen to date….  The guy I quoted is dismissing everyone that disagrees with him as “amusing”……  I’m telling him that they are just expressing what they’ve seen to date…..and are entitled to that opinion.  
 

either your misunderstanding my point or you’ve gone off the deep end 🤷🏻‍♂️ I think you’re simply misunderstanding.   While we

may disagree about the player, we are actually on the same side of this.  Neither of us think others opinions should be dismissed.  

 

I repeat-  Bernard could be adequate.  I’m not saying he ISN’T.  I’m saying from what I’ve seen…..I don’t think he’ll be adequate.  And I’m saying that YOU (and everyone else) SHOULD BE DISCUSSING WHAT YOU’VE SEEN TO DATE too.  I’m dismissing NOTHING.  If the what you’ve seen to date leads you to believe he’s the answer, you SHOULD DISCUSS IT.   
 

Not sure how else to explain this but I’m done with it.  If you don’t understand my point yet, 🤷🏻‍♂️ 

 

For the record, if anyone is reading this other than you and I, I've apologized to NewEra for my outburst.  It was out of line.  There's stuff to talk, and yelling about it doesn't help. 

 

But I'll try again.  Why is it that I should be discussing what I've seen to date?  Or put another way, why can't you see that I AM discussing what I've seen to date.  I've seen Beane and McDermott operate for five years, and at this stage of the team's development, one thing I've seen is that Beane always acquires someone to try to fill a hole.   I've seen that, over and over.  And the fact that he didn't do much of anything to get a middle linebacker to replace Edmunds tells me that he didn't think he had a hole there.  That, in turn tells me that he thinks Bernard or Dodson is good enough to give them what they need at the position.  That's what I conclude from what I've seen them do.

 

So, when you asked me (I think it was you) what it was that I've seen that makes me think Bernard might be the answer at middle linebacker, I told you exactly that.  What I've seen is how McDermott and Beane have reacted to what you and I thought was a hole in the lineup, and that suggests to me that they believe the guy they need.  

 

You seem to be saying that the only discussion you're willing to accept is a discussion based on observations of his play, data about his size or weight, and statistics.   That says you're not willing to discuss the possibility that Beane and McDermott know some things that you don't.  In fact, I'm interested in that possibility, and I think it's worth discussing.  Why do I have to be limited to discussing only the facts that you want to discuss. 

 

Now, as I've said over and over, I don't have any idea whether Bernard can do it.  And I'm not saying that we should have undying faith in Beane and McDermott or that they can do no wrong.  But I do know that Beane and McDermott are smart guys dedicated to winning a Super Bowl, so their response to the "hole" is meaningful to me.  Bernard looked lost to me on the field last season, so I understand exactly what you're saying, but Beane and McDermott saw what we saw, and they watched a lot more film of those plays (and his play in practice) than you and I, so I think there's a real possibility that the conclusion that you and I reach having watched Bernard play is simply wrong.  

 

Once again, I apologize for being so rude. 

[Sierra Foothills]

8 hours ago, Herb Nightly said:

Babich said early this summer that he was ted the MLB to be a "match up" player i.e. coverage LB

 

Made me think of Ted the Lorax. Wonder what he's up to these days.

 

7 hours ago, Dillenger4 said:

My only worry is that with Benford starting the Jets (and every team) will pick on Tre and burn him as per usual.

 

 

The Tre White who was an All-American and 1st Team All-SEC in college? The first round draft pick who is a 2-time All Pro and 2-time Pro Bowler?

 

That Tre White?

 

7 hours ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Hmmm...Why not just cut Dodson and bring back Klein?

 

Though both played on special teams I thought Dodson was a "core four" special teamer whereas Klein was not. If I'm right this would probably explain why Dodson is still with us and Klein is not.

 

7 hours ago, Mat68 said:

Curious how Benard looks at the mike.  Imo he looks too narrow but modern day bakers are around 220 so might be ok.

 

Alex Van Pelt went about 220 so things haven't changed too much in that regard.

 

 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

So your answer to the question is basically trust McD and Beane? 

 

3 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

 

Certainly, your opinion could be correct but there are also differing viable explanations. 

 

Firstly, Beane and McD chose to prioritize the offense and something had to give. 

 

Secondly, I think Beane and McD were surprised that Edmunds was offered such a big contract. I think they planned on signing him all along. The Bears overpaid so it forced their hands. 

 

Thirdly, I think Beane and McD felt l one of the MLB guys on the roster would step up. Whether it was Klein, Dodson, Bernard, or Spector. I believe they optimistically thought the competition would bring out the best in one of them. By all accounts that just didn't happen.

 

Fourthly, the Kirksey signing is a good one considering the roster. It can't hurt whatsoever. His experience despite his short comings probably makes him the starter soon. I believe both Kirksey and the Bills organization thinks Kirksey can be an effective stop gap. 

 

For now, it's Bernard starting on Monday night. The spot light is certainly on him. 

 

Thanks.  I've said it all before, but I'll respond to each point, for the record. 

 

It's not a question of "trust."  The Pegulas have to decide whether they trust them, but we're just observers.  But my observation is that they do a pretty good job figuring out who should play and who shouldn't, so there's some reason to believe that they have the guy they want in the middle.  Maybe not, but some reason. 

 

First, something had to give.  That isn't responsive to one my premises, which is that McBeane always address holes in the lineup.  They aren't always right, but they always take swings at it.  In the past three or four seasons, there hasn't been a time when Beane has said he just didn't have any money left or any draft picks left.  He's always taken a swing.   It would be uncharacteristic of Beane to just not do anything.  (And I don't consider drafting Williams as "something," because you simply can't expect to a third round pick to be the guy in 2023. 

 

Second, I don't think their surprise had anything to do with not signing Edmunds.  Edmunds may have gotten a bigger contract than they expected, but I think they fully expected SOME team to pay more than they wanted to pay.  But even if it was only the Bears who outbid them, then they would have used the money they didn't spend on him to get another middle linebacker.  But see First, above.  They had the resources and they didn't buy another guy.  And they then decided just to spend the money on Oliver, that means that they didn't think they had a problem at middle linebacker.  

 

Third, I now think you're right.  They thought one of the guys they had would step up.  That's exactly right.  See First, again.  They thought they had the guy.   The important question is how do any of us know now that they were wrong?   We've hardly seen Bernard play this summer, so how do we know that he's going to fail?  

 

Fourth, Kirksey was of course a good move.  One of the things I now realize, however, is that signing Kirksey didn't necessarily mean that they were panicked about who's starting at middle linebacker.  It could just as easily mean that they realized that they aren't comfortable having Dodson back up Bernard, and Kirksey was an opportunity get a backup better than Klein.  

 

Bottom line, of course, is that I don't know, and I've said that over and over.  There are all sorts of things that may be going on here.  It seems to me that some people are jumping to the conclusion that the position is a dumpster fire, and I'm saying that I'm not at all sure that's true.  I'm not reaching any conclusions until I see the games.  In fact, I'm not reaching any conclusions until November and December.  The way seasons go for good teams, is they win enough games in the first half of the season to be in the playoff hunt, and along the way they figure out how to play.   So, for me, the question isn't so much how Bernard is playing in September.  It's how he (or Kirksey) is playing in November and December that matters.   I think Beane and McDermott have planned for that.  I'm sure they've planned for that.   Their plan may fail, for sure, and in retrospect they may wish they'd paid Edmunds or signed someone else, but it seems foolish to me to decide today that their plan won't work.  

[RyanC883]

8 hours ago, BillsShredder83 said:

You have a press- man coverage specialist and a gauntlet of Tyreek, Waddle, Chase, Higgins,  Kelce, Garrett Wilson. Our fastest player on defense.

 

At worst hes great depth and a situational chess piece FOR THIS SEASON.... without accounting for the upside of a talented/smart #1 pick down the road.  Insanely short sighted take if we were a 9-8 team, made even more ridiculous in a SB expectation season.  What does a 2024 2nd rd'er do for our SB push? 

 

The only tape we've seen on the guy is as a rookie, and he played well down the stretch. Absolutely asinine to concede a loss after an above average rookie season. i really dont understand this board sometimes

 

if he is burried on the depth chart as a CB 4, it makes sense to trade him for a 2nd rounder.  This years 2nd rounder is our starting OG, much more important than a CB4 to our window of success.  Next year it could be a starting safety (ours are getting old/injured), or a OL, WR, etc.  

 

I agree he played well down the stretch, very well actually.  But what the heck is going on this season that makes him our CB 4??!!  

[Shaw66]

There's one other point I've made before, and that's that I believe McBeane that MLB is the least important position on defense.  If that's right, they don't think they need talent there that's as great as the talent they need at other positions. 

 

Why would that be?   Well, for one reason, it's the one position that is surrounded by teammates.   The middle linebacker is the only player who's not on an island.  Every defensive lineman has to win his one-on-one battles.   Milano and Johnson are more often one-on-one, as are the corners and safeties.  The middle linebacker is the one guy who can get help from all his teammates around him.  

 

Edmunds covered a lot of ground.  His replacement will cover less, more like a conventional middle linebacker.   So, the defensive assignments of everyone around him will change but not very much.  McBeane understood that six months ago, and they decided that they could make those adjustments without hurting the defense.  

 

I don't know any of that is correct, but it makes sense to me.  McDermott and Beane certainly thought about all of this stuff in deciding how they were going to build the roster.  We will see whether their judgments were correct.  

[MarlinTheMagician]

I am a Benford believer.  Seems to have the "it" factor and he hits like a truck.

 

Glad to see they think they hit on the pick with OT.  We certainly needed a little more ballast up the middle.

Bernard to me is the question mark, but why don't we just get behind the young man?  I am the biggest Bernard fan there is unless he proves unworthy of it.  But for now, I am glad the young man has his shot.  Seems like a good guy and a hard worker.  So let's go Bernard!  (don't screw up your shot)

[hondo in seattle]

As Socrates said, 'I know that I know nothing.'

 

I don't know what to expect from Bernard.  Or, more importantly, if the Bills will win.  That's why they play the game.

 

So I'm just waiting for Monday.  

 

 

 

[BillsFanForever19]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

For the record, if anyone is reading this other than you and I, I've apologized to NewEra for my outburst.  It was out of line.  There's stuff to talk, and yelling about it doesn't help. 

 

But I'll try again.  Why is it that I should be discussing what I've seen to date?  Or put another way, why can't you see that I AM discussing what I've seen to date.  I've seen Beane and McDermott operate for five years, and at this stage of the team's development, one thing I've seen is that Beane always acquires someone to try to fill a hole.   I've seen that, over and over.  And the fact that he didn't do much of anything to get a middle linebacker to replace Edmunds tells me that he didn't think he had a hole there.  That, in turn tells me that he thinks Bernard or Dodson is good enough to give them what they need at the position.  That's what I conclude from what I've seen them do.

 

So, when you asked me (I think it was you) what it was that I've seen that makes me think Bernard might be the answer at middle linebacker, I told you exactly that.  What I've seen is how McDermott and Beane have reacted to what you and I thought was a hole in the lineup, and that suggests to me that they believe the guy they need.  

 

You seem to be saying that the only discussion you're willing to accept is a discussion based on observations of his play, data about his size or weight, and statistics.   That says you're not willing to discuss the possibility that Beane and McDermott know some things that you don't.  In fact, I'm interested in that possibility, and I think it's worth discussing.  Why do I have to be limited to discussing only the facts that you want to discuss. 

 

Now, as I've said over and over, I don't have any idea whether Bernard can do it.  And I'm not saying that we should have undying faith in Beane and McDermott or that they can do no wrong.  But I do know that Beane and McDermott are smart guys dedicated to winning a Super Bowl, so their response to the "hole" is meaningful to me.  Bernard looked lost to me on the field last season, so I understand exactly what you're saying, but Beane and McDermott saw what we saw, and they watched a lot more film of those plays (and his play in practice) than you and I, so I think there's a real possibility that the conclusion that you and I reach having watched Bernard play is simply wrong.  

 

Once again, I apologize for being so rude. 

 

Very good post.

 

This is the kind of thing I'm constantly talking about that gets me into hot water with some posters.

 

On one hand, this is a place to talk about our opinions and views on players and what should or shouldn't be done. On the other, if it doesn't line up with Beane and McDermott's motus operandi, which is pretty clear entering their 7th season here, it doesn't really matter.

 

Ultimately, it's more about how they view players, their investments and plans in them, and their track record of how they handle situations. I tend to weigh that over a personal opinion, my own or someone else's.

[FireChans]

53 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

There's one other point I've made before, and that's that I believe McBeane that MLB is the least important position on defense.  If that's right, they don't think they need talent there that's as great as the talent they need at other positions. 

 

Why would that be?   Well, for one reason, it's the one position that is surrounded by teammates.   The middle linebacker is the only player who's not on an island.  Every defensive lineman has to win his one-on-one battles.   Milano and Johnson are more often one-on-one, as are the corners and safeties.  The middle linebacker is the one guy who can get help from all his teammates around him.  

 

Edmunds covered a lot of ground.  His replacement will cover less, more like a conventional middle linebacker.   So, the defensive assignments of everyone around him will change but not very much.  McBeane understood that six months ago, and they decided that they could make those adjustments without hurting the defense.  

 

I don't know any of that is correct, but it makes sense to me.  McDermott and Beane certainly thought about all of this stuff in deciding how they were going to build the roster.  We will see whether their judgments were correct.  

TEAMS WHO THINK THE MLB IS THE LEAST IMPORTANT DEFENSIVE POSITION DO NOT TRADE UP IN THE FIRST ROUND TO TAKE AN MLB AT PICK #16.  THEY DO NOT DRAFT AN MLB #9 OVERALL.

 

This flies in the face of a decade of decisions that McD/Beane have been involved in.  This is total and absolute appeal to authority combined with revisionist history.

 

This is like saying "Shanahan doesn't believe in investing heavily in the QB position because he's starting Mr. Irrelevant. Just pretend that he didn't make a blockbuster trade for Trey Lance or another blockbuster trade for Jimmy G.  He must not believe you need to invest a lot in the QB position."

 

I have read a lot of your posts Shaw, and they are pretty consistently, "McBeane must believe this is the best thing to do and who am I to argue" combined with a shoulder shrug. And that's fine that you believe that. But the history of how these guys operate is out there.

 

If McDermott didn't think MLB was important, why did he trade up for Edmunds in the first?  Why was he the DC on the team who took Kuechly at #9?  Are you seriously arguing that they decided MLB wasn't that important coincidentally when they trotted out the worst MLB group they ever have in the NFL? They must be the luckiest GM/HC's in history that their decisions to not invest in positions comes at the perfect time when those positions suck.

 

What's next?

 

McBeane must believe that Tyrod Taylor is good enough to be the QB for the Buffalo Bills because they started him in 2017 and passed on drafting a QB.

 

McBeane must believe that the WR group doesn't need much help because they only brought in Jamison Crowder and the corpses of John Brown/Cole Beasley in 2022.

 

You in particular need to grapple with the fact that just because the people in charge make a decision, it doesn't mean their decision was correct and it doesn't mean they are content with their decision.  There is ACTUAL evidence that McBeane weren't happy with the WR group last year. There is ACTUAL evidence that they believe that MLB is an important position.

 

I could easily say "I believe that McBeane are nervous as hell that they misjudged the MLB position since last offseason, and while they made the tough decision to let Edmunds walk, they now wish they probably made other moves to address the position."  But because they will NEVER say that in a press conference, you will never believe that's possible.

[GoBills808]

36 minutes ago, FireChans said:

TEAMS WHO THINK THE MLB IS THE LEAST IMPORTANT DEFENSIVE POSITION DO NOT TRADE UP IN THE FIRST ROUND TO TAKE AN MLB AT PICK #16.  THEY DO NOT DRAFT AN MLB #9 OVERALL.

 

This flies in the face of a decade of decisions that McD/Beane have been involved in.  This is total and absolute appeal to authority combined with revisionist history.

 

This is like saying "Shanahan doesn't believe in investing heavily in the QB position because he's starting Mr. Irrelevant. Just pretend that he didn't make a blockbuster trade for Trey Lance or another blockbuster trade for Jimmy G.  He must not believe you need to invest a lot in the QB position."

 

I have read a lot of your posts Shaw, and they are pretty consistently, "McBeane must believe this is the best thing to do and who am I to argue" combined with a shoulder shrug. And that's fine that you believe that. But the history of how these guys operate is out there.

 

If McDermott didn't think MLB was important, why did he trade up for Edmunds in the first?  Why was he the DC on the team who took Kuechly at #9?  Are you seriously arguing that they decided MLB wasn't that important coincidentally when they trotted out the worst MLB group they ever have in the NFL? They must be the luckiest GM/HC's in history that their decisions to not invest in positions comes at the perfect time when those positions suck.

 

What's next?

 

McBeane must believe that Tyrod Taylor is good enough to be the QB for the Buffalo Bills because they started him in 2017 and passed on drafting a QB.

 

McBeane must believe that the WR group doesn't need much help because they only brought in Jamison Crowder and the corpses of John Brown/Cole Beasley in 2022.

 

You in particular need to grapple with the fact that just because the people in charge make a decision, it doesn't mean their decision was correct and it doesn't mean they are content with their decision.  There is ACTUAL evidence that McBeane weren't happy with the WR group last year. There is ACTUAL evidence that they believe that MLB is an important position.

 

I could easily say "I believe that McBeane are nervous as hell that they misjudged the MLB position since last offseason, and while they made the tough decision to let Edmunds walk, they now wish they probably made other moves to address the position."  But because they will NEVER say that in a press conference, you will never believe that's possible.

I mean this is just a home run

[Dopey]

11 hours ago, appoo said:

This was Bernard's participation by week last season

 

 

He was exclusively Matt Milano's backup and played the Will. his only PT came when Milano was injured in the Steelers game and the Jets loss in week 9. 

 

So if you're saying he sucked at MLB because of what you saw last season, you should realize you never saw him play MLB last season

But @newcam2012 was on such a roll. 😂

[FireChans]

31 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

I mean this is just a home run

TBD is the best because we can vehemently disagree in one thread and be perfectly aligned in another lmao

[GoBills808]

23 minutes ago, FireChans said:

TBD is the best because we can vehemently disagree in one thread and be perfectly aligned in another lmao

It's such a massive leap of logic

 

Like equivalent of 'Pete Carroll let Wilson walk and didn't do anything to replace him except Geno Smith, he must think QB is one of the least important positions on offense'

[NickelCity]

Bernard had a strong scrimmage right before he pulled that hammy. Hope he runs with it. Dodson sucks.

[FireChans]

9 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

It's such a massive leap of logic

 

Like equivalent of 'Pete Carroll let Wilson walk and didn't do anything to replace him except Geno Smith, he must think QB is one of the least important positions on offense'

It’s a total specious argument. And while I have nothing personal against @Shaw66, he makes the same specious arguments year after year. 
 

“Beane isn’t concerned about IOL because he didn’t address it.”

 

”McD isn’t concerned about safety play without Hyde because he has Hamlin and Cam Lewis”

 

”Beane isn’t concerned about our WR after Diggs and Davis or else he would have done something else.”

 

Etc etc etc. every year it’s “I’m not worried about this position group because McBeane didn’t do much so they must not be worried either.” 
 

Someone had to tell this man that just because something is ostensibly plausible does not make it true or even likely, shout out @birdog1960 and @Jauronimo.

 

As a side note, these arguments always come out after the fact. Prior to Edmunds leaving in FA, we would have NEVER heard that the brain trust at OBD thinks the MLB position is the next fullback. 

Edited September 7, 2023 by FireChans

[par73]

Interesting how Bernard "won" the job while he was injured (McDermott said it was too close to call with Dodson-- and would like to see someone step up). My opinion-- he saw how bad Dodson was in the preseason, and Bernard was named the starter since the other contenders took themselves out based on performance.

It sure would have been nice if the Bills had addressed MLB more seriously in the offseason, instead of assuming someone would step up. Having seen Bernard last year (unless he is greatly improved-- didn't sound like it, when he was in a dead-heat with Dodson), I assume he is a place-holder until Kirksey is up to speed.

[Behindenemylines]

4 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Funny because we had the biggest MLB in the league and fans absolutely hated Edmunds here.

Wasn’t because of his size, it was because he had little instinct. 

[Doc Brown]

8 hours ago, newcam2012 said:

Bernard > Lawrence Taylor 

Finally an optimistic post from you.  Just admit you think deep down we're going 20-0 this year.

[Brianmoorman4jesus]

I just wish we had seen more of Bernard at some point. Would be nice to have a feel for him as a fan. I was all

for Dodson until about halfway through last season and I’m done with him. I would have drafted a starting MLB in round 1 or 2 but…hopefully Bernard ends up being great and Beane knew all along. 

[GunnerBill]

15 hours ago, appoo said:

Hamlin is the box safety and Hyde the deeper safety to Poyer's box safety...one would think that's going to be Taylor Rapp

 

Rapp is really a box safety too. What they did last year is Poyer played much more as the centre fielder with Hamlin in the box role. I expect Rapp will mainly play in the box and Poyer will play deep if Hyde can't go. 

[Buffalo_Stampede]

2 hours ago, Behindenemylines said:

Wasn’t because of his size, it was because he had little instinct. 

Exactly the point. It’s rarely about the size of the player. Instinct and technique go a long way.

 

Jason Kelce is probably 280lbs going up against 325lbs DTs and he wins almost every rep.

[Max Fischer]

2 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Exactly the point. It’s rarely about the size of the player. Instinct and technique go a long way.

 

Jason Kelce is probably 280lbs going up against 325lbs DTs and he wins almost every rep.

 

Yet at the same time, many fans on this thread have concluded that Bernard cannot be a good MLB because of his size. His size "could" be a factor, but we won't know that until he's played a few games. Who knows, perhaps instinct, technique, and athleticism will win out. 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Max Fischer said:

 Who knows, perhaps instinct, technique, and athleticism will win out. 

The question is whether Bernard has any of these!

[Warriorspikes51]

Just now, Shaw66 said:

The question is whether Bernard has any of these!

agreed, he's looked slow to me previously.  Would be happy for him to show up and ball out....but at least we have Kirksey on deck 

[Slippery Rubber Mats]

2 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

The question is whether Bernard has any of these!

 

So he lacks a feel for the game, has poor technique, and is slow and unathletic yet he's picked to start by the coach?

[Max Fischer]

36 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

The question is whether Bernard has any of these!

 

If he wasn't, Klein or Dodson would start. 

[Udubalum07]

I do think with Bernard, it is more about not feeling good about anybody they put out there than him playing great and winning the job.  McD said he was disappointed with the overall play from the position both vocally and physically.  He likes the way Klein communicated, but he doesn't seem to have the ability to play the position how he wants it played. 

 

Reading between the lines, he really hasn't loved anything he had seen, but Bernard seems to have the most upside.  I believe he will have Kirksey starting around week 4 if Bernard can't be  serviceable.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

7 hours ago, par73 said:

Interesting how Bernard "won" the job while he was injured (McDermott said it was too close to call with Dodson-- and would like to see someone step up). My opinion-- he saw how bad Dodson was in the preseason, and Bernard was named the starter since the other contenders took themselves out based on performance.

It sure would have been nice if the Bills had addressed MLB more seriously in the offseason, instead of assuming someone would step up. Having seen Bernard last year (unless he is greatly improved-- didn't sound like it, when he was in a dead-heat with Dodson), I assume he is a place-holder until Kirksey is up to speed.

 

Bernard was brought in as a leader/student of the game, more than based off of his physical traits.  The path to starting and success isn't always linear, it might require you to gain some size or strength, learn nuances of a new position, how to react more instinctively at a new spot, improve your tackling form, learn to shed blocks more effectively, etc.  But i think play recognition, game calling, and general film study are strengths of his - and that is probably why they want him out there.  

[K-9]

9 hours ago, par73 said:

Interesting how Bernard "won" the job while he was injured (McDermott said it was too close to call with Dodson-- and would like to see someone step up). My opinion-- he saw how bad Dodson was in the preseason, and Bernard was named the starter since the other contenders took themselves out based on performance.

It sure would have been nice if the Bills had addressed MLB more seriously in the offseason, instead of assuming someone would step up. Having seen Bernard last year (unless he is greatly improved-- didn't sound like it, when he was in a dead-heat with Dodson), I assume he is a place-holder until Kirksey is up to speed.

Yep. Bernard didn’t win the job so much as Dodson et al lost it. And he’s gonna be a prime target for the Jets run game coordinator to exploit like they did last year in NY. That said, the D is healthier than at any time last year and we will have Milano alongside him. 

[newcam2012]

9 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Finally an optimistic post from you.  Just admit you think deep down we're going 20-0 this year.

I want to see Allen hoist the Lombardi Trophy.

10 hours ago, Dopey said:

But @newcam2012 was on such a roll. 😂

But I did see him play seven games and 45 plays. Extremely short sample but I saw little to nothing that left me encouraged. I saw nothing that indicates he's close to being a starter. 

 

Dopey (fitting name perhaps) what did you see? 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, Bleeding Bills Blue said:

 

Bernard was brought in as a leader/student of the game, more than based off of his physical traits.  The path to starting and success isn't always linear, it might require you to gain some size or strength, learn nuances of a new position, how to react more instinctively at a new spot, improve your tackling form, learn to shed blocks more effectively, etc.  But i think play recognition, game calling, and general film study are strengths of his - and that is probably why they want him out there.  

This is a really interesting point.  My recollection is that when he was drafted, a lot of the decision was supported by the opinion of his college coach, with whom McDermott is friendly, and by the fact that Bernard was, as you say, an extraordinary student of the game.  (No one said this, that I recall, but he was sort of like Kellen Moore, a guy with an excellent college career who can at least survive in the NFL mostly on brain power.)  The assumption is exactly what you say - that he can learn to do the physical things well enough, but his real benefit should be running the defense and playing mistake-free football.  Kind of a Hyde-in-the-middle.  That may be what McDermott sees in Bernard.   And, by the way, that kind of on-field leadership is something Edmunds never grew into.  

 

It will be very interesting to see what happens at that position.  I'd guess that McDermott and the coaches have a pretty good idea what to expect from Bernard, where he's going to help and where he's going to be a liability, and McDermott seems to have confidence in him.  But we're naturally less confident, because all we know is that for all those great attributes, on the field Kellen Moore was still only Kellen Moore.  Is Bernard's ceiling just too low for him to handle the position?   It'll be interesting.  

[Doc]

Meh.  He'll be in there for the Jets game at most and then Kirksey will take over.

[BarleyNY]

20 hours ago, Coach Tuesday said:

But OTOH you keep basically preaching to us a football version of the Divine Plan: the roster is this way because it has been willed so by One Bills Drive.  “Beane and McDermott know what they are doing and who are we fans to question them.”  Talk about self-righteous…

Yup. "Appeal to Authority" is a logical fallacy. It is when someone asserts that something is true because someone deemed an expert says that it is. I have heard a version of this for just about every coach and GM that the Bills have had. I'm not sure how anyone can make such a claim after seeing all of the mistakes they've all made. That includes the current group. 

[oldmanfan]

39 minutes ago, BarleyNY said:

Yup. "Appeal to Authority" is a logical fallacy. It is when someone asserts that something is true because someone deemed an expert says that it is. I have heard a version of this for just about every coach and GM that the Bills have had. I'm not sure how anyone can make such a claim after seeing all of the mistakes they've all made. That includes the current group. 

This raises an interesting philosophical point.  The Internet and social media has led to many thinking they are knowledgeable in areas because of the ready access of information.  Take pro football and our current GM and HC.  Do they make mistakes that fans can criticize? Sure.  But do they make as many as someone here on this board would make if thrown into the job?  Not a chance.  Because they are indeed more expert in their field than any of us are.

 

I’m an IVF lab director with over 40 years experience and I have folks without a high school diploma try to tell me on social media how reproduction works.  Sorry, but I am an expert; you are not.  It would be like me taking my taxes to an accountant and then telling him or her I’m going to redo them because I know better.  So when it comes to football I give guys who have done this for years the benefit of the doubt, because I believe experience and expertise is to be valued and not belittled.

[BarleyNY]

23 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

This raises an interesting philosophical point.  The Internet and social media has led to many thinking they are knowledgeable in areas because of the ready access of information.  Take pro football and our current GM and HC.  Do they make mistakes that fans can criticize? Sure.  But do they make as many as someone here on this board would make if thrown into the job?  Not a chance.  Because they are indeed more expert in their field than any of us are.

 

I’m an IVF lab director with over 40 years experience and I have folks without a high school diploma try to tell me on social media how reproduction works.  Sorry, but I am an expert; you are not.  It would be like me taking my taxes to an accountant and then telling him or her I’m going to redo them because I know better.  So when it comes to football I give guys who have done this for years the benefit of the doubt, because I believe experience and expertise is to be valued and not belittled.

 

Couple points:

- There’s a big difference between acknowledging that someone is an expert and asserting their infallibility. 

- On the tax example my MIL had hers done by the same professional for decades. She passed away last year and my wife is handling her estate. She found numerous mistakes in the taxes sent to her by the same professional tax accountant. Some took several corrections before they were fully rectified. Thus the danger of appealing to authority.

- Similarly a lot of fans thought that despite his extensive experience Rex Ryan was going to be a disaster here. And they sure weren’t wrong. I hear the same argument of “he’s the pro.”

- Just because a fan may not be able to do the job of a GM doesn’t mean that they can’t point out where they think he went wrong. I’m not a professional chef, but I can tell you that a meal is terrible when I have a really bad one - and sometimes even when I’m watching one be made. 

- Let’s not confuse name calling and belittling someone with fans voicing legitimate concerns and criticisms.

- I don’t see the same push back when Bills fans criticize other teams players, coaches and GMs. Why the double standard?

 

There’s nothing wrong with a fan stating that they think we will have a problem at MLB because our starting MLB performed poorly last year and hasn’t been on the field in the preseason. That’s legitimate. That doesn’t mean that they’re rooting for the player to fail or rooting against the Bills.