Is there an NFL team with a weaker WR group than the Bills?

[Pete]

3 hours ago, T master said:

Was there one weaker last year when the Bills out scored even team in the league ??

We’ve covered this a few times.  Bills offense scored 62 TD.  Cook had 18. Josh ran for 12 TD, and caught 1 TD. Ty and Ray combined for 9 TD.  That totals 40 TDs, or 65% of all offensive TDs.  
 

Mac Hollins led all Bills WR with 5 TD.  Amari had 2 TD.  7 TD out the door, or 11%.
 

So that there is 76% of Bills 62 touchdowns in 2024.

 

Josh and Running Backs are doing all of the heavy lifting(and the offensive line).

 

Time for the 24% to step up, and start pulling their load.  

[Doc Brown]

Kind of what I expected given his play up to this point.  Eating $2.5m in dead cap is something the Bills have done before with OJ Howard ($3.2m) so he's not guaranteed a roster spot imo.

 

 

[RoscoeParrish]

1 hour ago, Mister Defense said:

 

Early in the off season I was fully on board with a wideout being a pressing need--I kept thinking that if the Bills just had that fast, sure handed wideout, it would have opened things up underneath all game long versus KC in the Championship game.  And then maybe Brady would have called many more runs and short passes, and then, well...

 

And ditto after the playoff loss to KC last season, especially the "sure handed" part of the need.

 

So, early this off season I was all about going all in for a player like Metcalf, and posted about it here, someone I  had wanted the Bills to draft. And maybe ditto in the draft this year.

 

But then in this off season, once I had time to really let it all sink in, and look at the season stats, and hear from friends and some on this board, it made much more sense to me to go all in for bettering the defense.  The reason? My original take would mean the Bills would have needed to overcome a  defensive weakness, time and time again maybe, to just outscore opponents.  Sort of like we saw this past season in the Rams and Lions games, for example.

 

To me it made much more sense to make the team stronger, to turn the defensive weak areas into strengths.  The struggles in the playoffs, albeit mainly against a dynasty in the making, the Reid Mahomes Chiefs, were usually defensive in nature.  Trying to just outscore them, and not stop them, began to seem foolish to me, And  the defense had the least talent it had had in years.

 

Now, I am not sure what that need is you ask me about.  I think I want to see what the safety play is like, hoping Bishop is the real deal.  If he is, I think we are in good shape there for now. Better depth this year with Hamlin and the Washington free agent--if Bishop works out.

 

Ditto for the wide receivers, but I would still like that sure handed burner.  But now, I would not pay a lot for him like I wanted to do early in the off season, but would want him on the cheap, in the draft, or as the Bills may have done with Palmer and/or Moore.

 

I am not being critical of those just because they wanted a wideout early in the draft, as I was there myself, but instead have been shocked by the bizarre over the top, irrational bashing of Beane and their reasoning. Hard to take seriously those who say he neglects the offense, it has almost no talent, hates Josh etcetera, after the year the offense had last year--best Bills' offense ever, and most points scored in the NFL last year etcetera

 

 

 

I think we are having different conversations.

 

I don’t mind the direction of the offseason at all.

 

I’m just saying objectively, looking at the roster and the position groups that would most benefit from a good to very good player.

 

QB - no

HB - no

WR - yes

TE - maybe, but Kincaid is young

OL - no

DE - upgraded in offseason

DT - upgraded in offseason

LB - slight maybe 

CB - upgraded in offseason/draft

S - yes

 

That article quoted said the biggest need on the roster was WR. Phrased another way, like I did, is where would I take a top 15 player today. 
 

I think there’s a very good argument for WR, today. It’s not me bashing the offseason because I frankly think we needed a defensive overhaul.

 

I look at the WR and safety groupings as “room for improvement,” aka they can be upgraded aka we need an upgrade there moreso than at running back or QB or the defensive needs that have already been addressed. It’s not “we should have taken a WR instead of Hairston,” its “we took all these defensive players, where else could we improve the roster.”

 

Just my 2 cents.

Edited 6 hours ago by RoscoeParrish

[HamptonBillsfan]

7 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

I think another underrated aspect of this offense is that all 3 RB's are capable of catching the ball out the back field and even the Full Back Gilliam is a solid pass catcher. Meaning that the Bills unlike a lot of teams always have good pass catchers out of the backfield. 

Great take, Josh doesn’t need #1s because we’re going to run the ball down team’s throats and make underrated receivers have the best yeats of their careers. With our defense improved, I’ve never been more optimistic.

[Mister Defense]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

We grade the level of discourse on TSW by how late in the offseason the thinking is.   By June people start thinking Trent Edwards will go from unplayable to being capable of running a no-huddle offense.   Or that Tavon Austin's comeback is actually going to work!    The insanity used to rationalize how perceived issues don't exist gets CRAZY.

 

If you don't know EXACTLY what the problems are after watching the team play 20 games.....when how things actually work on the field in the NFL is fresh in your mind....... then you just aren't seeing the game.

 

 

Well, phew, as I am glad I don't do what you say in part above..

 

Like years ago when I was so happy, as he 'progressed" here, that EJ Manuel was beginning to throw the ball 'in the vicinity' of receivers, getting the ball consistently within 2-4 feet of them.  We were saved.

 

 

[Kirby Jackson]

5 minutes ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

Great take, Josh doesn’t need #1s because we’re going to run the ball down team’s throats and make underrated receivers have the best yeats of their careers. With our defense improved, I’ve never been more optimistic.

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

[Mister Defense]

2 hours ago, RoscoeParrish said:

I think we are having different conversations.

 

I don’t mind the direction of the offseason at all.

 

I’m just saying objectively, looking at the roster and the position groups that would most benefit from a good to very good player.

 

QB - no

HB - no

WR - yes

TE - maybe, but Kincaid is young

OL - no

DE - upgraded in offseason

DT - upgraded in offseason

LB - slight maybe 

CB - upgraded in offseason/draft

S - yes

 

That article quoted said the biggest need on the roster was WR. Phrased another way, like I did, is where would I take a top 15 player today. 
 

I think there’s a very good argument for WR, today. It’s not me bashing the offseason because I frankly think we needed a defensive overhaul.

 

I look at the WR and safety groupings as “room for improvement,” aka they can be upgraded aka we need an upgrade there moreso than at running back or QB or the defensive needs that have already been addressed. It’s not “we should have taken a WR instead of Hairston,” its “we took all these defensive players, where else could we improve the roster.”

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Yeah, I know all of that, what you were saying above.  At the end I was just stating my views on the other aspect of this too, the over the top stuff--but you did not express that at all in your posts. (I was just too rambling I think, free writing it on a break.)

 

And I am on board with what you say with the WR overall, just changed my mind about its significance as the off season progressed, as the defense needed an overhaul.

 

I would now love that wideout you and others want.  Hope Moore and or Palmer can together  come close to that,  provide some of what we want.  But maybe next year the Bills go for it in the draft.  Will depend on what happens this coming season.

 

 

 

 

[Pete]

3 hours ago, Mikey152 said:

Legit follow up...

 

If Amari Cooper is directly responsible for a TD a game point difference, why is he still a free agent?

 

 

Hes still a free agent, because basically every other team already has multiple  WR’s with speed, besides Buffalo.  They do not need to add an older, slower Amari Cooper- their WR rooms are stronger without.

 

Buffalo has been starved for speed WR since John Brown.  It’s the missing element that would make Josh unstoppable.  Beane traded away a coveted 3rd round pick for Amari rental.  And it was worth it.  As Beane stated, the Bills averaged over 7 points a game when Amari played.  7.4 points to be precise.  Think about how bad Josh played against the Texans.  No WR could separate, it was one of Josh worst career games.  We traded for Amari, and he was missing element.  Defenses backed up, Bills score 30+ 8 games in a row.  
 

People underestimate how much Amari and Mack added to our offense, beyond the numbers.-  Palmer and Moore are solid route runners.  If those 2 can consistently get separation, the Bills offense will out score anyone.

[BADOLBILZ]

18 minutes ago, Mister Defense said:

 

Well, phew, as I am glad I don't do what you say in part above..

 

Like years ago when I was so happy, as he 'progressed" here, that EJ Manuel was beginning to throw the ball 'in the vicinity' of receivers, getting the ball consistently within 2-4 feet of them.  We were saved.

 

 

 

You are doing exactly as I described.   Moving the target to wherever you think the arrow landed.

 

But you are in good company.   Beane and McDermott have done this plenty of times as well.  

 

 

[BADOLBILZ]

28 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

 

 

It's going to be hard to avoid turnovers anywhere close to that again.   Allen literally fumbled and lost it on the first offensive series of the season versus Arizona and then the turnovers just didn't happen anymore. 

 

What IS aligning for them being able to thrive is their tremendously easy looking schedule.   Per Sharp analysis 5th easiest in the NFL.

 

The problem is winning in the playoffs though.

 

They've sort of become the Marty Schottenheimer Chiefs in the playoffs.    But that's just how pedestrian their offensive weapons have been in the playoffs/clutch.

[stinky finger]

5 hours ago, vtnatefootball11 said:

 

Right a great football team without any weapon that scares on you offense, one that depends entirely on the heroics of a single player, one that consistently gets close but can't get over the hump to make the Super Bowl. I desperately want the Bills to win one, and could care less if it's with McDermott or not.  Many Bills fans have pointed out, going back years, that the Bills lack any type of explosive weapon on offense (not just a gadget fast guy, but an actual plus starter that scares defenses). Diggs was not a top end receiver his last couple years with the team, he was borderline #1, good #2 type, yet Allen was forcing him the ball and we had no other help around him. That's why we saw addition by subtraction last year, along with Allen's continued development and continued chemistry on the o line. Like many Bills fans, I remain highly skeptical that team without a single offensive weapon that scares you can win the Super Bowl (and rightfully so). I hope I'm wrong, truly. I will be dancing in the streets crying tears of joy if so.  

 

You would do well to examine the defensive side of the ball as to why we haven't gotten over the hump.

[HamptonBillsfan]

49 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

You can’t compare stats from one season to the next because the roster will be different. Maybe Palmer and Moore improve the receiver production and Kincaid and Coleman do what they’re supposed to do. we’re talking about a different animal. I’m confident Cook will be highly motivated in his walk year. Offense will not be a problem with Josh making everyone better. If you believe in the defensive additions, we’ll be right there.

[Mikie2times]

23 minutes ago, stinky finger said:

 

You would do well to examine the defensive side of the ball as to why we haven't gotten over the hump.

It can be both right? I know people are thinking with these defensive additions and the prolific offense we just won't play in anymore close games. But in all likelihood we will have to win at least one game by scoring with under 2 minutes left if we want to win a Super Bowl. Most teams have at least one game like that and sometimes two while they make a run. We have lost back to back years after the defense failed AND the offense failed in that situation. Offensively that failure was largely our skill position players not making critical plays. It is both things. The more nuclear of the two WAS the defense. Just sort of irritating to have so many people act as if the other problem doesn't exist because we score a lot of points in lower leverage spots. I could really care less how many points we score in the regular season or even how many points we score in the playoffs. Do we have the horses to execute in a high leverage spot with the game on the line with the Lombardi on the line? 

[Kirby Jackson]

55 minutes ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

You can’t compare stats from one season to the next because the roster will be different. Maybe Palmer and Moore improve the receiver production and Kincaid and Coleman do what they’re supposed to do. we’re talking about a different animal. I’m confident Cook will be highly motivated in his walk year. Offense will not be a problem with Josh making everyone better. If you believe in the defensive additions, we’ll be right there.

You can compare stats to historical output. The 2024 Bills had the fewest negative plays EVER. Not just for the Bills, of any team ever. Is it reasonable to believe that, for a 2nd consecutive year, they won’t do something that no team in history has ever done? Common sense says it regresses even if it’s still good. The Bills could be a top 5 turnover differential team and that would be a massive step back from where they were. They were a statistical outlier. 
 

I believe that Coleman and Kincaid will improve some. I think Palmer and Moore are decent role players. They are as good as Mack was. But will that offset the regression in terms of “luck?” The pass catchers are near the bottom of the league. That’s not really debatable. The question is, “will it matter?” It didn’t last year but they had incredible luck and health on the OL. They were awesome. If any of that changes, the talent becomes more important. Is it enough?

 

I believe the defensive additions will make a difference there. I expect the defense to be better. I don’t expect them to turn the ball over more. I do expect more pass rush though. I expect better run defense too.

 

I expect the Bills to compete for the Super Bowl. That doesn’t mean that they are perfect. If they do fall short of their goal, what will be the reason? My guess is that it’s the lack of playmakers and questionable coaching. The defense will be better and Josh is incredible. 

[oldmanfan]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

Again if Beane had done that, or swings some huge deal for say Jefferson, fine.  But let me challenge your assumption a bit.  Say you have Metcslf.  Does Josh go back to feeling he has to feed him X number of balls a game?  And does it alter Brady’s everybody eats approach that resulted in a very effective offense last year and an MVP year for Josh.  No way to know of course, but right now we have 10 guys that can get involved in the pass game -5 WRs, 2TEs, 3RBs.  

[Kirby Jackson]

4 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Again if Beane had done that, or swings some huge deal for say Jefferson, fine.  But let me challenge your assumption a bit.  Say you have Metcslf.  Does Josh go back to feeling he has to feed him X number of balls a game?  And does it alter Brady’s everybody eats approach that resulted in a very effective offense last year and an MVP year for Josh.  No way to know of course, but right now we have 10 guys that can get involved in the pass game -5 WRs, 2TEs, 3RBs.  

Lol, we have people convinced that having better players is a bad thing. 🤣🤣 Josh throwing the ball to better players will yield better results. The passing numbers last year dropped quite a bit. Brady schemed guys open. 

[NoSaint]

2 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

last year was the proverbial first 5 games with Fitzpatrick in regard to getting a lot of luck.
 

Not something we are used to. But as you note, it usually normalizes.  

 

even with a very good unit, odds are we lose about 10 in the differential. 
 

do we have the horses to still maintain the point differential?

[oldmanfan]

9 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Lol, we have people convinced that having better players is a bad thing. 🤣🤣 Josh throwing the ball to better players will yield better results. The passing numbers last year dropped quite a bit. Brady schemed guys open. 

I thought you and I had reached a point where we could discuss things collegiality.  But I guess I was wrong.  My very first sentence I said if Beane had traded for Metcalf or swung a deal for a guy like Jefferson, what did I say?  Fine.  I then just threw out a theoretical on how that might affect the offense as constructed by Brady, and you give me this.

 

Let me know if you want to be collegial or not.  If so, great.  If not then let’s just ignore each other’s posts.

[HamptonBillsfan]

26 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You can compare stats to historical output. The 2024 Bills had the fewest negative plays EVER. Not just for the Bills, of any team ever. Is it reasonable to believe that, for a 2nd consecutive year, they won’t do something that no team in history has ever done? Common sense says it regresses even if it’s still good. The Bills could be a top 5 turnover differential team and that would be a massive step back from where they were. They were a statistical outlier. 
 

I believe that Coleman and Kincaid will improve some. I think Palmer and Moore are decent role players. They are as good as Mack was. But will that offset the regression in terms of “luck?” The pass catchers are near the bottom of the league. That’s not really debatable. The question is, “will it matter?” It didn’t last year but they had incredible luck and health on the OL. They were awesome. If any of that changes, the talent becomes more important. Is it enough?

 

I believe the defensive additions will make a difference there. I expect the defense to be better. I don’t expect them to turn the ball over more. I do expect more pass rush though. I expect better run defense too.

 

I expect the Bills to compete for the Super Bowl. That doesn’t mean that they are perfect. If they do fall short of their goal, what will be the reason? My guess is that it’s the lack of playmakers and questionable coaching. The defense will be better and Josh is incredible. 

Pretty good analysis, but the cap situation clearly prevented additional acquisitions. My hope is that we can find a way to retain Cook before he becomes even more expensive. He’s really good.

[HamptonBillsfan]

37 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

You can compare stats to historical output. The 2024 Bills had the fewest negative plays EVER. Not just for the Bills, of any team ever. Is it reasonable to believe that, for a 2nd consecutive year, they won’t do something that no team in history has ever done? Common sense says it regresses even if it’s still good. The Bills could be a top 5 turnover differential team and that would be a massive step back from where they were. They were a statistical outlier. 
 

I believe that Coleman and Kincaid will improve some. I think Palmer and Moore are decent role players. They are as good as Mack was. But will that offset the regression in terms of “luck?” The pass catchers are near the bottom of the league. That’s not really debatable. The question is, “will it matter?” It didn’t last year but they had incredible luck and health on the OL. They were awesome. If any of that changes, the talent becomes more important. Is it enough?

 

I believe the defensive additions will make a difference there. I expect the defense to be better. I don’t expect them to turn the ball over more. I do expect more pass rush though. I expect better run defense too.

 

I expect the Bills to compete for the Super Bowl. That doesn’t mean that they are perfect. If they do fall short of their goal, what will be the reason? My guess is that it’s the lack of playmakers and questionable coaching. The defense will be better and Josh is incredible. 

Historical output with bad QBs and offensive attacks doesn’t compare to Josh and our O-line. I agree we’re not expecting our two wideouts to be the Bengals receivers but expect Moore, Palmer and our 2nd year receiver (Coleman) and our 1st round drafted TE (Kincaid) to be markedly improved.