THE ROCKPILE REVIEW – McDermott’s Formula on Display in the NBA

[SoCal Deek]

24 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Absolutely the dog days.  There's nothing to talk about. 

 

This wasn't intended to "justify" anything.  It was just noting that the NBA seems to be moving away from the pack-your-roster-with-stars philosophy and approaching roster building in a way that is similar to what McDermott has been doing. 

 

Can't help it if you have trouble thinking about two sports at the same time.  

I don’t have trouble at all Shaw. I just see zero connection here. Sorry. 

[SoCal Deek]

I’m not a huge NBA fan but I think what’s being witnessed is similar to the transition the NFL went through after a generation of star QBs got old all at the same time. I remember a lot of NFL fans wondering at the time whether the ‘glory days’ of the league were over. Then, out of seemingly nowhere we got an entirely new set of young star QBs. 

[Shaw66]

11 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m not a huge NBA fan but I think what’s being witnessed is similar to the transition the NFL went through after a generation of star QBs got old all at the same time. I remember a lot of NFL fans wondering at the time whether the ‘glory days’ of the league were over. Then, out of seemingly nowhere we got an entirely new set of young star QBs. 

I think it's interesting to compare the two.  

 

The QBs are interesting, for example.  It's not just a new set of young star QBs, they are different QBs. Manning and Brady couldn't run and didn't need to run. Because of rule changes and strategy evolution, it's almost impossible for a QB to succeed if he isn't a running threat.  In my mind, it's the big knock against Burrow. The Bengals suffer because he isn't really a threat to take the easy running yards.  

 

I see something similar in the NBA. Rule changes, including the three point shot and how they officiate, has changed how the NBA plays.  For a while it's been difficult for a big man to really dominate.  Shaq may have been the last.  You have Jokic and Giannis, exceptional talents, but everything has to fall together just right for them to win. Instead, and this was my point, you have teams running, really running, with five guys who can run, jump, shoot, and defend.  The difference, as someone pointed out, is best seen in the defense. Five quick guys, 6'2" to 6'9" can defend better than four of those guys and Jokic, or four and Giannis. The big guys, mobile as they may be, aren't mobile enough.  

 

I haven't watched the NBA this year until the playoffs, and I don't know what happened to Durant this year. I assume he's at the end, maybe he was injured, whatever. Durant had awesome speed and quickness for a man his size, and he was devastating in his day. But I think coaches have figured out that they can win more with a smaller, quicker guy in the lineup (assuming you can figure out how to replace his points). So, for example, you have four teams left, all of whom play this way - stifling defense, with one star who gets you the points you need and who still plays defense the way you need. Five guys running together, attacking relentlessly on offense and on defense, with a star leading them

 

So, what we're seeing this year is smaller teams with one star.  You need the star to get 25-35 a night. The rest of the guys have nice offensive skills, can shoot threes, etc., but they win by having five guys on the floor who can cover the whole court, who can defend tough, anywhere, close out on threes, defend in the paint, anywhere. (Caruso on Jokic the other day was amazing to watch - pure determination, and it worked).  And because teams are putting five guys on the floor who can defend anywhere, you need five guys who can play offense anywhere. The Celtics showed it last season - everyone can shoot threes, every can drive.  Celtics hadn't gone all the way yet, because they Horford and the other big guy who aren't mobile enough, but they made it work. 

 

And this is where I see the similarities with what McDermott has been doing. Early on in Buffalo, McDermott said that the problem in football is to attack the entire field, vertically and horizontally, and to defend the entire field. And McDermott has been pushing the roster more and more toward what I just described as the NBA model.  We all fret about the fact that the Bills don't have a true one-tech tackle. Why not? Same reason the 7'2" center is tough to win with - the big one-tech guy just isn't as mobile, isn't as versatile, can't cover his gaps as well as smaller, quicker guys (three-tech guys). The smaller guys are challenged in some matchups (just like Caruso was challenged sometimes by Jokic), but McDermott's view is that if he has smaller guys who fight like hell, he can get good enough performance in those physical mismatches, and he can get better coverage of territory with the mobile guy.  Same thing with Bernard, undersized MLB.  It's why Beane and McDermott talk all the time about being competitive - they're putting undersized guys on the field, guys who make up for the lack of size with speed and quickness. Same thing with Spencer Brown - sometimes he looks outclassed, physically, but his quickness and versatility, combined with his tenacity, makes him valuable. He's a lineman who allows the offense to attack all of the field, because he can block all over the field. 

 

And that's just like I've said about the NBA.  The style these teams are playing features, relentless defense, with guys working really hard to make everything difficult for the offense. 

 

And as I said yesterday, that's why the Bills receiving room looks the way it does.  We can argue about whether they're good enough, but the style of the receivers is obvious.  Every receiver, including Kincaid, has enough speed to get deep when they face the right defense or matchup.  Every receiver blocks. Every receiver goes over the middle.  It's the same as the Thunder's offense - yes, they have a star in SGA, but every guy on the floor is a threat, every guy plays well in a motion offense.  The result in both cases is that the offense is best able to attack the entire field (football) or attack anywhere from the three-point circle in to the hoop. And the Bills don't care how talented a guy may be, if he won't play that way, happily, the Bills don't want him. Exit Diggs. 

 

And as I said, these NBA teams are good, better, actually, without having to chase after multiple super-stars.  

 

And what's really good about this philosophy is that there are more players who can play the new NBA style than there are super-stars.  I live in New England and I watched the Celtics a fair amount last year. The guy who made that team was Jru Holiday. And guess what? He's the same model - fast, quick, relentless defender, good offense from all over the floor, not a super-star.  Guys like Holiday aren't exactly a dime a dozen, but there are more of them than there are mega-stars, so you can find them and add them to your roster.  I see the same thing when I look at the Bills' roster.  All those guys the Bills have extended in the past couple of years, none of them is the close to the highest paid guy at his position in the league. They're not super-stars. But they all have the characteristics I'm talking about - fast, quick, relentless, team players. 

 

McDermott's philosophy is that 11 guys who play like that will regularly outplay 10 guys and a star who doesn't fit that mold, no matter how good he is otherwise. That's why Elam is gone - he was, presumably, more physically talented than some or all of the corners on the team, but he just wasn't useful because he didn't play the relentless team defense McDermott requires, play after play.  Dane Jackson does.  Benford does. White does.  That's why, I think, the Bills don't go after the free agent agent edge who takes plays off, or a guy like Metcalf, who I also think takes plays off.  You don't see anyone on the Thunder taking plays off. 

 

I think it's the same philosophy, and I don't think it's a philosophy followed by every team in either league. I love watching Doncic play, but I think he makes it impossible to play like the Thunder play. Still, the Lakers bet on him. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

13 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Absolutely the dog days.  There's nothing to talk about. 

 

This wasn't intended to "justify" anything.  It was just noting that the NBA seems to be moving away from the pack-your-roster-with-stars philosophy and approaching roster building in a way that is similar to what McDermott has been doing. 

 

Can't help it if you have trouble thinking about two sports at the same time.  

Except you seem to be forgetting the Bills have Allen. So using your analogy the Bills not winning is the same as Denver getting knocked out with the best player in their league. 

[SoCal Deek]

30 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I think it's interesting to compare the two.  

 

The QBs are interesting, for example.  It's not just a new set of young star QBs, they are different QBs. Manning and Brady couldn't run and didn't need to run. Because of rule changes and strategy evolution, it's almost impossible for a QB to succeed if he isn't a running threat.  In my mind, it's the big knock against Burrow. The Bengals suffer because he isn't really a threat to take the easy running yards.  

 

I see something similar in the NBA. Rule changes, including the three point shot and how they officiate, has changed how the NBA plays.  For a while it's been difficult for a big man to really dominate.  Shaq may have been the last.  You have Jokic and Giannis, exceptional talents, but everything has to fall together just right for them to win. Instead, and this was my point, you have teams running, really running, with five guys who can run, jump, shoot, and defend.  The difference, as someone pointed out, is best seen in the defense. Five quick guys, 6'2" to 6'9" can defend better than four of those guys and Jokic, or four and Giannis. The big guys, mobile as they may be, aren't mobile enough.  

 

I haven't watched the NBA this year until the playoffs, and I don't know what happened to Durant this year. I assume he's at the end, maybe he was injured, whatever. Durant had awesome speed and quickness for a man his size, and he was devastating in his day. But I think coaches have figured out that they can win more with a smaller, quicker guy in the lineup (assuming you can figure out how to replace his points). So, for example, you have four teams left, all of whom play this way - stifling defense, with one star who gets you the points you need and who still plays defense the way you need. Five guys running together, attacking relentlessly on offense and on defense, with a star leading them

 

So, what we're seeing this year is smaller teams with one star.  You need the star to get 25-35 a night. The rest of the guys have nice offensive skills, can shoot threes, etc., but they win by having five guys on the floor who can cover the whole court, who can defend tough, anywhere, close out on threes, defend in the paint, anywhere. (Caruso on Jokic the other day was amazing to watch - pure determination, and it worked).  And because teams are putting five guys on the floor who can defend anywhere, you need five guys who can play offense anywhere. The Celtics showed it last season - everyone can shoot threes, every can drive.  Celtics hadn't gone all the way yet, because they Horford and the other big guy who aren't mobile enough, but they made it work. 

 

And this is where I see the similarities with what McDermott has been doing. Early on in Buffalo, McDermott said that the problem in football is to attack the entire field, vertically and horizontally, and to defend the entire field. And McDermott has been pushing the roster more and more toward what I just described as the NBA model.  We all fret about the fact that the Bills don't have a true one-tech tackle. Why not? Same reason the 7'2" center is tough to win with - the big one-tech guy just isn't as mobile, isn't as versatile, can't cover his gaps as well as smaller, quicker guys (three-tech guys). The smaller guys are challenged in some matchups (just like Caruso was challenged sometimes by Jokic), but McDermott's view is that if he has smaller guys who fight like hell, he can get good enough performance in those physical mismatches, and he can get better coverage of territory with the mobile guy.  Same thing with Bernard, undersized MLB.  It's why Beane and McDermott talk all the time about being competitive - they're putting undersized guys on the field, guys who make up for the lack of size with speed and quickness. Same thing with Spencer Brown - sometimes he looks outclassed, physically, but his quickness and versatility, combined with his tenacity, makes him valuable. He's a lineman who allows the offense to attack all of the field, because he can block all over the field. 

 

And that's just like I've said about the NBA.  The style these teams are playing features, relentless defense, with guys working really hard to make everything difficult for the offense. 

 

And as I said yesterday, that's why the Bills receiving room looks the way it does.  We can argue about whether they're good enough, but the style of the receivers is obvious.  Every receiver, including Kincaid, has enough speed to get deep when they face the right defense or matchup.  Every receiver blocks. Every receiver goes over the middle.  It's the same as the Thunder's offense - yes, they have a star in SGA, but every guy on the floor is a threat, every guy plays well in a motion offense.  The result in both cases is that the offense is best able to attack the entire field (football) or attack anywhere from the three-point circle in to the hoop. And the Bills don't care how talented a guy may be, if he won't play that way, happily, the Bills don't want him. Exit Diggs. 

 

And as I said, these NBA teams are good, better, actually, without having to chase after multiple super-stars.  

 

And what's really good about this philosophy is that there are more players who can play the new NBA style than there are super-stars.  I live in New England and I watched the Celtics a fair amount last year. The guy who made that team was Jru Holiday. And guess what? He's the same model - fast, quick, relentless defender, good offense from all over the floor, not a super-star.  Guys like Holiday aren't exactly a dime a dozen, but there are more of them than there are mega-stars, so you can find them and add them to your roster.  I see the same thing when I look at the Bills' roster.  All those guys the Bills have extended in the past couple of years, none of them is the close to the highest paid guy at his position in the league. They're not super-stars. But they all have the characteristics I'm talking about - fast, quick, relentless, team players. 

 

McDermott's philosophy is that 11 guys who play like that will regularly outplay 10 guys and a star who doesn't fit that mold, no matter how good he is otherwise. That's why Elam is gone - he was, presumably, more physically talented than some or all of the corners on the team, but he just wasn't useful because he didn't play the relentless team defense McDermott requires, play after play.  Dane Jackson does.  Benford does. White does.  That's why, I think, the Bills don't go after the free agent agent edge who takes plays off, or a guy like Metcalf, who I also think takes plays off.  You don't see anyone on the Thunder taking plays off. 

 

I think it's the same philosophy, and I don't think it's a philosophy followed by every team in either league. I love watching Doncic play, but I think he makes it impossible to play like the Thunder play. Still, the Lakers bet on him. 

Shaw, don’t get me wrong. I completely understand the point that you’re making. However, to date at least McDs grand scheme (as you’ve scripted it) simply hasn’t worked. Are the Bills a good team? Obviously. But the two-star team of Mahomes and Kelce have knocked them out of the playoffs EVERY time they’ve faced them. 
 

Let’s just hope we’ve finally outlasted them and that Mahomes/Kelce are too old by January 2026

 

Go Bills 

[Shaw66]

28 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Except you seem to be forgetting the Bills have Allen. So using your analogy the Bills not winning is the same as Denver getting knocked out with the best player in their league. 

No. All these teams have a star.  I named them.  

 

It's a team full of dogs, with a lead dog.  SGA is a lead dog. Brunson is a lead dog.  Allen is a lead dog. 

 

The difference between Jokic and Allen is that to be the lead dog, you have to be a physical match for the team's style of play. Jokic isn't a physical match for the kind of team offense and team defense that the surviving NBA teams play.  And it pains me to say that, because I absolutely love Jokic, his skills, his determination.  He is a dog, for sure, but his body type and physical limitations require that he slows down the game. As I said, five relentless high-end athletes can play team basketball better than four relentless high-end athletes and a big, slower superstar. 

[uticaclub]

47 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

Except you seem to be forgetting the Bills have Allen. So using your analogy the Bills not winning is the same as Denver getting knocked out with the best player in their league. 

And Denver won a championship a few years ago and still fired their coach before playoffs. The more this is discussed the more you see the need for changes when it comes to coaching and roster building.

12 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

No. All these teams have a star.  I named them.  

 

It's a team full of dogs, with a lead dog.  SGA is a lead dog. Brunson is a lead dog.  Allen is a lead dog. 

 

The difference between Jokic and Allen is that to be the lead dog, you have to be a physical match for the team's style of play. Jokic isn't a physical match for the kind of team offense and team defense that the surviving NBA teams play.  And it pains me to say that, because I absolutely love Jokic, his skills, his determination.  He is a dog, for sure, but his body type and physical limitations require that he slows down the game. As I said, five relentless high-end athletes can play team basketball better than four relentless high-end athletes and a big, slower superstar. 

The difference between Jokic & Allen is that Allen isn’t on the field or court on defense. 

Edited 6 hours ago by uticaclub

[Shaw66]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

Shaw, don’t get me wrong. I completely understand the point that you’re making. However, to date at least McDs grand scheme (as you’ve scripted it) simply hasn’t worked. Are the Bills a good team? Obviously. But the two-star team of Mahomes and Kelce have knocked them out of the playoffs EVERY time they’ve faced them. 
 

Let’s just hope we’ve finally outlasted them and that Mahomes/Kelce are too old by January 2026

 

Go Bills 

Yes. Yes!  Yes!!!

 

You're absolutely right, it hasn't worked to win a Super Bowl. And if you look back, I haven't said that McDermott is right and that this will work.  All I've been talking about is that his philosophy about this is the same as the philosophy that the winning NBA teams are using.  

 

One thing I haven't said about the NBA teams is that as much as the philosophy that makes the Thunder so good is tough to maintain. Players come and go, and you need the right mix of personalities, the right chemistry, for the team to function in the synergistic way the Thunder is playing now.  It's tough to keep it going.  

 

On the other hand, it has worked to make the Bills consistently one of the top five teams in the league.  And (this is something I've written about before) McBeane said early on that their model is that the team will get better every year.  They meant it - better year after year. That's what we've been seeing.  I think Beane's been masterful this year, extending the best core talent on a very good team, then drafting a bunch of guys with high ceilings.  I think the Bills will be better this season than last, and I think 2026 will be amazing. 

 

There are different philosophies. Jerry Jones likes his stars.  The Eagles, the Lions, and Mike Vrabel believe in power. McDermott believes in competitiveness.  (Obviously, everyone like stars and power and competitiveness - I'm talking about what the team style or personality is.)  I don't know if McDermott is right.  I'm encouraged by the fact that his philosophy seems to be the philosophy that currently wins in the NBA, but that doesn't mean it will work in the NFL. 

[Shaw66]

7 minutes ago, uticaclub said:

And Denver won a championship a few years ago and still fired their coach before playoffs. The more this is discussed the more you see the need for changed when it comes to coaching and roster building.

The difference between Jokic & Allen is that Allen isn’t on the field or court on defense. 

This is a really good point.  Excellent point.  As extraordinary as Josh is, it's hard to see him fitting into McDermott's defense.  He isn't the physical type.  He's such a competitor, I can imagine him learning to play the edge - has the size, strength, and speed - the raw talent - but he doesn't look the part.  Just like Jokic, who makes plays on defense but who struggles to be good enough on that side of the ball. 

 

I love McDermott and I want to keep him, but the point about coaching change is important.  I don't think a coaching change would help the Bills - the roster is built to play the game he wants to play, and changing coaches almost certainly would mean changing the roster. It would mean starting over. 

 

Someone commented about the Warriors needing to change from Jackson to Kerr to get good.  The difference was amazing.  But Jackson clearly didn't know what to do with that roster, and Kerr did.  McDermott knows what to do with his roster - it's exactly the kind of roster he wants. I don't know where you'd find someone better. Maybe Shanahan, who seems to share the philosophy. But he hasn't won either.  Maybe that means that the philosophy is wrong.

 

I've said this before - McDermott thinks that football really is team wrestling. He wants 11 guys on the field who approach each play like it's a one-on-one wrestling match. And that's another thing that makes his model similar to the NBA - the toughest wrestlers all seem to be wrestling up a weight class and using competitiveness, tenacity, and quickness to overcome a modest weight and strength disadvantage. I'd bet that if McDermott watched the Thunder on Sunday, Caruso was his favorite player on the floor, given how he fought with Jokic.

 

I don't think there's a coaching solution for the Nuggets.  I think the roster was built for the 2010, and it's trying to win in 2025.  I think Gordon and Porter, Jr., like Jokic, are a step too slow and too one-dimensional for the modern game.  They aren't slashers.  Even Murray has the problem. These guys are good players, but they don't have the body types or personalities to play with their hair on fire, which is what you see from Indiana and OKC.  

[SoCal Deek]

25 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Yes. Yes!  Yes!!!

 

You're absolutely right, it hasn't worked to win a Super Bowl. And if you look back, I haven't said that McDermott is right and that this will work.  All I've been talking about is that his philosophy about this is the same as the philosophy that the winning NBA teams are using.  

 

One thing I haven't said about the NBA teams is that as much as the philosophy that makes the Thunder so good is tough to maintain. Players come and go, and you need the right mix of personalities, the right chemistry, for the team to function in the synergistic way the Thunder is playing now.  It's tough to keep it going.  

 

On the other hand, it has worked to make the Bills consistently one of the top five teams in the league.  And (this is something I've written about before) McBeane said early on that their model is that the team will get better every year.  They meant it - better year after year. That's what we've been seeing.  I think Beane's been masterful this year, extending the best core talent on a very good team, then drafting a bunch of guys with high ceilings.  I think the Bills will be better this season than last, and I think 2026 will be amazing. 

 

There are different philosophies. Jerry Jones likes his stars.  The Eagles, the Lions, and Mike Vrabel believe in power. McDermott believes in competitiveness.  (Obviously, everyone like stars and power and competitiveness - I'm talking about what the team style or personality is.)  I don't know if McDermott is right.  I'm encouraged by the fact that his philosophy seems to be the philosophy that currently wins in the NBA, but that doesn't mean it will work in the NFL. 

I’m still not sure your analogy works but I’ll give you an A+ for sticking by it. The Bills absolutely went the star route when they broke the bank to sign Von Miller after 13 seconds. McD and Beane thought they were one star away from the promised land. It did not work. As I see it they’re simply reacting to that ‘mistake’ in a salary capped world. Doesn’t mean they’re goof balls for trying….but they’re definitely not some sort of a super genius duo. 

Edited 5 hours ago by SoCal Deek

[Mr. WEO]

The era of great Defense is overblown---see teams trading blowouts on alternating nights.  See also the game being dominated by the 3 point shot with poor shooting everywhere.

 

Like Josh Allen, Denver has, by far, the most dominant player in the league --and in the playoffs.  Jokic played the most minutes, scored the most points, had the most rebounds and assists in the playoffs as of yesterday. That's incredible.  

 

IF the Bills don't make the SB this year, McD has to go---as the common denominator.  He would be the Bills Tomlin.   Since we are comparing, if he was an NBA coach, he likely would have gotten canned already.

[Shaw66]

4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m still not sure your analogy works but I’ll give you an A+ for sticking by it. The Bills absolutely went the star route when they broke the bank to sign Von Miller after 13 seconds. McD and Beane thought they were one star away from the promised land. It did not work. As I see it they’re simply reacting to that ‘mistake’ in a salary capped world. Doesn’t mean they’re goof balls for trying….but they’re definitely not some sort of a super genius duo. 

Maybe you're the poster child for why I'm misunderstood around here. 

 

What I try to do is understand what McDermott and Beane are thinking. Many people, including you, seem to confuse that with my thinking they're great. 

 

As I've said in this thread and elsewhere, often, is that I'm just trying to understand. If I understand their philosophy, I understand better what's going on with the team. 

 

I haven't said they're a "super genius duo."  I think they are extraordinarily good at executing their plan, a plan that's based on their philosophy, but it doesn't matter how good they are at executing the plan if it's the wrong plan. Some people are sure it's the wrong plan; I understand the plan and can see how it could work, but I don't really have an opinion about whether it's the best way to build an NFL team. What do I know? The only thing I do know is that the Bills are winning more regular season games than just about any other team, so that much is good. Whether this is the way to finish the job, I don't know. I have my doubts, but in the meantime, I'm rooting for my team.  And I don't see anyone out there who's giving their team a better shot at winning, year after year, than these two. McVay was the flavor of the month a couple of years ago. Shanahan. Reid. Now it's the Eagles guy. As I've often said, if the Bills cut McDermott loose, he'd be some other team's head coach in 24 hours, subject only to the Rooney rule. So, by that standard, I'm perfectly fine betting on this duo. 

 

I don't agree the Bills went the "star route." I hadn't said this before, but in the NBA comparison I've been talking about those teams having one star - in the NFL setting, it might be necessary to have two stars, one on offense and one on defense.  That's the point that Uticaclub just made - SGA does it at both ends, and Jokic can't.  Allen does it on offense, and maybe you need one on defense, too.  

 

I would guess that signing Miller wasn't going the "star route," (which I think is the Jerry Jones philosophy).  I think it's more likely that it's going the route that they need one lead dog on each side of the ball.  Miller didn't work. Now they're trying Bosa, and in both cases it's intentionally a short-term effort. In the meantime, we see them drafting all guys with high ceilings.  I think the Bills are doing exactly what the Chiefs did when they drafted Chris Jones - drafting high ceiling guys and hoping one outperforms his draft ranking. 

[HomeskillitMoorman]

I would have to completely disagree that anyone left in the NBA is doing anything that resembles McD's "formula". 

 

These coaches have figured out ways to actually support their best players for the postseason, which is a different game. McD's game management and more importantly his side of the ball - his supposed proficiency - his defense has been HISTORICALLY awful in the playoffs and has far and away been the biggest deterrent to us winning a championship. 

 

What we have seen here is completely unprecedented. There has NEVER been an elite QB or player in general who has played this well year after year in the playoffs that has been let down by their coach's supposed expertise literally and consistently year after year, definitely not in football history and I'm not sure in any sport ever. 

 

You said you watched OKC...that team has been crafted and coached brilliantly. SGA is a top 3 player in the NBA, they have guys for him to drive and dish to either at the 3 pt line or lobs to keep defenses honest or make them pay...and they supplant all of that with a tough, physical defense that can get stops and doesn't make their success completely reliant on SGA being Superman offensively in every big game. 

 

For a McD-led team...our biggest rival can have a mediocre offense all year and hang 30+ no problem on his D in the postseason...and asks our QB to put up 30+ against an elite D.

 

I not only don't see the similarity here....I think it's actually the exact opposite of what you're saying, and what you think teams should get away from but we're actually still stuck in. McD has created a situation where we DO need our star player to bring it home himself by probably needing at least 2 if not 3 Superman type games against elite defenses in the playoffs to win it all AND not have the defense on the field for the final moments of the game. It's an incredibly tough task and it's why we haven't won a SB yet with 17. 

 

I honestly can not think of a head coach in any sport, given what his supposed expertise is in, who has been more destructive and a bigger deterrent to an elite player winning a championship than Sean McDermott has been to Josh Allen. 

Edited 4 hours ago by HomeskillitMoorman

[US Egg]

OKC went and got the one piece they thought they needed, Hartenstein, and it worked.

 

Bills went and got the one piece they thought they needed, Miller, and it did not work.

 

That’s my OKC/Bills analogy.

Edited 4 hours ago by US Egg

[Shaw66]

43 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

 

 

What we have seen here is completely unprecedented. There has NEVER been an elite QB or player in general who has played this well year after year in the playoffs that has been let down by their coach's supposed expertise literally and consistently year after year, definitely not in football history and I'm not sure in any sport ever. 

 

 

i stopped reading here,

 

John Elway. And probably others.

 

Marino.  

[Bob Chandler's Hands]

22 hours ago, stuvian said:

I'm glad to hear that defensive basketball is making a comeback. I have not been a fan of the era of designated defensive players in the sport. In the sports greatest eras, every player played defense. Sure there have always been selfish players who took defensive plays off but few of those won titles. I'm also tired of today's spoilt stars whining their way out of town and getting coaches fired.

The defense being played in the NBA playoffs is ferocious, almost dangerously so. It's been that way for a while now. 

[HomeskillitMoorman]

6 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

i stopped reading here,

 

John Elway. And probably others.

 

Marino.  

 

I don't agree with the disparity for them, that they were consistently losing postseason games they were really good in...but even if we met there...isn't that comparison that you're making an admittance that McD's "formula" hasn't worked? Elway didn't win it all with that coach and Marino never did. 

[SoCal Deek]

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Maybe you're the poster child for why I'm misunderstood around here. 

 

What I try to do is understand what McDermott and Beane are thinking. Many people, including you, seem to confuse that with my thinking they're great. 

 

As I've said in this thread and elsewhere, often, is that I'm just trying to understand. If I understand their philosophy, I understand better what's going on with the team. 

 

I haven't said they're a "super genius duo."  I think they are extraordinarily good at executing their plan, a plan that's based on their philosophy, but it doesn't matter how good they are at executing the plan if it's the wrong plan. Some people are sure it's the wrong plan; I understand the plan and can see how it could work, but I don't really have an opinion about whether it's the best way to build an NFL team. What do I know? The only thing I do know is that the Bills are winning more regular season games than just about any other team, so that much is good. Whether this is the way to finish the job, I don't know. I have my doubts, but in the meantime, I'm rooting for my team.  And I don't see anyone out there who's giving their team a better shot at winning, year after year, than these two. McVay was the flavor of the month a couple of years ago. Shanahan. Reid. Now it's the Eagles guy. As I've often said, if the Bills cut McDermott loose, he'd be some other team's head coach in 24 hours, subject only to the Rooney rule. So, by that standard, I'm perfectly fine betting on this duo. 

 

I don't agree the Bills went the "star route." I hadn't said this before, but in the NBA comparison I've been talking about those teams having one star - in the NFL setting, it might be necessary to have two stars, one on offense and one on defense.  That's the point that Uticaclub just made - SGA does it at both ends, and Jokic can't.  Allen does it on offense, and maybe you need one on defense, too.  

 

I would guess that signing Miller wasn't going the "star route," (which I think is the Jerry Jones philosophy).  I think it's more likely that it's going the route that they need one lead dog on each side of the ball.  Miller didn't work. Now they're trying Bosa, and in both cases it's intentionally a short-term effort. In the meantime, we see them drafting all guys with high ceilings.  I think the Bills are doing exactly what the Chiefs did when they drafted Chris Jones - drafting high ceiling guys and hoping one outperforms his draft ranking. 

Shaw. I’m not the poster child for anything. I’m just pushing back against your hypothesis. Not sure why you take it as anything else. This is a place for healthy debate about something as trivial as a football team. Relax

[Shaw66]

8 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

Shaw. I’m not the poster child for anything. I’m just pushing back against your hypothesis. Not sure why you take it as anything else. This is a place for healthy debate about something as trivial as a football team. Relax

Cal -

 

I'm not upset.  You're one of the guys I most enjoy talking with about this stuff.  We have different takes, and I like it.  

 

I said you're the poster child because you, like others, do seem to regularly read something into what I write that I don't intend:  I'm not here to reflexively defend what McBeane do.  I talk about why I think they do what they do.  You seemed to be saying I thought they were super football genius, and I don't. I think they've worked hard to develop a plan and their following.  Maybe that's not what you were implying.  Sorry if you got the wrong impression.

[Gunsgoodtime]

So the best player in the NBA at the most important position never makes it through finals?  I'm not a big fan of this strategy