2025 OTAs are underway

[Doc]

I think they let Tre' run with the 1s out of respect and to let him see for himself that he's not a 1 anymore.

[YattaOkasan]

5 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

It had nothing to do with Bernard being hurt. They were giving everyone a shot with the 1's in a completely open competition.

 

 

 

My stance is, like Gunner said, they most likely want Hairston to be that #2 CB. But they don't want to overwhelm him and the other Rookies, who just got the Playbook. So they're starting Hairston out slow and putting White out there for the time being. So his being with 1's now seems more circumstantial. There's lots of guys running with 1's in June that aren't going to be Starter's. Forrest, through circumstance, ran with 1's at times and I think he's a longshot to make the team.

 

I also think, given how he looked last season, they also wanted to test where White is at by putting him against the toughest competition. And the results didn't seem great.

 

I think Training Camp and the Pre-Season are a different animal than Non-Contact June OTA's. I believe even if Tre responded better than he did in OTA's that Hairston is going to run with the 1's in August. I doubly think that given the reports of Tre's performance.

 

And I think when Training Camp is in full swing, it's a very real possibility that they think guys like Dorian Strong, Ja'Marcus Ingram, and/or Dane Jackson is performing better than he is for those last 2 spots on the 53 for CB.

 

 

I don't want to make it seem like I'm bashing Tre. I am rooting for him and would like to see my penciling him in on the 53 turn to ink.

 

But yesterday didn't seem like he was all that much better. He was in position to make a tip drill pick. But he still was getting beat.

 

All of this to say that I think OP's take that running with the 1's in June secures his spot on the Roster is putting the cart before the horse.

They also guaranteed 2.2 mil. That alone also doesn’t mean he makes the team. But in combination with him running with the ones it starts to mean more. Heck if Dane out performs him you probably can still stash Dane on the PS and call him up for 2 games and save 1.5 mil on the cap. 

[BillsFanForever19]

2 hours ago, YattaOkasan said:

They also guaranteed 2.2 mil. That alone also doesn’t mean he makes the team. But in combination with him running with the ones it starts to mean more. Heck if Dane out performs him you probably can still stash Dane on the PS and call him up for 2 games and save 1.5 mil on the cap. 

 

And we guaranteed OJ Howard 3.2m. Didn't save him when he didn't perform well in the Offseason either...

 

I get it. We all love Tre. We all want to see him here. But he's not guaranteed a roster spot just bc he's Tre and we love him. Even if he runs with the 1's in June, if he continues to have consistently negative days like he did in OTA's, he's not safe. He has to earn it.

 

There's too much depth. There's only 2, maybe 3 roster spots if they carry an extra this year. In addition to Tre, there's 2 Draft Picks (beyond Hairston), Ja'Marcus Ingram (who is a core Special Teamer), and Dane Jackson.

 

They're not going to cut someone who is outperforming him with all the guys we have just out of love and respect. 2.2m isn't a safe guarantee number. And with a presumed Rookie starter (and likely at least 1, if not 2 Rookies underneath if Hancock isn't considered a Safety) - we need a vet we can count on. If it isn't Tre, Dane being on the Practice Squad doesn't help, if he's the better player.

Edited 16 hours ago by BillsFanForever19

[BillsFanForever19]

7 hours ago, Doc said:

I think they let Tre' run with the 1s out of respect and to let him see for himself that he's not a 1 anymore.

 

I think it was more of not putting too much on Hairston too soon and also to truly test where he's at after not looking very good last season, but returning to a scheme better suited to him than LA and Baltimore.

[Richard Noggin]

16 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

There are exceptions.   Green and Lofton could still run late in their NFL careers.  Nature favors the lithe track-build.   Flutie and Owens claims are conjecture.   Some Tik-tok 35 yard dash with a laser pointer on a tripod being sold as a measuring device doesn't convince me that Owens runs a 4.4 at age 50.    That's why I referenced the infamous NFL veteran combine.   Legit times.   Finding an NFL veteran without your stipulations is not the norm.  There is a reason that Marquise Goodwin refused to play with any minor injury while with the Bills when he was training for the Olympics.   All of those inevitable "minor" muscle and joint injuries you get in the NFL compound and add ticks to those track times.    And of course, Usain Bolt is an irrelevant comp because he didn't play a contact sport.   And 4.22 would have been a couple lost steps for him.  

 

By 2020 Tre White had already lost a step in coverage.   And that was prior to the injuries.   Go back and watch him trying to run with the Rams last year.   Brutal.

 

If established, starting NFL vets (minus evergreen speed freaks like Darrell Green) are demonstrably slower after several years in the league, doesn't that legitimately deprioritize combine and pro day 40 times overall? Modern pre-draft speed training isn't exactly correlated with on-field impacts. Losing weight and training 3-point get-offs to trim hundredths off your 40 isn't exactly preparing these rookies for the rigors of an NFL campaign. The fact that NFL vets are potentially several tenths slower than their younger counterparts actually proves that 40 times are arbitrary, provided those vets are still legitimate starters. One can run a "meh" 40 but still have more than enough speed. NFL history is filled with 4.5+ guys who consistently dominated. 

[GunnerBill]

11 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

It had nothing to do with Bernard being hurt. They were giving everyone a shot with the 1's in a completely open competition.

 

 

 

My stance is, like Gunner said, they most likely want Hairston to be that #2 CB. But they don't want to overwhelm him and the other Rookies, who just got the Playbook. So they're starting Hairston out slow and putting White out there for the time being. So his being with 1's now seems more circumstantial. There's lots of guys running with 1's in June that aren't going to be Starter's. Forrest, through circumstance, ran with 1's at times and I think he's a longshot to make the team.

 

I also think, given how he looked last season, they also wanted to test where White is at by putting him against the toughest competition. And the results didn't seem great.

 

I think Training Camp and the Pre-Season are a different animal than Non-Contact June OTA's. I believe even if Tre responded better than he did in OTA's that Hairston is going to run with the 1's in August. I doubly think that given the reports of Tre's performance.

 

And I think when Training Camp is in full swing, it's a very real possibility that they think guys like Dorian Strong, Ja'Marcus Ingram, and/or Dane Jackson is performing better than he is for those last 2 spots on the 53 for CB.

 

 

I don't want to make it seem like I'm bashing Tre. I am rooting for him and would like to see my penciling him in on the 53 turn to ink.

 

But yesterday didn't seem like he was all that much better. He was in position to make a tip drill pick. But he still was getting beat.

 

All of this to say that I think OP's take that running with the 1's in June secures his spot on the Roster is putting the cart before the horse.

 

I have seen reports that his final day of mini camp was much better.

 

There are only two candidates to start opposite Benford. They are Hairston and White. They obviously want Hairston to win that battle. We all do. If he doesn't and Tre is healthy then Tre would play.

[YattaOkasan]

6 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

And we guaranteed OJ Howard 3.2m. Didn't save him when he didn't perform well in the Offseason either...

 

I get it. We all love Tre. We all want to see him here. But he's not guaranteed a roster spot just bc he's Tre and we love him. Even if he runs with the 1's in June, if he continues to have consistently negative days like he did in OTA's, he's not safe. He has to earn it.

 

There's too much depth. There's only 2, maybe 3 roster spots if they carry an extra this year. In addition to Tre, there's 2 Draft Picks (beyond Hairston), Ja'Marcus Ingram (who is a core Special Teamer), and Dane Jackson.

 

They're not going to cut someone who is outperforming him with all the guys we have just out of love and respect. 2.2m isn't a safe guarantee number. And with a presumed Rookie starter (and likely at least 1, if not 2 Rookies underneath if Hancock isn't considered a Safety) - we need a vet we can count on. If it isn't Tre, Dane being on the Practice Squad doesn't help, if he's the better player.

Yup, I said that alone doesn’t guarantee him a spot. But I recall fewer reports of Howard with the ones (also no history with the team). Do you not agree contract plus run with the ones means more?  
 

Why is Dane on the practice squad not helping?  he’s in the room when on the PS and he’s available for call up twice and can be signed if needed cause of injury. They are familiar with both players and made a clear preference choice over the years. Not sure why youre resisting the idea that white is ahead of Jackson cause white is running with the ones, has more guaranteed money, and both players are well known to staff?  I get that it’s June and things can change but you got to admit there’s a clear preference towards white over Jackson at this time (I haven’t seen reports of Jackson doing much of anything)

Edited 10 hours ago by YattaOkasan

[Shaw66]

7 hours ago, BillsFanForever19 said:

 

There's too much depth. There's only 2, maybe 3 roster spots if they carry an extra this year. In addition to Tre, there's 2 Draft Picks (beyond Hairston), Ja'Marcus Ingram (who is a core Special Teamer), and Dane Jackson.

 

They're not going to cut someone who is outperforming him with all the guys we have just out of love and respect. 2.2m isn't a safe guarantee number. And with a presumed Rookie starter (and likely at least 1, if not 2 Rookies underneath if Hancock isn't considered a Safety) - we need a vet we can count on. If it isn't Tre, Dane being on the Practice Squad doesn't help, if he's the better player.

This is this is an excellent statement about the reality of the situation. It is pretty much exactly what McDermott would say himself.

 

I would add only two things. First, the evaluation of who belongs on the team and who will need to be cut has only barely begun, and whatever it was that White showed on the field during OTAs is going to have very small impact on the final decision. The issue will be determined almost exclusively based on what he does in training, camp and preseason, not how good or how bad he looked during OTAs.

 

Second, the evaluation will include not only what the guy shows on the field during training camp in preseason, but the impact the guy can have in the locker room and in the cornerback room. It has been very clear for several years now that McDermott places a very high value on having a senior leader within every position group, and that leader cannot lead from the practice squad. That means, I think, in White's case if he can be close to being physically good enough to make the final 53, his knowledge of how McDermott operates and his ability to be that senior leader could be enough to include him on the final 53, even though a marginally better player in terms of on-field performance might have to go to the practice squad.

[Brand J]

3 hours ago, YattaOkasan said:

Yup, I said that alone doesn’t guarantee him a spot. But I recall fewer reports of Howard with the ones (also no history with the team). Do you not agree contract plus run with the ones means more?  
 

Why is Dane on the practice squad not helping?  he’s in the room when on the PS and he’s available for call up twice and can be signed if needed cause of injury. They are familiar with both players and made a clear preference choice over the years. Not sure why youre resisting the idea that white is ahead of Jackson cause white is running with the ones, has more guaranteed money, and both players are well known to staff?  I get that it’s June and things can change but you got to admit there’s a clear preference towards white over Jackson at this time (I haven’t seen reports of Jackson doing much of anything)

Yeah, I struggle to see a world where Dane Jackson starts over Hairston and White. Even Dorian Strong is a more promising player.

[BADOLBILZ]

9 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

If established, starting NFL vets (minus evergreen speed freaks like Darrell Green) are demonstrably slower after several years in the league, doesn't that legitimately deprioritize combine and pro day 40 times overall? Modern pre-draft speed training isn't exactly correlated with on-field impacts. Losing weight and training 3-point get-offs to trim hundredths off your 40 isn't exactly preparing these rookies for the rigors of an NFL campaign. The fact that NFL vets are potentially several tenths slower than their younger counterparts actually proves that 40 times are arbitrary, provided those vets are still legitimate starters. One can run a "meh" 40 but still have more than enough speed. NFL history is filled with 4.5+ guys who consistently dominated. 

 

 

I'd put it more like this........players excelling on the field despite modest workout numbers is what proves that the testing doesn't promise results.  

 

However,  it provides a foundation.

 

The future performance can't be accurately predicted but if you pick a guy who runs sub 4.4 there is a greater chance that he will play fast than a guy who runs 4.6.

 

The way it's framed in media sometimes that doesn't seem to be the case........because when a guy like Christian Benford excels with a 4.53 40 time they don't mention that he's one of hundreds of CB draft hopefuls in the last 5 years to run a 4.5 or slower.........they point to the much smaller group in faster sub-sections and compare his play to those players.  

 

Then it's something like "hey, only 3 of the 10 guys that ran under 4.4 in that draft class are good NFL CB's and Benford is as good or better than them........must be track speed doesn't matter".   

Edited 6 hours ago by BADOLBILZ

[Doc Brown]

8 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

I have seen reports that his final day of mini camp was much better.

 

There are only two candidates to start opposite Benford. They are Hairston and White. They obviously want Hairston to win that battle. We all do. If he doesn't and Tre is healthy then Tre would play.

What I always wonder about McDermott is if it's a tie in his mind does he give the vet the job or the younger guy?  

[GunnerBill]

22 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

What I always wonder about McDermott is if it's a tie in his mind does he give the vet the job or the younger guy?  

 

I think he probably does. I reject the "he doesn't trust rookies". If they are better they play. I can't think of a single rookie he has sat who later we went "okay maybe he should have played" maybe Cook > Singletary as a rookie. But if there are ties I do think he tends towards experience. He hates mental mistakes more than he hates the guys just being out "athleted" (not a word I know).

[HappyDays]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I think he probably does. I reject the "he doesn't trust rookies". If they are better they play. I can't think of a single rookie he has sat who later we went "okay maybe he should have played" maybe Cook > Singletary as a rookie. But if there are ties I do think he tends towards experience. He hates mental mistakes more than he hates the guys just being out "athleted" (not a word I know).

 

The mindset should be if there's a tie or even if it's close you give the job to the rookie because the rookie has the most room for improvement. We shouldn't be afraid of mental mistakes early in the season if the rookie is learning from those moments and ultimately playing better than the vet ever could in December and January.

[K-9]

13 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

If established, starting NFL vets (minus evergreen speed freaks like Darrell Green) are demonstrably slower after several years in the league, doesn't that legitimately deprioritize combine and pro day 40 times overall? Modern pre-draft speed training isn't exactly correlated with on-field impacts. Losing weight and training 3-point get-offs to trim hundredths off your 40 isn't exactly preparing these rookies for the rigors of an NFL campaign. The fact that NFL vets are potentially several tenths slower than their younger counterparts actually proves that 40 times are arbitrary, provided those vets are still legitimate starters. One can run a "meh" 40 but still have more than enough speed. NFL history is filled with 4.5+ guys who consistently dominated. 

Every GM, personnel director, and scout I’ve ever known over the years understands this well. 40 times, vertical jumps, broad jumps are used primarily to gauge athletic explosiveness which are key indicators for talent evaluators. That aspect of the combine’s utility means it won’t be de-prioritized by those charged with evaluating various results. 
 

Edit: I meant to add that in addition to the various explosion events, those talent evaluators also look closely at the stamina events as well. Like the bench press for example. There’s just so much more than just looking at prospects in shorts. 

Edited 1 hour ago by K-9

[GunnerBill]

27 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

The mindset should be if there's a tie or even if it's close you give the job to the rookie because the rookie has the most room for improvement. We shouldn't be afraid of mental mistakes early in the season if the rookie is learning from those moments and ultimately playing better than the vet ever could in December and January.

 

Maybe. I admit I hate mental mistakes as well. It is, as someone who has coached, the most infuriating and frustrating thing that happens in a sporting contest. 

 

My view is lean towards the rookie until they repeat the mistake. At the point you have to pull them unless everything else they are doing is clearly outperforming the vet. 

 

Very occasionally you miss that way. Im my soccer coaching I can immediately think of one guy I definitely pulled the plug too early on and regretted. But I can think of a ton more where my instinct was 100% correct.

Edited 3 hours ago by GunnerBill

[Doc]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

Maybe. I admit I hate mental mistakes as well. It is, as someone who has coached, the most infuriating and frustrating thing that happens in a sporting contest. 

 

My view is lean towards the rookie until they repeat the mistake. At the point you have to pull them unless everything else they are doing is clearly outperforming the vet. 

 

Very occasionally you miss that way. Im my soccer coaching I can immediately think of one guy I definitely pulled the plug too early on and regretted. But I can think of a ton more where my instinct was 100% correct.

 

Has Bend It still not forgiven you?

[GunnerBill]

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Has Bend It still not forgiven you?

 

Was a kid name Billy Jones. Fast as lightening but erractic movement and technique. I thought he was too raw and let him go. I re-signed him 6 months later. But I might have won an extra title in the meantime had I kept him. Oh well. 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

The mindset should be if there's a tie or even if it's close you give the job to the rookie because the rookie has the most room for improvement. We shouldn't be afraid of mental mistakes early in the season if the rookie is learning from those moments and ultimately playing better than the vet ever could in December and January.

That is definitely not McDermott's mindset. McDermott does it the way Gunner describes, which is that he favors the vet over the rookie until the rookie shows that he can execute his assignments play after play without mistakes. Mistakes. McDermott clearly values execution excellence over raw physical talent or potential.

[3rdand12]

6 hours ago, Brand J said:

Yeah, I struggle to see a world where Dane Jackson starts over Hairston and White. Even Dorian Strong is a more promising player.

The plain fact that Jackson can be retained on PS is what he was brought in for.

 Good move by McBeanes imo

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

What I always wonder about McDermott is if it's a tie in his mind does he give the vet the job or the younger guy?  

Thats easy with McD

 Veteran , every time. And I agree

Push the rookie to start

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

The mindset should be if there's a tie or even if it's close you give the job to the rookie because the rookie has the most room for improvement. We shouldn't be afraid of mental mistakes early in the season if the rookie is learning from those moments and ultimately playing better than the vet ever could in December and January.

two different mantras we have. 

[BillsFanForever19]

9 hours ago, YattaOkasan said:

Yup, I said that alone doesn’t guarantee him a spot. But I recall fewer reports of Howard with the ones (also no history with the team). Do you not agree contract plus run with the ones means more?  

 

Considering they paid more than a million more for Howard than White, at a position considered non-premium (as opposed to White), his release was more surprising than a White cut would be. Regardless of how many reps with the 1's he had.

 

You keep going back to these June reps with the 1's. I think, or at least hope, there's a communication breakdown in our discussion.

 

If you're saying as long as he continues running with the 1's, he's safe - I'd agree. But that's not the verbage you've been using. Your implication is that it doesn't matter how he looks, he ran with the 1's in June so he's safe.

 

My stance is that his run with the 1's in June were at least partly circumstantial. And given his mostly negative reports combined with Hairston getting up to speed, it's possible, if not likely, that time with the 1's will reduce if not come to an end in Training Camp. As opposed to OTA's, Training Camp is when they start positional battles and really start giving the Rookies heavy play. If he continues on the path he was on in OTA's, him running with the 1's in June will not matter as heavily as you're weighing it.

 

9 hours ago, YattaOkasan said:

 Why is Dane on the practice squad not helping?  he’s in the room when on the PS and he’s available for call up twice and can be signed if needed cause of injury. They are familiar with both players and made a clear preference choice over the years. Not sure why youre resisting the idea that white is ahead of Jackson cause white is running with the ones, has more guaranteed money, and both players are well known to staff?  I get that it’s June and things can change but you got to admit there’s a clear preference towards white over Jackson at this time (I haven’t seen reports of Jackson doing much of anything)

 

6 hours ago, Brand J said:

Yeah, I struggle to see a world where Dane Jackson starts over Hairston and White. Even Dorian Strong is a more promising player.

 

First off, Dane Jackson is only part of the equation. I personally don't believe he'll make the Roster. I think Dorian Strong will be one of those two open Roster spots outside of Benford, Hairston, and Taron.

 

I believe Hancock, being trained as a Cam Lewis clone, will fall under the Safety roster like Lewis did as a Backup Nickel/Safety. However, there's a scenario where they could feel he needs to focus solely on Nickel in Year 1. Which would complicate things on the CB roster as he's almost assuredly going to be here (we've never outright cut a Rookie before Round 6).

 

My discussion on Jackson comes down to your idea that if he looks better than Tre, it doesn't matter bc you can just put him in the Practice Squad and play Tre White. My point was if Jackson looks better than Tre, sticking him on the Practice Squad for a couple elevations doesn't help the team as we'd be only getting 2 elevations out of him while playing someone who looked worse.

 

I'd also add that I think Tre White could be brought back on the Practice Squad. No one was beating down the door for him this offseason. We got him for a small 2.2m guarantee. He didn't look great last season. If we were to cut him bc he didn't look great for us, I don't think anyone's going to be chomping at the bit to put him on their 53 for Week 1 cold.

 

There's much more at play here than Dane Jackson. There's the other Rookies, as I've discussed. There's also Ja'Marcus Ingram, who had a helluva game for us in Miami when we had to start him and is also a core Special Teamer. If Tre continues to performs poorly, any number of those players could take his place. I don't think Jackson is making it. But if Tre doesn't step up and earn his spot, I don't think it's crazy to think they feel Jackson is a safer bet as one of the last CB's.

 

11 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

There are only two candidates to start opposite Benford. They are Hairston and White. They obviously want Hairston to win that battle. We all do. If he doesn't and Tre is healthy then Tre would play.

 

This was kind of a surprising post to read from you. As we've discussed CB post-Draft and I thought we agreed that White is likely to make the roster, but not a lock. Saying it's Hairston or White to Start and no other options would imply to me that he's a lock.

 

I don't believe it's just Hairston or White. I think it's very much more likely than not that's the case. But if Hairston isn't ready and White's struggles continue through Training Camp, I could see a scenario where something unexpected happens.

 

In 2022, no one thought Christian Benford would start for us Week 1 over our 1st Round Pick and Dane Jackson. But that's just what happened. Just like in 2022, we took Strong in Round 6 after taking Hairston in Round 1. If it played out the same way where our vet options didn't wow and our Round 1 Pick wasn't ready, but our Round 6 Pick wowed - I could see history repeating itself. I don't think it's likely. But it happened in 2022.

 

I could also foresee a scenario (again, albeit not likely) that if White and Hairston looked bad and especially if there were injuries and Jaiire Alexander was still floating out there that they may hop on the phone. 

 

And yes, although I don't see it as likely, there is a scenario where I could see them thinking Jackson looks better than Tre at this stage and he gets the spot over him and is a bridge starter, as we've used him in the past. But only if Hairston and Strong aren't ready and Tre looks bad.

 

All this to say, Hairston or White is almost definitely the plan. But any number of unexpected things could happen where it's neither.

 

7 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

First, the evaluation of who belongs on the team and who will need to be cut has only barely begun, and whatever it was that White showed on the field during OTAs is going to have very small impact on the final decision. The issue will be determined almost exclusively based on what he does in training, camp and preseason, not how good or how bad he looked during OTAs.

 

Yes, I completely agree. The basis of this entire discussion stems from my original post that if Tre continues on the path that the reports from OTA's have said, he may not be safe.

 

Of course it's early. And that's been the crux of the discussion. The guy I'm going back and forth with wants to say that since he ran with the 1's in June, it means he's safe come September. My stance is that if things were to continue looking negative for Tre through July and August - it doesn't matter where he ran in June.

 

And again, I want him to make the team. I want him to look better. But I think people are in their feels when it comes to Tre and want to vehemently argue anyone who even points at the possibility that they may not be a lock. If reports were coming in that he was looking good or if we didn't have such a logjam at CB, I wouldn't even be discussing it.

Edited 1 hour ago by BillsFanForever19