McDermott - "Still looking for that other safety"

[Dick_Cheney]

Good lord I wish they would trade for somebody instead of scraping the literal bottom of the barrel and hoping that it ends up being good enough. 

[zow2]

Go figure, the Bills D is floating through camp and McD knows they aren’t going to flip a switch and suddenly be good at Safety vs a fired up Ravens.  

[Alphadawg7]

26 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

I think it was a mistake to ever draft one high. These days, and especially in McDermott's scheme, the safety position is mostly about cerebral traits. All else being equal you'd prefer to have a high end athletic talent there of course, but that's not as important as the safety understanding their responsibilities and hitting their landmarks. That's where Hamlin despite his athletic limitations still beats out Bishop.

 

Hyde and Poyer were 5th and 7th round picks respectively. Hyde had a 4.73 RAS score, Poyer had a 5.32. I don't know why this regime decided a top 64 pick with athletic traits but under-developed instincts and technique was the direction we needed to go.

 

 

No disrespect, but I don't agree with this philosophy at all, which also gets thrown around with RB's.  Just because there are some examples where some later round picks panned out doesn't mean that is the place to target impact players.  I mean Brady was a 6th round pick, Kurt Warner was UDFA, Brock Purdy Mr. Irrelevant - thats not an indicator to future success of finding franchise QB's.  

 

You are not finding Ed Reed's easily on day 3 picks, if ever.  One thing everyone complains about here is not finding more top end talent, and when we have holes in positions, like we have had at Safety, why should they settle for just looking for a capable starter at best in the late rounds and then just hoping for the rare off chance they actually find a pro-bowler like Hyde and Poyer eventually became?  

• And lets be real about Hyde and Poyer, it took them a while to get to that level, they were not impact players early in their careers and didn't blossom until they left their original teams and went on to play for the Bills.  Finding a late round rookie safety who doesn't blossom until their next team adds no value to a team pursuing a SB today.

 

The Bills should absolutely be looking to upgrade the weakest positions in FA and early in drafts while we are in the SB hunt, especially given how important the S position is in a McD defense.  The Ravens not only drafted Ed Reed in the first round, they drafted Kyle Hamilton which they obviously don't regret also in the first round - and now they just also drafted Malaki Starks in the first round to play opposite him 3 years later.  

 

Doesn't mean Bishop proves to be the right guy or not, but the decision to address one of our weakest position groups at one of our most important positions in the 2nd round is not a bad approach in my book.

 

 

Edited August 19 by Alphadawg7

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Mark Vader said:

I like how Hancock has played so far. I'm not  that crazy about throwing him to the wolves on day 1, but if he's the one who is showing he deserves to be starting, then you have to go with him.

 

Yea I think it is only in like the last 10 days they have shifted his focus to safety, almosy certianly because they were not happy with their options there. It was a mixed bag from him Sunday night, but there are flashes. I don't think it would be smart to put him out there day 1. But trying to get him up to speed by week 5 or 6 maybe in case whoever you start fails? Yea I can well see that. Him starting the season is unlikely. Him being the starter by the end of the season? Definitely possible. 

[Einstein]

I love how honest McD has become 

[HappyDays]

2 minutes ago, H2o said:

I think Hancock ends up in the position long term. He seems like the guy with the most upside to me. I just think McD may not trust him with the entire playbook and all of the assignments yet. 

 

On the all-22 watch Hancock to my eyes had a few mistakes that led to coverage busts. Hard to know for sure without knowing the play call but that's how it looked. He also gave up a TD because he didn't get enough depth in the endzone.

 

I will say though those issues are all fixable with experience and time in the film room. My growing concern with Bishop on the other hand is that he just isn't a natural football player. That position requires an instinctive feel for what's going on around you in real time, and every time I watch him play it looks very robotic like he's thinking instead of just reacting. NFL history is littered with busts who failed for that exact reason. Hancock doesn't look robotic to me, he just looks like he needs time.

[SoonerBillsFan]

38 minutes ago, Bockeye said:

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/buffalo-bills/news/buffalo-bills-may-pursue-all-pro-safety-after-38-0-loss-bears-justin-simmons-atlanta-falcons-denver-broncos-damar-hamlin-cole-bishop/e2466385d11a2b7d26a06442

 

This would be a great move at this point. 

I said this in another thread, should have been done to start the offseason. And why did we sign Forrest again?  

[Alphadawg7]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

Yea I think it is only in like the last 10 days they have shifted his focus to safety, almosy certianly because they were not happy with their options there. It was a mixed bag from him Sunday night, but there are flashes. I don't think it would be smart to put him out there day 1. But trying to get him up to speed by week 5 or 6 maybe in case whoever you start fails? Yea I can well see that. Him starting the season is unlikely. Him being the starter by the end of the season? Definitely possible. 

 

I am surprised Forrest has not been more in the mix if they don't feel like Bishop or Hamlin is seizing the reigns yet.  Personally, I think it was more they were really focusing on Bishop developing further to be the guy and just giving him as much opportunity to grab it and it was at the expense of guys like Forrest, but at this point feels like we should start seeing or hearing Forrest getting some chances with the 1's.

[SoonerBillsFan]

4 minutes ago, zow2 said:

Go figure, the Bills D is floating through camp and McD knows they aren’t going to flip a switch and suddenly be good at Safety vs a fired up Ravens.  

Right now it looks like  42-10 with them Monkey stomping us.   "but its just the first game" is what I am going to hear. The reality is, it will come down to the tiebreaker head to head for the #1 seed. With McDermott's 0-4 record on the road in the playoffs, I sure as hell don't want to play in Baltimore come January

[Toyo321]

These two preseason games have looked like the pro's vs the amateur's.  Our Safeties, even though it is just preseason,  have been horrible.  Late to the ball, can't cover, no speed.   Can't believe they allow this type of game play on the practice field or in a preseason game.  There is not a single positive take away from our Safeties this preseason when you are getting beat down by the other team the way we have been so far.  Yes we don't want people hurt but wow has this been ugly football,  if you are a DB.. or safety.  We need to find a stud back there at safety, IMO Bishop and Hamlin are 2nd string all day long.  Never liked either as a option to be a potential starter.

[DapperCam]

Why the heck are we trying to put Bishop at Free Safety anyway? He’s a strong safety and should be either replacing Rapp or Rapp’s backup.

 

What happened to that Forrest guy we signed?

[balln]

8 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

No disrespect, but I don't agree with this philosophy at all, which also gets thrown around with RB's.  Just because there are some examples where some later round picks panned out doesn't mean that is the place to target impact players.  I mean Brady was a 6th round pick, Kurt Warner was UDFA, Brock Purdy Mr. Irrelevant - thats not an indicator to future success of finding franchise QB's.  

 

You are not finding Ed Reed's easily on day 3 picks, if ever.  One thing everyone complains about here is not finding more top end talent, and when we have holes in positions, like we have had at Safety, why should they settle for just looking for a capable starter at best in the late rounds and then just hoping for the rare off chance they actually find a pro-bowler like Hyde and Poyer eventually became?  

• And lets be real about Hyde and Poyer, it took them a while to get to that level, they were not impact players early in their careers and didn't blossom until they left their original teams and went on to play for the Bills.  Finding a late round rookie safety who doesn't blossom until their next team adds no value to a team pursuing a SB today.

 

The Bills should absolutely be looking to upgrade the weakest positions in FA and early in drafts while we are in the SB hunt, especially given how important the S position is in a McD defense.  The Ravens not only drafted Ed Reed in the first round, they drafted Kyle Hamilton which they obviously don't regret also in the first round - and now they just also drafted Malaki Starks in the first round to play opposite him 3 years later.  

 

Doesn't mean Bishop proves to be the right guy or not, but the decision to address one of our weakest position groups at one of our most important positions in the 2nd round is not a bad approach in my book.

 

 

This ties into my position about McD scheme and philosophy. It’s too complicated or they can’t find ALL the right players to run it. We hold poyer and Hyde as the STANDARD. They WERENT good enough in their time here! They got bounced by kc multiple times and Cincy. So like to hope that we get ANOTHER Hyde and poyer is selling this idea short.

 

I’m at . And have been. NEW D or new Coach. 

[SCBills]

The Safety play this preseason has been comical.   Theres not one positive thing I can take away from these two games aside from the potential of Jordan Hancock next year because McDermott won’t play him with his ultra-complicated wizard level Safety requirements. 

[SoonerBillsFan]

1 minute ago, balln said:

This ties into my position about McD scheme and philosophy. It’s too complicated or they can’t find ALL the right players to run it. We hold poyer and Hyde as the STANDARD. They WERENT good enough in their time here! They got bounced by kc multiple times and Cincy. So like to hope that we get ANOTHER Hyde and poyer is selling this idea short.

 

I’m at . And have been. NEW D or new Coach. 

We gotta see how this year pans out.  Who knows, maybe Allen can perform a miracle and get us there by himself

 

[Steptide]

I think this is just motivational tactic on McDermotts part. They're hosting Gabe Davis for a visit, but no safety? Cmon

[LABILLBACKER]

33 minutes ago, Brand J said:

I remember in the pre draft process Cole said he used to win most of the battles against Kincaid in practice at Utah. Kincaid concurred. That no doubt endeared Cole to the Bills and they even tried to trade up for him. It’d be a tragedy if the reality of it all was that neither one of these guys are more than an average NFL player, a JAG, given the high investments in both. 

Both Bishop & Kincaid will be Utah busts. While Josh is in his prime,  we just afford these high pick misses.  When we settle for blatantly mediocre players like Hamlin or the possible return of Gabe, we send a message to our fanbase that knowing the system takes precedent over playmakers.

[balln]

I’ll keep going. This D gives up the easy quick pass way too much the last 2 years. The FLATS. And screens

 

they all are undersized by design. Get pounded on the ground. Get injured bc they are a reactionary D and small. 
 

used to never give up the big pass play. But now they give up that. 

[HappyDays]

12 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

No disrespect, but I don't agree with this philosophy at all

 

Trust me I know it's not a popular opinion, but it's how I've felt for a while. Safety to me is a position that shouldn't be drafted in the first 2 rounds, and if you do draft one they better be a total stud. To me the first 2 rounds are about premium positions with high end athletic traits. Safety is not a position where I care as much about athleticism. Obviously I'd prefer to have better than Hamlin out there but I'm also not panicking over it. Agree to disagree on this one Alpha.

[balln]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

Trust me I know it's not a popular opinion, but it's how I've felt for a while. Safety to me is a position that shouldn't be drafted in the first 2 rounds, and if you do draft one they better be a total stud. To me the first 2 rounds are about premium positions with high end athletic traits. Safety is not a position where I care as much about athleticism. Obviously I'd prefer to have better than Hamlin out there but I'm also not panicking over it. Agree to disagree on this one Alpha.

100. And all last year. Preseason and during the season - the idea of Rapp and Hamlin were a joke to me. 
 

Those rams , lions and playoff chiefs losses are bc we have bad safety play. Almost gave away ravens. 
 

and I died on the hill that Rapp BETTER  be the starter - that would be a huge miss by Beane to draft a SAFETY w those measurable in 2nd and he’s not even on the field.

was a red flag then. 
 

when you draft a guard , rb or safety in round 2. They better be starting ! End of story. When they aren’t. It’s a problem. 

 

[Artful Dodger]

At least this will gin up some drama for "Hard Knocks" which has been really dull so far.