Bills consistent excellence on offense after this year will be historically great

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, NewEra said:

I hear ya-  it’s just my eye test. His efficiency combined with movement was unmatched.  Loved watching that guy play 

 

Oh I am with you, I agree - Young is in my top 5 all time, I would take him over guys like Elway, Brees, Rodgers, Manning, etc.  For me though, I still think Montana and Brady are duking it out at the top and Mahomes has been nipping at their heels.  Allen though I really feel like will have his own case once his career is done and is IMHO might end up being the most talented QB I have ever seen play who could dominate in any era.  

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, folz said:

 

No question New England saw a string of mediocre receivers wash through during the Brady years. And I don't think many people will argue against the fact that Brady probably did more with less than any other SB winning QB.

 

But, for a 12-year stretch, he did have pretty good top targets at least:

2007: Moss, Welker, TE Ben Watson

2008: Moss, Welker, Watson

2009: Moss, Welker, Edelman, Watson

2010: Moss (for 4 games), Gronkoski, Hernandez, Welker, Edelman

2011: Gronkowski, Hernandez, Welker , Edelman

2012: Gronkowski, Hernandez, Welker, Edelman

2013: Gronk and Edelman

2014: Gronk and Edelman

2015: Gronk and Edelman

2016: Gronk and Edelman

2017: Gronk and Edelman

2018: Gronk and Edelman

 

*Bold years indicate a Super Bowl appearance. [Note, having Gronk and Edelman was not unlike KC having Kelce and Hill. No question Hill is better than Edelman, but you know what I mean.]

 

Similar to the Bills...no #1 X-receiver (outside of the Moss years), but Brady did still have at least a couple of very good players to throw the ball to (besides the Brandin Cooks, Josh Gordons, Deion Branches, Chris Hogans, Brandon Llyods, Danny Amendolas, and Brandon LaFells that cycled through). The Pats appeared in 5 of their 9 Brady-era SBs during those years, 2007-2018---2 wins, 3 losses in the Bowl. Edelman isn't a HOFer or anything, but he was a damn good player in that system and with Brady (over a 6-year stretch, discounting games he was out for injury/pro-rating them, he was averaging 1,117 yards and 6 TDs per season). And earlier in Brady's career, the Pats had a better defense and Brady was more of a game manager, and though not a murderer's row, he did have Troy Brown, Ben Watson, and Corey Dillon in that era, plus a good D. Still, no question, Brady did more with less.

 

In relation to Josh, I would say that Josh currently (this year) has more/better weapons overall than Brady had for the majority of his career (outside of a few years maybe), but Josh has never had a Moss- or a Gronk-level player either...Diggs was close, but not nearly as dominant (or as big and strong) as the other two in their prime. Diggs was a pro-bowler, Moss and Gronk were generational talents. As far as the Bills of this era, yes, Diggs will obviously be remembered. Shakir may be remembered as an Edelman/Welker type. I think Kincaid and Coleman (if they continue their progression) will probably be remembered. Cook obviously will be remembered (though a RB, not a full-time pass catcher). Hawes is looking like more than just a blocker (who knows where his career goes). But yes, over the previous 5 years, not a lot of guys will stand out from those teams (2020-2024) when looking back from the future.

 

 

As to the Bills scoring (interesting stat callout OP),

 

If they continue at their current 2025 scoring average of 34 points a game (improbable), they would end the 6-year stretch at 29.93 points/game.

If they scored the same amount this year as last year, they would end the 6-year stretch at 29.40 points/game.

If they continued at their 5-year (2020-2024) scoring average, they would end the 6-year stretch at 28.98 points/game

 

If I'm not mistaken, any of those scenarios would put them ahead of the New Orleans run. But, we would need to average 38.79 points per game the rest of the season to match New England's run (2008-2013). Really shows you just how good that New England offense was over that stretch---although that team did like to run up the score a lot, which McD never really does---but then, New England will have also played 4 fewer games in their span too (than the current Bills)...due to the increase from 16 to 17 games in 2021, but then the Bills losing the Cincinnati game). 

 

 

 

 

Welker was a creation of Brady.  Edelman less so.  But that's like saying "look, Allen had Beasley!".   

 

Cook is having a moment for sure....but Josh is 8 years in.

[folz]

42 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Welker was a creation of Brady.  Edelman less so.  But that's like saying "look, Allen had Beasley!".   

 

Cook is having a moment for sure....but Josh is 8 years in.

 

True, Beasley was very much like a Welker or Edelman. Though I think Beasley could be considered a big help to Josh at the time...having both Diggs and Beasley made things go back then. Not a HOFer or anything, but he was one of the best slot receivers at the time (the same with Edelman), so that does count to an extent (just not if you are counting like how many All-Pros/HOFers on a particular SB team or whatever). And I do agree that Welker and Edelman were both a bit of a product of Brady and the New England short passing offense (Edelman was raised in that offense and didn't become a main factor until his 5th year). 

 

Curious, I know you are kind of putting Josh in the same boat as Brady as far as lack of other All-Pro/HOF-level players around him (which is true), but what do you think of Josh's weapons overall this year (in relation to Tom Brady, and obviously acknowledging that we don't have a stud #1 outside receiver). Outside of maybe 2008-2012 (the Moss and Gronk/Hernandez years), do you think Josh's weapons are better this year than what Brady usually had? It definitely seems like we are at least deeper at the skill positions than the Pats were for many years.

 

I did see a stat that from 1966-2000, the average number of HOFers on a winning Super Bowl squad was 5.68. I would assume that number has lowered a bit over the last 25 years due to free agency and both New England and Kansas City winning so many Super Bowls (without a big number of HOF players). My bet is that it is closer to 3-4 players now (besides NE and KC, the Giants won twice without a stacked roster...I don't feel like Seattle, Pitt, Denver, or Tampa Bay were stacked with HOFers---meaning like 5-6 or more). And one last thought, a player could not end up being a HOFer, but could have a HOF-type season. For instance, if Cook and Kincaid have huge years this year (that if maintained might make them a HOFer, but say they don't maintain it---then they wouldn't be a HOFer on that team, but for that season, maybe they played as if they were). Not sure that I have any point here...just some food for thought.

 

[Governor]

I’ve been told we can’t throw the ball down the field. Which is it?

[Mr. WEO]

10 hours ago, folz said:

 

True, Beasley was very much like a Welker or Edelman. Though I think Beasley could be considered a big help to Josh at the time...having both Diggs and Beasley made things go back then. Not a HOFer or anything, but he was one of the best slot receivers at the time (the same with Edelman), so that does count to an extent (just not if you are counting like how many All-Pros/HOFers on a particular SB team or whatever). And I do agree that Welker and Edelman were both a bit of a product of Brady and the New England short passing offense (Edelman was raised in that offense and didn't become a main factor until his 5th year). 

 

Curious, I know you are kind of putting Josh in the same boat as Brady as far as lack of other All-Pro/HOF-level players around him (which is true), but what do you think of Josh's weapons overall this year (in relation to Tom Brady, and obviously acknowledging that we don't have a stud #1 outside receiver). Outside of maybe 2008-2012 (the Moss and Gronk/Hernandez years), do you think Josh's weapons are better this year than what Brady usually had? It definitely seems like we are at least deeper at the skill positions than the Pats were for many years.

 

I did see a stat that from 1966-2000, the average number of HOFers on a winning Super Bowl squad was 5.68. I would assume that number has lowered a bit over the last 25 years due to free agency and both New England and Kansas City winning so many Super Bowls (without a big number of HOF players). My bet is that it is closer to 3-4 players now (besides NE and KC, the Giants won twice without a stacked roster...I don't feel like Seattle, Pitt, Denver, or Tampa Bay were stacked with HOFers---meaning like 5-6 or more). And one last thought, a player could not end up being a HOFer, but could have a HOF-type season. For instance, if Cook and Kincaid have huge years this year (that if maintained might make them a HOFer, but say they don't maintain it---then they wouldn't be a HOFer on that team, but for that season, maybe they played as if they were). Not sure that I have any point here...just some food for thought.

 

 

 

 

Great points!

 

Other than Cook (this year anyway), I would say Allen's weapons are in the same "mediocre but Josh makes them better" category that Brady had for most of NE years, especially the WRs.  

 

The bar for a HOF type season for Cook was set by Barkley (and even Taylor) last season.  He would have to average 122 YPG rushing for the rest of the season to get into that stratum.  Same for Kincaid--he's off to a better start than last season, but still only 5 targets a game, so the opportunity for a massive impact (even for a TE) is limited.  The Bills spread it around far more than, say, KC with Kelce who has averaged 8 targets a game over his entire career.

[BigDingus]

On 9/23/2025 at 12:49 PM, RyanC883 said:

I'm convinced Allen is the best QB ever, period.  No one has had his combination of running, passing skills combined with the lack of a blue-chip WR.  It's unreal.  If the D gets its act together we could win 2-3 SBs in the Allen era.  

 

See, this is where I'm a pessimist. 

 

I don't think that's a real possibility as long as McDermott is the coach. He's been great at building this team & culture, but defense is his baby. 

 

A lot of people think if we just get better players than things will improve, and while I think that's partly true, I don't think it'll look any different come playoff time.

 

Like were prime Hyde & Poyer better than Rapp & Bishop? By a mile, yet the D still looked just as bad against the Chiefs/Bengals in the playoffs. Maybe prime Tre White & Milano? They didn't move the needle either. 

 

Then you look at all the draft picks invested in the D, you'd expect better results. Unfortunately, they've gotten worse the last few years, all while "offensive-minded" Andy Reid has managed to build a strong D before us. 

 

Josh will have to be exceptional, and we'll have to continue surrounding him with good weapons. That's how I think they can overcome the McDermott playoff defense.