Cole Beasley interested in returning to Bills in 2023

[Woodman]

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2023/02/04/cole-beasley-interested-in-returning-to-bills-in-2023/

“This is probably the healthiest I’ve ended a season in a long time,” Beasley said, via the Buffalo News. “It’s weird this season is ending, because I feel like I just got here. I feel like I was just starting to get back in my groove a little bit, so it’s frustrating, but I look forward to hopefully getting another opportunity (https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/despite-a-reduced-role-in-his-return-to-bills-cole-beasley-is-open-to-coming/article_cf5fdbc2-a3e0-11ed-ba44-3790f5087316.html).”

Beasley would like that opportunity to be in Buffalo.

“At this point in my career, I’m still hungry and my body feels good,” he said. “I still feel like I can do it and I can compete and play at a level that I’ve been playing at before this season. Obviously, I want to be somewhere that I can win, and I know that’s here, also. If that option is there, I would definitely do that. We’ll just have to see.”

[Ingtar33]

good news. We need a viable no.2 option and with luck he won't be expensive.

especially since we probably lose davis in FA this year.

[Night Train]

As I posted in another thread, that would double the number of good hands receivers (Diggs). Allen needs him. The rest to be determined during the upcoming off-season.

[DraftBoy]

For the league minimum I'd be interested, but not for much more than that.

[notacon]

For the league minimum I'd be interested, but not for much more than that.

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

His best value is to hold the fort while the Bills develop (or draft or sign in FA) a long term solution at that position.

He was cut by the Bills last season because his $6M+ cap hit was wildly out of whack.


Vet minimum is the only way he should stay on the team.

[TacklingDummy]

Going to need a few players on the cheap.

[Woodman]

good news. We need a viable no.2 option and with luck he won't be expensive.

especially since we probably lose davis in FA this year.

Vet minimum count me in.

[ParanoidAndroid]

good news. We need a viable no.2 option and with luck he won't be expensive.

especially since we probably lose davis in FA this year.
Gabe Davis is under contract until 2024.

[Woodman]

Gabe Davis is under contract until 2024.

So this is his contract year.

[Ingtar33]

Gabe Davis is under contract until 2024.

wasn't davis like a 3rd or 4th round guy?

His rookie deal shouldn't be 5 years; he's been here since our AFC championship loss... that's 3 years... right, one more year on the rookie deal, means we have him for 2023

[Mace]

If he can win and keep a spot on the roster, and I don't see how he can't, I'm great with it.

[sukie]

I’d love it if Cole was a camp casualty…. And McKenz quits football.

[TacklingDummy]

wasn't davis like a 3rd or 4th round guy?

His rookie deal shouldn't be 5 years; he's been here since our AFC championship loss... that's 3 years... right, one more year on the rookie deal, means we have him for 2023


CONTRACT TERMS:4 yr(s) / $3,994,380 SIGNING BONUS$699,380 AVERAGE SALARY$998,595 GTD AT SIGN:$699,380 TOTAL GTD:$699,380 FREE AGENT:2024 / UFA
BONUS BREAKDOWN CAP DETAILS CASH DETAILS

YEAR AGE BASE SALARY SIGNING CAP HIT DEAD CAP YEARLY CASH
2020 Contract details by year 21 $610,000 $174,845 $784,845 $699,380
$1,357,690
($1,357,690)
2021 Contract details by year 22 $780,000 $174,845 $954,845 $524,535
$780,000
($2,137,690)
2022 Contract details by year 23 $895,000 $174,845 $1,069,845 $349,690
$895,000
($3,032,690)
2023 Contract details by year 24 $2,742,000 $174,845 $2,916,845 $174,845
$2,742,000
($5,774,690)

[Mr. Pink]

I'm all for Beasley on a one year deal for like 2m with some incentives that can get him to 3m.

He's better than anything else we have in the slot and has reliable hands in general.

[DraftBoy]

I'm all for Beasley on a one year deal for like 2m with some incentives that can get him to 3m.

He's better than anything else we have in the slot and has reliable hands in general.

Where’s that money coming from given our other needs and cap situation?

[kgun12]

For the league minimum I'd be interested, but not for much more than that.

I think you might be letting your politics cloud your judgement. Beasley is good for this offense. They tried to replace him with McKenzie, how did that work out?

[kgun12]

Gabe Davis is under contract until 2024.

Trade him, there are people that thinks he practiced on the juggs machine for an hour everyday like after Von Miller talked to him. Wasted talent, maybe coaches fault but still wasted talent.

[DraftBoy]

I think you might be letting your politics cloud your judgement. Beasley is good for this offense. They tried to replace him with McKenzie, how did that work out?

It’s strictly a financial decision, we don’t have much cap space and we have a lot of holes to fill. Beasley helps in the slot, but he’s not going to be a #2 or work much outside. While talented, that’s not worth much to this team compared to addressing the OL, LB, or S spots.

Also it’s not like he’s got much leverage in terms of demand market. Nobody else wanted him after he was cut last year from Tampa.

[YardRat]

Where’s that money coming from given our other needs and cap situation?

From trading McKenzie for a 6th/7th rounder or just cutting him.

[DraftBoy]

From trading McKenzie for a 6th/7th rounder or just cutting him.

So now we're prioritizing slot WR over starting LB or SS? That's not a decision I'm comfortable with.

[Woodman]

From trading McKenzie for a 6th/7th rounder or just cutting him.
How much would we save?

[notacon]

So now we're prioritizing slot WR over starting LB or SS? That's not a decision I'm comfortable with.

We already have one of the best starting tandems at LB in the NFL. The last thing the Bills need is a “starter” at LB.

WR is a huge position of need. Gabe Davis is just not good enough to be considered a true #2 WR....not nearly good enough to take the pressure off Diggs.

Prioritizing a “starting LB” over a bona fide #2 WR would be dumb.

[Woodman]

We can't blow this draft period.

[Mr. Pink]

Where’s that money coming from given our other needs and cap situation?

Cutting McKenzie.

[Mr. Pink]

So now we're prioritizing slot WR over starting LB or SS? That's not a decision I'm comfortable with.

We should build like the Chiefs.

They ignore their D and just give Mahomes weapons year after year....and it's working out pretty well for them

[Novacane]

I think Shakir is ready to step into the slot role. I'd take Beasley back for vet min since he'll be backing up Shakir

[DraftBoy]

We already have one of the best starting tandems at LB in the NFL. The last thing the Bills need is a “starter” at LB.

WR is a huge position of need. Gabe Davis is just not good enough to be considered a true #2 WR....not nearly good enough to take the pressure off Diggs.

Prioritizing a “starting LB” over a bona fide #2 WR would be dumb.

No we don’t. Edmunds is a free agent, not our starter unless we re-sign him.

[kgun12]

Why not Shakir taking over Davis’s spot and Beasley stays in the slot?

[DraftBoy]

We should build like the Chiefs.

They ignore their D and just give Mahomes weapons year after year....and it's working out pretty well for them

Ignore their D? They drafted Chris Jones whose become one of the most dominant DL in the league and just the past year spent their top draft pick at CB and made their biggest free agent singing a safety.

[Ginger Vitis]

To say the chiefs ignore their D and give mahomes weapons year after year is wrong... since 2019 the chiefs have taken more defensive players with day 1 and 2 picks than they have offensive players.. Hill and Kelce were with chiefs before they drafted mahomes

[YardRat]

So now we're prioritizing slot WR over starting LB or SS? That's not a decision I'm comfortable with.

I wouldn't consider trading/cutting a depth WR to have assets to sign a vet-minimum slot receiver a "priority". It's basically a lateral for a bottom half roster spot.

LOL "priority".

[YardRat]

How much would we save?

I think $2.2 mil from getting rid of McKenzie. Vet minimum for Beasley = $1.165 million, so a net savings of $1.035.

[DraftBoy]

I wouldn't consider trading/cutting a depth WR to have assets to sign a vet-minimum slot receiver a "priority". It's basically a lateral for a bottom half roster spot.

LOL "priority".

Not given our cap situation. Cutting McKenzie to commit $2+ to Beasley is a big commitment given we already are going to be challenged to find enough money to adequately replace what we are going to be losing. Spending anything more than the vet minimum on Beasley is an unnecessary luxury at this point.

[YardRat]

Not given our cap situation. Cutting McKenzie to commit $2+ to Beasley is a big commitment given we already are going to be challenged to find enough money to adequately replace what we are going to be losing. Spending anything more than the vet minimum on Beasley is an unnecessary luxury at this point.

None of that screams "priority".

[DraftBoy]

None of that screams "priority".

Cool, so where are you willing to sacrifice to pay Beasley an extra million plus since it’s no big deal? Because cutting McKenzie and brining in Beasley for no cap savings helps you not one bit. So which other position are you cutting money from to bring him in?

[YardRat]

Cool, so where are you willing to sacrifice to pay Beasley an extra million plus since it’s no big deal? Because cutting McKenzie and brining in Beasley for no cap savings helps you not one bit. So which other position are you cutting money from to bring him in?

If you want to see the Beasley for McKenzie details see my response to Woodman.

If you want to see proposals for getting under the cap see the Roster Evaluation thread.

[Mace]

So now we're prioritizing slot WR over starting LB or SS? That's not a decision I'm comfortable with.

With their aversion to starting rookies though, what starting lb or ss can you see them drafting and plugging right in to their rigid scheme ? If there is one and we spend a pick on him in the first round, we're going to lose one of the best ol prospects we have a shot at at g or c.

FA addition will cost more than slot receiver.

[DraftBoy]

If you want to see the Beasley for McKenzie details see my response to Woodman.

If you want to see proposals for getting under the cap see the Roster Evaluation thread.

That’s not an answer. The proposal was to give Beasley $2M plus bonuses to get to $3. To do that you proposed cutting McKenzie which would result in almost no savings. Since McKenzie is one of the guys you’ve mentioned multiple time as being cut to save money the question is where else you’re willing to sacrifice since you’re now no longer going to see any savings from cutting McKenzie.

[DraftBoy]

With their aversion to starting rookies though, what starting lb or ss can you see them drafting and plugging right in to their rigid scheme ? If there is one and we spend a pick on him in the first round, we're going to lose one of the best ol prospects we have a shot at at g or c.

FA addition will cost more than slot receiver.

I don’t think you have one in this draft on a preliminary look. I’d be much more comfortable with a slot rookie WR that brings true cost savings with little production sacrifice.

[YardRat]

That’s not an answer. The proposal was to give Beasley $2M plus bonuses to get to $3. To do that you proposed cutting McKenzie which would result in almost no savings. Since McKenzie is one of the guys you’ve mentioned multiple time as being cut to save money the question is where else you’re willing to sacrifice since you’re now no longer going to see any savings from cutting McKenzie.
Well, if you want to speak to Pink's proposal only, $2.2 savings from McKenzie pays for Pink's $2mil salary to Beasley and the incentives...not necessarily bonuses...would have to be determined if they are LTBE or not before counting anything against a cap number.

So getting rid of McKenzie still pays for Beasley, there just isn't as much cap savings. So, it actually is an answer.

[YardRat]

That’s not an answer. The proposal was to give Beasley $2M plus bonuses to get to $3. To do that you proposed cutting McKenzie which would result in almost no savings. Since McKenzie is one of the guys you’ve mentioned multiple time as being cut to save money the question is where else you’re willing to sacrifice since you’re now no longer going to see any savings from cutting McKenzie.

And, again...see the roster evaluation thread.

[DraftBoy]

And, again...see the roster evaluation thread.

I’ve read that thread. You’re free to actually answer the question or you can just keep referring to a thread. I don’t care either way.

[YardRat]

I’ve read that thread. You’re free to actually answer the question or you can just keep referring to a thread. I don’t care either way.

I answered your question in that thread. I could cut and paste the post, but that would be redundant.

[Mace]

I don’t think you have one in this draft on a preliminary look. I’d be much more comfortable with a slot rookie WR that brings true cost savings with little production sacrifice.

Might just be Shakir if they're determined to keep Davis on the field, otherwise would probably have to be undrafted rookie, and I'm not convinced they're that good at drafting.

I don't think we have enough picks to address slot receiver, and they trend heavily cheaper vet, because they wouldn't play a rookie much anyway.

I think they're stuck in their method.

[DraftBoy]

Might just be Shakir if they're determined to keep Davis on the field, otherwise would probably have to be undrafted rookie, and I'm not convinced they're that good at drafting.

I don't think we have enough picks to address slot receiver, and they trend heavily cheaper vet, because they wouldn't play a rookie much anyway.

I think they're stuck in their method.

I have little doubt the primary three will be Diggs, Davis, Shakir and a Day 3 rookie that either has super high level speed or big size. They can’t afford much else.

[kgun12]

I have little doubt the primary three will be Diggs, Davis, Shakir and a Day 3 rookie that either has super high level speed or big size. They can’t afford much else.

Let’s try to trade Davis and McKenzie and bring back Brown or Lofton type vet. I look at their 40 times and Shakir has the fastest time.


Diggs: 4:46
Davis: 4:54
Shakir: 4:43

Put Beasley in the slot, draft his replacement. Diggs is Diggs, Beasley catches almost everything thrown his way and Shakir if he continues to improve can contribute!

[DraftBoy]

Let’s try to trade Davis and McKenzie and bring back Brown or Lofton type vet. I look at their 40 times and Shakir has the fastest time.


Diggs: 4:46
Davis: 4:54
Shakir: 4:43

Put Beasley in the slot, draft his replacement. Diggs is Diggs, Beasley catches almost everything thrown his way and Shakir if he continues to improve can contribute!

I wouldn’t assume that Davis or McKenzie has much or any trade value currently.

[TacklingDummy]

Let’s try to trade Davis and McKenzie and bring back Brown or Lofton type vet. I look at their 40 times and Shakir has the fastest time!

They can probably get something for Davis since he would cost less than $3 million and actually does have a good game once in awhile.

McKenzie probably couldn't get anything.

[Mr. Pink]

Ignore their D? They drafted Chris Jones whose become one of the most dominant DL in the league and just the past year spent their top draft pick at CB and made their biggest free agent singing a safety.

So your way of trying to disprove my point is a 2nd round pick from 2016? OK!

[DraftBoy]

So your way of trying to disprove my point is a 2nd round pick from 2016? OK!

Yes, because that’s the only reference the post made to any player, draft pick or free agents singing. Well done.

[Oaf]

Shakir can be the next Beasley. Beas can show him the ropes for one more year if he likes. Ideally as a PS callup.

I like McKenzie, but I'm good to let him walk after his 2022 here.

[Forward_Lateral]

I have little doubt the primary three will be Diggs, Davis, Shakir and a Day 3 rookie that either has super high level speed or big size. They can’t afford much else.
THere's numerous articles written about the many different ways the Bills can free up 30 plus million in cap space. There will be money to spend, IF they want to. Not saying they will, or should, but it is definitely possible.

[kgun12]

There is always money available if a team wants it. CAP hell usually follows, but if it gets the Bills a SB I’m all in, for the right player(s).

[Forward_Lateral]

There is always money available if a team wants it. CAP hell usually follows, but if it gets the Bills a SB I’m all in, for the right player(s).
Yep, but, with the cap expected to just keep going up, which it should with all of the billions of dollars of new TV revenue kicking in next year (I think, or maybe 2024), passing the cap hits down the line isn't that bad of a strategy.

They can also extend guys, and free up money that way, etc.

It's not as big of an issue as some here make it out to be.

[kgun12]

Yep, but, with the cap expected to just keep going up, which it should with all of the billions of dollars of new TV revenue kicking in next year (I think, or maybe 2024), passing the cap hits down the line isn't that bad of a strategy.

They can also extend guys, and free up money that way, etc.

It's not as big of an issue as some here make it out to be.

I’m fine with it but the front office needs to make better decisions in FA and the draft.

[Forward_Lateral]

I’m fine with it but the front office needs to make better decisions in FA and the draft.
They've done OK in free agency. I'd say better than average.

Draft wise, I'd agree with you. If they want to be a contender every year, they need to start hitting on more draft picks, especially in the trenches.

[kgun12]

They've done OK in free agency. I'd say better than average.

Draft wise, I'd agree with you. If they want to be a contender every year, they need to start hitting on more draft picks, especially in the trenches.

Yeah I guess that’s true for last year but 2021 was horrible.

QB Mitchell Trubisky
WR Emmanuel Sanders
RB Matt Breida
DE Efe Obada
P Matt Haack
OT Bobby Hart
LB Tyrell Adams
LB Marquel Lee
G Jamil Douglas
WR/returner Brandon Powell

[TacklingDummy]

Yeah I guess that’s true for last year but 2021 was horrible.

QB Mitchell Trubisky
WR Emmanuel Sanders
RB Matt Breida
DE Efe Obada
P Matt Haack
OT Bobby Hart
LB Tyrell Adams
LB Marquel Lee
G Jamil Douglas
WR/returner Brandon Powell
That was pretty ****ty.

[kgun12]

2020 was worst:
Quinton Jefferson
Daryl Williams
Mario Addison
Josh Norman
A.J. Klein
Tyler Matakevich

[Mace]

In 2022, Saffold, Quessenberry, Hart, Van Roten, Rhodes, Brown, Beasley, Settle, and Crowder didn't improve anything.

DaQuan Jones was a hit, Lawson & Phillips contributed, Von Miller looked like a hit, but you have to wonder for how many games a season now with that contract, which might make him tragic.

Doesn't look all that sharp to me, we scraped down the backstretch and took a beating from a team who evolved faster in the playoffs.

[Oaf]

I have little doubt the primary three will be Diggs, Davis, Shakir and a Day 3 rookie that either has super high level speed or big size. They can’t afford much else.

This is seriously not terrible either, esp if we have Beas to back Shakir up. Top 15 corps. Get an OL, a complimentary RB, maybe a TE2 threat and JA will cook.

[DraftBoy]

This is seriously not terrible either, esp if we have Beas to back Shakir up. Top 15 corps. Get an OL, a complimentary RB, maybe a TE2 threat and JA will cook.

It's average, which shouldn't be our standard if we're actually trying to be a Super Bowl contender.

[sukie]

Beas… no thank you.

McKnzy…. See ya.

I don’t have an opinion of Crowder. A broken leg is an injury that I don’t consider someone being fragile or oft injured.

chronic ankles ? Yes… broken leg… no.

[Woodman]

I’m fine with it but the front office needs to make better decisions in FA and the draft.
Bingo! :cheers:

[Oaf]

It's average, which shouldn't be our standard if we're actually trying to be a Super Bowl contender.

That's obviously up for debate. I like upside for Davis in a contract year, Shakir who showed maturity as a rook, Beas as mentor, plus a still Top-5 WR in Diggs. I'm not sure there's more than 10 WR corps I'd take over that.

Then, looking at our OL/RB combo right now, I'm not sure I'd take the Bills' lineup over more than 5-8 teams. Agree/disagree?

[DraftBoy]

That's obviously up for debate. I like upside for Davis in a contract year, Shakir who showed maturity as a rook, Beas as mentor, plus a still Top-5 WR in Diggs. I'm not sure there's more than 10 WR corps I'd take over that.

Then, looking at our OL/RB combo right now, I'm not sure I'd take the Bills' lineup over more than 5-8 teams. Agree/disagree?

Is it really though? Davis has demonstrated issues with drops and runs really bad routes. Shakir hasn’t proven anything yet but has flashed in limited reps. It’s an average group to enter the season with.

I’d blow up the entire OL and RB group if we had the opportunity and money.

[Oaf]

I’d blow up the entire OL and RB group if we had the opportunity and money.
So let's start w/ that.

RE: Davis, can you demonstrate "runs really bad routes"? Yes, had some drops but also has shown excellent routes/catches against the Colts in the playoffs, MIA in '21, KC this year, PIT this year (have a few of his routes in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4rt-OOpGAg) I made).

[DraftBoy]

So let's start w/ that.

RE: Davis, can you demonstrate "runs really bad routes"? Yes, had some drops but also has shown excellent routes/catches against the Colts in the playoffs, MIA in '21, KC this year, PIT this year (have a few of his routes in this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4rt-OOpGAg) I made).

Just watch Davis run routes. They aren’t sharp at all. It’s been pointed out multiple times here and on social media.

[YardRat]

Just watch Davis run routes. They aren’t sharp at all. It’s been pointed out multiple times here and on social media.

I dunno. He's always done a good job of setting up his corner and getting leverage/separation on the deeper and intermediate routes IMO. If he wasn't running good routes and getting open his horrible drop issue wouldn't be as big of a deal as it is. He certainly isn't a 'cutter' like Diggs, but he's not supposed to be.

[DraftBoy]

I dunno. He's always done a good job of setting up his corner and getting leverage/separation on the deeper and intermediate routes IMO. If he wasn't running good routes and getting open his horrible drop issue wouldn't be as big of a deal as it is. He certainly isn't a 'cutter' like Diggs, but he's not supposed to be.

Watch his depth, crossing angles, and his hitches. He's consistently getting the wrong depth on routes, he has no concept of what angle his cross is supposed to be at and his hitch is basically just a turnaround as opposed to actually coming back for the football.

Also despite his size, he can be easily redirected off the line.

His routes bother me way more than his drops honestly.

There is a reason why you see Allen throws look more "off" to Davis than any other player and it's not just Allen missing him.

[The last buffalo fan]

Watch his depth, crossing angles, and his hitches. He's consistently getting the wrong depth on routes, he has no concept of what angle his cross is supposed to be at and his hitch is basically just a turnaround as opposed to actually coming back for the football.

Also despite his size, he can be easily redirected off the line.

His routes bother me way more than his drops honestly.

There is a reason why you see Allen throws look more "off" to Davis than any other player and it's not just Allen missing him.

Davis, Dawkins and Edmunds, what to do?!?!? All the talent there!

[kgun12]

Davis, Dawkins and Edmunds, what to do?!?!? All the talent there!

Trade, move to guard, see ya, don’t let the door him you in the a$$.

[The last buffalo fan]

Trade, move to guard, see ya, don’t let the door him you in the a$$.

Oh well!! ............. :beers:

[Woodman]

That's obviously up for debate. I like upside for Davis in a contract year, Shakir who showed maturity as a rook, Beas as mentor, plus a still Top-5 WR in Diggs. I'm not sure there's more than 10 WR corps I'd take over that.

Then, looking at our OL/RB combo right now, I'm not sure I'd take the Bills' lineup over more than 5-8 teams. Agree/disagree?

He's getting a new WR's coach I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

[sukie]

He's getting a new WR's coach I'm keeping my fingers crossed!
Davis is still cheap. Just move him down the line. I dont want him even looking at Diggs in meetings until he earns it.

[Woodman]

Davis is still cheap. Just move him down the line. I dont want him even looking at Diggs in meetings until he earns it.
You're the new WR's coach congratulations.

[notacon]

That's obviously up for debate. I like upside for Davis in a contract year, Shakir who showed maturity as a rook, Beas as mentor, plus a still Top-5 WR in Diggs. I'm not sure there's more than 10 WR corps I'd take over that.

Then, looking at our OL/RB combo right now, I'm not sure I'd take the Bills' lineup over more than 5-8 teams. Agree/disagree?

I mostly agree.


The glaring need is for a more reliable and dynamic #2 WR. Davis showed great promise in 2021, especially in the playoff loss to KC. But, he then regressed. Not nearly good enough of a threat to get some heat off Diggs.


But, he’s still on his rookie contract and has a cap hit of only $2.9M for 2023. Like you said, there is some “upside for Davis in a contact year”.

Your line-up....."upside for Davis in a contract year, Shakir who showed maturity as a rook, Beas as mentor, plus a still Top-5 WR in Diggs” still leaves room for a FA signing (mid-range like KC did last year after Hill left).


They signed Marquez Valdes-Scantling for $30M over three years, but only a $4.8M cap hit in year one, 2022 season.

They signed JuJu Smith-Schuster for one year at only $3M.

I could see the WR position improving by...


Diggs
FA Signing - like JuJu Smith-Schuster
Davis
Shakir
Beasley or Crowder (both are credible as a “mentor”)
Kumerow (for special teams) or draft pick - I would LOVE to see a relatively high draft choice, higher than the 4th round that Beane has spent since 2018 on WR, who could bump Kumerow onto the practice squad or not re-signed (he’s a UFA for 2023)

McKenzie has worn out his value.

[Oaf]

Watch his depth, crossing angles, and his hitches. He's consistently getting the wrong depth on routes, he has no concept of what angle his cross is supposed to be at and his hitch is basically just a turnaround as opposed to actually coming back for the football.

Also despite his size, he can be easily redirected off the line.

His routes bother me way more than his drops honestly.

There is a reason why you see Allen throws look more "off" to Davis than any other player and it's not just Allen missing him.

Can you point to some actual examples?

Here's a throw where Allen is "off": https://twitter.com/Pro__Ant/status/1617693751530651649

This could be a touchdown on an accurate throw, but Dawkins is walked back right into Allen and Allen also doesn't get it down the field enough. This is why we need to upgrade WR at the same time or ahead of the OL?

[YardRat]

Watch his depth, crossing angles, and his hitches. He's consistently getting the wrong depth on routes, he has no concept of what angle his cross is supposed to be at and his hitch is basically just a turnaround as opposed to actually coming back for the football.

Also despite his size, he can be easily redirected off the line.

His routes bother me way more than his drops honestly.

There is a reason why you see Allen throws look more "off" to Davis than any other player and it's not just Allen missing him.

Yeah, I don't recall ever seeing those issues. He rarely gets an opportunity on crossers across the field, unless Allen extends the play and Davis continues to the sideline...where he has separation. And he isn't going to in the middle anyway because of the mostly C1 coverages the offense sees with the safety planted in the middle. On any hitches probably, but that's where "he's not Diggs" comes into play.

[DraftBoy]

Yeah, I don't recall ever seeing those issues. He rarely gets an opportunity on crossers across the field, unless Allen extends the play and Davis continues to the sideline...where he has separation. And he isn't going to in the middle anyway because of the mostly C1 coverages the offense sees with the safety planted in the middle. On any hitches probably, but that's where "he's not Diggs" comes into play.

Running a hitch and coming back to the football is just basic skills. The idea because he’s not Diggs he doesn’t have to run the route properly is a rather ludicrous.

[DraftBoy]

Can you point to some actual examples?

Here's a throw where Allen is "off": https://twitter.com/Pro__Ant/status/1617693751530651649

This could be a touchdown on an accurate throw, but Dawkins is walked back right into Allen and Allen also doesn't get it down the field enough. This is why we need to upgrade WR at the same time or ahead of the OL?

That route isn’t supposed to be bent that wide. What the writer says is Davis cooking the CB is mostly Davis getting redirected towards the sideline which significantly tightens the window for the throw.

It’s not a good throw by Allen either as it’s late. But Davis can’t be redirected against a jam like that.

[Woodman]

But Davis can’t be redirected against a jam like that.

Coaching.

[YardRat]

That route isn’t supposed to be bent that wide. What the writer says is Davis cooking the CB is mostly Davis getting redirected towards the sideline which significantly tightens the window for the throw.

It’s not a good throw by Allen either as it’s late. But Davis can’t be redirected against a jam like that.

You're seeing something that isn't there. Davis' stutter makes the corner whiff on his jam and that's where the route should be run to maximize spacing from the safety. If Allen doesn't short-arm the pass and make Davis slow down...and Davis' hands of stone don't bite him...that's six. That's about as far away from 'running a bad route' that one can get.

Great route. Bad throw.

[DraftBoy]

You're seeing something that isn't there. Davis' stutter makes the corner whiff on his jam and that's where the route should be run to maximize spacing from the safety. If Allen doesn't short-arm the pass and make Davis slow down...and Davis' hands of stone don't bite him...that's six. That's about as far away from 'running a bad route' that one can get.

Great route. Bad throw.

Incorrect. There is no route on the tree that is designed to run closer to the sideline and tighten the window.

Agreed it was a bad throw and if on time and with better placement it could have been a TD. Doesn’t mean it was a good route though.

[Woodman]

Knowing how your going to be defended might be important :idunno:

What is the defender comfortable with and what is he uncomfortable with?

Determine which routes make each defender less likely to successfully defend and run em.

[Oaf]

That route isn’t supposed to be bent that wide. What the writer says is Davis cooking the CB is mostly Davis getting redirected towards the sideline which significantly tightens the window for the throw.

It’s not a good throw by Allen either as it’s late. But Davis can’t be redirected against a jam like that.

Ha! I appreciate your time sharing your thoughts but trying to argue he ran a bad 9-ball that was open by a couple yards…

He's between the numbers and the sideline until he fades to track Josh's throw.

I really do put this bad rep on Dawkins more than Allen, though Allen could've saved DD with a stronger throw.