I did not do a BROP (Buffalo Rumblings Offseason Plan) this year. I am a bit late. Free agency has already started. I got a bit distracted by the WR analysis. Then I got sidetracked by the Diggs signing.... Yeah... I got a little hung up on Diggs... It was not my finest hour... I meant all of what I said, and I stand by it, but I took it a bit too far... That said, we have our #1 WR. He will be all of that and more on the field. In that respect, he is an exciting player and it is exciting to think about how he will open things up for the offense. I will have to trust all of you and your optimism about the off-field stuff and move forward.

Moving forward....

As a result of being late to the BROP party, I am going to do something a bit different. The operative word in the BROP acronym is "Plan". So, I thought it would be interesting to focus just on the Plan part of the BROP rather than the picks. I think the strategy is the most important aspect of it.

Strategy:

At the core of a Plan is strategy. A plan is not a singular set of choices. Real life does not work that way. There are 32 other teams trying to compete against you. Not everyone that you want will be available to you in the draft or in free agency. As a result, you need a strategy that assesses a wide-range of prospects and scenarios. To do that, you need to define a standard for player evaluation, solidify you your team values, define your team's offensive and defensive schemes, and come up with a prioritized list of needs. With this framework, you can react to the reality of contingencies. That said, let's dive in...

Reality:

I feel very strongly that a plan should be realistic. It is not much of a plan if it is not likely to be executed. It is good to be optimistic and shoot for big moves, but you have to prepare for reality. I think the right way to approach it is to be Optimistically Realistic.

Building a Team vs Acquiring Talent:

Building a team is way more than just "acquiring talent". Acquiring Talent is just picking talented players. Building a team is more holistic. All of the pieces need to fit together. They need to fit the scheme. They need to fit the strategy. They need to fit the culture. Because of this belief, I don't like strategies that just focus on a couple of top-level talents at the expense of the rest of the team. This is the pitfall that many GMs fall into. This is a desperate strategy. This is why so many top draft picks and top free agents fail. Bad teams look for a "savior". They pick their "savior" and then their "savior" under-achieves or is a bust due to the lack of talent around them. This is the point we are at with the Bills. They believe that they have their "savior", but the offensive talent around him is about average (with the exception of Diggs). If we don't increase the offensive talent around Josh, then he will not progress and he will assuredly fail.

Football is a team sport. It is by far the most interdependent quintessential team sport of all of the popular sports. This concept is at some level a catch-22. So how do you build a great team? I think the secret lies in increasing the average overall talent of the core or the team. Building up the average overall talent at multiple positions on a football team has a cumulative effect. Behind every "star" player is a group of very good to great players. On teams with a high average level of talent, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The synergy of their interdependence amplifies any single individual. This also works in reverse. On teams that have a below-average level of talent, the whole is less than the sum of its parts.

Because of my belief in building the overall talent-level of the core of the team, I don't feel desperate to sign just a few top free agents to enormous contracts just because we have lots of money. Yes. The team was much more talented in 2019, but I think the offensive side of the ball still needs an infusion of talent across multiple positions before we can expect successful results. Until then, I am very good with a strategy of spending big if the player is truly worth it and then spreading around talent on a variety of good to great players. Don't underestimate the value of mid-high range free agents.

"Best Player Available" vs "Strategic BPA":

A commonly used phrase in acquiring talent for a football team is Best Player Available (BPA). I know that this phrase is primarily used for defining a draft strategy and the draft is only part of the offseason, but I want to use a discussion about it to highlight my overall strategy for building a team. I think BPA is one of the most misunderstood and misused phrases in football. In so many ways, this phrase just bugs me. It is often used way too literally and it is often just used as a flippant crutch to criticize picks citing some general consensus scheme-independent drafniks' definition of "best player". The definition of "Best" is different for each team and for each scheme. The definition of "Best" does not come from some group-think of Mel Kiper, Todd McShay, and all of the other draftniks. Their definition of "Best" is just a slightly more informed educated guess. I really don't get the idea of ripping a team for "reaching" for a player. The GMs of the 32 teams have more resources and man-power to research these prospects than anyone. They meet with the players, they dig into their backgrounds, they know what kind of player that they are searching for. I trust any of the 32 team's GMs more than I trust any "consensus group-think ranking" of players. I actually appreciate the team that knows the player that they want and they go after it.

That said, as much as I don't like the semantics of BPA and how it is typically used, the CONCEPT of BPA as an overall offseason strategy has some merit. I prefer to think of it as a "Strategic BPA". There always needs to be a balance between "Strategy" and "Best". Free agency determines how much strategy you need to apply. If a team comes into the draft with glaring roster needs, then they need to use more "strategy" than "best" rankings in the draft. This is where teams can get into trouble. If a team does its work in free agency and they cover the roster holes with legit starters, then less "strategy" has to be involved and they can focus mostly on players that are the "best" for them.

That leads us to the definition of "Best". What "Best" means is different for every person and for every team. To me, "Best" is the result of a combination of Player Talent, Team Values, Team Scheme, and Team Needs. These elements are the core of my "Strategic BPA" and will help me define what it means to be the "Best Player Available" for the Bills.

Evaluating Talent:

If you believe in this theory of interdependence of players and the impact of the overall talent-level around a player (like I do), then you will also understand my approach in evaluating talent. When evaluating talent, you need to look beyond the typical stats. Sure, some players are transcendently great and it doesn't matter what team they are on. Barry Sanders comes to mind. However, the vast majority of "elite" players are actually just very good players, but they look elite and they get elite stats because of the team they are on, the scheme that they are in, the supporting players around them, and the level of competition across from them. Basic individual stats and even many "advanced stats" are the fool's gold of player evaluation. In order to choose wisely, you need to try and strip out the impact of the scheme and the players around them to get to the true value of that player. Someday there will be much better stats that can isolate an individual, but until then I will have to look for some slightly better stats, watch some full-game tape, and level-set with some measurable athletic traits.

Team Values:

The Team Values are at the foundation of defining what "Best" means. If a team does not have a set of Values, then they will likely just pick a bunch of players that may or may not work together. Bad teams do this all of the time. The Team Values are the glue of player evaluation. Below is a list of criteria that will influence my BPA ranking...

Reliable Playmakers - Playmaking is not necessarily just a talent thing. Playmakers are not just small fast guys. It is a mentality. Playmaking requires talent, focus, effort, consistency, and relentlessness. There are plenty of inconsistent playmakers out there, but for me, a true playmaker is talented, but also reliable. All players on a team can be a playmaker, whether they are the #1 starter or a backup. Good teams should be confident to go to the #3 TE as we are going to the #1 WR.

Versatility -Predictable, 1-dimensional teams can be easily beat by good teams and smart coaches. As a result, I want players that can be successful in multiple schemes. The key word is successful. Having a 1-dimensional limited player line up in versatile roles will not be successful. More specifically, ....

• For my starters: I want players that allow us to use and succeed in versatile formations, so that I could match up better to what the other team is giving me and on any given series. For example, I would want an OL that can pull and use zone concepts, but can also excel in power schemes. I would want LBs that can defend the run and also drop in pass coverage. I would want RBs that can run AND catch AND block at a high-level. I would want WRs that are good in the short quick routes and the long speed routes.
• For my backups: I would hope for the same versatility as my starters, but not all backups have that skill set. However, I do want my backups to be versatile enough to play a variety of positions so that if an injury hits in one position, I would have the versatility to switch them over to cover a different position.

Build from both Lines - I believe in this strategy whole-heartedly. The offensive and defensive lines are the most depended-upon positions in football. As such, if we build these lines with talent, then the rest of the team gets instantly better. These position groups are foundational and need to be a top priority. It doesn't matter what WRs, TEs, RBs and QBs we have if we don't have an OL.

Intangibles / Culture - Yes. Culture does matter (ask the Patriots -€” "do your job!"), but not at the expense of talent. Football IQ, reliability, effort, toughness, hard-work, growth-mentality, team-first attitude, and leadership are all part of culture. I believe the culture that the Bills are trying to build can (if done correctly) help the team over-achieve. It can also raise the floor of talent and help stave a losing attitude. They don't have to be choir boys, but the Bills do value how its leaders represent them in the community. From this point forward, I will refer to this as Processexy. I can't take credit for this phrase. Someone else coined it here on BR (I can't remember who).

Team Scheme:

Just like with Team Values, if scheme is not considered in selecting players, then you will just waste picks and $. If you draft a 3-4 LB for a 4-3 scheme, that that is a waste. As simple as this concept seems, this happens all of the time with NFL teams when the GM and coach are not on the same page. So, when evaluating players, I will use the following offensive and defensive schemes.

The defensive scheme that I will use to build talent around is based on the current Bills defense. I don't see a reason to change it. It is a good base. The only thing I want to improve is the run defense. Basically, the Bills run a 4-3 defense that can morph between a traditional 4-3, a nickel, and a dime defense, depending on what the other team is showing. They are also predominantly a zone coverage team, but they do their fair share of man coverage when the matchup dictates. The Bills have done a good job so far finding versatile talent at all levels of the draft and FA for this scheme. They just need to Keep on Truckin' with this strategy.

The offensive scheme is a bit tougher. The Bills in 2018 were different than the Bills in 2019. For the most part, the changes in 2019 were positive. I like that they featured the TE more. I like that they featured the short to mid-range passing game. The deep pass is not so good right now, but that is more about Josh solving that problem. I think they are still evolving on this side of the ball. I don't know where Daboll is headed, but I think that they need to focus on the following...

• Keep trying to use players in versatile roles. See my definition of "versatility" above in Team Values. Specifically, with respect to Offensive Scheme, I would want Daboll to continue to use versatility in his scheme. I know that he got a lot of flack for moving Dimarco to a WR position. It failed mightily, but it was not the concept that was flawed. It failed mightily because of the amount of specialized 1-dimensional players the Bills have. Frank Gore was just a runner, Pat Dimarco was just a blocker, Lee Smith was just a blocker, Isaiah was the gadget jet sweep guy and did OK in traditional routes, Duke did well in the Big Slot role where he could use his size to block out but struggled to get open on the outside and struggled with drops, Roberts was OK in a limited role, and Foster was non-existent. None of these guys seemed to have the skills to do multiple roles in the offense. Hopefully this offseason will solve the 1-dimensional talent issue...
• Strive for 4 dynamic, reliable receiving playmakers. They really need this to tip the balance in their favor. They need to create multiple threats that defensive coordinators are scared of. When you can do this, an offense can then dictate to the defense because the defense can no longer afford to key the safety and the MLB on stopping the run or blitzing. Ideally, I would like the Bills to go to a Flood / Multiple WR scheme like Alabama, Oklahoma, and KC, but I am not holding my breath. However, one-step towards that goal would be to utilize more of the horizontal route tree. The Bills last year were predominantly a vertical route offense. I don't think they utilized the slant and dig routes nearly enough to get some of their quick fast guys open. I also think this type of scheme would benefit Josh quite a bit while he sorts out the deep pass. He was very good at these routes in college.
• Spread the ball around to multiple playmakers. Offenses that depend on a star player on offense can be great for fantasy owners, but it makes the team very beatable against good defenses.
• Beat the blitz with more screens and quick passes
• At RB, I really prefer the RB-by-committee approach. Singletary is the starter, but he is not a dominant starter in the NFL. He benefitted greatly by Frank Gore wearing down the defense. With a 4.6 40 he needs the benefit of some rest to keep his legs fresh. In order for a RB rotation to work (in my opinion) all of the RBs in this committee need to be legit starting RBs. They also need to be legit pass catchers. It does not work to have RBs that are great at running, but cannot catch or visa versa. If they all have those two traits, then it does not matter if they are big or small.
• I would also like to replace the FB with an H-back or a legitimate RB that can also block. I just don't see the value of taking up a roster spot for a FB. An H-Back can block, but can also be a much better receiving threat than the FB. I like what SF is doing with Kyle Juszczyk. He is a multiple threat as a runner, receiver, and a blocker.

"Team Needs" Strategy:

Team "Needs" must also be considered in the overall team building strategy. However, the plan is to try and fill the major needs in free agency so that when it comes to the draft, the Bills do not have to reach for a player solely due to need. However, the reality is that there will always be some level of need in every draft pick, but the hope is that the "need" is based in more long-term strategy and not based in an immediate desperation "need".

For the Bills this offseason (like every season), they have needs on both sides of the ball. However, I think they need to focus their top FAs and top draft picks on the offensive side of the ball. They are way under-talented on the offensive side of the ball compared to the defense. If the Bills don't surround Josh with top-end talent on the OL, WR, TE, and RB, then this whole experiment with Josh will be a waste and they will have to start over from square one. QBs only have a small window to prove that they are a franchise QB before the team and the fans give up on him. If we don't fill that need quickly, then all of the players that we traded away and all of the draft picks that we used to trade up for him will be wasted. It doesn't mean that we have to ignore the defense, but the priority is to fix the offense. I know this sounds desperate, but I think the Bills can accomplish it without being desperate and with the draft picks and the cap space that they have.

With the main wave of free agency done, here are the remaining holes that I perceive in the team listed in a rough order of importance...

Needs:

Need a full-time starter:

• None

Need a rotational starter:

• RB - Devin Singletary is the only true starter, but he is not an unconditional dominant starter. He needs to be in a rotation to maximize his skills... in my opinion. Yeldon is a nice pass-catcher and an OK runner. Wade may surprise, but we cannot count on him being part of the rotation. Taiwan Jones is a special teamer. Ideally, I want 3 RBs for the rotation. So, I need 1 legit starting RB.

Wants:

Want to replace an existing full-time starter:

• CB - Wallace is an OK starter. He is slower than most starting DBs and is a bit of a liability in man-to-man. Norman is older, slower, and also a liability in man-to-man. Having two slow, zone-DBs on the team just doesn't make sense. The Norman signing was a waste of $... in my opinion. I am listing this position as a "want", but this is a borderline "need". The disappointing thing is that this would barely be a "want" if they would have signed a guy like Kevin Johnson instead of Josh Norman. At least KJ brought a different skillset to the position that would allow them to continue to rotate based on scheme and matchup. Now they have two limited zone DBs with no option for man-to-man schemes. Even though our base defense is a zone coverage scheme, we used man coverage quite a lot last year. There were several games last year where we let Tredavious travel with the top WR. This left Wallace in man-to-man quite a bit (remember the Cleveland game last year? Landry ate him up). The only way the Norman signing is made better is if he can take over the nickel CB position or we trade him for some draft picks at the end of camp. Cam Lewis may surprise, but we cannot count on him being an NFL starter at outside CB. As a result, I want to get a starting CB that is good at both zone and man coverage.
• RT - We have two starting OTs. However, Ford was not great at RT. He was not awful either. Actually, he was pretty darn good considering he only had one year of OT experience in college. He struggled with JJ Watt, but he handled TJ Watt and Von Miller rather well. That said, if you watched his film in college, you would see that he is a really, really good OG. Spain is smart and good at pass protection, but he was not the mauler that we had hoped when we signed him and he is a liability on the move. Everyone (including me) loves the attitude and fire of Feliciano, but he is good, not great. As a result, I would love to move Ford to OG. The one condition that I would put on this WANT is that I would only replace Ford if we can get a top-end talent to replace him at RT. I would not stretch at this position for an athletically limited prospect with a ceiling as a swing tackle. We already have those on the roster. Nsekhe was our best O-lineman last year... in my opinion, but he is getting older and has had injury concerns. A rotation (like we did last year) with Nsekhe and a young stud would be perfect. It would be like two picks in one. You would get a Pro Bowl OG along with a top RT prospect.
• P - Corey has improved, but he is so inconsistent. It also came out last year that his holding was a huge liability in the kicking game. I would really like to add serious competition to this position.

Want to replace an existing rotational starter:

• RB - I don't view Yeldon as an ideal rotational RB. He is OK, but he is an awkward vertical runner with low-contact balance and fumble issues. I would like to replace him as the 3rd RB in the rotation.
• WR - We have WR#1-3 with Diggs, Brown, and Beasley, but this team will run 4 and 5 WR sets from time to time. Foster could be that guy. He has the size and athleticism to be a starter in this league, but for some reason he has either been in the dog house or he just can't grasp the position. Isaiah McKenzie was left to go out into FA. He is a nice slot and gadget guy. Duke is super slow and has drop issues. So, I want to add someone for competition at this spot. Ideally, I would want a player that has size, speed and versatility so that they could do multiple roles in the offense.
• TE - We have one promising, but incomplete starter. Outside of that, this position is loaded with JAGs. Smith is a blocker only (albeit a very good one). Croom is promising, but still a huge unknown. He is the only one on the roster besides Knox with the athletic profile of a receiving threat. Kroft is solid, but not great. Sweeney is limited athletically, so his future is limited to be Smith's replacement. As a result, I would like to add another prospect to this group.

Want to build up depth:

• Safety - Poyer and Hyde are awesome. Jaquan Johnson is a nice special teams player, but his is limited athletically for a full-time starter role in the NFL. Dean Marlowe is nice, but nothing special. I think we are very exposed at depth at this position if Poyer or Hyde go down. So, I want to add some youth with skills to be a starter some day
• LB - AJ Klein was signed to replace Lorenzo and we have Vosean Joseph as depth. However, I am not sold on either of these guys. Klein is more of an MLB than he is an OLB. They paid him as the starter, but I am not sure. Corey Thompson is OK as a backup, but I would like to add some competition to this spot.

Want to build up youth at a position:

• Edge - This position has starters and even backups. However, Hughes, Murphy, and Addison are old. Quinton Jefferson is more of a hybrid DE/DT. Bam Johnson and Mike Love are nice but unproven. I would like to get a young prospect that may develop into a starter at this position.
• OG/C - This position is set with starters and even backups. But there aren't any young prospects outside of Bates.

Even though the Bills did an OK job at filling holes in FA (minus the Josh Norman signing and my concerns about Diggs... OK... OK... I am moving on... ), the final count is 1 need and 10 wants and only 7 draft picks. The good news is that none of these are glaring pressing needs, so the team can do a true Strategic BPA with this upcoming draft. Hmm... this will be interesting!

Summary:

I hope this post clearly laid out my strategy for an offseason plan. I think if a team focuses on their strategy, the picks will just fall out naturally. If their favorite player is taken in FA or the draft then they will have the plan to guide them to the next best pick. I think my philosophies on building a team are pretty close to OBD. I think I am more aggressive about the need for multiple playmakers in the offensive scheme where I think they want more traditional balance in the offense. I am pretty sure that I value the horizontal and slant routes more than the Bills. Before the Diggs trade, I would have said that they value culture more than me, but now I think it is the other way around. I think I am more of a purist about the RB-by-committee than the Bills. I am not sure they think that they need another equal or better RB than SIngletary. Like I said earlier, everyone has a different philosophy on what "Best" means: "Best" player, "Best" strategy, "Best" scheme. What is "Best" to you?