Thurman#1

It's the first game. If we see it continue, we'll know it's real. We're not there yet. It could easily have been something particular to the Rams, or even just to put a lot of runs on tape so teams have to prepare for it before they jigger the amount down for most of the rest of the season. No way to know this early. One of the problems is that Allen himself seems to love it. And he has a ton of say on what the Bills do at this point. I hope they adjust it down significantly. He'll always run when plays break down, it's part of why he's so very good. But I hope they really limit his planned runs. Too early to say right now. This team wants a title right now. This year. That will play into how they game plan. It'll be interesting. One thing I was disappointed not to see was sliding. One play in particular he got around 8 or 9 yards on a first down run (planned, if I remember right) and was met by two defenders. I was saying, "Go down, go down," and he just refused to do so, trying to smash his way to a 1st. Pick your spots at least, Josh!!

Um, OK. So, why did you say: When you say stuff like this, of course people are going to tell you about the actual facts about SB teams.

Yeah, hard to figure out why they kept trying using the strategy that got them 5.6 ypa versus the strategy that got them 2.4 ypc. Clearly a logician would tell you that we can see from those numbers that if they'd run more they have done much better.

No, you can't be sure about something like that, that's a guess. Might be correct. Might not. But we know that our run game was better in 2021 than in 2020, in YPA and in total yards. Yet Allen's passing was slightly better in 2020, and a signficantly higher INT percentage in 2021 despite the run game being quite a bit worse in total. Certainly there were other reasons for this it's not a great correlation. But that's the point. You can't assume that your imaginary alternate reality correlation will be true or even if they happened would be true through cause and effect. Um, no. 9 rushes by running backs, not 9 rushes. And numbers introduced by phrases like, "something like" are right out there as guesses. Guessed numbers wouldn't show anything anyway. What if they were higher? Lower? We have no idea what would have happened. All we really know is that the whole offense played awful, that the line was overwhelmed, and that when they did run, the backs the results sucked. Thinking those numbers showed they should run more makes no sense. They can't run and they can't pass and that means they should have run more and things would have been better? There's no logic there.

No, it wasn't. Again, when they tried to run, they were awful. Moss went 3 for 6 in that game and Singletary 6 for 16.

That was a lot of years ago. The game was different then. And you do NOT NEED a 1,000 yard rusher. You just don't. The Rams didn't have one last year, nor did they have an especially good run game. The Bucs did not have one the year before. The Chiefs best runner didn't reach 500 yards the year before when they won the Lombardi. You have to go back to the 2016 season to find a single Super Bowl champion with a 1,000 yard rusher on the team. That would not be true if you "need" a 1,000 yard runner. Improving any facet of the team will help results. But you can't improve every facet, not with the salary cap and the rise of parity. It's a balancing act, and you have to have priorities. Your run offense is a lower priority than the other three facets. It still helps to have a good one. But it helps a lot less than having a good passing offense and defense.

That was mostly just a crappy game by Allen and really the whole offense. Including the run game, by the way. Moss went 3 for 6 in that game and Singletary 6 for 16. Are we supposed to think that if we'd just kept running and making crappy gains the Jags would have thought that they needed to switch their defensive focus? The problem wasn't a lack of runs. It was a terrible game in all facets of the offensive game. Ah, said it better than I. Their DL killed our OL but nobody played well on that side of the ball.

No, they really do not support that at all. The Rams last year were 25th best at total run yards and 26th best at YPC. The 2020 Bucs were 28th best at run yards and 26th best at YPC. The 2019 Chiefs were 23rd in total run yards and 13th at YPC. On run defense? They were 26th best at total run yards allowed and 29th best at YPC allowed. Not only are they absolutely not vital but the last three SB winners have not been very good at one or both. That's a lot closer to immaterial than it is to vital. Being good at any phase of the game helps your team. But of the four phases, there are the two least vital.

"Hard-pressed to find a team with a good running game that doesn't win games," you say? No, not at all. It partly depends on what you call a good running game. Most yards? Most yards per carry? Most yards with QB runs eliminated? In any of these cases there are plenty of examples of teams with good run games that didn't win games. The 8-9 Bears last year were 4th in the league in run yards and first in YPC. The 7-10 Seahawks were 3rd in YPC and 11th in run yards. The 2020 8-8 Pats were 3rd in the league in rush yards and 8th in total yards. The 2020 4-11 Eagles were 3rd in the league in YPC and 9th in total yards. You wouldn't be hard-pressed by any means. It's not that uncommon. Hell, the 7-9 2016 Bills led the league in YPC and yards, #1 in both. Take out all of Tyrod's rushing yards and they'd still have been 3rd in the league in runs yards. Another problem, IMO, with your thesis here is that last year's Bills were quite good at running once they got Bates in place the second half of the year. Running and stopping the run are the two least-important facets of the game, with stopping the run being #3 and running being #4. Not that they're totally unimportant. They are not. But less important than passing and stopping the pass? Absolutely.

I don't see this as the media souring on him. They're just reporting a situation which doesn't look great and now hasn't for a couple of years. This is a rational response to what's going on. Belichick has earned a lot of respect and a lot of latitude, but this is their third year post-Brady and things don't look good.

It's really not. But that's life.

No, wait, we've been told on this very board that he's only a slot guy. I expect Kumerow to far out outsnap him on the outside.

Myself, I doubt it. But certainly possible.

Like the first half of the season or so. That's how McDermott tends to handle rookies. Most likely it's how they'll handle Cook as well. By the way, apparently Singletary was also not a guy who needed to "get some work" in the preseason. 12 total carries in his rookie preseason. 10 the next year. And 4 this year. Moss had 8 carries in his rookie preaseason and 7 last year. Yup, I think you guys are onto something. This isn't just something they do. It's a new top-secret ploy for Cook.

Nope.

Four QBs (including Peterman) threw passes for the Bills in games in 2018: Allen, Peterman, Derek Anderson and Barkley. Three in 2017: Tyrod, Peterman and Joe Webb. Three in 2016: Tyrod, Manuel and Cardale Jones. That's about as far as I was interested enough to go.

Disagree. They paid two LBs big money when they were in Carolina with a DC who has now become our head coach. They have no problem with that kind of valuing of the position. IMO he's got it right, that Oliver, Knox and Edmunds will be the priorities. But I think they'd love to find a way to keep Poyer if possible. Not sure it will be.

That's interesting. OverTheCap and Spotrac have quite different details for Keenum's contract. Spotrac lists the Browns contract as his latest, with no money guaranteed, and OverTheCap says the Bills signed him to a new contract. "Following a trade to the Bills, Case Keenum agreed to a new contract worth $3.5 million according to ESPN's Field Yates." They list $2M as guaranteed. Wonder which is true. Both have his salary at $3.5M, but the guarantees are quite different.

He's not as horribleas some here have said. If he were, there wouldn't be a spot for him in the NFL, on a roster or a practice squad. And there obviously is, as he's building a pretty long career. He had a nice game for us against the Jets a few years ago and subbed in in 2019 and arguably out-performed Josh in that game, three INTS for Josh against one for Barkley. Against NE, was it? You don't want him starting. But you can say the same about every 3rd string QB, nearly all of the 2nd stringers and a bunch of the 1st stringers around the league. Keenum has clearly been better. But as a great locker room guy, you get the benefit of that by giving him a practice squad spot. I don't agree with the OP.

Nonsense. Levy as a coach was terrific. As for the OP, it's far far far too early to know about Dorsey, either way. I'm hopeful.

Least of my worries. After White is back particularly I expect them to be a real strength as usual.

You're right, the salary is guaranteed. But they could still decide that they value the roster spot more than the money they would save. In that case they would of course try to trade him before cutting him, but might not find a taker. If no trade was available, they still might decide to cut him, but would not save money by doing so, as you correctly pointed out.

Barnwell's smart as hell. Watches all the games. And the article you mentioned did mention Daboll but did not mention him as the real hero or anything similar. Not that anyone has to agree with him, but he's extremely smart.

It's all just guesses. Might indeed be four games or more. Might also easily be fewer.

Great stuff, that must have been a terrific feeling.