Thurman#1

I think he had two or three genuinely bad plays, but overall the secondary was surprisingly solid. But a few bad plays that turned into big plays can - I would think - mess up a grade pretty good. For who was playing, I was really happy with the pass defense overall. But those two plays .... yikes. Still, the guy has played 265 career defensive snaps. He needs playing time but shows every sign of being able to handle it and improve as he gets more snaps.

The problem with the run game is the OL. Even Saquon wouldn't be consistently good behind this group the way they're playing now. And if they get better, the RB room now is good enough to play quite well, witness the last third of the season last year. Saquon's a great player again, that's good to see. But they wouldn't be able to sign him to a new contract after the season, so this year they'll need to give their current RBs plenty of chances to improve, to help them decide what to do with Singletary in the off-season and Moss the year after. In any case, the G-Men have $56M under the cap next year. Now that Saquon is back and still 25 years old, the Giants are very likely to want to keep him. The Bills on the other hand are already $7M over the cap next year according to Spotrac, with a number of important guys still to sign. Not to normal people, no. But confirmation bias is a deeply powerful handicap to clear thinking. When you're already convinced of something, plenty of clear and logical evidence it's wrong won't convince you. Singletary was 6th in the league last year at Broken + Missed Tackles Forced %, with 11.2%. Only Javonte Williams, Rhamondre Stevenson, James Conner, Michael Carter and D'Onta Foreman were better. https://www.fantasypros.com/2022/07/rb-broken-plus-missed-tackles-forced-percentage-analysis-2022-fantasy-football-javonte-williams-elijah-mitchell-ezekiel-elliott/ And Singletary is killing it again this year in forcing broken and missed tackles. https://www.rotoballer.com/2022-running-back-stat-busts-missed-tackles-forced/995609 But when you have an idea absolutely planted in your brain you don't let facts get in the way of things. Looking at what some people get from that clip where the guy is deliberately slowing himself running down the line to set the edge should make the same point. But for some, it won't. Nothing will. Some people pick a hill to die on and never notice that it's actually a valley.

Yup. Insane defense, particularly that year. McMahon was one of those very very few Trent Dilfer types that win a Super Bowl despite being a real game manager type about once a decade or so.

Yup. That's how I've watched the games for years now here in Japan. The games are archived, so you can watch them anytime later (1:00 games in the Japan time zone start at 2:00 a.m., 3:00 a.m. after daylight savings starts). You get all-22 view of every play. It's expensive but very very worth it.

Yeah, because McMahon was such a great QB. I mean, he had 15 TDs that year and 11 INTs. 56.9% completions. 82.6 passer rating. Guy was Josh Allen before Josh himself. Sorry for the sarcasm. Looked like you probably had a bit of sarcasm in there as well. No reason to think da Bears would have scored 41 points if he'd been there. I mean, it's not impossible, but it's not like a guy, McMahon, who averaged 184 passing yards and less than a touchdown per game that year, was likely to explode that day. Chicago actually got more than their average number of yards and passing TDs that day. The problem was 3 TDs, and one of those was thrown by McMahon before he came out after throwing six passes for 0 TDs, one INT, two sacks and 42 yards. The reason that Bears team was terrific was the defense, which didn't play that well that game. Miami scored 38 points that game and nobody else scored more than 28 against them that year. Hell, including the Fins, only three teams reached 20 points against them that year. The Fins simply did a terrific job that day. Can we say the Bears would have done better if they hadn't had a key injury? Yeah, maybe, better, but 17 points better? Same with us yesterday, we'd have done better w/out so many injuries. Except we had way more injuries yesterday, particularly including heat problems, than the Bears did back then. Our Miami game this week was historic in terms of injury, one of the larger numbers anyone will ever see.

Yes, both teams played in it, but one team was in blue shirts soaking up the sun and one was in white. One was on a bench in the shade, the other in the sun. And one was acclimated to WNY temp and climate and the other to Florida. There are some major differences there. And Barley is right, only one team per year does NOT spend the next year obsessing on whatever it was that cost them the Lombardi. Every team has that one or two losses they think made the difference, even the 18-1 Pats, though for them that one loss was the actual Super Bowl game. My guess is that this won't be that game for us, anymore than the first Pats game last year, at the Ralph with the insane wind, is the one we focused on last year.

Some catches were easy. Some weren't. He's made some very nice catches while here, as this shows: The Bills also love that he's a terrific pass blocker. I'd like to see Cooke too. All of them, really, but the OL has not been providing opportunities so far this year.

You asked a question. I answered it, as did several others here. And then you revealed your unwillingness to listen to answers. This is a hate thread whose title should be something more like, "Wah, wah, I don't like Zach Moss." Fine, whatever. You want to explain away the facts that don't fit your position. Again, whatever. You won't understand the world as well as people who try to look at all the available information, but that's your privilege.

People who ignore information are genuinely stupid. Particularly when that information that has a very real effect on the question you're looking at. Injuries do. And you have to ignore reality to say that Moss has regressed every year. A guy who is running at a 6.0 YPC pace right now behind an OL that is not blocking the run well is not suffering from regression. You're acting as if your opinion is a fact here. And it's not even a particularly good opinion in this case. He does offer something Singletary doesn't. Power in short yardage situations. The fact you don't see it says more about you than about Moss. You don't like him? Fine, whatever. We all like and dislike different players for different reasons. But that doesn't mean ignoring a lot of things about him makes any sense.

Singletary is a very good back. Not elite, or close. But very solid. The guy has put up 4.7 YPC despite running behind OLs with issues for a lot of his time here. When the OL came around late last year Singletary was able to show himself as the very good back that he is. And you're right about the OL. This is a new scheme and the OL had very little time to gel this preseason with injuries. Joe B. took a look at yards before contact for Bills RBs this year and found they're getting hit very very early. The OL is having problems. Hopefully things will get better as the year proceeds.

He was injured last year. And if you take away the best 10% or so of their runs, nearly every RB will have much worse stats. You don't take away his best run. You look at what he's done. All of it. And the Peterman comparison is genuinely stupid. Moss has already had one good year and now a start of another one.

It's called ignorance that as a coach you have extra information and you use it? Um, no. It's called ignorance if you don't have that information and think you know more than the people who do have it. He's more of a hammer and a short yardage back than Singletary. And three turnovers over three years isn't statistically significant with his volume. They think you're wrong. So do I. And it doesn't really make sense that he hasn't added any contributions. He managed 4.3 YPC as a rookie. That shows a guy who can contribute. So does 78 yards in 13 attempts this year.

By doing well in year one, fighting through an injury last year and by winning the coaches' confidence. The long run yesterday can't have hurt. And the blame yesterday should be spread around. The coaches get their share but most was on flukes, horrendous weather and injuries. The players get some but that happens in situations that abnormal and unhealthy. The coaches get a bit but their share yesterday was not that large.

You're kidding, right? They did prepare, but there just isn't much you can do. Two separate readings of 120 and 123 were recorded on the field that I've seen, 123 on the broadcast and 120 from Dan on BillsPlus. And we were wearing blue and the bench was in the sun.

Yup. Three new OLs including Doyle at guard, where he had never played a snap.

It was just turning from 0:10 to 0:09 when he went down. He got his knee off the ground at 0:08. He ran towards the middle of the field and at 0:05, he threw it to the ref. At 0:04, the ref had it, but he was about halfway between the numbers and the hashes., and the Bills were still moving and couldn't know where to line up since the ball was still in the ref's hand. He moved quickly through a group of players and put it down at 0:01. Just not enough time. Sometimes 0:09 is enough, but McKenzie was way over by the sidelines and had a crowd to get through. Yeah, that was a killer.

Saw on Buffalo Plus that thermometers on the field were reading 120. That's insane!! But yeah, players gotta execute. This was a team loss. Plenty of blame to go around and a bunch of very weird bounces and such besides.

The measurable objective criteria you're most likely referring to are often either small potatoes, mostly old info. Am I wrong? Here's measurable objective criteria, his teams win more than they lose. They've gotten better. And not by a little. And you're right I'm focused on the big picture. That's where everyone should focus, IMO. I wouldn't mind if they got someone in to take over challenges. But that's the old info. He started out doing pretty badly in challenges and he's been fine the last year or two. Um, yeah. And sometimes factoring in the excuses is what gives you the right viewpoint. The Bills shouldn't be saying this, it's not the productive way for the people in the action to look at things. But we're not players, we can look at things realistically. And the injuries and in particular the heat problems had a massive impact on this game, the way the wind did in the first Pats game last year.

Um, yeah, fair enough. Just in your OP you called a bunch of things indefensible that are very defensible, and dug deep into scapegoat territory by blaming McDermott for several things that he's not particularly to blame for. He's far from perfect, as I'm sure he'd tell you. Needs to keep improving as I'm sure he'd agree. But he's one of the best coaches in the league.

The thinking. Knee-jerk, lazy, find the scapegoat and blame him as loud as you can thinking.

Says the man on a day when Belichick used a timeout at 10:00 in the 2nd corner for no tactical reason. Plenty of times TOs are used for great reasons that fans aren't privy to. Sometimes not. Spending a timeout can cause problems down the road. Or not. Plenty of times the problem at hand is as bad or worse than what will come up down the road. McDermott's fine about TOs. Not a big problem of his.

That is correct, which is unusual for someone who started such a lazy and ridiculous thread. McDermott being good is what makes McDermott being good. It's more complex than that, of course, and I expressed it as it's own logical fallacy. But the point is true. The reason people say in overwhelming numbers that McDermott is good is that he does good things for the team, things good coaches do. In far larger numbers than the bad things he does. No coach is perfect. McDermott is one of the best in the league. I haven't been here after the game till just now, so many people have already probably said this and things like it. But down the road this game will almost surely be seen as this year's version of the first Pats game last year when the conditions had a far out-sized effect on the game and made it a bizarre outlier.

This is a dumb thread. Coaching wasn't the problem.

Neither was the slightest bit of a problem. The problems happened on the field with the heat and the cramping, the injuries and the missed opportunities. Dorsey was in the coaches box, probably feeling the cameras would be elsewhere. Who cares?

Nonsense that this was "completely ignored." We drafted Jaquan Johnson in the 6th. And Damar Hamlin in the 6th I mean, maybe we could have thrown a bit more into it. I mean, they could have drafted a 5th rounder instead of a 6th. A 5th rounder like Micah Hyde, maybe. Or a 7th rounder like Poyer. You don't like these new guys. Fair enough. But they didn't ignore the position. They just appear to have a very different view than you do about how good the backups are. We'll see who's right as the youngsters start to get some experience.