Thurman#1

Most 300 yard games come in games where there are a lot of pass attempts. The Bills are well below average in attempts per game. And very few 300 yard come to QBs hitting none of their passes over 30 air yards yet this year. Which is Josh. He was 0 for 8 in over 30 air yard passes for the bye week, and I think after Miami, that's 0 for 9. https://theathletic.com/1277203/2019/10/08/zay-jones-trade-josh-allens-deep-ball-and-playoff-chances-thoughts-on-the-bills-at-the-bye/ You need chunk plays or to pass a lot. Neither is happening here.

Enough with the wins as a QB stat. They aren't. Wins and losses are a team stat. Judging a QB by whether a kicker nails a last-minute potential game-winner, or whether an MLB manages a drive-ending tackle or a CB catches or drops a potential pick-six ... it's just stupid. And more, Fourth Quarter Comebacks and Game-Winning Drives are wildly affected by circumstances. As has been pointed out many times before, Aaron Rodgers has averaged one 4th Quarter comeback per year. Exactly 1.0. Is it because he's not clutch? Or is it because the Packers are usually ahead going into the final quarter when he's playing QB? 1.0 4th quarter comebacks per year and around 1.3 Game Winning Drives per year. Rodgers has few of these because of the circumstances. Those stats are extremely dependent on situation and context. A better pair of stats would be something along the lines of: GWD percentage = Game-Winning Drives / Game-Winning Drive Chances and 4QC percentage = 4th Quarter Comebacks / 4th Quarter Comeback Chances But nobody's going to sift through this and check the situations for all the games and do the math for all the quarterbacks. Me either.

Not a single receiver in the league is getting 12 targets a game, and only four are getting 10 or over. https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/reports/targets/wr.php On a team that is 18th in the league in pass attempts, they're throwing to Brown a lot. We're one of the run-heavier teams in the league (10th highest run:pass percentage) and that will only help Allen.

It always depends on how you use the phrase. Some people by a #1 mean what is often called "a true #1," generally a top 5 to 10 guy who consistently draws double teams and is obviously among the best in the league. Brown isn't one of those guys. But if you mean a guy who's the best WR on his team and is in the top 32 WRs in the league, he's absolutely doing that. He was an excellent pickup and seems to be among the top 20 or so in the league.

Makes total sense.

The amount of film? Yeah, um, no. They don't film games. And as for the details of what they're buying, great. If this isn't a guess, I'd love to see your link to the details of what the teams are buying.

If there's one thing that should be obvious from watching field goals this year it should be that they aren't automatic, even the close ones. Pressuring a FG isn't wasted effort. Fair enough that they should have been anticipating at least the possibility of a fake, though.

Nonsense. You're far from spot on here. Tre buries his shoulder in the ball carrier's hip, but he's coming at him from the side, not the front, which means he can't stop his momentum. His primary responsibility here was holding the edge, then making the tackle. In holding the edge he couldn't just run in with his hair on fire. It wasn't a great play but he did his job. Nobody was there to help, unfortunately.

NBC Sports has him with two. https://scores.nbcsports.com/fb/leaders.asp?type=Receiving&range=NFL&rank=232 STATS has the Bills with a total of six from all players. http://hosted.stats.com/fb/tmleaders.asp?type=Receiving&range=NFL&rank=232 ... with Knox with two. http://hosted.stats.com/fb/leaders.asp?type=Receiving&range=NFL&rank=232 The Washington Post has him with two. http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/leaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=232&type=Receiving Fox Sports appears to be the one you refer to, as they have him with six. But it's not all that clear. They appear to be a distant outlier.

Those two are still young enough that even in a rebuild you probably keep them. But with Rivers still 37 and playing well and $57K under the cap for next season, I wouldn't rebuild if I were them.

No. I like Evans a lot, but they want to build through the draft, and I want them to do exactly that. Evans is terrific, but that's too much for nearly anyone, IMO. If it were one 1st, I'd at least strongly consider it. But Tampa probably wants to keep him, as he's still very young. They probably won't let him go unless they can absolutely fleece someone in the trade. I wouldn't be surprised if the Bills bring someone in. I'd be quite surprised if they pay as much as one 1st or 2nd.

Yeah, PFF didn't mention kumquats either. Damn them. They leave so many things out. Whenever you hear, "they left out," it's almost always something not necessarily relevant, but important to the kibitzer. Same in this case, IMO. And it really doesn't make much sense to say PFF doesn't know what they're doing. They do. And the proof of that is that nearly every NFL team buys their materials. They wouldn't do that if they didn't know what they are doing. PFF gets a lot of crap here and most of it is of the "I don't like the message, and here's the messenger standing right here ... wait, I've got an idea" variety. Agreed that Allen is trending up a bit the last two games, but this last game was a lot better than the Pats game but not really a very good game for him. He still has a long way to go, looks to me.

Yeah, um, no. They're elite. They were very very good last year, and this year they're playing at an elite standard. That could change as the year goes on, of course, but right now it's not even a question. Third in yards, third in points and third in DVOA. That's elite.

Daboll? B+/A- He's been good. The line is doing well overall, but they're still gelling, and he's dealing with an inconsistent young QB getting to know new receivers and RBs.

I've gotta admit, when I first saw this play I felt the same thing but as I watched it again slowly, I didn't blame him much for this. The ball was never in his field of vision. More, when Fitzy was in his field of vision - and it was for a very brief instant as Phillips' momentum rolled him almost instantly right over Fitzy and put his back to him - Fitzy wasn't reacting, he was still stunned from the hit, his reaction hadn't started. Those pictures above seem to give him a chance to see it, but he was rolling, fast, towards the ball and away from Fitz in that sequence. That sequence is somewhat strangely ordered. In order those pictures went middle then top then bottom and it happened in an instant. When players look for a fumble it's usually because they see a loose ball or they see players looking for a loose ball, or they hear someone shout. I don't think he had any of these cues on this play. Looked like bad luck to me. Yeah, he rolled over on the ball, but players roll over on things constantly when making a tackle.

Agreed. Ridiculous of BadolBilz to blame Tre for not hitting him high when he had to fully extend to hit him in the hip on that fake kick. But Tre was coming in from the side, not head to head and so though he brought him down he couldn't stop his momentum. While not a great play, it wasn't a bad one either. You'd want the Bills DL to be gang tackling him there, and it didn't happen. It was a good call, surprising them.

I doubt it, myself. I think the reason everything feels so pronounced here is simply that we spend more time here. This is what fans do. But maybe you're right. I don't spend enough time elsewhere to compare the levels thoughtfully.

Trubisky isn't playing all that bad. 64.4% through five games. Five TDs and 2 INTs. The one thing you don't like is the very low YPA, that's cause for concern, and you'd ideally like to see more TDs, but he's playing OK game-manager ball right now. One problem is that a game manager QB is going to have problems when the run game is 29th at both yards per attempt and yards per game. The whole offense has been pretty bad. The eye test matters mostly to the owner of the eyes. What you see is your perception of what happens, it's not a fact. Which is why you can get two guys standing opposite of each other saying, "You didn't watch the games. He rocks." "No, YOU didn't watch the games. He sucks." As an example, you say the Bills had "fluky turnovers" in the Jets game by your eye test, but it's just as reasonable to say Allen had bad execution on those plays, botching a snap, throwing low and hard to Beasley when he didn't have to, holding the ball for too long on the sack fumble. And I'd argue that saying he was "in total command" says more about you and your state of mind than it does about Allen. He was inconsistent. Had some nice moments, but also some bad ones, and the Bills were very lucky the Jets gave up four points on a missed extra point and a missed field goal in a one-point Bills win. I liked how Allen played at the end, but that he was NOT "in total command." And stats do matter. They are a reflection of what happens on the field. Do they give the whole picture? No, but they tell a lot. Plenty of Bills fans thought that "the eye test" had clearly shown them that Tyrod and Trent Edwards were going to be franchise QBs.One guy on here felt that "the eye test" told him that Tyrod was "near-elite," at one point and a clear franchise QB through most of his tenure here. In any case, Trubisky is still a young player. This is his third year. He could easily improve, especially if they put better players around him on offense. Of course, he also might not.

This. Fitzy has a long record of keeping bad teams in games until late ... and then throwing INTs. Every fan base does it, and for good reason. The Bills absolutely get credit for winning five of six. They could have lost the games and they didn't. But it's only reasonable to point out strength of schedule (either way) as a factor in record. Look at Pats coverage. They're getting less of this due to having blowouts rather than close games, but people are still pointing out the same thing. And again, for good reason.

Why not try .... if and only if it doesn't hurt future chances. They've made it clear that they want to build a consistent competitor. And if you're giving away a high pick you're doing that unless the guy you bring in is both a great fit in the locker room and young enough that he can be around for a while on top of excellent talent. I agree with Skurski ... the Kelvin Benjamin trade didn't work out, but it was a nice attempt. Giving up that kind of value for a guy with that kind of (potential but ultimately unrealized talent) effect on the field would be worth it, IMO. I don't expect them to send away a 1st or a 2nd, and I hope they don't.

Not seeing this at all. Josh played pretty well. And he and Daboll appear a nice match. Josh is still young, and has a lot to learn. Comparing him to the young Russell Wilson is missing that Wilson was much much more NFL-ready when he came in the league. And while our running game this year is pretty good, it doesn't compare to the Seattle version back then.

Opportunities haven't been the problem, as that Cover One video shows. Yikes. Hopefully they can improve things.

I'm sure this has already been mentioned, and for good reason, but again ... win-loss is simply not a QB stat. It's a team stat. The official name of the stat you're referring to is "TEAM record in games started by this QB (regular season)," my capitalization. Team record. I mean, why would you judge Josh Allen by how well Steven Hauschka plays? It doesn't make sense, and that's what you're doing, times 52, when you judge a QB by the team's win-loss record. You judge a QB by how well he plays QB. It shouldn't be that hard to remember this.

Beane did get rid of him for a reason. That reason seems to have been to get Josh Allen or another one of the top QBs that year.

I don't think that's fair at all, Hapless. In his first four years, Byrd played nearly every game. Every single game in year 3 and year 4. It was only in his fifth year, when tagged that he became careful. And why wouldn't you? When you have a foot injury in a contract year, would you play and put bad performances on film? Byrd was a team guy, playing on the same injury in year 4. But when the Bills tagged him, it only made sense not to play at less than full strength. I'd have done the same, rehabbing as hard as I could but protecting myself. The Saints got Byrd's best, as the Bills did the first four years, but he fit the Bills and didn't fit the Saints early and he hurt his back and was never the same after he got to N.O. And by the way, having Rob Ryan as your coordinator, as he did in the Big Easy, isn't the way to maximize your performance.