Thurman#1

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.

Yeah, he or Night Train Lane would have been my guesses. I forgot Krause. The great point from the article is that a lot of the reason is how much shorter and more precise the passing game has become. In the Rams locker room following their Week 1 win against Carolina, Talib and fellow cornerback Marcus Peters, who has the most interceptions in the league since 2015 (now at 23 after a pick-six in Week 4), got into a spirited debate about whether the latter could ever catch Krause’s record. “It’s impossible!,” Talib shouted. “No, no, no,” Peters replied. “You trippin, bro. I got 22 right now.” “Yeah, you in Year 5,” Talib says. “Listen…” “I’m on pace to do 60!,” Peters interjects. “Then you’re 21 off 81!,” Talib exclaims. Krause, meanwhile, sits comfortably with his unattainable record.

Among other things, that nearly all NFL teams buy PFF data. The reason they do so is that they value it.

NO, based on this, we're trading straight up ... based only on how people have played the last few weeks. And nobody would make trades based only on that. PFF doesn't throw in very very obvious stuff like the fact that Allen has a major excuse for problems that Mariota doesn't have in that Allen has played - what? 17 games? Plus salary, when someone will get a 2nd contract ... there are thousands of other factors. Nobody would base trades on only this. PFF is only talking about effectiveness so far this season.

Sure, maybe two or three percent of plays will be right on the line, as far as accurate. Hard to call. The vast majority, though, could be agreed on by most reasonable people. And nearly every NFL team buys PFF's data. They wouldn't do that if PFF wasn't damn good at what they do.

PFF is good. Not perfect, of course, but they're very good, and they don't tailor the stats to what they want to find. Now, do the watchers find their perceptions are interfered with somewhat by their preconceptions. Yup. Same as every single human being in the history of history, but PFF still does a good job.

Shouldn't be. Win/loss is a team stat, not a QB stat. IMO that's a bit low for Josh. But not horrifically low. He's been consistently inconsistent.

Too early to say, but it's been good for both sides. My sympathies are usually with the injured person. They know better than doctors if they're still suffering symptoms. Glenn was a good teammate here. Concussions are serious business, and Cincy should back down a bit. A second opinion is a very very reasonable thing.

Really interesting article, I thought. https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/10/02/nfl-interception-rate-decline And it made me wonder who has the record for most INTs in a year in the last ten years and it's what I thought: ... a five-way tie with nine INTs between 2012 Tim Jennings and four guys in 2009, Asante Samuel, Darren Sharper, Charles Woodson, and the legendary Jairus Byrd. One of the most interesting bits is that the career INT leader is a record that may never be broken, it's the DiMaggio's 56 hits record of football. EDIT: Yeah, it's Krause, with 81. Nice call for those who knew. I didn't till I read this excellent article. Excerpt: "Of all the great NFL records, sneakily the most unattainable is the interceptions crown. Rod Woodson played 17 years and still came up 11 picks short of topping Krause. Charles Woodson, who has 65 career interceptions, would have had to duplicate his two best seasons and tack those on to his 18-year career to beat out Krause. Aqib Talib, the 12-year corner for the Rams, is the NFL’s active leader in interceptions—with 35 career picks, he’s tied for 128th on the all-time list." Another excerpt: “The schemes and stuff are more detailed. It’s elevated,” Talib says. “Back when he had 81 picks, guys were probably running fades and slants. There was probably one receiver in his three-point stance. The receivers are bigger and faster and the quarterbacks, the game is getting way more detailed. We have to be that much sharper.” The three-point stance is an exaggeration, but it’s inarguable that the passing-game concepts are far more precise today than ever before. The average yards per completion have decreased in the modern era, though not as steadily as the interception rate. Offenses have replaced handoffs with screen passes. The first-down run has turned into a quick hitch on first-and-10. There are quick throws to the flat and RPOs where “you’re throwing only high percentage short passes so not even if it’s not a successful play it’s probably not an interception,” Brown says.

Equally, though ... why? Your expectation is actually a guess. And a very optimistic one. Nothing wrong with that, except confusing guesses with something that should happen. It could happen. The odds are well against it. Yeah, a much more reasonable guess.

He's always pretty classy. I don't see this particularly as classy. Normal and positive, really. And for that matter, Zay was classy too, this year and generally, outside of his breakdown.