Thurman#1

Not everything, hell, not even this evidence suggests that Dorsey was a major issue for this. It just doesn't. Hi first very significant rise in percentage, a jump of 0.6 percent, happened under Daboll. Between Daboll's third and fourth years, Allen went from 7th best in the league at 1.6% to 18th best. Again, under Daboll, a major drop. If Dorsey were the problem, his first year, when he took over from Daboll would see a major jump. But that's not what happened. He only got 0.2% worse. The difference between Dorsey's first and second years would not be significant if Dorsey were the main part of the problem. But in fact he went up 0.5%. What all this tells us is that the ups and downs do NOT correlate well at all with the difference between Daboll and Dorsey. It tells us that it's likely something else. There's likely some effect from the OC, absolutely. But the biggest changes happened between two years when Daboll was coordinator and then again between two years when Dorsey was. Something else is at play. Perhaps several things. I have a guess, myself. Remember early in his career, when in the offseason Josh would go to work on improving one aspect of his game that needed work? Remember? One year it was deep ball accuracy, which improved greatly the next year. The year before that it was mechanics and footwork and using the turn of his torso to generate force. After that it was touch and accuracy on short passes, which also greatly improved. Remember that? What did he work on the last couple of offseasons? We didn't hear much of anything. In his interview with that Dallas podcast he said this offseason he's just relaxing, getting healthy. Whisky was mentioned. This was the best way for him, he said. The switch in girlfriends was not really mentioned, but dating a movie star isn't concentrating on touch and accuracy on short passes. Josh didn't used to get out-worked. These days, he is. Again, the difference between Daboll's last year and Dorsey's first was statistically pretty much insignificant. 2.3% and 2.5%. If that were where the problem was, that's where we'd see the effects hit. We don't.

More like 2.0%, honestly. 2.5% is still pretty bad these days.

Fair enough that the last two games he's been better. That's a positive trend. It makes me hopeful. But it's really not safe to say that Dorsey is a big reason for that. The uptrend had started the year before Dorsey took over. 2.3%, his figure in Daboll's last year, was Allen's worst under Daboll barring Allen's rookie year. And the difference between Daboll's last year and Dorsey's first was the difference between 2.3% and 2.5%. Not a significant difference. So no, it's not safe to say that. It's very possible that it's a factor, but equally possible the uptick is something else, perhaps a more relaxed way of handling the off-season than he had earlier, for instance. Not saying that's it, but it's one of a number of possibilities among possible major factors. And Dorsey is one of those.

Spoiler alert: YES. 2.5% last year. That's high. Seriously high. 25th best ranking in the NFL in 2022 in terms of INT percentage. Only 34 players qualifed for the list by having 200 or more attempts. 25th out of 34. The guys behind Josh that year? Stafford, Carr, Matt Ryan, Zach Wilson, Mariota, Davis Mills, Wentz, Justin Fields and Dak dead last. Now the guys just ahead of him, from 2.2% and back to Josh? Aaron Rodgers having a down year. Russ Wilson having a catastrophic year. Kenny Pickett, Taylor Heinicke, Andy Dalton, Baker Mayfield and Mac Jones. Again, those are the guys ABOVE Josh. 3.0% this year. That's terrible. No kidding, it's really bad. Seriously high. 29th best ranking in the NFL in 2022 in terms of INT percentage. Only 35 guys have qualified with the 200 attempts threshold this year so far. The guys behind Josh? Aidan O'Connell, Mac Jones, Daniel Jones, Ryan Tannehill, Tyson Bagent and Jimmy Garoppolo. How does that list look? And the ten guys immediately ABOVE Josh this year, in order from best to worst? Bryce Young, Deshaun Watson, Minshew, Josh Dobbs, Stafford, Tagovailoa, Sam Howell, Jordan Love, Justin Fields, Jalen Hurts and Desmond Ridder. There's a QB or two there who are good, but mostly dross. So, yeah, Allen is having too many INTs the last couple of years. He just is. Yeah, he managed to do quite a bit better from 2019 to 2021, at 2.0%, 1.7% and 2.3%. Those much better years keep his career numbers looking reasonable. But right now he's just not avoiding INTs like he should.

The "hindsight is 20/20" comments show you that McDermott is saying, "it's not my fault"? No offense, but that's on you. That just shows your confirmation bias. "Hindsight is 20/20" is simple truth. It means nobody can see the future perfectly. You're assuming that he meant, "and therefore I'm blameless." But you make that assumption only because you don't like the guy. He could just as easily have meant, "so I can learn from the results of my actions there," as what you're saying. McDermott is precisely correct that when a judgment turns out to be wrong, far more people "knew" it was wrong afterwards than said so at the time. In your example, I'm sure you're right that 3/4s of the people in the room in the room at the time suddenly remember later how they really had opposed things even though generally when 3/4s of the people at the time actually speak up and say they're wrong, most decisions - not all, but most - are affected and re-thought. McDermott, by all accounts, listens and considers opinions. He doesn't always change his mind, but he More, the fact that we lost doesn't mean we would've won if the decision had been different. We might easily have lost by more and in less time. I didn't like either of those decisions, myself. But they're very defensible. As is the notion that if Cook makes the catch and the two FGs are made, and Allen doesn't throw that INT (though he had a terrific game overall) there is a wildly different result.

Yeah. The way things are running themselves based on the way Belichick - the GOAT - created his foundation. And nobody's saying that McD doesn't have anything to do with it. He deserves his share of the blame. Oh, wait, no, I forgot, he deserves all of it. It's all his fault. I totally forgot the conventional wisdom. When things go well, it's because we've got Allen. But when they're bad, it's because we've got McDermott. How could I have forgotten?

He was open. The situation was ambiguous. They had time for a route involving cuts on that very play.

Those years he went through those head coaches and GMs for the Sabres ... how many of those switches came when the Sabres had made the playoffs four years in a row and consistently been considered a Cup contender? Yeah, he is willing to make changes. When it makes sense.

Bar's a lot lower than that. He could go, particularly if they fall apart down the stretch. But if they don't, he's likely to be here for at least another year. And while that win was tremendously painful, the Bills looked like an excellent team. What words did you hear that you are twisting enough that they somehow come to mean, "It's not my fault," to you?

The Bills could draft anywhere between 32 and probably #8. Way too early to even reasonably guess. Getting to cap won't be particularly difficult. But yeah, wildly expensive FAs aren't going to be on the menu this year. Nah. They really don't. I mean, it's theoretically possible, but not realistically. And we certainly have some flexibility, but very far from a ton. Spotrac has us 30th out of the 32 teams in cap space next year, $42M over the cap. OvertheCap has us 31st out of 32, with $29M over. Either way, not good. In 2025, OvertheCap and Spotrac both have us 29th.

All too true.

You really think the Dolphins will finish with 12 wins with the Ravens, Cowboys and us on their schedule? I don't. They're a team that habitually folds near the end of the year. They could turn that around but I'd have to see it. My guess is 10 or 11 wins. They could win 12. My guess is they won't. That would leave it up to us. A realistic scenario where the Bills are 11-6, the Fins are 12-5 and the Bills make the playoffs? There are tons of them. One? Fins 12-5 Bills 11-6 Browns 11-6 Texans 10-7 Steelers 10-7 Colts 10-7 Broncos 9-6 There are also plenty where we'd lose. That's generally the way theoreticals work, but we could very easily get in. Last year in the AFC, two Wild Card winners had 10 wins and none had 11. Same the year before and that's all the experience we have with 17 game seasons. Let's say that it's not just us but the Browns also who put up 11 for the first time this year. We're still in.

Oh, please. Yeah, I get it. It hurt. An awful lot. That doesn't mean we have to pretend the sky is falling. We've won plenty of close games in the McDermott era. Lost plenty also. Three seasons where we're over .500 in games won by seven or less, three seasons below and one season even at .500. 44.19% total. And 2 - 3 in the playoffs, which is statistically insignficant and close to .500.

The defense is very good, particularly with the injuries they've suffered. Not good enough yesterday, that's for sure. But damn good under the circumstances. It's just nonsense that it all comes down to that D. The offense, though really good the last two games, should absolutely share the blame. The two missed field goals were huge in this game as well. Does the D deserve a very significant share of the blame? Absolutely. Man, that was a painful loss.

Aaah, screwed up the link. I'll post again. I did screw up the link. I have now fixed it. But again, why would I explain it? You just go there and you watch Levi explain it. He knows better than me. Or you, by the way. Here's the link. I'll fix it in my post above as well. https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2022/5/3/23055147/code-of-conduct-okay-so-now-what-levi-wallace-john-fina

Kid yourself if you want. That's your right. My take doesn't matter squat. Know whose take does matter? The guy on the field. Wallace. Him. If you don't think he knows infinitely more than you do about what happened, you are flat-out kidding yourself. Which is what seems to be happening. Laughing because you think you know way more than me because I listened to a guy who knows far far more than you do ... that ain't far from the textbook definition of kidding yourself. You say you're all ears, but clearly that's not right. If it was, you'd have already heard what Wallace said about this. He explains with great specificity right there in the podcast I linked to exactly what the communication breakdown with Poyer was. This has been posted a million times here, but here it is again: https://www.buffalorumblings.com/2022/5/3/23055147/code-of-conduct-okay-so-now-what-levi-wallace-john-fina Again, what I think doesn't matter. I wasn't reporting on my opinion. I was telling you specifically what Levi has said, with great detail, right there on video, taking responsibility for the play, and explaining why it was the fault of the communication between he and Poyer. The interview comes after he's signed with Pittsburgh. It's great. The guy was playing intramural at Alabama, walks on and makes the team. Terrific guy. But, hey, why start listening to the facts now? Instead, ignore things that don't fit your narrative as so many here consistently choose to do.

Again, McD was not the reason for that loss. There is zero reason to think so. Levi Wallace made it plain they called the right play on D, but that the communication between himself and Poyer broke down and that resulted in that big hole for Kelce. It really was a great game by Davis and of course by Allen as well. I love what Brady said here. Clearly Davis wasn't the MVP, but equally he's doing a lot that goes under the radar and Brady is pointing that out and keeping the team together by spreading the praise. Good for him

Yes. He was.

They do. You felt the need to write this, as one of millions of examples. I felt the need to write also. I really don't like the guy. I hope he doesn't win another title. I'd love that. But this seems reasonable to me. I think he liked Wilson and really thought he'd do better given time to study and develop without the pressure. I'm not sure he's wrong.

Around 65%. https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-fourth-down-conversion-chart-rate-by-distance/vofkeub6xwms6imajxqkfipp 90% is a lot higher.

I don't think you can get under Kelce on that play. He's going to be about five inches above the ground, lower if you try to get under him. You can get as low, but I doubt you get under. A lot of the reason Philly's so good at this is that Kelce is really good at what needs to get done.

In key situations it really could make the difference. But yeah, you're right. We need to score, and not a little bit.

It has been stopped. "How the Detroit Lions stopped the Bears' Tush Push, and why it might matter come playoffs" https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2023/11/20/detroit-lions-stopped-chicago-bears-tush-push-play-philadelphia-eagles/71654436007/?gnt-cfr=1 The Commanders got Hurts to fumble, also. The problem is that the more you sell out and put in only huge defenders, the easier it is for Hurts to just sprint around the end instead. I'm sure they'd be perfectly happy to use that alternative if teams sold out enough.

This doesn't show PFF is questionable. Sometimes it's pretty subjective who got the tackle or sack, and whether the QB went down an inch behind the LOS or right at the LOS. If they have another opinion, it's fair enough. We should go with the official numbers, but worth looking at all of them for the sake of interest.

Not significantly. He's always been quite good.