Thurman#1

Yes. Good post.

It really is not ridiculous at all. Nor pathetic. And certainly not insulting in any sense of the word, that's absolute nonsense. You and I may not like it. But they're human. Humans aren't computers. They have bad days. Their emotions affect performance. They can't always perform as well as they'd like to. All of us, not just them. There isn't one of us hasn't had a bad day at an important time in our life. Still plenty of reason for us to be frustrated. And them too.

Why would this be a surprise to anyone? They talked about a lack of juice in the post-game presser, several of them. More, it was there to see. It wasn't all the problem, though. That's for sure. But it was part of it. They just didn't match up well. Would've been quite different with Von, Hyde and Tre playing at his normal level, IMO. They're also a different and lesser front seven without DaQuan Jones. They really really missed him. But the Bengals were a tough team playing well, and they match up with us really well.

Details, shmetails. The important thing is to have huge reaction quickly. Please, the coaches and the DLine didn't cost the Bills this game. Everyone did. Allen did. And the rest of the offense. And the defense. And the special teams. And the coaches. Everyone. Certainly the coaches and the DL had their part, but so did everyone else, every single person. Sparing the offense that scored ten points? Ridiculous. Only guy that came out of that mess looking good was DaQuan Jones, as we found out what life looks like without him.

Jeez, no thanks. Easiest road is the best road, especially with Von out and not helping to chase down Mahomes. I don't give them much chance though. They're better late in the year than they had been but not that much better.

No, they really won't. I mean, one or two maybe, but very few.

As noted before by others, it kinda is normal when the defense gives up on safety help and decides instead to spend a lot of the game blitzing enough guys that they outnumbered the blockers. And simultaneously clogging up the short routes. Miami played a somewhat similar plan the first game this year and totally opposite in game two. They arranged it so that the best strategy for the Bills was often holding the ball long enough to see whether the guy running a long route managed to beat his CB and throwing it to him if he had. The Bills still scored 34. But the Miami D did an excellent job this week.

Allen had a great game, put a lot on the money but not nearly all of them. You look at that time when they ran Davis deep two times in a row. He was open both times. Bad throws (on lower percentage plays, as long passes are, of course) torpedoed both plays. On the first, Davis was ahead by a step and a half with zero safety help and Allen threw behind him, forcing Davis back into the coverage behind him and allowing the CB to make a play. The second time he again had a step with again zero safety help and Allen overthrew him by a couple of steps. You're certainly right that there were a few bad receiver plays as well, though.

Yes, an awful lot of this is Allen. But that's true also of every other great QB in the league, in league history, really. Having a great QB is huge. If we had an average QB we'd be a lot worse, probably pretty decent but not great. But saying that "none of it is because of playcalling or more importantly in game adjustments," is nonsense. You can't reasonably separate things like that. A horrendous play-caller - a Rick Dennison for example - absolutely could submarine things even with Allen on the field. Dorsey is good for a first-year guy, but certainly needs to do keep improving. Personally, I expect him to as he learns from his experience.

A lot of you seem not to have seen this, but the Beasley inteception didn't make it to him. The defender deflected it away. It was just good defense and a ball that unluckily angled right into a defender's hands. Cover 1 and the other serious film watchers are generally putting the blame on Josh on the long INT aimed at Brown, or at best that they share blame. Most seem to say that after looking at the film it's clear Romo was wrong about Brown being at fault, Cover1 particularly. Buscaglia says they "interpreted the space differently." Game planning and taking what the D was giving. With the Fins particularly, they were bringing the safeties up and blitzing, hoping the blitz would have Allen get balls out early to short routes which they would have well-covered. They were willing to give Allen shots at low-percentage long balls. And the Bills were pretty much expecting exactly that.

Blocking isn't about size. It's much more about want-to. Gesicki doesn't. If he did, he'd have done it by now.

$10M+ per year for a TE who can't block? They have shown no interest in paying anything much above vet min for TEs who can't block. And this isn't a year when they have a lot to spread around, especially after they deal with their own FAs they would like to re-sign.

IMO we haven't seen enough to be indicative of this. Two games isn't statistically significant. Could be a game plan thing. Could be a spy-related thing as StreetKings suggested above. Could just be situational luck. My guess is that he hasn't really changed his approach.

Miami averaged 2.1 YPC. I think the line did dominate them. Not really constantly one-on-one in the pass rush, but they did get pressure on him.

Next man up is anything but garbage. This year we lost Von, we lost Hyde, White missed a bunch of games, Phillips is missing some, Damar, Benford, Edmunds, Poyer missed games ... But we're still one of the three or four best defenses in the league. Next man up can work. But if it's next five men up, you're in some serious trouble, generally. That's what's so impressive about their season this year. I think you're right that it'll be a factor against Cincy. Hope so, anyway.

Not to mention his halftime interviews.

Von Miller. We do cash in once in a while. Just not lots and lots of times in a while. People keep saying this, that we can afford it. That's correct, but beside the point. I can afford a Lamborghini. As long as I don't mind jam-packing my credit cards and living under a bridge the next few years. The question is whether it would be good judgment to bring the guy in. It wouldn't. Yeah, if you re-structure a lot of guys you could keep rolling forward as long as you weaken yourself at other positions, same as I can pack the credit cards on the Lambo. Same thing with things you can rationalize. Sure you can. Same as I can rationalize that Lambo. Doesn't mean either one would be using good judgment. It's not just that we're $6M under the cap for next year. It's that we're only $19M over the cap (27th) for 2024 even with only 30 guys under contract yet for that year. Throw in Hopkins on top of it, especially if we were to re-sign him and we'd be under serious pressure and would have to start creating holes at other positions.

Yup! And I love your name.

What was fluky about that sack fumble? They got through easily and when that happens, you're at risk for precisely that, especially the way Allen was holding the ball there. That was far less a fluke and far more a fail. I mean, you can say the TD part of it was fluky but the sack fumble wasn't. I don't see how anyone could say the offense looked fantastic. They constantly put our D in terrible situations. More good than bad, and that's a key point, but fantastic? Nah. IMO if the offense was in fact best, it was more that there wasn't a lot of great offense in these six games. The defense on the other hand looked excellent.

He looks OK. Not special, but OK. Yeah, this exactly.

I see, it's a search you made on that site? Thanks very much. I really appreciate it. It's hard to see everything, as it's a subscription site. Hard to see how other teams compare at each distance category, for instance. But as far as statistical significance, the numbers are large enough in each of the four categories to be legitimately significant to a reasonable degree. Without comparison numbers to other teams it's hard to see the ultimate meaning, but ... Thanks for the link. As I say, I appreciate it.

They aren't "criticisms." "100%, I just personally would like to see the deep shots dialed back a bit This was not a reel to show how Allen made the wrong read every single time. Simply to show that Josh Allen has open options at various levels of the field (on both successful and unsuccessful plays)." - Mirsky, a bit further down the chain Says he's pushing back on the idea some are pushing that Allen is being forced to go long by Dorsey. Specifically, in one tweet, "Pushing back on the idea from people that Josh is forced to throw it deep bcuz of play calling or the way things are schemed up." - Mirsky again, a little further down the chain.

OL rankings are extremely subjective. Where are you getting this 27th number?

IMO there's a good chance that Brown's injury (ankle, I seem to remember?) is still holding him back. We'll see next year, but that seems likely. But there's not much excuse for Saffold. He just seems to have lost a half a step in pass pro.

I'd love to see these stats. I always wonder whether or not the numbers have much statistical significance. Where did you find them? Link?