JESSEFEFFER

That was so strange. Why take the bunny hop there? Uhg! It's kind of a good thing that so many players on the team can look in the mirror, point their finger and say uhg! about some of the plays they did not make in the game.

IMO, the IR designated to return needs to change to accommodate maintaining the quality of game day rosters. "....the NFL changed the IR with return designation so that you no longer have to designate the player who will get the designation at the time they are placed on the list. Now, teams can bring back any two players they've placed on IR at any time after the eight week mandate to be on the list has been met. Previously, if a team wanted to use the one return designation spot, they had to declare it when the player was placed on IR. Now, they can just see who is getting healthy quickly, and take them off IR after they’ve been on the list for eight weeks (or more). One constraint here is that a player must be on the 53-man roster in Week 1 to be eligible for the IR designation to return. That means, anyone who was placed on IR before roster cuts were made to trim the roster down to 53 players is not eligible." A positive test that runs the course through quarantine and an actual illness would last 4 weeks minimum? Ready to play again in 6 weeks maybe? Let's say this applies to 6 players over the course of 4 months. They should be IR'd and they should be eligible to return to the active roster when ready without restriction. Teams should not have to worry about designating only two for return to the roster on top of players who suffer a more typical physical injury. Reduce the time limit to 6 weeks and allow more than two to return.

Interesting. I should go back and find it. There are nice benefits to taking these shots even when you are struggling to connect on them. The plays are there to make and when they start hitting on them the offense will look much different. 400+ points.

Joe Marino had him ar #3 in the 2018 draft. The Bills were lucky he fell to a spot where they could trade up and get him.

It is a difficult thing to track a ball over one's shoulder while running full speed. For much of its flight the ball can be seen with only one eye. Most of us have a dominant eye as it is. Cole had one hit him in the helmet vs. the Jets and go through his hands vs. the Ravens and I think he has trouble seeing it so he can't really adjust to it. I haven't seen much of the video about Diggs but I suspect he might be elite at seeing it and adjusting to it. Probably far better at it than anyone running with him (the old mantra about DBs that if they could catch they would be WRs.) Once Josh and Stefon get to work, it may become obvious that all Josh has to is put it close, let Diggs track and adjust to it and make the DB look clueless. All of a sudden Josh is a more accurate thrower. PS I think John Brown is very good at it too and Foster seems shaky at it.

AND the one to JB vs. the Broncos and the one to Knox vs. Pats. He was definitely in a slump but showed signs of coming out of it late in the year. My theory is that it was a toxic brew of being conscious of not under throwing it for an int, battling with swirling wind conditions in home games and having too much variation in how he can get a ball 60+ yards down the field. For many their only choice is optimum angle and max velocity but for Josh there is a range of angles and launch velocities that he can use. I do not recall seeing/hearing about this problem at Wyoming, his rookie NFL year or during 2019 training camp reports. So I hope it was just a slump. I did have a suggestion for them. That technology used in the MLB and PGA coverage to track balls in flight would be great to have in a football practice. Give all their QBs immediate feedback on launch angles and velocities vs. time of flight and the ground the receiver covers. Find the variance and self calibrate.

He did that type of breakdown when he made the TT comp. He also said he was likely to be better than him.

One of the better analyses of Josh after year 2. Much better than the lame title suggests. Duh! The Tyrod Taylor comp is interesting but as I posted elsewhere he could have chosen 2014 or 2017 Cam Newton. He makes a balanced attempt to put his overall play in context within the offense and sets the stage for what needs to improve in 2020.

I do not think Devin gets enough goal to go carries to make him a FF stud. Josh's redzone running bleeds TDs from others and lowers his own passing TDs.

I get your point. Depth of target/lack of checkdowns, 10 or so drops above average, spikes/throwaway, 3 or 4 extra windy games. They all eat at completion %. He was 62+% in road games. If his work on shot plays pays off like I think it will, combined with roster improvements and better OL play, this offense should be at 400 or more points.

I think the injury and surgery are more problematic than others. Lisfranc can linger much longer and if it impacts his ability to run he may not be near as valuable.

Cam Newton had multiple seasons similar to Josh Allen's 2019. Most similar were Cam's 2014 and 2017. I did not realize how similar these would be. Maybe the Patriots staff gets more production from Cam and maybe Josh is ascending but this is certainly interesting.

We have only seen Barkley one time where he had a week to prepare as the starter and played with the 1st team offense around him. He played surprisingly well then and if the coaches think he is their best QB2 option then I am ok with it. There were years where Frank Reich's status as the #2 QB was the subject of much concern among the Bills fandom. He never looked good in the preseason and seemed to lack any outstanding trait(s) that would justify the organizational faith in him. His first start came in his 4th year with the team in 1989 against the 5-0 Rams on Monday Night Football and the offense sputtered most of the game. I remember Dierdorf(?) asking how a game that was such a clunker could get so good as he lead the team to 17 4th quarter points and they came from behind twice to earn the win. Then we kind of figured out why they kept him around. He went 3-0 in the games he started that year. Frank Reich was the classic example of a backup QB that knew his place, was an asset to the starter during the week of preparation and could rally the team around him when he was called upon. Barkley may or may not be that kind of QB2.

I recently watched some Youtube combine videos where Mayock was gushing over Josh and wondered what his current opinion would be. There was always a big divide between the scouts and the analytics types. It seems to still be true.

Maybe Ken Dorsey can matter in this regard?

I do not think there is any closer QB comp for Josh than Cam Newton. We have likely seen Cam's best football whereas Josh is still ascending. Cam in 2014 was very much like Josh 2019 except Josh scored more TDs and had fewer turnovers while getting his team to the playoffs. Very interesting to see which has the better 2020. Game on.

I am getting Brain Paralysis by Analytics Website Analysis so I will not vouch for this but there's this from Twitter and SIS:

I should have added that I am surprised that we have yet to see a Hail Mary from thereabouts to the endzone in Josh's 27 odd games of action. I thought going into his rookie year that we would see him in that situation either before the half or at the end of a game by now.

Ok, I'll play. My assumptions: High school field. Thrown near the 24 between the hashes to the 5 near the numbers. By my best guess that's ~66m = 72 yards. I think this was a one step and throw not a running, crow hop that we'd see QBs typically use in those distance competitions. I say that based on how his body is under control after the throw. I think that is what is implied by the "8 iron" comment vs. what the "driver" would imply.

Imo, as an interviewer, I do not think its his job to challenge the opinions of his guests by presenting his own. It's not a debate. He has plenty of time to present his own views in other show segments and does so. He just needs to probe their view enough to fully see the foundation upon which their view is made.

This is all good. I would add this: If you are a "playmaking QB" that can make off script plays, there is even more to learn. More bad plays come because there is an inclination to extend plays because they can and they have yet to develop a sense of when a play is there to be made or should be scrapped. I think of an "athlete playing QB" as being very weak at QB aptitude, as you say yet to "master the mental aspects of the game" and not likely to ever do so.

Most QBs that fail do so because they do not develop fast enough to help their team win enough games to let everyone keep their jobs. Patience is not encouraged and rarely is a virtue in the Not For Long world. Josh is on a winning team and is doing everything he can to make himself a better QB. He has made huge progress and is already better than many predicted and has a real good chance to be a long term, difference making player. I could go further but Yolo nailed it. I do feel weary of this today.

In general an interviewer"s questions should never be longer than the interviewee"s answers. There are some who never seem to grasp this concept. They are too concerned with trying to impress the audience with how much they know about the subject matter that they bury the question in a series of statements.

This was before practice squads and salary caps. The old term was "taxi squad" but I think current rules would penalize abuse of the system.

And we could add Gary Anderson to the list of "but he wasn't good enough as a rookie." You are right. There is near zero patience for any kicker that is in a slump and costs a team one or more wins. How many teams cut their kicker last year after they played the Bills and they had a rough game? Three? It's tough for a rookie to be as good as they need to be the day they walk in the door and there are not enough chances to develop any faith in said rookie's talent without letting them attempt meaningful kicks. I would like to see the data on it but I'd bet New Era is one of the tougher places in the NFL to either kick FGs or punts. Assuming the competition is close, maybe they might keep both for a spell, avoid going "all in" on a rookie and delay relying on him to decide games. If the rookie can pretty much guarantee touchbacks and mitigate the need for great ST guys to cover them, it might work as a lower risk transition strategy. Let him ease into the NFL with some less significant kicks until he demonstrates he can "hack it."