All_Pro_Bills

I think Denver sat Manning once before in last years Super Bowl. Or maybe it just seemed that way?

The number of passes targeted for Woods and to a lesser extent Hogan in recent games would appear to counter the argument that Orton is 'forcing' a high number of attempts at Watkins. I suspect Watkins injuries are hampering his production and play. The Bills offense suffers from a lack of big plays and red zone production due to some combination of execution, personel use such as no use of Mike Wiliams known past proficiency in the red zone, and play calling. The first is up to the players and the latter two can be corrected by coaching staff decisions.

Just like the Bills did against the Giants in SB 25.

The Bronco fans should be confident but their team is hardly unbeatable. When NE mopped up the field with them a few weeks ago I concluded they don't deserve another Super Bowl appearance off that putrid performance. Their run defense stats are supported by a high scoring offense rather than some dominant play up front. Still, they have some great players, when Manning is 'on' he's almost impossible to beat, and being home is a big advantage here too. For starters, the Bills 'D' needs to give them a physical beating similar to what the Seahawks gave them in the Super Bowl. I think they're up to the task here. And the offiense needs to get a little more creative. While I don't expect a win I do expect a battle.

I think Coleman's crew had the Broncos/Chief on Sunday so its unlikely he'll be assigned to a Denver game two weeks in a row.

The big difference between the Saints and Bills in your example is the Saints put up 5 TD's with Graham getting lots of attention and the Bills 1 and a lot of FG's with Watkins being the focus of attention. Until they 'hurt' the defense and force them out of their coverage schemes of keying on Watkins with some significant points on the board from mulitple TD's they'll continue to face this strategy. Along with the other obvious difference being the OC dialing up the right calls and the QB executing on them.

All the Bills have to do is finish 10-6 by beating Oakland on the road and winning 2 of 3 games against 3 of the top 4 teams in the league each of which is lead by a future home of fame quarterback. Given that, to me 14.3% seems too high. They screwed the pooch by losing to both Miami and Kansas City in that 5 day stretch where getting a minimum of a split was needed. The defense should hang tough but I find it hard to get too excited with an offense that cannot score red zone TD's. FG's are not going to beat Manning, Rodgers, and Brady. Not that its impossible but something has to get fixed and fast for any kind of miracle finish to happen.

A college offense? Yes, watching a lot of college games yesterday a lot of teams were running the Bills offense. But getting better production than the pro version. Next season we need to dump the college 'O' and get a 'real professional offensive system..

For sure punting or going for the 1st is a matter of playing field position but its also situational management. You're not going to punt for field position on 4th down from the opponents 41 yard line if you're trailing by 4 points with a minute left and no timeouts. We can all agree with that. And in the 1st quarter of a 3-3 game you might punt because its early and no need for taking the risk in most cases. This makes a lot of sense too. The issue most point out with coaches deciding to punt in opponent territory is situational. Take the Miami game. If I recall correctly, with something like 9:30 left and down two scores coach Marrone chose to punt on 4th and 6. 6 yards is a high risk and no gimme for certain. But in that situation you're down 2 scores, your offense is having red zone issues, you've only managed 3 FGs to that point and maybe you don't sniff the other side of the 50 for the rest of the game, you might get a possession two, and Miami's offense has been moving the ball well in the 2nd half so other than the opponent burning more clock what's the difference if they drive down the field from the 20 or the 40? So maybe you take a shot at that point in the game rather than punt? Not going for the 1st in that situation also gives off the vibe of being timid and scared and that you have no confidence in your offense to pick it up and no confidence in your defense to defend a shorter field. In the Thursday night game after that punt it sent me the message that the Bills had more or less conceded the game.

I understand your viewpoint but I don't see teams game planning on defense for Beckham or Evans like some have done for Watkins. That in itself tells me how the professional coaching ranks view Watkins ability. And I also don't think we can conclude the trade was a mistake. It's one possible conclusion but all the information is not available yet. Does surrendering a #1 choice in 2015 really put this program back 2-4 years? Why? Because that pick could have been used on a franchise QB? Unless the Bills go down the drain here and finish 5-11 I think its a misconception that some sure thing QB is going to be there sitting and waiting to be picked in that draft slot. Who will be available at that draft slot when the pick's on the clock? We don't know yet but I'll wager no QB identified as a sure thing franchise QB will be there in round 1 when the Bills to Cleveland pick is up. Right now Mariota is the only QB worthy of top 5 consideration and it's certainly possible the prospects of other QB can improve before the draft. But he'll be off the board way before that pick is on the clock. At this point the Raiders control the board with the #1 slot and and given their record they look like a 'lock' for the top pick. The next guy up might be Winston if he declares but there's all kinds of red flags and lights flashing there. Maybe the Browns get a great player with that pick. And if they do so be it, that's the price of the deal. The Bills got a great player in Watkins. You can't get something for nothing. The mistake was not trading up for Watkins and giving up the 2015 #1. The mistake was believing EJ was the long term solution to the Bills QB problems based on his potential and his performance on the field to that point. And from the 'eye test' I do not understand how the teams front office and coaching staff, football professionals and talent evaluators, could have reached that conclusion based on his performance and what I saw as a lack of improvement over time. I certainly didn't see it but a lot of times it's just human nature that the fathers of a plan refuse to see their child (the plan) is not working out.

You hit on a lot of topics here with some valid points. I won't comment on all of them. On Watkins I believe he'll turn out to be over and above the other WR's in the draft the Bills could have taken and I believe none of those other top rookies have made much of an impact to their teams in the win/loss column. And they're not getting constant #1 receiver attention like Watkins is from the defenses every weekend. I could argue Watkins has been instrumental in a few Bills wins. The catch over the middle in Detroit to set up the FG, the winning TD catch against the Vikings, some big plays against the Jets. He's also been hindered by rib and groin injuries which have impacted his performance. The big 'what if' is the draft choice they gave up to move up. As for Pegula I suspect he'll be 'all in' when it comes to doing whatever it takes to get the Bills turned around. I don't think he spent $1.4B in order to see his investment troll the bottom of the barrel forever. No doubt in my mind that things will turn around at the top here and quickly.

Yes. The Bills aren't going to be bad enough to get into the top 5 so the potential to grab a bonafide 'franchise QB' with the surrendered 2015 1st round pick won't be there. Granted the bowl season and the combine might change the outlook but at this point I only see one QB, Mariota, that gets first round grades and he'll be off the board quickly. So the idea the Bills gave up a chance to grab another QB if EJ didn't work out is off the table. But the Browns should still get a good player at some position that will help them.

All we know to this point is that Terry & Kim Pegula purchased the Bills from the Wilson estate for $1.4B and have made a commitment to keep the team in Buffalo. We know of TP's work to date with the Sabres but comparing that experience with the Bills probably isn't going to give any clues of where things are headed with the Bills. We've heard about the potential hiring of some football 'consultant' but that is just specuation at the moment. My suspicion is the evaluation process of the front office, the coaching staff, adminstrative staff, game operations, the players, etc., is already underway but nothing is going to be made public prior to the end of the season. I think there's a good collective understanding of what ails the Bills on this board and I can't help but believe that TP/KP are observing some of the same things our fellow board members are seeing on and off the field. And that they will conclude the weaknesses that need to be addressed are consistent with what most identify here, OC, HQ, QB, OL, to name a few. I expect the Pegula's will not be hesitant as Mr. Wilson was to spend funds on top-tier coaches or delegate power and authority to competent personnel 'experts' that will be brought in to manage the front office. So all options are open and any previous conceptions candidates have had in the past with regards to ownership will no longer exist. Money/pay level shouldn't be an issue and mostly how attractive the job is will matter. This I would think would be the first steps and it would happen pretty quickly after the season unless there are candidates of playoff teams they want to consider. Around the New Year we should see things start to happen.

I'm resigned to the fact the Bills are close to certain of not going to the playoffs again this year. Sure, we can look at all the scenarios and hold out hope but you're just setting yourself up for more disappointment. The team is like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown. Trust me, I won't move the ball when you try to kick it! They had their chance with the 2 games in 5 days against the Chiefs and the Dolphins and failed the test. Plain and simple they didn't answer the bell.

Hypothetically lets say a QB throws a deep sideline pattern to his receiver launching the ball 50 yards down field but his receiver cuts off the pattern 25 yards downfield and runs a deep in vs. the fly. The ball lands at least 25 yards downfield beyond any receiver. Is that intentional grounding since no receiver is in the 'area'? The problem is the rule is inconsistent, arbitrary, randomly enforced, and subject to way too much individual interpretion by the officials. There may be no 'right' or 'wrong' in saying the call was correct or not because it is so subjective the term 'rule' should not even apply.

I'll trade your two guards and a running back for one guard and an NFL level offensive coordinator. Just for the sake of argument, can somebody find me Richie Incognito and Charlie Weis? I think both might be available right now..

However, its okay to throw the ball at the feet of a receiver 5 yards away from the QB, clearly in order to avoid a loss, avoid a sack and a hit, and its clearly intentional? And getting 'out of the pocket' and throwing the ball 10 yards out of bounds to the cheerleaders is okay too even though its clear intent to avoid a loss? I'm coming around to the idea that the entire rule should be eliminated since it requires the officials to determine intent and arbitarily set what 'in the area' means rather than some clear cut action like offsides or facemask penalties for example. But I do agree it was a stupid call by the OC. There was absolutely no way the Bills were going to convert that 3rd and long absent some defensive penalty resutling in a 1st and 10. Get 4-5 yards and give the punter some room to work might have been more prudent. Then at other times when you'd think being a little more aggessive would be the right playcall and they turtle up on the call. But I'm getting off topic and venting a little..

My problem with intentional grounding is the ref's are trying to judge the QB's intent. Did Orton throw that ball specifically to avoid a loss or was the intent to attempt a completion to the receiver, in this case Watkins who cut inside rather than to the sideline. Given the reciever was still in the picture and the inside cut occured as the ball was released I'm not sure how you can be certain Orton was just throwing it away. The entire receiver in the area concept is pretty weak at times. As mentioned before the QB throws the ball at the feet of the lineman when a screen play gets blown up but since a receiver is 'in the area' its not grounding regardless of the fact we know he threw it away because the play was busted and he was surely avoiding a loss. Coleman's crew blew that call. That all said, the Bills were handed a wonderful opportunity to turn the tables when they recovered the ensuing fumble on the free kick but did nothing with that chance.

Don't forget the hail mary pass interference call that followed placing the ball at the Bills 1. And I'll continue to hold Wade in high esteem for taking his team to the locker room in protest after NE scored the gift TD to win the game. The only extra point play I've seen in NFL history where there was no defense on the field. I remember the pricks had the stones to go for two there!

I have no doubt there's a lot of bad calls by the officials and the Bills have more than their share of those bad calls go against them. But I don't think there's an organized effort to favor one team over another. Maybe individual officials have some sort of bias but its not institutionalized. Like for example, Coleman's crew always seems to screw the Bills. Last night the intentional grounding call was weak. But it actually would have worked out to the Bills advantage since they forced a fumble on the free kick and recovered the ball. The offense got 1 first down and then the missed FG. So the score could have been 12-12 or 16-12 in favor of the Bills if they would have actually took advantage of that opportunity. Some would say a 'good' team would have turned that misfortunate call into something positive, a tie or a lead. But they didn't. The PI call was terrible and I couldn't believe it was called. If that's the criteria for pass interference then I can point out 20 or so plays every game each and every weekend that should be called. What that official 'saw' is unclear and the timing of the call couldn't have been worse for the Bills. I think the Bills get way too many bad calls when measured against how many of these calls go against their opponents but I've concluded this team loses because they don't take advatage of their opportunities, don't score enough points, don't consistently make the big stop on defense, and make way too many major blunders to be contenders.

Agree here. While Orton is better at this time than Manuel, neither seems to be the long term answer here based on performance to date. And those saying Orton isn't good enough are correct but the other option looked even worse earlier this season. I wasn't happy with Orton's performance the last two weeks. He's been ineffective, inaccurate, perhaps a little timid in the pocket, and hasn't produced results, which is measured by TD's on the board. But thinking this team would have been better than 5-5 at this point if they stuck with EJ seems doubtful to me given how his performance had regressed though the first 4 games. That said, I wouldn't be opposed to giving EJ another shot here at the remaining 6 games because this team has played themselves out of playoff contention the past 5 days. While he might never pan out it's worth another look at this point. This other issue is I think the entire offensive system and game planning of this team is dreadful so I'm not sure how you can completely and accurately judge the QB's given that anchor around their necks.

I liked the hire initially and I expected Marrone was going to bring a different culture and a fresh look to the team. But that hasn't happened. He completely lost me last night with the call to punt on 4th and 6 from the Miami 47 with 9:50 left trailing 19-9. At some point you need to be aggressive and take a risk. I'm 100% certain that Pegula is not going to 'cheap it' with the coaching search and selection process. So there's reason for optimism although that does nothing for us this season. We still have to suffer 6 more games of this crew. TP & KP won't make the same mistake here he did with the Sabres by letting the coach and GM hang around too long. We'll get somebody competent and good next season. A coach that can get more out of this same bunch. This team does not need a total rebuild, more like a re-load. We need a long-term solution at QB for sure. While I believe the HQ is a goner I'm not clear yet on the GM and the rest of the personnel guys..

When I saw it was Coleman's crew I knew we were screwed. Those two calls were dreadful (the grounding and Def. PI). Almost as dreadful as the Bills offense. The football Gods corrected the safety call when the Dolphins fumbled away the free kick but the Bills offense generated one first down and of course they then missed the FG attempt.

I wouldn't lay 100% of the blame on Hackett because as some have stated there is more than enough 'blame' to go around. While the 2 fumbles were the most obvious errors there were plenty of other things here, penalties, dropped passes, missed reads on both sides of the ball, a fairly lousy day for Orton. But isn't the saying that 'a coaches job is to put his players in the best position to win' applicable? And if you know the offense, and the QB in particular is struggling after a strong opening drive, wouldn't it make sense to mix it up a little? My critique of the Bills offensive game plan is they rarely show a team a 'look' they might not be prepared for? How many specific plays has Hackett designed for Watkins, or for Spiller before he was hurt, or any other offensive player? The offensive game plan looks to me to be unimaginative plug and play simply substituting one player for another in the scheme without any subtle or obvious variations. I can think of a half-dozen ways to use Watkins given his speed, elusiveness, and strengths? So why can't Hackett attempt to use Watkins like the Seahawks and Jets have attempted to use Harvin for example. Get him more touches. How about Spiller as a bigger version of Sproles? Why no Mike Williams given his previously demonstrated 'red zone' abilities and the teams lack of success in that area? Unless you have an overwhelming talent level when you show 'good' defenses the look they expect they're going to stop you more times than not. Get them thinking and unsure rather than reading and reacting. I'll be extremely surprised if the Bills show the Dolphins 'D' anything new or different than they used in the Chiefs game. In a word - predictable.

Out of the three that's the game I would have picked too. But that would leave the Bills with a 6-6 conference record (4-2 division, 4-0 with the NFC North) and likely at a disadvantage with any tie breakers. Dare I say the Bills best chance of getting to the playoffs might be going into NE tied with an 11-5 record or a game back. A Bills win in week 17 would give them the AFCE title based on a 1-1 split with the Pats and a 5-1 division record. For that to happen NE would need to lose 2/3 of these games. Maybe one at this point but I'm not sure I would go so far as to predict 2. That would imply an unexpected flop by the usual division champs. No doubt a a longshot at this point but If NE loses to the Colts and the Bills win tomorow night we might want to take another look. First the Bills need to take care of business tomorrow night and lately they seem to have the Dolphins 'number'. unday night) Lions home at Packers at Chargers (Sunday night) Dolphins home at Jets