thurst44

Star always gets this tude from a large part of the fanbase and I'm downright sick of it. When he was brought in as a FA in 2018, one of the big reasons given was b/c QBs were stepping up into the lack of pressure up the middle for short passes and tight ends were feasting. That was one of the biggest rationales I heard for his contract: he would stop tight ends. In 2017, we gave up the 6th most yards to tight ends. In 2020, the most. In Star's two years, we gave up the fewest yards to tight ends. Yet so few people seem to be putting two-and-two together that maybe, just maybe, Star's not the garbage player we've judged him as. I could be wrong and I know correlation is not causation, but I do know enough to say I don't know. Just like people here who tore him down don't know, but I will say that I do have some numbers that suggest my claim could be correct. I'd like to see Cover 1 or someone similar do a deep dive to prove my point or convince me I'm wrong. Star's coming back regardless, but I'm willing to bet that his return will mean that two other first-rounders will have monster years (as others have said in this thread), as Oliver's free to make plays and Edmunds is not a sitting duck in coverage. If Milano is here, Star'll likely improve him too, but it sounds like he may be out the door. So much vexation and so many calls for purging on a team that had the second best record in the NFL, finished the regular season at a 9-1 clip, demolishing most teams, then won two playoff games before losing on the road to the defending SB Champions and likely again SB Champs who were also methodically moving through the league. It was a weird season. I'm thankful for what transpired last year, but also excited to see what this defense can do with regular pre-season, practice, and a mountain in the middle, paired with an explosive offense that's also likely to be even better next year.

Part of me wants this, but (1) hate the idea that Tampa would get a home game Super Bowl and (2) as much as it would be fun to ultimately beat Brady on the biggest stage, I'd just as soon close the door on him and cut our losses. Plus, Green Bay is just easier to root for

Fair enough (and don't mistake the length of this comment for my thinking your comment was unreasonable), and while I loved the trade-up at the time, it was fairly accepted at the time that it was too much to give up. However, a few posters here are kind of altering how Watkins was perceived at the time. No one had a problem with him being picked at 4 at the time. I found six mock drafts from the time before stopping and every team had Watkins in the top 5, many at number two. If Watkins had played anywhere near his perceived potential, it would have looked like at least a solid move, but Whaley rolled the dice and was wrong, and the risk-reward even at the time, was probably not worth it. That said, he was thought to be the clearly best of a great wide receiver class and the Bills did not have the luxury of a great QB which makes taking a chance on one in a crowd of potentially great WRs easier (and remember while the post-9 WR picks included OBJ, Adams, Jarvis Landry, and Allen Robinson, it also included Kelvin Benjamin, Jordin Matthews, Cody Latimer, Paul Richardson, and Marqise Lee. At the time of the draft, all we have is perception and what is seen on tape. Yes, if Watkins had been a later pick, he would have fewer detractors. The same was true for Shaq Lawson, a player who I saw people here posit was only drafted at 19 b/c of Ryan's Clemson connection and even saw one person suggest he would not have been drafted, even though practically every draft had Lawson going before 19 and Bears fans outside the draft location were chanting to take him at 11. Watkins was considered a generational WR at the time and clearly the best with a burst and playmaking ability that could make a mediocre QB/game manager look better than he was. Hindsight is 20/20. With hindsight, Mike Evans was clearly the better choice, and at the time there were a couple experts (but not most) suggesting he might turn out to be the best. However, for this argument this is kind of moot, because we would have had to trade up to get him anyway. Beckham had tons of concerns for both his headspace and his injury, and he has been a headcase and injuries have hampered his career, but definitely would have been a better pick. However, I do remember people questioning his draft that high at the time, and the best reviews I found for the pick still called him "basically Victor Cruz" and "low ceiling...best he'll be is a complementary player to Victor Cruz." Devante Adams -- well, duh, but at the time, EVERY OTHER TEAM, including the Packers passed on him. Sure, we know now, but I'm also sure the Browns wish they had chosen a certain QB from Michigan instead Courney Brown at Number 1. Was anyone here really lobbying for Devante Adams at 9? Probably someone, but that's not really the point. We can judge Whaley for having poor football sense with the pick, even if many others would have selected the player that high, and definitely for giving up too much to move up for a WR, but let's not understate the benefit of hindsight or expectations at the time.

David Koechner is apparently a huge KC Chiefs fan in real life (just stumbled upon that fact yesterday, and then saw this :)--it's been a good week so far!)

Also, can we give credit to the defense for, after being on the field for so much of the game and faced with terrible field position as they got punched in the nose all day, stopping the Colts on their final drive. The Colts had to convert a 4th & 1 (and we almost stopped them). The only huge play was one that should have by all accounts ended the game if not for a bad call and an awful replay. Even after that, they got up and played to the buzzer and did not allow them to get close to trying a field goal. They had to be exhausted and most defenses would fold, but this has been a hallmark of this defense for the last few years: when they have a bad day or give up a lot of yards, they still play with enormous fire at the game's end. It's not nothing. Look, I was screaming at the defense all day, but they came through when it counted, and all season they have regrouped and found renewed strength the next week.

I was responding to your quote (i.e. have we not come to play and figured out a way to win the next week pretty much every time?). The first part was not addressed to you, but the formatting puts them together so I apologize for that since I knew that would likely happen (but did not intend for it to happen). Yours was less "woe is us" than "whew. we dodged a bullet" and that's fair. I'm just amazed that after the first playoff win, and a gutsy one at that, I come here to revel in it for at least a little bit the morning after and it's almost all about what the Bills did wrong. You'd almost think we lost yesterday. There were many obstacles and the team found a way to win. The defense played worse than the score and better than the yards allowed would indicate. Ultimately, they found a way to win. I'm not worried about the defense, because they have found ways to win 14 of 17 in a hard schedule. It's not that there's no right to analyze or criticize even after a historic and cathartic win, it's just at some point we have to enjoy this time or why be fans (and again, this paragraph is not directed at you or saying you did this--in fact, your comment was perfectly reasonable to me and I tried to answer it with a reasonable answer).

Our defense played well enough to win. Period. They came up with huge stops when was necessary. And all the people who are saying things like "well, this doesn't bode well for the next few weeks"... Have you watched this team? Or football? Has it not happened MANY times where the Bills do poorly on one front on D in a WIN and then do well on the same front in next week's WIN. And I know you do watch the team and know about football, it's just that some people have a propensity to only notice the terrible. Yes, I sometimes err in the other direction, but people, we were 13-3 and just won our first playoff game since before Spin City (Michael J. Fox version) or The Daily Show (Craig Kilborn version) existed. It was an exciting game and we lived to fight another day. I get that the board is here for analysis, and saying the D played bad in spots (those two 4th quarter sprints down the field were maddening) is fair game, but the sense of absolute dread here is absurd. Perhaps watch the last 7 or so games of KC and see how close they came to losing in almost all of them. This is a great team. We may lose next week. We're more likely to win whoever we play b/c we are definitely the better team in a matchup against any team except (maybe) the Chiefs. Have they not in the past over the course of the last 17 games?

I can't stand the Dolphins either, but they did a lot with a little (and an overhyped off-season). They are probably the Bills in 2017. My semi-educated guess is they take a step backwards as Tua has growing pains and the defense falls back a bit (can't help but feel they are playing above themselves), but they have so many draft picks and Flores, whether you like it or not, would seem to be a good coach, that there's a good chance they will be a force with which to reckon in the '20s. Thankfully, the Bills have a coach who has more clearly established his acumen, much more talent, and the means to keep putting together teams that will likely be better than the Dolphins, so hopefully it's kind of like the 1990s when the Dolphins had some great seasons, but we sent them packing most years. That said, I'd put McDermott and Stefanski ahead of him, and possibly LeFleur and Andy Reid (just b/c he's been great year-after-year does not mean he should be overlooked).

He can be obnoxious and normally I don't like his brand of obnoxiousness, but I've always found him a fun listen. He called Kyle Williams his favorite interviewee ever, which is great on so many levels.

Yeah, agreed here, although it is a major pet peeve of mine when writers try to twist facts to fit an established narrative instead of letting said facts tell the story. Not that I haven't done it myself at times 😕

Ok, I'm gonna stop posting stats

Tie goes to the more frequent poster (you). I'll add the craziest one. Only one Bill has led the league in combined tackles: Preston Brown (of all people) in 2017.

We also drafted the wrong Josh! (that's one i probably said in April of 2018--i changed my tune within a day or two). I did love this trade from day one and had wanted Diggs for at least a year.

Thurman Thomas led the league in yards from scrimmage four years in a row (yes, combined stat) Henry Jones, Nate Odomes, Jairus Byrd, and Tre'Davious White have all tied for the season lead in INTs

Also, every time I open TBD during games, things go sideways...

My superstitions for this year: - Chicken bites from BJ's that my wife bought on a whim Week 1. - My dog Trixie has to have her Bills jersey on (but I do not) - First beer has to be Presidente, second Modelo (yeah, I'm basic) The bites are well on their way to being 13-1 with the Hail Murray week being the only loss. The Dolphins were driving today when I realized I was doing none of these. The moment Trixie's second paw got in the shirt (oven on, Presidente in hand), Edmunds got the sack, so can't question it. The Mike Love play came when I put the bites in and got the Modelo.

What has ever gone wrong when relying on Pitt's backups to do one thing or another to affect our post-season outcome. Oh wait.

Ha, sorry if I was combative (it wasn't intentional, but I should have read more carefully). FWIW, on the Edmunds tip, that was more of a frustration on every board I've read, but I did say that part was not necessarily about the two people posted here. Let's put it this way: I just now noticed your awesome screen name. Robb Riddick was my first favorite Bill. I guess part of my thoughts here are that trying to figure out who is best to play in the playoffs is ultimately pointless since football (and this D in particular) can be so unpredictable. As you, yourself, say, anything can happen in the playoffs. Then again, this is a Bills board and it's something to talk about, so your opinion is as valid as mine here. I tend to look at it as who would I least like to lose to b/c I expect to win. This time feels like they could beat anyone right now, but as the Ravens showed last year, and the Giants will probably show if they somehow get in (since they seem to win the SB every year they get in with a ridiculously bad record) fortunes can change with one bad day in the playoffs. Also, I had a different takeaway from the Ravens game. The defense did enough to win and stopped Lamar Jackson about as well as anyone did last year (they were a juggernaut at the time we played them and he was MVP for a reason), but their defense just never allowed us to get into rhyth. I still have nightmares about Judon -- it's why I wanted us to pick him up and I had him on my fantasy team. The Ravens really only scare me for illogical reasons (they looked unbeatable going into playoffs last year and fell flat, so this year when they look a hot mess much of the time, watch them have a run).

Any given Sunday. Teams have bad days and good days, our two best linebackers have been hurt much of the season and we have WON every game in that period, many against good teams, save for that fluky game we lost in the last seconds. We could play the Dolphins in Wild Card Weekend and get gashed or play the Ravens and hold Lamar to 100 yards total. And we've won 12 out of our 15 games this year and their losses have had many extenuating circumstances if that's your logic. They've stopped good rushers (see Josh Jacobs, Henry) and had problems against others. I'd say I can't believe the level of anxiety over a 12-3 team that has dominated five games in a row going into the playoffs (we ARE that team right now), but I've been alive long enough to know that it was like this in the 1990s too. And Ravens are also a good example that you can be looking this good and lose right away in the playoffs. It happens. Right now, however, it would be foolish to change much about the way the team is playing. And people (not necessarily the two quoted here as i haven't seen them do this) need to lay off Tremaine Edmunds. His D has got it together right now.

Derrick Henry got his fewest yards of the year against us when Edmunds was hurt and Milano was out. I wouldn't hold up that disastrous game as a template for good defense, but it was actually Tannehill who destroyed us in that game. When we beat them last year, Henry only had 78 yards. Just saying Bills have actually stopped some good runners this year (and been brutalized by some meh running games). Given that we're 12-3 and the two bad losses were against 10-win teams when we could never focus on either team and one of the teams had 16{?!} days rest, I'm gonna say our coaches are probably doing the right thing. Henry could hang 200 on us (he's been doing that a lot), but, again, he's been doing that a lot. Our Run D worries are overblown. It's not been a strength this year, but our team has been having a season for the ages, so maybe Frazier and McD and our inexplicable whipping boy defensive captain Edmunds know what they are doing.

I did a double take when I heard that comment. (1) By the same logic, you could say they don't have anyone this year b/c he threw to McKenzie a number of times, or that they were relying on the rookie Davis b/c he got over 60 yards a few games this year. It was a false equivalency, since Duke Williams was not Allen's 1st option by a long shot and that's what Griese's analogy implied; he just got a lot of passes in that playoff game. Griese seems to have forgotten about Brown and that Beasley was also there last year and playing well. Getting Diggs changed the dynamic of the team and gave them a true #1 take-over-the-game receiver, as opposed to 2019's group of good receivers and 2018's mess, but the Duke Williams analogy was not the right way of expressing how Diggs changed the offense.

Oh for crying out loud, he's the MLB and 22-year-old CAPTAIN of a defense on a 12-3 team which has dominated five straight games (and he held the same role on a team that was the #3 defense last year). They have allowed fewer than 260 yards the last three weeks. All players have bad plays (Aaron Donald looked silly a couple times in that game where he also had a few sacks against us), but if you've watched Edmunds and your takeaway is that he's a reclamation project or a bad player, then you probably don't know what you're talking about. Making the Pro Bowl this year was a stretch, but it was the players and coaches who sent him there. And say that nonsense to McDermott or Frazier and see what reaction your "expert" take gets. Or most football analysts. Moreover, it's just sad that this team is rolling in all aspects of the game for the first time since the 1990s and some here's takeaway is how we need to get rid of a player who is a respected captain of the team. How miserable. And I will keep mentioning 22-years-old, because it's relevant whereas O'Leary's grandfather isn't and if you don't get that, maybe your take is a wee bit chilly and maybe you should enjoy this team's run and not try to dismantle it in your head b/c you think you know better. Frankly, I'm finding the "he has no instinvts" comments becoming a lazy meme, especially when I've seen him with my own eyes take over games and sniff out plays from sideline to sideline. One other thing you need to remember is YOU DON'T KNOW what he's supposed to be doing or the game plan.

I'm gonna go with Kyle Brandt and take Taiwan Jones and it will make up for last year.

There's a Madden game, which might be more real than the usual Pro Bowl.

Nah, "typical fair weather fan" only pays attention when the Bills are winning and are oblivious at other times. OP seems the opposite if anything--maybe over-invested. Even as one of the most overly positive Bills fans out there, I can understand and respect that (even if it can get irritating during the temporary lulls); I think we all get moments of gloom as Bills fans (some are just more pronounced). It's a slight better than people who are obsessed with players who should be benched when we have won 5 of the last 6 games.