CodeMonkey

Because he missed one downfield pass ? Seriously? You are right, I've never seen TT miss on a pass like that. Obviously Peterman had all kids of time all game. He just sucks and is a bust. This proves it. Case closed

538 (which is the model I tend to trust the most) right now has the Ravens: 60% chance of beating the Lions 27% chance of beating the Steelers 80% chance of beating the Browns 77% chance of beating the Colts 68% chance of beating the Bengals So the Lions and Bengals both pulling off the mild upsets seems to be the best hope. But the Bills would still need to beat the fish twice and the colts. It's early December "what if" time at TBD

Also need an offensive line. The primary reason Peterman did so poorly is because he is a pocket passer, and had absolutely no pocket to pass from the entire game. Taylor can use his legs to make up somewhat for that deficiency, Peterman cannot. No pocket passer will be successful on the Bills until the line can create and maintain a pocket most of the time. Until then, you need an escape artist like TT, even with his other flaws. I have to assume that the coaching staff saw enough potential in practices that told them that with protection, Peterman could get the job done. We simply do not know about Peterman yet.

It's called Viagra.

They are afraid that far more would end up on YouTube being used on each other by drunks in the parking lots than there would on the field

</sarcasm> ?

Also from the same source ... Tom Brady needs 1 win to tie for the most wins as QB at Ralph Wilson/New Era Stadium since 2001 Drew Bledsoe - 14 - (14-10, .583) Ryan Fitzpatrick - 14 - (14-16, .467) Tom Brady - 13 - (13-2, .867) Tyrod Taylor - 12 - (12-7, .632)

So your contention is that even though the cable companies are losing subscribers "by the millions", and the ratings in general for NFL games has been in decline for years for all outlets, but those same outlets will keep paying contract prices that go up every year?

Even if that were true, and I don't think it is, all TV problems become NFL problem as it is the TV contract that pays the players salaries.

My family and I watch commercial free Bills games when we eat dinner together Sundays. But that's the only game they watch, and me too these days. I wonder when the TV contract price starts dropping, followed by the salary cap dropping as well.

That's where I am as well. I watch nothing but the Bills games anymore. 10 years ago I would watch games all day.

An interesting perspective and one I happen to agree with. NFL TV Partners Set To Lose Up To $500 Million On Ratings Decline

That's where I am as well. But not inconceivable that the Bills sweep the fish.

I wish all coaches didn't allow those ridiculous flaming sideshows.

As well they should be. Their last two losses were to the Giants and the Bills. I didn't see their Giants game, but their game yesterday was worse IMO than any of those last 3 Bills turds (with the possible exception of the Peterman experiment). I'm sure they were still thinking playoffs even after losing to the Giants. But I suspect that opinion may be changing now.

After those turds the Bills dropped in the previous 3 games, I'd say it was very meaningful to beat KC on the road. Yes it was very ugly and a difficult game to watch, but they sucked it up, didn't make many mistakes and pulled out the W. Had they lost that game with the way KC played, the death spiral may have been impossible to pull out of. I suspect KC might not recover either after losing to the Giants and the Bills in consecutive weeks playing like they did.

It's a mathematical model. So it tends to take longer to react to things like player trades, injuries, and QB changes than humans do. But those numbers don't look bad to me.

I disagree. Simply look back to when the Bills were 5-2 (seems so long ago, doesn't it). Except for worthless people such as Sully, the media, national as well as local, were loving McCoach and the Bills. Because they were winning and looking pretty good doing it. Fast forward 3 [very long] weeks after the Bills look like a steaming pile of crap all 3 games and the talk is now about the mistakes, lack of talent, ill advised trades and so on. Nothing complicated at all. The media (except as noted, the Sully types and also any shills owned by the team) is a reflection of the team. Not a driving force in determining the season for the team.

As of today, fivethirtyeight.com sees the Bills with: a 22% chance of beating the chiefs a 24% chance of beating the pats at home a 66% chance of beating the colts a 66% chance of beating the fish at home a 13% chance of beating the pats away a 48% chance of beating the fish away If it's correct (and it has called 61% of all games correctly this season so far), that puts the Bills at 7-9 for the season. But that last game it sees as pretty much a coin flip so it thinks 8-8 is also a good possibility.

... not dinged up ... fresh legs. Could be a good pick up for safety. We'll see.

I didn't say I was sure, I said in my opinion. But look at what has happened to the run defense of the Bills and Jags after the Dareus trade for example. Is it hard to think the Bills could have won one of the last 3 games if the run defense wasn't historically bad now?

Minimum of two. Fish at home and Indy. And being the Bills, they will likely do something like take a meaningless one from the Pats when the playoff window is closed. Take that all day long.

Correct about QB. But not sure Lynn would have dumped players like Dareus, Watkins, etc. The Bills would be at least at 6-4 now IMO with the possibility of sneaking into the wildcard if the talent dump for picks hadn't happened. To be clear, the Bills absolutely need a QB next draft so I'm not upset about the talent fire sale. Just think with Lynn at the helm they might not have been quite so aggressive about getting cheaper "character" players over more talented players and picks.

That works until you see how much the glorified gym teachers are getting paid.

Well, at least we have the Sabres