hondo in seattle

I don't feel good about this one. I don't believe our main problem is motivation. I think the major issue is talent. Every level of our defense has struggled this year. Yet every level has also had at least one good game. Can they all play well at the same time against KC? Our running offense has been good but we're probably going to need our passing attack to be productive, too. Mostly, our downfield passing game has sucked, except in the 4th quarter of the Ravens game. Can Brady, once again, figure out how to call an effective downfield pass game? I have big questions and fear for the worst while hoping for the best. I'm just as excited as usual. Though in years past, this was a battle of juggernauts, and it felt like one of them would end up in the SB. This year, I don't think either of these teams are - at present - in the top two of the AFC. Though maybe they just haven't peaked yet.

You gotta understand context to appreciate OJ's accomplishments. First of all, the NFL was different back then. Even though QBs were already producing more yards than RBs, RBs were still considered just as important. In the 1960s when OJ was drafted, more RBs than QBs won Heisman trophies and got picked first overall. OJ's rookie contract was the biggest rookie contract in history, surpassing any QB's. So defenses were built differently back then. Nickel and Dime defenses were called "Pass-Prevent" and mostly used only at the very end of a half. OJ played against heavy 4-3 and 3-4 fronts - no light boxes ever. Coaches thought you had to "establish the run first" to make downfield passing work, so defenses were determined to stop offenses from running. LBers were big, brawny, blood-thirsty thugs who took sadistic joy in punishing RBs, not the small, rangy, coverage LBs of today. DEs were freakishly huge bone-crushing run-stuffers, rather than pirouetting sack-artists with elite "lean" like Von. Finally, OJ was the engine of the Bills offense so opposing defenses had one clear overriding goal: stop OJ - or at least slow him down. In 1973, when OJ rushed for 2,000+, our QB (Joe Ferguson) passed for less than 1,000 yards despite starting every game. The main function of a Bills QB was to hand off to OJ and defenses knew this. As for the Thanksgiving game in Detroit, I remember thinking that the numbers were great but (1) we lost, and (2) it wasn't OJ's best game in the sense that the holes were bigger than in some other games, the yards easier to come by. In terms of athleticism and artistry, OJ had better games. Then again, the Bills QB that day was backup Gary Marangi. He wasn't quite as bad as Nate Peterman, but comes very close. He went 4 of 21 for 29 yards and a pick on that Thanksgiving. In other words, our passing attack was no threat at all, and the Lions' top-ranked defense were entirely focused on stopping OJ yet couldn't.

It worked for the Bills.

Cam seems like a good guy, and he was a talented QB, but his fashion choices are interesting. When I see a person pontificating about the NFL, I'd prefer them to wear normal, mainstream clothes. I find the top hot and other stuff distracting. Similarly, I can live without Pat McAfee's locker room gotcha stuff. Maybe that's just me.

I screwed up during our two-game losing streak. One week I neglected to make wings, breaking a 10-year tradition. The other week, I got confused about the start time and missed the first few minutes of the game - a clear offense against the Gridiron Gods. I didn't do anything special this week but I did do the requisite rituals: made wings, dressed in my Bills gear, and was comfortably seated on my couch in time for kickoff.

We had a bye week to address some execution issues, McD is more involved in play calling, and we had some new faces out there against a team with a backup QB. It's hard to pinpoint what made the difference but it was fun to see. Encouraging, too, though I'm going to reserve judgment until after next week's game.

Why did Cook head toward the right sideline on his long TD? He had a direct path to the endzone up the middle of the field but then he veered to the right. It looked strange.

I may have been a little off on the score, but I got the gist of it right: Bills eke out a win.

I thought Josh said in his post game interview that he was forcing throws in the 1st half?

Bills 24 Panthers 23 It's not pretty but Bills eke out a win.

His performance this year is a huge red flag. Then again, we're a bit desperate this year and when you're desperate you accept longer odds. Thomas runs a 4.33, gets separation, and was dynamic last year. He's just a young kid; the potential to return to that level of performance is still there you'd think. And he's on a rookie contract. I'd take a chance on a trade if the price was right.

I hear you. He was a good college back but, still, getting drafted in the 4th round doesn't scream "Somebody!" In any case, my point was that his NFL productivity so far, running style, and attitude - as well as a unique last name - are giving him a little pro hype right now that I think he'd get regardless of what team he was on.

I'm not sure I agree with your take on Skattebo. He came into the league as a 4th round nobody and surprised people with his fearless, gritty running style, intense personality, and production. Best of all, he's got a fun sounding name. Put it all together, and there's your 15 minutes. I don't think being a Giant has a lot to do with it.

My take is similar to @SCBills. My guess is that years ago Beane and McD agreed the NFL was a passing league. And they're not wrong: about 2/3rds of the yards gained in the NFL come through the air. They also decided that it's impossible, under the salary cap, to be good at every position group and every facet of the game. So they logically focused on pass offense and pass offense. This philosophy dictated who Beane drafted (e.g. Josh) and who he signed to big FA contracts (e.g. Diggs, Von). Beane has a preference for rangy LBs who can cover, DEs who are sack artists, OL who are better at passpro than road-graders who can push a DL back, and so on. Until Cook opened some eyes and proved his worth, I think Beane would have been happy using cheap RBs on first contracts. This think-pass-first philosophy certainly dictated McD's defensive behavior as well. He runs the nickel more than anyone in the NFL. But on offense, he's a little torn. He likes the chunk plays a passing offense delivers, but he dislikes turnovers. So he's settled on balance, rather than committing primarily to the pass, to help keep defenses guessing and TOs low. But there are a number of problems cropping up. Some teams are complementing their offense with a power running attack that we're not equipped to stop. On offense, our OC is not a passing game whiz. To make matters worse, many of Beane's draft picks and FA acquisitions - on both O and D - haven't panned out which means we're not elite at the two areas we should be philosophically: Pass O and Pass D. Injuries and suspensions haven't helped either. Not only is the think-pass-first philosophy somewhat problematic, its execution has been flawed.

I've read so many silly critiques of our defense that it's refreshing to read one that makes sense.

I've been fooled too - but I wasn't fooled all the time. Once a job applicant submitted a resume saying he had previously been an army officer. While it wasn't particularly relevant to the job he was applying for, I was sincerely curious about his experience in the military and asked him a lot of naive questions. I'll give him this: he had quite the imagination and was a fascinating teller of tales. When I told him I was a former army officer myself, his face beet red realizing he'd been caught in a web of his own lies, collected his papers, and shamedly said something to the effect of, "Well, I guess you're not hiring me." Lombardi is hardly alone in overstating his accomplishments.

You're operating from a paradigm I just don't believe. I'm a pretty self-confident guy overall, but one thing I know I absolutely can't do is read minds. ESP, telepathy, and all that are just not in my toolkit. So I don't know why McD hired Babich. I won't pretend to. I have no idea if ego, selfishness, idiocy, or feeling threatened were involved. But if I had to guess, McD promoted Babich because McD felt misaligned with Frazier and wanted to avoid that problem with the new guy. But that's just a guess. And I still don't know what people mean when they say we should abandon schemes that don't work. The Bills run the same schemes as everyone else. We just don't execute them as well as the best teams. I do agree with this, though: McD doesn't have a great track record with coordinators. He's replaced a bunch but still hasn't caught up to KC. Chiefs OC: Matt Nagy (a former head coach and NFL Coach of the Year, innovative play-caller) DC: Spags (former head coach; Chris Jones, Tony Romo, and others say Spags should be enshrined in a coordinator Hall of Fame). Bills OC: Brady (young first-time coordinator; experiencing some growing pains). DC: Babich (young first-time coordinator; experiencing some growing pains).

While the details are new, I remember hearing unflattering things about Lombardi's football acumen years ago. Lombardi overstating his contributions is sadly no surprise when we live in a society where - according to one source - 55% of job applicants lie on their resumes. And I've personally had people steal my professional ideas and claim them for their own on multiple occasions. I know my experience is hardly unique. Maybe that's how Lombardi justifies his exaggerations: Everyone does it.

A couple thoughts... Is our scheme the problem? Or our roster? People keep saying our scheme is deficient, but I only hear generalities - we're not aggressive enough, we're too soft, etc. I think if you do a detailed tactical analysis of our Xs and Os, you'll find our scheme isn't altogether different from the schemes of other teams. We just don't execute as well as some others, mostly - I believe - because we don't have many All-Pro or Pro Bowl-type players. Since our "scheme" wins 2/3rds of the time, I don't think most opponents would say our scheme is easily defeated. The other thought... The Fins and Jets are national embarrassments. Being 4-2 this season and winning the AFCE 5 consecutive seasons is not an embarrassment, though it is frustrating for sure.

Probably, but it's situationally dependent. I think there are so many lucky and random events in a football game that the better team does not always win: bad ref calls, balls taking weird bounces, tipped balls going off in strange directions, players slipping, a normally sure-handed receiver allowing a ball to slide right through his hands for a pick six, all that stuff. Obviously, you can tilt the odds in your favor by having a good roster and coaching staff but neither of those provides a guarantee. What compounds the problem is that NFL playoffs are one-and-done. No best of three, or five, or seven. So the way I think about it is that a good coach gets you a lottery ticket to the dance. And there's no telling what will happen at the dance. But 32 teams vie for tickets and only 14 get 'em. So if your coach can get you that ticket, he's doing well and giving you a chance. But I also look at the roster and expected outcome. If a roster is stuffed with All-Pros, I expect something more than a woeful departure after the wild card round, year after year.

More Josh than McD. When I think back on each of McD's seasons, I feel like he either won as many games as you'd expect given the roster or maybe a couple more than that. In other words, he's above average but not stellar. I think our main problem has been the players on the field. Either Beane hasn't gotten enough playmakers, or the playmakers were hurt, or both. I don't know how we can demand McD win a SB when, at least in my estimation, Beane's never given him a SB roster. I think McD is good at 'process' and building culture, good habits, effort, execution (usually), and teamwork. I don't think he's done a great job with picking coordinators and that shows up on those days we lose the X-and-O battle. Not only is Andy Reid better than McD, his coordinators are better. That's a real problem. Though the gap isn't so great that the games aren't typically competitive. Between Terry, Beane, and McD, I probably trust McD the most. I don't know how much faith I have in Beane. After his homerun with Josh, he's become a base hitter with more than his fair share of strikeouts. Terry is the member of the Bills Triumvirate whom I have the least faith in. I think the chances of him hiring someone better than McD aren't especially good. And, yeah, I get your points about the Sabres and Pegs hiring a consulting firm. I also acknowledge the possibility that if McD was fired, Terry might just surprise me and find a great coach. But if there were two alternate universes: one where we keep McD, and the other where he's replaced, I'd put my money on the keep option. But I'd have some trepidation about it. There are no sure bets in this game.

I can't say with any certainty that I know your point. I know mine: changing coaches right now is probably a bad idea. I don't think Pegs is likely to hire a better coach. I think it's more likely he'll hire a coach worse than McD, thus making it less likely we'll win a Lombardi. You clearly disagree and that's fine. Neither of us gets to make the decision. It you want to call my opinion "pearl clutching," go ahead. Besides maybe not understanding your point, I also don't know why you resort to ad hominem attacks to support your case. It's truly puzzling to me but I'm having a fine day regardless. About to take the husky along for a ride on my bike on a sunny California day. Hoping for both our sakes that - however it happens - this team hoists a Lombardi someday soon.

I don't think signing Tre was a horrible idea. I do agree, though, that Beane didn't do enough for the CB position overall and that we lack a certain level of athleticism. Some teams are faster than us. Some teams are more powerful than us. Some are both. Josh is our only elite player. It's not a great roster.

Fair points. But I guess even though I'm not a mathematician, I'm a game theorist at heart because I see the future as a bunch of probabilities with no certainty at all. With 32 teams in the league, the average NFL team has a 3% chance of winning a Lombardi. I think with McD and Josh (and Beane's flawed rosters), we have about a 10% chance each season. Better than most teams, not as good as KC's. That means we have a 65% chance of winning at least one trophy over the next ten years. But let's say the fans get their wish and McD is fired. I think there's only about a 10% chance that Pegs hires someone better than McD. Historically, teams usually get worse after firing a winning head coach. And Pegs track record at hiring coaches (just look at the Sabres) isn't good. Finally, most proven head coaches are either gainfully employed or retired. Hiring a coordinator to be our HC, or a college HC, is a real roll of the dice. I think our odds are better with McD.

The average tenure of a head coach is only about 3.5 or 4 years. Guys like Tomlin are the exception, not the rule. That's why it's called it the Not For Long league." So of course Super Bowls are going to be won by coaches who haven't been in position very long. Most coaches haven't been in position very long. That doesn't mean firing a coach leads to a trophy because usually it doesn't.