CA OC Bills Fan

No! While correct the odds of 38 straight or 29 straight are very low, and I'll also agree that "it's got to end sometime," still the odds on the next game (or the next day of no work accidents) are no different than the first game after losing the turnover battle or the first day after an accident. And to think that cutting a finger after a great streak of no accidents is good because somehow that means you won't have a catastrophic accident is complete garbage.

I didn't respond initially. I was trying to figure out if you were serious or just trying to get a laugh out of whatever responses you'd get, maybe a bit like Jimmy Spags. The entire premise is close to the stupidest thing I've seen on this board, and we've all seen some very stupid things posted. How losing a turnover battle would be a good thing absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. Or, the idea that winning many in a row, whether it's 25 games or 525 games, has any implication for the next game that it means we will lose the turnover battle. I didn't read the entire thread, but I did see someone, maybe you, say something about "what does a coin flip have to do with it?" So, if turnovers were completely random, then it would be extremely unlikely that you'd win the battle 26 straight games as it's extremely unlikely that you'd flip a coin and get "heads" 26 straight times. In fact, the odds are 0.5 raised to the 26ths power or approximately one in 67 million. However, if you're flipped it 25 times, the odds of flipping it a 26th time and getting a heads is 50%. So, if betting on tails just because there were already 25 heads is still the same as the first flip, a 50/50 chance. Maybe less because I'd wonder if the coin is weighted wrong or both sides are heads. In football, it's not entirely random, kind of like a weighted coin. So, even if it was random the odds of losing after 25 straight wins of the turnover battle would be even odds. But, the reason a team wins this battle 25 times in a row is because they're awfully good at it. In that case, odds are good that you WILL WIN the battle a 26th time in a row unless the other team is even better at it than you. I still am pretty sure you're joking and looking for reactions. I've been reading your posts for years and never thought of you as clueless. I just wasted 5 minutes of my life that I can never get back responding, but I couldn't help myself any longer!

I just read the article and was about to post the same thing (without the meme though). Really? Rex is a disciplinarian type? What kind of "journalist" would be idiot clueless enough to write something so stupid?

I commented last night that the worst two games that Josh has had the last two seasons were both against Diggs. I didn't realize at the time that both were week 5 or that the final score of both games was the same. So, does Josh get too wound up to play when Diggs is on the other sideline?

I didn't get one yet. It does take a bit longer to ship to CA. My account manager called me a couple of weeks ago and confirmed my address. He said the team is sending a memento to all current season ticket holders in honor of the farewell season. But, I'm sure he said they're sending it after the season, so not sure if it's based on some other criteria as to when some are receiving it.

I thought it was great. No problem with this game ending in a tie.

First, yes, I live in Mission Viejo, CA. I was supposed to be going to Detroit area for work this week and was planning on driving from Detroit. Last week my work trip got cancelled so I bought really crappy flights out, two stops and an overall 12 hour trip. I have a parking pass but not I always park at a house almost a mile away. I tailgate at the house where I park for a bit but then walk over to Hammer's lot and the stadium lots to hang out and tailgate more. There's no fee to tailgate, you just need to bring your own stuff.

Taking a redeye tomorrow night.

I had heard this as well, not going to look for a link but I do remember reading that CBS didn't like him saying ahead of time what the play was likely to be based on what he was seeing. Since that change, he's been pretty awful.

He kind of addressed that in his post-game. He said something like he could have taken a knee to get an injury time out and give Mitch some time to get ready, but he just wanted to get off the field right away because he was bleeding quite a bit.

I disagree. If they don't get it, yes, they are pretty much conceding the lead. However, they would have expected to get the ball back with some time on the clock. I know if this was the other way around (or against the Chiefs), and Cook was running wild all game except for maybe the last couple of drives and Josh was on fire the entire game except maybe the last couple of drives, I absolutely would have been p**sed at McDermott for punting (unless of course our D stopped them and we won anyway, then all would have been forgiven).

I'm undecided on this. The one thing I'm 100% confident of however was that it was a horrible play call if we're going for it (I'm talking about the first one). I said this at the time and I heard the same thing said on either the Shout or Locked on Bills podcasts (I think it was Shout). If Josh is going from shotgun with an empty backfield, why did the penalty to bring it one yard closer change to go for it or not? I do agree that going for it and missing leads to a need to chase points. Biggest example of this that I remember was the Carolina / Patriots Super Bowl of several years ago. Carolina went for two, missed it, and then continued to go for two later because of it. They never made them just like the Bills didn't on Sunday and partially led to their loss.

I hate to admit it, but I left☹️ The last Henry touchdown did me in. I said to my friend, "Let's what the next Bills drive, but even if they score, let's leave, the Bills just can't stop them." Then, the pass that was initially called an interception happened. Even though the replay came before we were out of our aisle, we still said "screw it" and were out of there. By the way, I DID stay to the end of the Houston comeback game, so this is the first time I've made this major mistake. It's quite depressing that I missed it. I flew from CA, arrived at my father's in Rochester at 11 PM Saturday night, got back from the game around 1:30 AM Sunday, and my Uber picked me up at 5 AM. Was in town for 30 hours just for the game, and then I blew seeing the end of an epic! And, although I was honest about leaving with all my friends and family, I lied to those at work, the strangers I saw in the airport, and told my wife to lie to her coworkers! I'll take my lumps with those I know (and anyone who may respond to this post), but refuse to take the xxxx (and pity) from coworkers or others!

Just watched Hard Knocks Episode 4 last night. They spent a lot of time talking about his work ethic, that he stays in the building until late at night studying, that he played nickel in the Bears game without ever having practiced at that position. I wonder if other teams see this and if they need a bottom of the roster guy see him as a good addition and sign him off our practice squad. Although Hard Knocks has been very vanilla on anything that could be perceived as negative, this is the one negative I've seen. That being said, when those types of guys get opportunities, although I'd rather it be with the Bills, I'm happy for them.

I agree. I never watched before, so I hadn't seen players cut. I'm sure a part of me might enjoy seeing them go through that but it just seems wrong.

I get your point and agree with some of it. I think the team does hold regular tryouts and sometimes bring players in this time of year more than anything so they are not scrambling mid-week. I'm pretty sure either on Locked on Bills or Shout podcasts in the last week I've heard them say exactly that for some of the recent roster moves. They are churning through some players so they can see what's out there in case of injury mid-season. I also very much agree kickers are very important positions since most NFL games are decided by less than 7 points. I just don't agree keeping a player on the PS does much towards this. If they are top notch kickers, any other team can sign them to their 53 anytime so all it's doing is having them in practice full time to be called up at any time. Instead, they should be doing their due diligence constantly so they can call the player when the incident happens.

I can't agree with having a kicker on the PS. Very unlikely we'd have a game day call up for a kicker unless Bass was injured. If injured during a game, we'd get by for the rest of the game, same thing if he's struggling. If he was injured, we'd have a mid-week tryout session for a replacement kicker for the time he was injured. Having had Davis in camp, the staff already has some idea of what to expect of him and that would either give him a leg up (lol) for the competition or they'd know they wanted to find better. No need to waste a PS signing on a kicker.

When I was growing up in Irondequoit, the only Abbott's was in Charlotte right by the beach, and in the summer the line was huge. I kind of always thought they were just average.

Remember this Snickers commercial from 1995?

Not sure why you say we can't trade him unless you mean no team would pull the trigger based on his contract. I absolutely think it's possible they find a way to trade Samuel. Actually, the only thing that would surprise me is they were to cut him. I could see a trade, placing him on IR, or expecting he'll be healthy and a solid contributor.

Two points. I didn't listen to the podcast, I just read the short article so I don't know what Simms said. Did he actually say Cook has leverage or did the headline just say that he said that? Simms didn't write the headline. Secondly, once the season starts, Cook holds some leverage but still not that much. Of course he can withhold his services which affects the Bills if Johnson, Davis, and whoever they call up in Cook's absence don't do very well. Back in the 90s, Emmitt Smith held out on the Cowgirls for two games. When they lost both, Jerry signed him. However, Cook would get hefty fines and if he doesn't show up by a certain date (too lazy to look up which game number), he doesn't earn a year of eligibility so he wouldn't be a free agent next year. From my perspective, the Bills hold most of the leverage.

Happy Birthday Marv! My father turns 101 in 2 weeks so he has Marv beat by 50 weeks. My dad is going with me to TC today. If you go today, I'll be there with my son, daughter, son in law, wife, and a really old man walking with a cane or walking sticks.

Completely agree with MJS. Number of Ints is meaningless. Each specific pick could or could not mean something. If it was a "regular" play that the team runs, minimal pressure, receiver is open, and the QB had a horrible off target throw, that may mean something. A QB trying something they wouldn't normally try in a game, who cares.

Sierra Foothills beat you to it, page 1.

I agree with this, however, I think the point the OP is making is valid. At least based on the number he's stated publicly, Cook is seeking a contract that's out of line with what others at his position who are more valuable have recently gotten. Perhaps by next season it would be in line since salaries keep going up, but as of now, most analysis have put his value at closer to $12 or $12.5 million AAV, not $15 million. One theory I've heard says that Cook doesn't really want to remain in Buffalo, but at a high enough price, he's willing to sign and stay. If that's the case, he's playing it perfectly. He's stated his expectations and will do everything he needs to do to show other teams he's worthy of a big payday next offseason. That could include full participation, not holding in (or out) as well of course of balling out this year.