34-78-83

Interesting stuff... It might be hard to gather, but it would also be interesting to see what the difference in these numbers are when the game is in the balance and is still competitive.

It used to be more obvious, and I'm not sure which crews it was or anything.... But the Pats used to often "get the calls" throughout the competitive portion of games, and then later on when the outcome was already decided they'd get the majority of the penalties. That way at the end of the game it often appeared even, but wasn't.

Looks good to me ...

Sammy looks just like what they had been saying early on- A Julio Jones clone.... His skills more closely resemble Jones than any player I can think of. Gonna end up at minimum our 2nd best WR ever on the Bills (if we keep him around)

shhh - makes too much sesne

Why not call Gronk for it when he does it like every other completion he's involved with? Not arguing, just saying

Doubt he cares. Like most NFL coaches - the redundant waste of time called the media session is what coaches dread most. And no, not because these sharp , probing questions are going to reveal something negative about them... because it's a complete waste of time full of arm chair Qb's speculating on things the team shouldn't / don't want to / or are not allowed to reveal.

Truth

It's funny/ witty sure but not even 1 100th of a percent of validity to that

I thought that yesterday too

Right? It's sad to see.

Hughes isn't going anywhere, PF's or not. But this team does preach and impose accountability. And this defense is above being "held hostage" by one player screwing up on game day. This defense also has some noteworthy depth. Lot's of factors there.

At 1st a sit down to calm down.... Later other reasons came into play (potentially). That's the type of thinking I was respecting on.

Mine are green

It's often smart to ponder alternate reasons for what may have occurred. It doesn't tie in as nicely as an agenda, but it's more likely true. Good thoughts.

this ^^

I think thats just wording that Marrone had an issue with. He doesnt see it as a benching, he saw it as an opportunity to settle a player and allowed his defensive staff to deal with it. But right now we don't know... What we DO know is the Bills would have won this game with better QB play overall.

It isn't in your mind.I disagree. Nothing wrong with that. Parcells and Bill Walsh also had two completely different approaches with their players and both succeeded.

Overall not sure why were making a big deal of this anyway... I would have benched him for a while yet another play to keep the opponents O on the field in what the last 5 games in a row? The fact that DM said he didn't means that someone else did (Schwartz) or it was a package thing or fatigue or a combo of a short benching, some package adjustments and some fatigue/ getting a hold of his emotions time. Why is it such a big deal who made the call? This is petty Na no disrespect intended- the yawn was from hearing the same old stuff and I can tell you really believe it so it is more of a surrender on my part in this discussion. Not gonna be worth the effort and not gonna change your mind.

Man you make too much sense tonight

yawwn

Sorry thats just easy old fashioned agenda ... If he did yank Hughes he would have admitted it publicly like he always has in the past.

Marrone didn't bench Hughes soooo now we are just deciding that it's a lie and he DID so we can keep complaining about it?

It gets even more odd then cuz I know Simon and Simon knows his football.Especially secondary play, and I don't think he deserves to be called what you calle d him (not that it would bother him). I don't and won't spend any time on PPP so ... mystery remains. Your football posts today make a lot of sense though

I must have missed something from prior to today?