EmotionallyUnstable

And yet this is what good leaders do. I am not excusing his tirade on the morning show BUT: A good leader supports their staff, sells the future and delivers confidence in their players. At the same time they admit failure and reflect honestly when they’re wrong. If Beane came out and said “we were counting on our guys to develop into XYZ and we haven’t been able to get there, so we’re looking to find ways to bring the room up to our standard” I’d respect that. People would want to play gotchya because it’s easy and as fans we don’t have to answer to anyone when we’re wrong…we just like calling it out publicly when others are. If tmrw they traded for BTJ and won the Super Bowl would ppl be calling for a stock and quarter of Beane because he looked silly? Nahhh man it’s business. You take chances, you redeem the rewards if good movements and you know when to take your losses.

What is it about the 1st that you are hesitant to part with? The last few years: Hairston Kincaid Elam Groot Oliver Edumnds Diggs* multiple trade backs for Coleman* Two of these players have been extended as keystone pieces of the team, 1 traded away, 1 allowed to walk, and 3 who it’s unfair to judge at this point…and one absolute home run coming via trade. I am not saying that BTJ would be Diggs, but if your argument is getting a cost controlled player, he has 3.5 years left w/ 5th year option that are already negotiated. I think we value our future selections in drafts way more than they’re worth.

I think these are fair points and yet again point to the fact BBB is forced into selecting need vs talent, largely due to his own roster construction, especially in the early rounds. I think it’s unfair to categorize Kincaid as a slot, as you referenced. He does a lot of work in the MOF but is not going to be playing the same Z or H role that a slot wr would be. I am not here to say that Ladd SHOULD have been the pick over Coleman. No one could have forecasted how things have turned out…I am simply responding to the retort i often here for why Ladd wasn’t a consideration and it just doesn’t seem to be a valid excuse to me give the fact that Beane has repeatedly doubled down on positions at time (Groot/Basham, Walker/Sanders,) in early rounds while paying guys who are already on the roster being paid at the same position.

By my count they’re still at 52 players on the active roster. They’ve elevated Phillips and Poyer from PS so doubt they’re going to sign a S or DT to active roster but idk what theyre doing hanging out with an extra roster spot….

I hate myself for watching this whole video, but hate the PR staff more for coming up with such a lame concept

I was thinking about this today: On one hand we dismiss Ladd as a potential selection for the Bills because of other positional needs and the existence of Khalil Shakir a similar role. Yet one year earlier the same regime selected Dalton Kincaid….when already heavily invested in the position, while trying to explain that he’s a different kind of player? You can’t do both. Either Ladd was a mistake, or Dalton was a mistake, but philosophically as a front office if you’re trying to make that arguement and explaination, you can’t be right however you slice it.

How do you get assigned the job “first mow of the new sod at New Highmark Stadium”? #retirementgoals

Yeah I was thinking the same and am pleasantly surprised. This is excellent news for bills fans. Not only do we get a potential upgrade on the boundary that is sorely needed, but we get an exciting piece back to the team that we’ve invested heavily in. It brings a level of excitement and anticipation to this game I feel has been missing.

Another Jordan Phillips game. Bring yo ice skates

The idea that generating turnovers is a means to win football games is a false narrative. It is an unreliable strategy and as you acknowledge, often times has a sense of randomness to it. You cannot rely on this. It is much more important to limit turnovers than it is to try and force them.

Lost in all the chaos of the last few losses is how ridiculously frustrating the defensive tackle depth has been this season. Despite having what appeared to be a surplus of servicable players, so much so that we were struggling to contemplate how to roster them all, yet we now find ourselves (once agan) relying of practice squad level talents. Another Phidaruan Mathis game? Big Phil? Just insane. Between the O gun suspension, mystery ed injury, Carter and Sanders IR, and recent DaQaun Jones injury, I think week 1 was the last time we have a full complement of rosterable players at the position. This is almost unbelievable considering the recent investments into the position. Just sign Zion to the roster already. He is by far the best option, but out of elevations.

You have to look past this season for that answer. 2026 DEs under contract are only Groot, Hoecht and Solomon (who personally I don’t think is a valid 3 down option). I am sure if you asked Beane he would mention that they’re trying to win a Super Bowl AND sustain success year after year. I agree it’s frustrating and disappointing given the results thus far. I am also curious if they expected Epiness to have as good of a year as he is having. Possibly they wanted to move him or Solomon, bringing the DE numbers to a more reasonable number. Bosas injury history could play into this, as well as the suspension. It’s 100% fair to question the investment, although idk how much more a 3rd round WR or S would be contributing at this point.

It’s not usually a shot in the arm, but in the arse. If you asked me in August I’d have been more eager to see Hoecht in action. Given the state of the DT room, I think O gun has the bigger opportunity to be a regular contributor early on. It will be very hard to work all the current DEs into the rotation, will like 1 (Jackson) being inactive. Groot Bosa Epinessa Hoecht as your rotational guys, and Solomon in on specials.

Okay here is your challenge rule explained; Rule 15, Section 2, article 2 “Once a review is initiated, all reviewable aspects of a play (Section 3) may be examined and are subject to change, even if not the specific reason for the challenge.” And why they announced it twice: Article 4. Each Ruling Reviewed Separately Any aspect of a ruling that is not changed will be considered a correct ruling for purposes of reviewing the play. https://operations.nfl.com/the-rules/nfl-rulebook/#article-2-plays-involving-possession

Well after that was overturned…done.

I don’t understand how they can lose the initial challenge and then they review the spot and get their challenge back?

Bucs seem teetering on the brink of no return. Down Evans, I am not sure they have the fire power to hang with the Lions O despite the fact that they are banged on D

Fair question: I think a lot of people were most interested in the addition of Nielsen, specifically since he has a history of playing a more agressive style on D (man and blitz). I wonder if their plan has been hampered by the injuries and if we’ll see any change in scheme with the return of some guys like Hairston.

Bucs moving into a Bear front and the lions just swing the ball to the back. Nice.

I really wish they’d just let him play Sunday (they won’t). If for nothing else, it’d add another layer of excitement to the game.

Finally…we can beat a team with a winning record!

This is everything to me. It’s not only what has made us consistently competitive on the back of JA17, but also what’s held them back when they need someone to step up.

Not arguing anything you wrote; but this is a bizarre clip to show as the authors support: The play where we lose our Center to injury and a backup enters, who between him and the LG don’t handle the twist the right way. The mesh might have actually been there had they not completely blown the protection. Again, not arguing the perspective but it just feels like a better example could have been shown.

No fire at all.

Brutal half. Heads should roll