ctk232

I don't know that it changes my opinion about him, but that TD throw was indeed a complete thread over the DB... That being said even a healthy, fit, and playbook savvy Anderson is not much better than Peterman. And in one week there isn't much that can be done to get a QB out there that can help us compete who isn't already on the roster...unless we drastically simplify the playbook it's just not plausible

While it's easy for us to sit here and say "culley isn't the guy to coach Allen" (I've said this for one), and "Peterman should've been cut." What else should they have done? Going into the season they thought they could sit Allen a year and focus on internally developing him. We were all fooled by the preseason and thought we'd actually be okay with Peterman. AJM turned out to not be the QB we were expecting and threw the first wrench in our QB depth chart. But we all expected Peterman to have progressed to manage the team for this year at least, and combining that with minimal cap led us into the season with two qb's on the roster, fairly average across the league. Peterman flops and forces McBeane's collective hand to start Allen. Allen performs as expected and now we're all crying out as though this would've ended up differently had Culley not been the coach, or we had more talented players, or cut Peterman and picked up another guy. With what cap would we have been able to cut Peterman and bring on a solid back up QB? Who's even available that could fit that role AND be better than Peterman? No way we trade and waste capital for the rebuild that we are currently in. While they aren't entirely off the hook, I'm not exactly sure what else could have been done. Where it becomes a fireable offense is how they address this with all of the weapons we have in the offseason. Not many excuses can be made after that. Idc if you're the literal QB guru, no coach could make Allen serviceable in this amount of time, and he needs the year to develop at least. But to expect anything other than what we are seeing is a bit ridiculous.

Means they want to win now and not worry about next season while our Defense is playing like this. Not only is it shortsighted but Anderson is not that guy either. Let them have fun with that pipe dream though. I'd rather see Allen if healthy, Anderson if not, but otherwise focused on building a competitive team beyond just this year...focusing on a playoff berth seems a bit out of the question given how things have progressed thus far. Retain our defensive talent, hit the offseason equipped with the cap and draft pick weapons we have, give that a year to develop, and then start the chicken little posts. Gonna need about 2 years for the process to even get remotely close to the intended goal. Went thru the sixers process and it's still going - not all processes are equal, but they are all time consuming. Never heard of an overnight process...

You honestly think Anderson is ready to play by Sunday?

Agreed - sitting him for a week, regardless of elbow severity might be helpful, unless the elbow is absolutely 100%. The only harm here is Anderson is not ready to play Sunday, and we all know what will happen with Peterman in there.

Tbh we need J Phillips pass rush in the middle. If his play continues I hope we can retain him. I'm more worried about when Tre's rookie contract is up...even if it isn't until 2020. I think Lorax and Kyle bring veteran leadership to the defense and help them with a young MLB calling out plays and coverage, that will be difficult to replace. I've seen a few key veteran plays this year from both that were absolutely needed. Idk how he's doing it, but Lorax is definitely contributing beyond his own tip drill INT yesterday.

There really is no good part of this play, but a key component highlighted right thur. We have a lot of timing routes in our offensive playbook that require Allen and whoever else is there (hopefully not Peterman), to make this throw before the receiver completes his route, hell, with Peterman's arm strength, he should have thrown this within two seconds of the snap. The ball should be hitting his hands the second he turns around - receivers practice these catches on juggs a lot of the time for this purpose. You might also flip the formation as this is a difficult throw to time across the hash marks regardless. This requires two things, the ability to process and read coverage quickly, and the arm strength and finesse to deliver this throw on point and on time. With our current QB roster, these aren't plays that we should have in our scheme. However, they are throws that Allen will need to learn to make if he's going to be successful. Nothing beats a red zone zone coverage quite like timed routes like slants, hooks, crosses in man coverage, etc.

Without knowing the play calls and audibles even, there's no way to really tell. You'd likely need the Bills to publish their playbook and hot routes, or an annotated all-22 review by the coaching staff. You can guesstimate using footage though, if you understand route concepts and our offense. Much appreciated. They were never the same, nor will they ever be, and the Bills and Bills staff are not the Chiefs and company. They shouldn't be compared, and I'm tired of hearing about us passing up on Mahomes, so did every other team prior to the pick.

While I agree that what Andy Reid did for Mahomes was perfect for Mahomes given the roster and coaching staff available, Allen would likely still have the same raw struggles this year regardless, but just with players that put the support in supporting cast. I think people would be more upset if we did have a competent offense, because there are issues with Allen that a talented offense can't compensate for. Regardless of Reid's offensive background versus McD's defensive background (although I believe this to be a major contributing factor in QB development), Reid also has decades of experience as an HC over McD and has seen these threads play out in many different cases. But we really need to stop comparing things to Mahomes and Reid, because we don't have any of that nor is Allen Patrick Mahomes. The kid needed development, whether that was starting his first year or not, but makes more sense to commit to an offense once they know with greater clarity, the QB they drafted, and how their defensive rebuild is progressing. I think they'll now look for players that fit a scheme and skill set that will be more designed for Allen's play style, strengths, and understanding of game fundamentals. Or at least that's my hope...

Julio (when healthy) likely would too if they played more often. Would guess Antonio might be up there as well as a few others for right now. Kids only getting better though, and that's remarkable given where he is at currently.

Even if he could do this, which he isn't for the Giants, why would we try to make moves to be potentially competitive for only one year instead of focusing on the rebuild? Just drafted Allen and whether or not you like him, he needs the most attention for developing as the investment in our future. Does it suck to waste our Defensive talent this year? For sure, but we need a team for the future, not just this year.

Oh I entirely agree - just noting the odd similarities between that hawks team and the Bills this year, and if it were to work, how it might look. I don't want to see a defensively dominant team with an offense that can barely demand it's own worth in salary. I'd like to see a competent offense capable of putting up two to three scores a game consistently.

This team is a lot like the Seahawks team right when the LOB was starting up. Stellar Defense, porous OL, no-name receivers, and an unproven mobile QB (more so forced out due to lack of line play). The difference being Russell Wilson is very different than Allen, but the team comparisons are similar enough. Most of their games were 3 points at a time from both sides - the LOB holding a team to FGs and the offense middling it's way to a ton of FGs and maybe a TD. Usually it was the case that if the offense could put up a single TD and kick FGs with consistency, the defense would win the game. You saw final scores like 13-10, 6-3, 9-6, etc. It's not sexy or easy to watch, but they made function out of chaos.

Right? A lot could go wrong, even just throwing to 1v1 matchups here, but we don't typically get those calls going our way very often anyway. Worth it to take more shots though, if the situation calls for it. In reference to the game, it was over had we been able to cover that deep route or avoid the PI. The fact we came back and held them to 3 there was ridiculous, and shows me more what this Defense is than "letting them drive the field." Was the PI stupid? Yes. Was it necessary? Given the positioning and where the ball came down, it was likely a TD if not. The answer is we need better secondary play if anything, but even they showed out yesterday versus a tough WR corps and QB. Helped that we got pressure against a weak OL, but you saw where our secondary fell short when Watson actually had more than average time to throw.

Beyond just that call as well - a couple defensive holdings were pretty suspect, but did feel a couple calls were either "make up" calls, or home team discounts. Not sure about the holding that brought the KB play back tbh, but either way it wasn't the reason we lost.

12 teams had sack totals of over 50 in 1984 - comparing that to last season of 3 even before the rule change, which is double what teams are on track for this year then. There's plenty of variables that go into these discrepancies, but those stats alone don't provide nearly the foundation to say the rule isn't impacting anything at all. Nor are mine - but all I'm saying is that it will be interesting to see what happens.

I'm reserving my judgment on him until next year at the very least, but I've commented on his performance week to week, mostly in reference to bringing in help for him to develop on a coaching level (not a vet QB, though this is better than nothing). To be fair, those two wins weren't exactly his wins. To answer your question though, it's a culmination of many things, most of which will get left off here - but, in my mind it's the 18 year playoff drought and beyond that most of us lived and survived, and the fact that Allen is supposed to be one of the better QB prospects we've drafted during the drought and has "the greatest upside" (though similar rumblings were felt during other QB selections). But it also likely has to do with what we gave up to get him. The idea of bundling two top picks to move up and select a known project that may never return dividends leads most to say that if there isn't any indication that he will pan out, it's all over. I think it also has to do with the other questionable moves by the organization regarding lack of coaching support, unproven OC, and other offensive issues at present, coupled with the actual analytics of what Allen is lacking in his current form. At the end of the day, we all just don't want this pick to end up like the others since Jim, and will jump on it as soon as we see similarities to that which is all too familiar for us. Lastly, we have a tendency to react in the moment - just look at our reactions about Allen from the end of the Vikings game to after the Chargers and Packers games. Bottom line is that there's a lot of hope riding on this kid panning out, and general sentiment that he needs to work out. Sooner just always happens to be preferable to later.

Did the same thing, it's like we're having the same Allen conversation across most every thread. The only things that change are the varying levels of irrationality and instant gratification. A singular Josh Allen thread is needed, or if not, just rename this one and close the others. There's plenty of productive conversation to be had about him, but most of it has been chicken little speculation with only four games under his belt. Nothing is surprising given how he's played and the circumstances of why he's starting now.

Ideal. We shouldn't move him to DB2 while he's developing, and especially while he's performing at an exceptional level for what was given up to draft him. The FA DB class has some solid names coming up, and while it's not an immediate need, having that stud DB2 to anchor our secondary would be great to see. Johnson could nickel/slot and also help with depth should we need it. No reason to overshoot the guy just yet.

Exactly - half these guys may not even be on any lists in a year or two - not all top draft picks bust in their first years, and some just peter out into perpetual mediocrity or average play. What I'm more concerned about is how he is progressing within the system he was drafted to play within, and how he is executing those roles. So far his growth has been as expected for a 20 yo MLB. He's been heading in the right direction, and let's hope it continues.

Tell that to Daniel Jeremiah...

While the rule is interpretted the way it is now, the gradual decline is likely inevitable without changes by the league. It'll be interesting to watch the numbers this year and those following. Great dig on the stats - it's crazy how it definitely has felt like there have been less but the numbers paint different pictures. But still likely seeing a greater disparity this year and those following without changes to the rule as it stands. I'm curious what the individual numbers say, and not just team stats either.

Yup. Though it is about time he hung them up. He hasn't been a good QB for over four years now in all honesty. He isn't the only problem that franchise has, but the giants really need to move on.

Bills are a family thing, pops grew up talking about and watching Cookie and Kemp, I was sadly born just in time for our first super bowl, but otherwise know jim, bruce, and thurman better than not. Bills are a franchise regardless and our franchise highlights were back in the day and the 90s. It's hard not to know them and respect those guys for what they did. Plus, for anyone else not fortunate enough to have the family dynamic, they did the Four Falls for the cliff notes version. Still got my Bruce jersey fwiw, just about the only jersey worth buying at the moment.

I'm not saying he's handled Watt consistently - but in their first matchup he held the edge well. Sunday - anybody's guess. It matters more the blocking sets we'll be calling, but he'll be one on one with him the majority of the day. Moving a TE out there would help on some downs, but would otherwise be a waste of a guy. It did, no question about it. But it did so in an otherwise offensive slopfest of a game. 13-12 final score...not exactly offensive production there.