PolishDave

Supposing Tre White is playing and Gronk is playing, how can the Patriots not expect Tre White to go low on Gronk - like right about knee level - like helmet to knee from the side = bye bye career.

Maybe Belichick sits him for the next Bills game in NE for fear of him getting injured before playoffs? And perhaps he becomes a target for other players on other teams who want to punish the dirty player. Hope so. Ghetto justice for a ghetto player.

Bitcoin and ETH will both ultimately become obsolete just as the 56K modem and its predecessors essentially have. The long lasting cyptos (ones that are backed and condoned by the largest world governments, IMF, world banks, etc.) have yet to be invented most likely. Probably years down the road yet. All current crypto investments are much more likely to be profitable in the near term (several more years perhaps of ups and downs) up until whatever creation that comes into existence in the future ultimately becomes the defacto - standard world crypto. The existence and acceptance of cryptos (on a mass scale - especially by Americans) is very, very bearish for the US dollar and likely to ignite dollar inflation on a severe level at some point thereby rewarding all of those idiots who have overspent their living standard and punishing conservative investors who have tried to build a nestegg through conservatively investing saved earnings. Don't sell any of your physical gold, silver or copper over the next few years unless you intend to buy it back cheaper shortly thereafter. If the cryptos gain acceptance among the average American to the point where Joe average begins conducting a high percentage of commerce using them - then very bad things are coming for America as a nation. This is why I think the US government will put a stop to unregulated open source cryptos (to the best of their ability)- within the next 5 years or so. Timeline is very questionable and up for debate. They will probably try to stop open source crypto use by making it illegal for any American to conduct business using them. They will only allow use of a crypto they can control and manipulate so they can continue to slowly inflate away its value as all Keynesian economists love to do. (my opinion) Banks create money in America by making new loans. The economy and the stability of the economy depends on that. If people stop using US dollars to make purchases and begin using cryptos instead, America will experience a massive over supply of dollars. The value of the dollar will collapse. The Federal Reserve will lose control of its ability to regulate how hot or cold the economy runs at. Banks will begin to fail. The banking crisis of 2008 will look like it was really no big deal at all. This is why, in my opinion, the American government will be forced to outlaw the use of "outside" cryptos as a means of conducting domestic commerce. They may allow it for international commerce. Very unlikely they allow it for domestic use unless it is a crypto they control and one that has a built in mechanism where the "Federal Reserve" can control its supply. Without that, the American financial system does not exist - and the collapse of America becomes a horrific reality. Whoever is in control of the White House at the time this starts happening will be forced to try to stop it at all costs. The entire United States economy relies on Americans putting their faith in a currency the government has a large degree of control over. If Americans lose faith in the dollar (as they will would if the value collapsed quickly enough) then our entire economy would likely tip over like one giant domino. And break into pieces. And the most valuable thing you will own at that point is ammunition for your guns.

Jeff Tuel > Peterman. The Bills are doooooooomed!

I hear you. But it is a lot easier to say if you are not a season ticket holder who forked out thousands of $$ with the intent to go watch your team compete for the year. Less painful to turn the tv off and walk away from a bad game than it is to swallow the $$. People forget that part. Tens of thousands of devoted fans fork out big $$ to watch them try to win - not try to lose. The things that matter most long term for this team is how well they identify talent, how well they coach that talent and how well they manage those assets. The single most important part is identifying the talent to begin with though. They don't need to purposefully lose games to do that. They just need to identify the best talent available to them and go get it. McDermott is a high character guy. It is not going to be easy to fire Dennison. At this point right now, I think it would be much easier for him to talk himself into reasons why Dennison should stay. At the end of the season - the decision may be easier or may be harder depending on offensive production from here on out. Just because a lot of fans want Dennison gone, doesn't mean the coach will do it.

This is stupid.

Rain man!!

I feel the Bills should act more "Urgent" and promote someone "Hot Blooded" from the practice squad to take out the Patriot "Head Knocker" in their next match up.

You picked the wrong day to come to this forum and pretend to be nice regardless of whether or not you are sincere. If this was a bar, you would be missing teeth in 5, 4, 3, 2,....... You just have to know when to keep your mouth shut and walk away.

Yep.. They are still trying to "get a feel" for this team. Still undecided about quarterback. Still undecided which offensive linemen are the "best" 5. Still not sure if or how to use Tyrod. Still uncertain about RB #2. Flippy floppy about linebackers and pass rushers and d-linemen. It takes 15 games or so to get a "feel" for a team. Fricken noobs boobs..

Well, we'll see if McDermott has the balls to fire Rico after his first year. I am not so sure he does. Tyrod is very likely done. And this team is very likely to get worse next year, possibly a lot worse (if you can even imagine that) unless they truly hit on the QB in the draft. Sad time to be a season ticket holder.

Dude, there is fraud and crime all over the place. It is everywhere. White collar crimes, violent crimes, thuggery, buggery, vandalism, identity theft, banking fraud, securities fraud, insurance fraud, government entitlement fraud, fraud fraud... Of course there is going to be fraud in cryptos. There is money involved. Where there is money involved, there will be crime, somehow, somewhere. Predicting that criminal enterprise is going to become involved with cryptos is like predicting that it might be cloudy sometime within the next month here in WNY. It is a no brainer. There are hackers all over the world right now trying to get into banking computer systems of banks that you probably deal with every week. Does that stop you from going to the bank or using their services? Most of these cryptos are equivalent to international banks that only handle checking accounts and mostly don't offer any other services. They operate on that bank's personal internationally accepted currency rather than the currency of whatever country you are in. There will be some rotten bankers that run crooked banks that end up stealing people's deposits. It will happen. People will still use these banks anyway. They will just do their best to avoid the crooked ones. So far, the vast majority haven't proven to be crooked at all. I suspect this market will regulate itself quite well.

Had a lot of friends go through this at some point in their late 30's early 40's where they started questioning if they should change their careers to be "happy". My advice to you is this - be practical first and foremost. You have a great paying job/career with excellent benefits that allows you to provide well for you and your family. It would be utterly idiotic to risk that to change to something else that you aren't 100% sure is going to make you a lot happier - "happier enough" so to speak. I think you should start looking for ways to find satisfaction in your current employment. I bet there are ways you can improve on that. You certainly have somewhat taken for granted the excellent position you are currently in compared to most of humanity. And if you are still interested in pursuing a major career change, do it part time on weekends until you learn what the hell you are doing. And pay down your debts and save a year's salary in cash so you can weather the hardships that will certainly befall you as you try to jump from your cruise ship to a smaller boat that is passing by at the moment. Not one of my friends who "Stuck" with their existing job now regrets it - at least that is what they tell me. Because now they are making even more money and even better at their existing jobs. Which makes the work easier and a lot more palatable.

Why would Beane have any say in it? If anything I would think Leslie Frazier might chime in with an opinion. But otherwise why wouldn't it just be between McDermott and Dennsion?

Now I know who you are. You're that one guy who is chomping handfulls of popcorn with his eyes glued to the pitcher.

Last year's Superbowl was the least emotion I have felt in a Superbowl in forever. Saw the result coming. Actually chuckled at it and walked away from the television. Numb to it. Seeing them winning the division yet again and quite possibly walking into the playoffs with home field advantage - makes me not even want to watch Afc playoff games. Just don't care unless I was confident the Patriots are going to get beat.

It's like a baseball game. Who actually watches the game? You just hang out, soak up some sun, enjoy a hot dog and a few beers with your buddies. What is happening in the game and its overall outcome is an after thought.

Fact or opinion? How do ya know?

I wondered why the league doesn't have a ref watching the actual live broadcast of the game that the television viewers are watching so that when the general consensus is that it is a bonehead call, the ref watching television can get on the horn and let them know that call needs review. It has to be the same feed broadcast that the viewers at home watch, that way the bias of the announcers/commentators gets accounted for too. The commentators can sway opinion greatly. So the ref needs to hear what those guys are saying that is obviously influencing the fans' opinions of how fair the calls are.

You don't have to reinvent the wheel. These coaches have years of film to watch to see what plays these guys have executed well and which ones they didn't. They also had training camp and numerous practices to evaluate what these players can and can't do. You can usually tell by looking at a square peg and a round hole that the two don't fit together. You don't have to try hitting it with a hammer a few more times. If they are still trying to "get a feel" for the team and what the players can or can't do, then these coaches are extremely slow learners who don't belong in the league. NFL stands for Not For Long which is how long you get to become good in the league before getting canned.

You are right. There are more people boycotting it than some realize. I guess it depends on who you know. I am very surprised at how many people I know who have boycotted NFL entirely since about the second game after they started kneeling. That includes 2 season ticket holders I know and a seemingly growing number of other more casual fans. Seems to me like the boycott has gained a little steam since a few people started it. Probably not enough to make a major impact like cord cutting has though. I agree with others who posted that cord cutting is a big reason. It certainly is. The only reason I haven't cut the cord yet is because so far the only option I have found that has every channel I want and most of the wife's is Sling. Many other options don't even give you NFL channel.

Forget the quarterback's name for a minute. This staff chose him as their starting quarterback. Should have played to his strengths every game this year. You can give them a pass for a the first couple games as they found their feet. But they still aren't trying to do what this qb does best. They aren't doing what this offensive line does best. And they aren't doing what this offensive unit does best. No matter who is quarterback - this offense sucks. And if they aren't tweaking their offense to their existing QB and their other personnel, why in hell would you think they are going to do it with the next qb and other new players? They aren't. They are going to try to get lucky finding a QB and other guys who are good enough in their system. This offensive coaching staff obviously lacks the mental ability to be able to adjust to what cards they have been dealt. They want to keep calling hearts trump every hand even when their hand is full of clubs.

Good post. I think a lot of it is just an example of how the coaches generally think they are a more important part of the puzzle than the players are. And their unwillingness to explore other "proven" approaches to play design and philosophy than what they currently "think" is the best way to do things. I am willing to give Dennison and McDermott a break on the Peterman starting thing. I am convinced their mindset was something along these lines leading up to that game - "We have been regressing horribly on offense the last two weeks. We need to try something different. Lynn knows the strengths and weaknesses of this offense better than any other coach we have faced yet. This game could be a complete disaster. What could we do to change that? Maybe if we start Peterman and execute well in the short passing game- we can catch Lynn's defense off guard and come out of there with a win. And we will get to see Peterman perform under strong pressure. We can't just go into this game hoping the trend from the last two weeks is going to reverse itself if we keep doing the same thing. Ok - let's give it a shot and see how it turns out. Worst case, if it becomes a disaster, we can always go back to Tyrod. Best case, we catch lightening in bottle and we found our new quarterback." Or something along those lines generally. As far as McCoy goes, your logic makes sense. Plus we would be guessing which McCoy everyone is talking about when they are blaming the offense for something.

I think you are wrong about that. I think the offensive coordinator is the one largely responsible for the design and implementation of whatever offense is being ran. There are exceptions to that I am sure. I just don't think the Bills' situation is one of them. I think it has been mentioned that McDermott preferred other guys ahead of Dennsion. He more or less settled on Dennison as the best guy available to him at the time. And he had to convince Dennison to come here. You don't convince a guy with Dennison's pedigree and experience to come work for you by telling him you are going to run my offense. My opinion is that these guys got together and talked about each other's philosophies and that McDermott essentially put his stamp of approval on what Dennison's approach was going to be. And I am sure that McDermott influences that offense to some extent. How much is unknown. But based on what we are seeing, this looks like an offense that Dennison has ran before. They even said as much coming into this year as Dennison was bringing the stretch zone **** style running game with him. McDermott likely prefers a somewhat different approach to offense - otherwise he wouldn't have had other guys ahead of Dennison that he wanted to come here to coach the offense. He would have wanted Dennison first.

Every single offense should be tailored to the starting quarterback's strengths. Every single one. If they aren't doing that, then they are stupid and/or lazy and/or stubborn. You don't design an offense for a quarterback you might have in a year or two. Think about how ridiculous that sounds. The impact of getting good quarterback play is so strong on your team, that you are absolutely insane if you plan an offense around your backup qb, your 3rd stringer or some imaginary quarterback you might have in the future who isn't even on this roster yet. If you want the best possible QB play you can get out of your starting QB, you tweak your offense and your play calling towards his strengths. You don't need to completely redesign everything. But you should tweak things by consistently calling plays the team has shown they can execute well. It is okay if a coach prefers a different philosophy but runs the one that his team can execute the best. It is absolutely idiotic for a coach to keep forcing a style of play on players that have proven they can't execute it well - when there is a different style they have proven they can execute well. And it's not just Tyrod that isn't executing Dennison's offense well, it is the entire offensive unit with the offensive line being the poorest performers.