msw2112

Diggs is tough to figure out. He played really well in the first half of the season. When Brady took over, his production dropped, but I don't think it's because he lost a step mid-season, it was simply because Brady was (wisely) spreading the ball around to other weapons such as Shakir, Kincaid, Cook, and even Ty Johnson. If teams were going to double-team Diggs, that means someone else has single coverage and/or is open. That said, he's made some key drops. That dropped bomb from Allen yesterday could have changed the complexion of the game if he had caught it. An NFL WR of his level HAS to make that catch. The Chiefs' WRs, ridiculed for drops all season long, made all of the tough catches yesterday. Shakir and Kincaid also made a bunch. So is his decline because he lost a step, or is it because the offense is not running through him anymore? And if it's because the offense isn't running through him anymore, is he dropping the ball because he's just out of rhythm or is it because he feels "disrespected" and his head/heart are no longer in it? I hate to question the guy, because he's always been a competitor who plays hard and wants to win, but he's also shown to be a bit of a head case. I'm curious to know what others on the board think. And I'm really just looking for insight into his play and not taking the contractual situation into account.

Young guys like Bernard, Benford, Cook, Shakir, Torrence, and Kincaid (listed in no particular order) definitely make it look like they can continue to be one of the better teams while they move on from some of the more expensive veterans. Dorian Williams also looks like he has some potential to improve as he adjusts to the NFL level of play. It doesn't take the sting out of the loss, but at least provides some hope that there will be talent on the roster other than Josh Allen.

I'm bothered and disappointed, but not devastated. It's not like 13 seconds, which ripped my heart out and I was depressed for about 2 weeks. I think it's because I (we?) objectively knew that the Bills were not the best team this season. I didn't see this team beating Baltimore or San Francisco. I do think they could have beaten the Chiefs, but it was a 50-50 game going in and whoever won the game was going to do so by a slim margin. The 13 seconds year, we literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, and I think that Bills team was the best team at the time and would have gone on to win the Super Bowl. This team wasn't going to do that. I should add that the injuries on defense were the biggest part of my feeling that the Bills were not the best team. If Milano was healthy, I don't think Kelce has the game he had. Then you take out Bernard, and others, and it was obvious that the Chiefs were going to be difficult to stop. I said before the game that the offense needed to be near-perfect and put up 35 points to win. I still think that holds true. If the Chiefs were not in kneel-down mode on the last series, I think they would have scored a TD, which would have given them 34 points, so 35 would have been needed to win. (Even if the Bills had scored a TD on their last drive, getting them to 31, I think the Chiefs would have scored to take a 34-31 lead, and 35 would have been needed). But hey, if the Queen had balls, she'd be the King. There are lots of ifs, ands, or buts, but the Bills lost and it's time to move on.

That's the same feeling that I had. Rather than throwing for the end zone, Allen had Diggs underneath on the 2nd down which would have gotten the first down and allowed them to milk the clock, take a few shots at the TD, and if unsuccessful, then attempt a chip shot FG. On 3rd down, I thought I saw Shakir open underneath, but in fairness to Josh on that play, he was on the run and it would have been difficult to get the ball to Shakir. Although the defense had a couple of stops in the final 10-12 minutes, I didn't think they'd stop the Chiefs if they had scored and given them the ball back with more than a minute on the clock.

This is about where I'm at....

Agree. With the injuries on defense and WR, and the RB room now healthy, the spots are needed elsewhere. Should one of the RBs go down again, it would be great to bring Fournette back (if he was interested in coming back).

I agree with this. I fully understand why McD calls those timeouts and I have also noticed other teams doing the same thing recently, but I believe that forcing the other team to scramble and rush to get the play off benefits the defense more than calling timeout to settle everyone down. It gives the offense a chance to catch their breath, get their best play called, get their guys aligned, etc. Obviously, if you have 12 men on the field or otherwise see a significant flaw in the defense, you call the timeout, but I think McD does it in those situations as a matter of course and I don't agree with it. I say all of this in the context that I'm not a McD hater. He's done a hell of a good job over multiple seasons. He's not perfect - no coach is - but hopefully the Bills will earn/get some breaks this year and get to the promised land. I'd be curious as to how many people on this board wished we had a coach "like Nick Siriani" over the last couple of years ago, and how they feel about that now. I admit that I had some thoughts that it might be great to have a young, brash, aggressive coach versus the more traditional/conservative style of coach in McDermott, but after the last 7 weeks, I'm good with what we have. Ask me again in a month.

When I saw it in real time, I thought it was a penalty for sure. When I saw it on replay, it did not look like a foul. I used to be of the mindset that I didn't want my team to benefit from any bad calls - I wanted to win without any questions or doubts. As I get older, I realize how many bad calls have gone against the Bills, and that people may or may not remember a bad call, but they will always remember who came out on top. So, if this was a bad call, I'll definitely take it! Also, as to officiating yesterday, I think the first fumble that was reversed in the Bills' favor was an incomplete pass, so a bad call in the the Bills' favor, but the second one that was not reversed was a terrible call. The player fumbled in bounds, it was not touched by anyone who was out of bounds before touching it, and it was recovered in bounds. I don't see any rationale for that not being ruled a fumble. I think it was a makeup call for the questionable one earlier. I hosted a bunch of people for the game including some noisy children (mine), so I couldn't hear the explanation given by the referee or the follow-up commentary.

When Dodson went down, I expected this move to happen. It makes all the sense in the world. Klein knows the system and has played OK in spots. And he was available. I'd rather have Klein than a guy with more athletic ability who doesn't know the system. He was not signed to be a developmental project. He's insurance and might just suit up this week, given the fact the the opponent is likely to run the ball this week and the Bills are down 2 LBs (if you include Milano along with Dodson).

I'm thinking days....

I am not in favor of adding an 18th game. I was against 17. That said, if the did go to 18, I agree with your suggestions.

No doubt. This is exactly what I was thinking should have been called on the 4th and long 1 (which I stated in a different thread).

The narrative at mid-season was that McDermott and his defense could not hold off an opponent late in the 4th quarter and could not close out a game. I was on board with that narrative. The Bills have won the last 3 games by stopping an opponent late in the 4th quarter, so the narrative has changed. I'm very thankful for this development as they need to be able to win this way in the playoffs.

I happen to have access to Peacock and the $6 monthly fee isn't a big deal for me, but I absolutely agree that this is a bad move by greedy owners. On top of the fee and challenge to find the game, the Peacock technology is terrible. I don't know how it works for NFL games, but I tried to watch a college basketball game on Peacock the other night. I was not able to watch it live, but I couldn't "record" it to my DVR because it was on Peacock. If you try to tune in before the game is over, your only option is to join it in progress. You can't start at the beginning. If you wait until after the game is over, you can watch the "Replay." YouTubeTV is MUCH better. You can "record" to your DVR, join live or start at the beginning. ESPN+, which I use for Sabres games, has many flaws, but at least that also allows you to start a game in progress from the beginning. Peacock just sucks. If they're going to charge for a streaming service, at least make the technology good.

I agree that going for it was the right call. I admit that I had some concern before the snap that they had gone to the well once too often and that the Fins defense was ready for it. I was thinking a rollout/bootleg with Allen having the option to keep it or dump it off (perhaps to a TE) might have been the better call there. Since it was 4th down, the clock was not a factor if there was an incomplete pass. I think they ran the play I'm suggesting a couple of weeks ago and Allen short-armed it and Knox couldn't haul it in, so it failed, but it was wide open. The Colts also lost their game on 4th down on a very similar except that it was a backup RB and not a TE. I still like that call.... All that said, I'm OK with what they did. The chances of Allen making were still pretty high and with a different spot from the officials, they might have had it.

I was thinking the same thing - what an idiot! He was in a walking boot yesterday and now, in the biggest game of the season, he's putting more pressure on his bad wheel by doing backflips. What a fool. I don't question his talent - he's arguably the best WR in the league when healthy, but what a jackass. He truly took stupidity to the next level. If a Bills player that was critical to the team's success did that on a bad ankle, I would have been furious.

I don't want to get ahead of myself, but let's hope he's using that ability once again in about 3 weeks.

I thought Sherfield was a good signing and that he'd have a larger role in the offense this year. I don't blame his lack of production on a lack of talent; I think it's just a numbers game. There's only 1 ball and you have to feed Diggs, Davis, Kincaid, Shakir, Knox, plus the Bills are running more this season. That doesn't leave a lot of touches for Sherfield and Harty. Sherfield stepped up big last night and if Davis is out next week, I think we'll see a little more of him. I honestly can't say whether he'd be a better #2 than Davis, as the sample size of his play is just too small and he's never had that opportunity in the NFL. I'd guess that based on his draft status and the fact that he's bounced around the league a little bit that he's less talented than Davis, so he would not be as good of a #2. While I agree with the criticism of Davis for his drops, I don't agree with the heavy criticism for his lack of receptions in certain games. The offense has to take what the defense gives it. Some games Diggs is "quiet" and others Davis is quiet. It depends on the flow of the game, the coverages, etc. No one can question that Davis has had a number of big games for the Bills this season and over the course of his career. He's also a glue guy and known as a very hard worker. If he leaves the team, it's because of the salary cap. I'm guessing he'll be able to make a lot more money - potentially life-changing money - somewhere other than the Bills. If that's the case, I wish him well.

This reminds me of what my mom used to say: "If the Queen had balls, she'd be the King!" And my mom is a fairly well-mannered person, so this is a bit out of character for her. As to the original question, if I was the Dolphins in that situation, I would take a knee and the tie. Two reasons: 1) A FG could be blocked and returned for a score. It's unlikely and rare, but stuff like that has happened in the history of football; 2) would you rather face Mason Rudolph/Kenny Pickett/Mitchell Trubisky in the playoffs or Josh Allen?

With all due respect, I disagree. This board is overly critical of the Bills. If you spend enough time on this board, you'd think McDermott was the 2nd coming of Hank Bullough. I have many friends outside of Buffalo who are primarily fans of other teams and they all think the Bills are pretty damn good - most see them more favorably than from what I see on this board. The Bills are definitely among the best teams in the NFL over the last 3 or 4 years, but they have not been able to get by Kansas City in the playoffs and have also matched up poorly with the Bengals. I agree with you and think that most on this board does too - the Bills have their flaws and they've been exposed this season. They've seemingly corrected a couple of them recently - a) the ability to run the ball and commit to it; and b) the ability to not only PRESSURE the QB, but to also actually SACK him. They also closed out 1-score games against inferior opponents the last 2 weeks, something they struggled with earlier in the season (losing to NYJ #1, NE #1, Denver, and almost to NYG and TB). Allen is still throwing some ill-advised picks, although the one to Diggs last week was not a terrible choice - he was in single coverage and had his man beat and the the ball was simply underthrown. Right now, I think the Bills can play with and beat anyone, but objectively, I think Baltimore and SF are playing better football right now. Outside of those 2 teams, who is playing better than the Bills right now? Maybe Cleveland? Despite playing close games against lesser opponents the last 2 weeks, the Bills took care of business, and they beat KC on the road and dismantled a good Dallas team in Buffalo. Back to the original post, Kinkaid is having a very good rookie season and will continue to get better. I suspect that if he was in Detroit's offense, his numbers would look a lot like LaPorta's and if LaPorta was in Buffalo, his numbers would look a lot like Kincaid's. I think Kincaid has a lot more room for growth than LaPorta - LaPorta is peaking right out of the gate, whereas Kincaid will get better as the team figures out how to use him better, and as some here have said, he could use a full offseason in an NFL weight room.

From what I have seen this season, no, he should not be active. But I trust the coaches to evaluate how he looks in practice and then make the decision. Between his age and his injury, he may be done. Now that the Bills made the bold move to sit him last week, it would not be as big of a deal to sit him again.

The Bills are 4-0 in their last 4 games. I really don't care what Diggs' personal statistics are. Maybe he's hurt, or maybe defenses are shifting to take him out of the game, opening things up for other guys. Let's hope it's the latter. I get the sense that Diggs has his big paycheck, his 100 catches, and his 1,000 yards, so as long as the team keeps winning, he's fine. I also think he's going to bust out in a big way, perhaps Sunday night.

100% of the focus needs to be on beating the Pats. We lost to them once and they are playing better with Zappe at QB, and they still have some good players on defense. They went into Denver and won last week. I still think the Bills will be ready and will take care of business. I'm not going to drive myself crazy thinking about playoff scenarios until after Sunday's games. Go Bills (and go Ravens).

Could he be the next Oliver? What I mean by this is that Oliver has flashed his first few years, but was highly inconsistent from week to week. One week a monster, and other weeks invisible. The Bills paid him and it looked like a huge overpay. He came out this season and earned it. Epenesa has been similarly inconsistent, some weeks a monster and others invisible, just like Oliver. Maybe he gets paid good money (but not top dollar) and rewards the team with great play next season. Or, he goes the way of Edmunds and moves on to be overpaid someone elsewhere....

Wings not being crispy is the worst. Something that can be so good is rendered so disgusting....I prefer traditional Buffalo wings: not breaded, fried to a crisp, and in butter/Frank's sauce. I have come around to enjoying other "wings" (garlic parmesan, BBQ, lemon pepper, baked, smoked, etc.) but they are not "Buffalo" wings and will never be. I am able to make pretty good ones in an air fryer and found that to be a pleasant surprise. See image below and note that I didn't have any celery on hand that day....When I was in grad school several years ago, my buddies and I went out and bought a countertop deep fryer to make wings and despite all the oil, those were not as crispy as I can create in an air fryer. I think that to get a real crisp using oil, you need a restaurant/commercial standard deep fryer.