PlayoffsPlease
-
Posts
2,224 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by PlayoffsPlease
-
-
-
9 hours ago, Augie said:
Tomorrow is one game.
We will play 16 games that count, and this is just one of them. If you told me 3-1 going into week 5, I’d have been happy. Sure, 4-0 is better, but it’s looking like 9 wins could get you in the playoffs this year. I’ll hope for a great showing and a win, but I won’t collapse on the floor if we lose to this dynasty.
I like our trajectory and hope we keep showing progress.
the "16 games that count " has been a fallacy for 20 years. Most of those years after 10 games or so the season is over for the bills regardless of the outcome of the rest of the games. A loss won't mean we wont make the playoffs. But a win here makes its over 80% likely the Bills will. Plus beating the Patriots doesn't just mean the Bills have a nice 4-0 start. It means they have beaten the team considered in every single power ranking as the best team on the planet. Comparing this to a meaningless week 16 game is absurd.
-
1
-
-
58 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:
The Colts should have been better -- they had Manning one of the all time greats and the closest thing to Brady's equal.. why didn't they? stupid coaching, and terrible team building. (they shortened his career with those god awful O lines) Manning was the team while Brady was PART of a team.
Steelers -- Have been good BEFORE Big Ben, they been a playoff team almost every year for like 30 years. they are rarely rebuilding but rather reloading. I dare say Tomlin is the orst HC in the NFL now and being exposed without AB/Bell/ Or Ben
Baltimore - I noticed you forgot them? because they dont fit the mold of a great QB leading them? lol
AB was Bills way trying get the Pats a 19-0 season. the only thing they have not accomplished with him and Brady. (Thats My Opinion)
Sometimes reading is hard.
-
Believe what you want but 29 nfl gms are trying figure out if they can get one of the leagues best WRs for vet minimum
-
3 hours ago, Just Joshin' said:
It is also easy to support your facts when you make a statement.
The link does not show his record picking games, only his rankings. Is there something I missed as that was the original question.
yes there is something you missed.
-
3 minutes ago, MJS said:
Yeah, but we faced much better offenses and a Jets team that wasn't yet spiralling downwards. Bills for sure aren't better than them, but the manner in which they beat their opponents is a deeper story than just looking at the margin of victory.
The Steelers with Ben were mauled by the Pats. That game was executed flawlessly from start to finish by the pats.
-
50 minutes ago, skibum said:
I didn't realize until today that that Pats"* three victims this year are all winless (I don't follow the rest of the league that closely).
So we have a matchup two 3-0 teams whose opponents thus far are a combined 1-17. The Bills may not be a championship team yet, but they're no bums. But then again, they have played nothing but bums. And so have the Pats*.
This could be more interesting than I thought!
Pars have massacred their bums. Bills need two q4 drives to win. bills can win this game. But it is a long shot is
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, Just Joshin' said:
Care to post his track record?
Google is easy to use
-
Bookmakers at the large shops have their own version of power rankings that assign a numerical value to each team based on expected performance against an average team. Home field advantage is actually not an automatic 3 points, but is based on teams actual histories. But it is typically between 2.5 and 3. So 3 is a perfectly fine short hand. The use this to set INITIAL betting lines. The actually lines move depending on actual bets placed, to try to keep the action even on both sides.
Currently bookmakers rate the Patriots in the neighborhood of -10. They rank the Bills in the neighborhood of -1. With the home field advantage of 3, the initial line should be -11 - -1 +3 = 6. Other factors such as know bettor bias (big market teams and teams like the Pats draw more bets to their side) are built into their algorithms as well.-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Cygnus99 said:
We have won against the NY Jets , NY Giants and the Bengals
DIVISION : We sweep Miami and looks like we may sweep the NY Jets . For now I hope I am wrong but we will be swept by the Pats 4 wins against the division :
NFC : I think we can go 3-1 Most likely win against the Redskins , the Eagles are not as good so we have a good shot I am expecting a loss against the Cowboys
NON DIVISION AFC : Denver and Cleveland should be 2 wins maybe the Titans ?( Cleveland could be tough it depends if they show up but we should be able to handle them )
our losses will be 2 times against the Patriots , Steelers , Ravens , Cowboys and perhaps we lose a game we should win and a game we win we should lose
I am gonna say 9-7 or 10-6 or at best 11-5 and most likely a wild card playoff spot
What makes you think the Bills will lose to the hapless Mason Rudolph led Steelers?
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
While you're right that having a top QB is huge, I disagree that it needs to be a top 3 or top 5 guy.
Roethlisberger, for one, isn't top three, or even top five. Top ten? You betcha. And Russell Wilson is another terrific example. They've been consistently competitive right since they got him, and no he's not top five either, though close.
I'd further argue that Rivers has been a top five guy for a very long time now and it hasn't got that team consistency.
Oh, and in your first paragraph you say that "Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out." But then you hang your hat on the Steelers, Manning's Indy, the Pats and the Saints. But the reason they Colts got Manning was that they were so very very bad the year before they drafted Peyton that they got the first draft pick. The Steelers were also consistently good before getting Roethlisberger. Wasn't till they had a bad year and got the 9th pick in a year where Eli and Rivers were also coming out that they finally got their first Super Bowl titles since Noll.
More, the year before the Saints got Brees and got good, they went 3-13. They were lucky enough to get Brees without having to draft him, but they were still bad to mediocre for a long time before that, and that had a lot to do with how they were able to put a pretty good team around Brees almost instantaneously. And the Pats sucked pretty good in Belichick's first year too, going 5-11. I don't think your best examples bear you out very well, even though the Pats and Saints managed to get a top five QB without having to draft him very high, a rare feat.
Get a top ten or top twelve QB and you'll have a chance every year. Not that you'll be good every year, but you'll have a chance if you can put a solid team around him. Below the top ten or twelve and you have to have not a good team but a sensational team to have much success and it's likely not to be very consistent. If you can get a top three or five guy, you're even better off, but it's not necessary for consistent competitiveness, as your own example, the Ravens, show.
1. Ben Rothlisberger may not have been a top 5 QB every single season, but over the course of the entire number of years he played, he definitely was. I can prove this by adding "you betcha"
2. "Have a chance every year" is not the same as sustained excellence, for the purposes of my post. Feel free to use my definition (in the OP) to demonstrate which teams accomplished sustained excellence the four I mentioned (each of whom were led by future HOF QBs). Having an excellent non-future HOF QB probably gives a chance every year (of course chance every year is not really measurable). Have Matt Stafford and the Lions had a chance every year? Did Carson Palmer and the Bengals?
-
1
-
-
Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out.
I think sustained excellence is fancy word for having one of the leagues top 3 or 5 QBs for an extended period of time. Bills fans are skewed by their relation with the Patriots. I am going to go out on a limb and say their run of success is a fluke, that won't happen again in my lifetime.
In truth only 4 teams have really had a period of sustained excellence in the this century. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning, Steelers with Ben Rothlisberger and the Patriots with Tom Brady and the Saints with Drew Brees. Other teams have had intermittent successes with a different model, notably the Ravens. But no team without a future HOF QB who truly gaps out from their peers has accomplished that. ( I am defining sustained excellence as appearing in divisional playoff games more than 50% of the time for an extended period of years. Anything less would be more like "sustained good".) One great QB Aaron Rodgers only had intermittent success. So HOF QB is not the only thing for "sustained excellence" just the minimum starting requirements.
I don't think top 10 QB really gets you sustained success. Think Matt Ryan or Cam Newton or Russell Wilson. Their teams had their moments when everything came together.
Fortunately Josh Allen is a future HOF QB, and he provides the minimum building block to lead the teams to playoff wins and championships for the next dozen years. Starting this year.-
1
-
-
Trying to understand how the "lets offer a pay cut" scenario played out internally:
Coaching staff : "Richie is fat and coming to meetings high"
GM Staff: "Has he flunked an NFL drug test"
Coaching Staff : "No"
GM Staff : "Lets give him a pay cut and hope he doesn't get caught"
I see cutting him outright. I just don't see how the pay cut concept fits any "process". Color me confused. -
1 hour ago, TigerJ said:
Size and speed. Coming out of college he needed to add mass and strength. Needed to work on hands and route running as well. He's had two years to work on deficiencies. It helps that he's smart. He presents intriguing possibilities.
Its exciting when you consider how many times the Bills have taken WR's cut by multiple other teams and coached them up into NFL stars.
-
Patriots have not scored less than 30 this season. The have given up an average of 5.7 pts per game. The most the Bills have scored is 28. The have given up an average of 17 points per game. The money line will get action where it is now.
-
1 hour ago, mjt328 said:
The Browns/Jets are a perfect example of what I've been saying.
You can't build a TEAM by just going out and picking up a handful of stars in trades/free agency (Odell Beckham, Le'Veon Bell).
You need a cohesive vision - starting with the front office, working together with the coaching staff and then trickling down into the locker room. You need consistently solid drafting, and strong depth across the entire roster. And you need a culture that ties everything together. Talent is absolutely important. But it's very rare to see 1-2 guys (especially ones known for being me-first) to carry the other 51 guys alone.
The Bills approach may be slower to yield results. But eventually, I think what Beane/McDermott are building will transform this franchise from a consistent loser into a consistent contender.
what did you think of the Rams approach?
-
6 hours ago, folz said:
As I posted in a thread last week, I believe this is the reason that Zay starts over Foster or Duke Williams (for those who continually wonder about that). He has a much better command of this very complicated offense than the other two do.
Interesting observation.
-
During the broadcast yesterday Jay Feely mentioned that John Brown told him the Bills offense is the most complicated he has played in. Previous head coaches for Brown include Bruce Arians and John Harbaugh, so that is an interesting observation by John.
Its not clear to me that "most complicated" is a great thing. But my understanding is that NE's offense is considered very complicated, and that seems to have worked out over time.-
4
-
1
-
-
41 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:
Brutal analysis.
Brutal.
The 2019 Rams had a better offense than NE's defense. They also had a better defense than NE's offense. But the NFL is a matchup league, so it's probably worth diving JUST a bit deeper than "we're better than you".
Otherwise why even play the game?
I think that the problem for Buffalo is the matchup of WRs vs secondary.
Gilmore will probably draw Smoke and is capable of limiting him significantly. That likely means that Beasley draws a bracket inside and Zay/Foster/Slick draw 1-1s.
If the Bills want to score consistent points against NE, they're going to have to hit big plays to their backs and TEs early and often and force NE to adjust.
Matchup is certainly critical. I am not sure that our defense (or any defense) can take away the strength of the Patriots offense, the quick hitting short passing game. The Patriots will score over 20 points almost certainly. It will take a much better game plan than the Bills have had so far to score more than 20 against the Pats defense. -
Does anyone know Singletary's status for week 4?
-
1 minute ago, PromoTheRobot said:
My point is stop drooling over the Pats. They beat 3 tomato cans. The Bills are the first actual good team they are playing. It's not a gimme for them.
Even if the Steelers with Ben were a tomato can it was a 30 point beat down. Bills have struggled to win against two of their three tomato cans.
-
51 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:
I would prefer they say nothing this week. But Hughes is held constantly with no calls
Sometimes he is tackled from behind without a call. He is the ref's anti-Brady
-
Josh is no Marcus Mariotta, that is for sure. 0-2 Kyler Murray f'n rocks the house. Go NFL.com
-
no there is not. Mahomes is also exciting but in. A different way
-
2
-
1
-
Foster out
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
One could ask if you could have seen the thread title and simply ignored this thread instead of being the thread police.