LA Grant

I hope so. I would love to see tons of roll-outs, moving pockets, and especially RPOs. I don't know how many are in the playbook. God do I hope they are adding & emphasizing them. It won't be easy - Jags LBs are good at containing roll-outs. In the Jets primetime game, they rolled out on the first play and it resulted in a sack and then the offense got very gun shy... whether that was Tyrod or Dennison or whoever, they have to stick with it as much as they can. Tyrod is a playmaker when his running ability is emphasized, and with McCoy close to being out, and Benjamin still limited, they need to treat him as such. I hope so. I thought we'd see Tyrod unleashed in a few instances this year, and it never happened. Actually it usually went the exact opposite and it was one of his worst games. Hopefully they've grown into a different unit than that 3-game losing streak. One of the best "clutch" games we've seen from Tyrod was that TNF against Seattle last year. Even though we lost, he played a great game. That's the Tyrod I'm hoping to see on Sunday. Y'know, maybe he absorbed some of that Joe Flacco playoff magic in Baltimore -- once you're in the playoffs, doesn't matter how you were in the regular season. You just gotta be clutch in these games. Blake Bortles will turn the ball over. Tyrod generally does not. If that stays true, and we get some great runs, options, and deep-balls off of play action, the Bills will be heading to Boston next week.

Rams and Eagles.

Tyrod definitely has limitations, no argument. The disagreement is that I think those limitations could be mitigated into a far more productive and effective offense if we ran a scheme that emphasized his strengths more (run-option, downfield throws, rolling pocket) and limited his weaknesses (pure pocket WCO). Considering the organizational dysfunction that's happened with the Bills during Tyrod's three years, I've been impressed with the growth of his game. Last year, it was "Tyrod can't throw over the middle." Well, this year we saw he can certainly throw over the middle. Sometimes his play is very frustrating, and I do wish we had a better QB2 option than a 6th-round rookie. If we had someone like Fitz on the bench, I don't think people would have disagreed with the Chargers decision; at least, I wouldn't have. There are times when we're down in the 4th quarter and you need some QB heroics and he doesn't get it done and it's excruciating. Similarly, I wish we had a Fitz gunslinger on the bench for those moments just because it's like... take the damn shot!! At the same time, it's a double-edged sword. Because NOT turning the ball over does mean you are going to win games where you wouldn't have if you gifted the other team 7, 10, 14 points. And we generally do not do that. So any of those 1-score wins this year... Tyrod deserves credit there. And, yes, we all wish we were winning games by more than 1 score and didn't "need" that -- well, that's not the NFL for the most part. As the team continues to hope & pray they find the next Aaron Rodgers, don't shoot yourself in the foot by getting rid of a guy who's strengths have won you games more than his weaknesses have cost you games.

lol. We get it, you hate Tyrod. My reasoning for why Bills have advantage over Jags in passing game is (1) I think it's more likely Bortles will commit a turnover than Tyrod; (2) we finally have Kelvin Benjamin and Charles Clay healthy at the same time, which hasn't happened much, and I think we're going to need to rely on those weapons with McCoy out or limited, and I think the fact that we have big targets could give the Jags' talented secondary some trouble. We'll see what happens. If I'm right, I'm sure we won't be hearing from you, which will make a great day even better. If Bortles outperforms Tyrod, congrats to you on your campaigning.

Is it possible that red zone production regressed for another reason? A completely overhauled and downgraded WR group, maybe? New OC? No? Just Tyrod? Well, let's see. First year, Greg Roman's playbook was built probably for Matt Cassel -- Rex said from the get-go we'd be ground & pound. Tyrod stole the job in training camp, but that offense was NOT built with him in mind -- it was built to be as QB-proof as possible. Second year, Anthony Lynn is working off of Roman's playbook but adjusting the philosophy which remains run-first -- makes sense because he was a RB coach. This year could've been the opportunity to build around Tyrod, but the coaches did the opposite. It's clear that they don't trust him, based on the Chargers game alone, and Dennison's scheme isn't a fit for Tyrod's abilities -- you'd want a RPO offense -- but I don't think they're right. I think it's an error on their part, one that hopefully they are reconsidering given Taylor's playoff-caliber production, with almost no organizational support. I also don't think the coaches were right to punt in Miami territory in the 4th quarter yesterday. Coaches can be wrong. And in this instance, in designing the 2017 offense, they were wrong to not bring in an OC who would use Tyrod's abilities to their fullest potential. If you can't see that, yikes.

Biggest reason we made the playoffs: Turnover differential -- QB who does not throw INTs, and a RB who rarely fumbles. Not turning the ball over is our offense's biggest strength. It's not sexy but it is effective, especially when you have an elite secondary like we do. IIRC, Hyde and Poyer both have 5 INTs, plus the outstanding play from Tre'Davious White. This is the biggest reason the Bills won 9 games. Biggest reason we almost did not make the playoffs: Lack of talent -- Outside of the secondary, every position on the roster is thin. RB -- Keep McCoy, and our FA pick-ups have been decent, but we need a younger stud RB to split carries with Shady in 2018. QB -- Keep Tyrod, but draft for the franchise guy, and bring in a veteran QB2 like Fitz. When Tyrod struggles, or if he's unwilling to take chances in a 4th quarter situation, take him out. But his game-managing is part of the biggest reason we won games, and that is valuable. Go into Training Camp with four QBs -- Tyrod, Fitz-type, Peterman, and rookie -- and keep the best 3, then trade the one you don't want for his value. WR / TE -- I think we are set after the Benjamin trade... assuming Matthews doesn't return, which I don't think he's really a good fit here even though I really liked him in Philly, you need another guy like Thompson -- a true downfield threat. OL -- we need some help on the interior, but we're not in terrible shape. Eric Wood is old & not good, Incognito is old & his play is declining, and starting guys like Vlad Ducasse and Jordan Mills isn't ideal. If you believe the trade rumors, it seems like the organization wants to move on from Cordy but he's the best player on the OL so I hope they keep him, and Dion Dawkins looked good. Need more talent, tho. DL -- we need talent across the board. Kyle is done after this year, god bless him. Hughes had a down year in sacks and pressure, but at least he cut down on the penalties. Shaq Lawson didn't impress, wonder if he would be better suited for OLB? LB -- Matt Milano looks great. Preston Brown is solid, as was Lorenzo. But going to need at least one new starter here. Secondary -- best position on the team, we're pretty set, just add some depth.

Goff & Garappolo had healthy Watkins & Goodwin almost all year ... when Taylor had them healthy, which was never close to a full season, they looked just as good and were making highlight plays as frequently as they are this year, which is to say, occasionally. Also, keep in mind both Goff & Garappolo are playing with creative pass-first OCs. Taylor has always been in run-first offenses. Is it possible Wilson's throwing skills, reading, and clutch are related to being on the same page with his WRs? His targets have been very consistent. Much easier for those 3 things to look better when the passes are complete... and pass completions are a two-way street. Otherwise, if 2017 didn't show you that you can never say never, I dunno how else to convince you.

It won't be easy, and I don't think the Bills should win -- but they could. Both teams have excellent secondaries. Both are run-first teams with limited passing attacks. Passing offense - advantage Buffalo Running offense - advantage Jacksonville, especially with McCoy down, and Fournette is a beast Passing defense - almost even but Jacksonville has better pass rush Running defense - advantage Jacksonville Special Teams - advantage Buffalo Coaching - even To win, Bills will need to play mistake-free + get contributions from playmakers on offense + get turnovers on defense.

They really published their predictions for the Patriots as 16-0????? How does this person sleep at night?

Fail to see why Tyrod's winning record doesn't count the same as Aaron Rodgers' winning record. Do wins count differently for some QBs? Keep seeing Haters saying they'd rather have Kirk Cousins. Now here's what a QB should look like for you, right? Tall, white, multiple 300+ yard passing games... Only thing is Cousins' record, though, is 26-30-1... hmm, so not quite a top-end back-up quality QB then, huh? Guessing we're hoping to bring him in as 3rd string? Might be pricey! He limits the offense all the way to the playoffs.

Not sure why you're so sure Taylor is nowhere close. For one thing, his style of play is very similar to Russell Wilson, who won a SB and appeared in another. He plays far better than Peyton did in SB 50 season and can do more. He's better than both Flacco & Kaep. You can debate if he's better than Eli Manning but I'd rather have Tyrod. Seems to me as though the future is unwritten. Why not give Tyrod a season with consistency at WR? We have not seen that.

Interesting, I didn't realize 300 yard passing games were what determined Wins and Losses. I thought it had to do with the amount of points scored versus the other team. Really bizarre how Taylor ended up having a winning record as a QB with those 300 yard requirements.

I think what we see anytime we're talking about Tyrod's future is there are simply a contingent of Bills fans who will be saying "Tyrod is not good enough to win a championship" even if he wins a Super Bowl in Buffalo.

Yep, this is exactly right. Tyrod isn't perfect. But he is good enough that you don't dump him until you have found your Brady, Brees, or Young. Not when Tyrod has over-achieved to the level that he has in his time here. It's just foolishness to start over again.

Go ahead and take a look at Tyrod's stats when he had all those guys healthy at the same time. It wasn't often, if you recall. But when it happened... well, just go take a look, and merry christmas.

Okay so, Aaron Rodgers has won one (1) Super Bowl, the same as Drew Brees and Russell Wilson... the same as Brad Johnson & Trent Dilfer. Fewer than Eli Manning and Joe Flacco. Point is: you're right, we can win with Tyrod. We actually don't know what his ceiling is, because he has not had any consistency with his WRs in Buffalo. My question is — can we give that to him? Can we see what that looks like? Because when he had it, in the rare instances when Watkins/Woods/Goodwin were all on the field together — Tyrod looked pretty damn good.

You are totally correct — but I can't recommend this enough: do not bother responding to MAJBobby. He doesn't debate from any point of reason. He's quite literally just trolling. Take a look through his profile and his history of posts — they're all the same, just quick posts of inflammatory things, almost never backed up, and rarely (if ever) cordial. He's asking you to show him video of Tyrod making a throw he's made in tons of games -- don't bother. It's not going to change his mind, and he's not going to be persuaded by facts. Sorry to have to call it out so plainly but it's the truth. There are obviously counterpoints to the idea of building around Tyrod, and he's not without his faults — but you won't be having that debate with MAJBobby. It will just waste your time.

"Actually" no. You are wrong. Our line grades out pretty well for run protection — this is obviously their skillset. They are not great in pass protection. Did you see how much time Peterman got against the Chargers? Okay then. Yup. Tyrod Haters are really amazing -- Nathan Peterman can literally go in & break the record for most INTs thrown in a half, while Tyrod can take a group of receivers he's barely on a first-name basis with to the playoffs and still they're like "UHHH I dunno guys Peterman looked good to me at times!"

I like McDermott but your head is on backwards, friend... should I thank him for throwing away the Chargers game by starting Peterman? Or for trading away the team's top talent for character guys? For going into the season with a receiving core that was all slot guys, none of whom had any time to develop a relationship with the QB? Should Coach be thanked for punting on 4th and short in Miami territory yesterday? Should we thank Rick Dennison for installing an offense that suits exactly 0 of our personnel -- every idiot in the league knows McCoy runs better from shotgun/spread, and Tyrod is clearly a RPO QB, and yet we're running an offense for ghosts of who we might someday have. Team is in the playoffs for three main reasons: 1. Our secondary is elite -- especially Tre White, Micah Hyde, and Jordan Poyer. (Obviously credit goes to McD for bringing these guys in) 2. Shady McCoy is a work horse 3. Tyrod Taylor plays smart, efficient, and doesn't turn the ball over We have a team of over-achievers, which is wonderful... now I'd love to see what happens if we had some consistency in personnel. What does Tyrod look like with a full offseason working with Kelvin Benjamin and Deonte Thompson?

100%. Yup... but according to the TBD geniuses, the only thing that matters is passing yards. I'm guessing it's also because he doesn't "look" like how they want their QB to look but we won't get into that (they get sensitive when they're called on it)...

I'd love to see what Tyrod could do with a cast of receivers that he has worked with for more than a handful of weeks. Wouldn't that be something? Haters should check his numbers when he had a healthy Watkins, Woods, and Goodwin on the field before this season. I won't even get greedy and ask for an OC who knows how to call RPOs that would suit Tyrod's skillset. Just some consistency would be great. Even with the handicap of a rotating cast of receivers this year, we ended a 17 year playoff drought. Still somehow people are convinced we'd be better off with someone else. You'd rather have the likes of Andy Dalton? Joe Flacco? Sam Bradford? Sam Darnold? Keep drafting QBs. Look for that Hall of Fame franchise guy. Trade up if you're within striking distance. Cutting or trading Tyrod would be a horrible mistake. I hope securing playoffs means Tyrod has secured his future here. Build around him, you jags!

There are many reasons sexual harassment goes unreported. 1) It's usually presented in a way that "this is okay, this is just how we do things here." Whether it's a joke, or an "innocent" offer of a date or sex or whatever else. The offender isn't thinking of their behavior as harassment, even when it's egregious like Matt Lauer with a secret button under his desk, in his head he's probably not thinking "yes today I will harass one of my employees, preferably sexually." 2) If the victim is a subordinate or in a position of less power or younger -- which is usually the case -- they may doubt their feelings. Women generally struggle with asserting their feelings because we live in a society that has traditionally taught girls to be nice & pleasant & to not make a scene, even when they ought to. This is changing but slowly. As men, we tend to have a hard time understanding this because generally men will make a scene, or will take action. To keep speaking incredibly generally, that's one small aspect of why abusers tend to be men rather than the other way around -- men will just do things they feel are right, whereas women will overthink things until they feel absolutely certain. 3) There usually isn't a clear way to handle reporting these things in the workplace, either. HR is there to protect the company, not you, so if you're bringing an allegation against a powerful person in the organization and you're, say, an assistant or a temp -- odds are, it's you that will be the one quietly shown the door. At-will employment has become increasingly common, meaning employers don't need any justification in particular to let you go. I've seen this happen in companies that I've worked for -- in one case, the offender did also lose his job but so did the accuser, although the offender did continue to work for the company in quiet freelance way, whereas the accuser of course did not. 4) Men often simply do not want to believe women. You're seeing it even in this thread. "Where's the proof? Well, what did you do? What were you wearing?" It's easier to believe the woman is wrong, for some reason. 5) Lastly, I think most people agree with you in the very broad sense -- in a platonic ideal society, a crime would be reported and dealt with immediately after it'd been committed. I've never had to deal with being sexually harassed, but I have seen bosses who don't listen and don't care, and I have seen wildly incompetent HR at more places than I've seen competent HR. In Los Angeles, and the entertainment/media industry, obviously there's been a lot of this lately in the news. And there is also a lot that doesn't make the headlines. From what I've heard from friends and women generally in my life or circles, these instances are almost never really a "gray" thing -- I think sometimes men see the headlines and think, "ok so if I tell a coworker she looks nice, am I going to get sued?" No, that's not what's happening. To put it in equally simple scenario, it's essentially a version of the "casting couch" concept that's being taken down. The idea of "If you want to work in this town, honey, you need to go along to get along" (lol) -- that's the basic core at a lot of this. Men in power leveraging that power to get sex. Women not knowing if they have the power to fight back. Now we're seeing that people are listening.

The NFL has many problems, but these are the most crucial, imo: Too many games are tedious and boring. and Injuries, Illegal Hits, and Inconsistent Punishment. I think the simplest way to solve is to focus on revamping Instant Replay. 1) Challenges and Booth Reviews are removed entirely. The call on the field stands, always, period the end. Will calls be wrong? Absolutely, but calls are wrong now even with Replay. Short of replacing the referees with robots, you're going to have human error and incorrect judgments. Rather than spending hours upon hours every season debating "was his knee down? was that a catch?" -- the call is the call as it's judged in the moment. Keep the game moving, and they will be far more enjoyable to watch. 2) Instant Replay is used only to review injuries and illegal hits. If a player is injured, the play is automatically reviewed, even if there is no one at fault. Even if a player is not injured but the referees see a hit they think should be reviewed, then it is reviewed. "The Booth" can also initiate a review, should they see something the officials on the field miss. 3) Punishments are simple and severe. If the officials believe someone made an illegal hit, the player is immediately ejected. The league then evaluates and determines if the hit was intentional or avoidable, and if so, the player is suspended for the remainder of the season, including playoffs. Players can appeal, but if the language in the rules are specific and clear, then a hit like Gronkowski's or JuJu's or any of Burfict's in previous years would be very clear violations and thus lead to full suspension. If the league determines the ejected player's hit was an accident, and they were perhaps wrongly ejected, then the player can return the following week. 4) This is, in effect, a zero tolerance policy toward intent to injure. There are not a range of tiers to this punishment. It is ejection and, if a true violation, a full season suspension. This would be the harshest punishment, and rightfully so, which also helps to (somewhat) justify every other punitive judgment. This way, you do not have a situation where Gronk's hit is somehow equal to Jerry Hughes mouthing off to officials -- completely ridiculous. Being suspended for 2, 3, or 4 games for off-the-field behavior doesn't seem so bad... and may also make the NFL reconsider how many players they want to be suspending for minor offenses. If you're committing to player safety, then even a star like Gronkowski should be subject to the rules, but since you don't want to suspend all of your star players... maybe give the players a heads up before you give them a drug test, or better yet, stop testing for THC and just let them be. Leave it to coaches/teams to punish players for being unprofessional. Although you'll never eliminate injuries entirely, it's entirely possible to dramatically reduce them. Swift, harsh punishment for what should be football's biggest offense will 100% make players go out of their way to avoid making these hits. If that overall effect leads toward more scoring because defenders aren't using their bodies as missiles when they're out of position, then... that's a good thing for the league. Tackling needs to be taught very simply and consistently. If you are not wrapping up a guy from the chest or below, then you are doing something wrong. If you're leading with your head instead of your shoulder, you're definitely doing something wrong. 5) Back to making the games more exciting, I would then recommend adding more cameras in the style of the Pylon Cam. The league already puts chips into players' pads for Next Gen Stats, so why not include tiny imperceptible cameras to helmets? The tip of the ball? All along the sideline? The NFL has always been a product designed for television, but it's not taking advantage of new technology. It now is beginning to look antiquated, and when the games are dull, it's almost as bad as watching baseball. So instead of reviewing calls ("were his feet in bounds?") from boring, repetitive angles, the highlights that we're seeing are of the exciting plays, from exciting perspectives. In this way, the TV viewer is seeing about the same amount of replays as we are now, but the replays are better. Imagine seeing a slowed-down replay of a spectacular one-handed catch from the perspective of the nose of the ball as the WR leaps into position. Or a RB leaping over the pile from the POV of his helmet. Or a sack on a QB from the pass rusher's POV. This is not some sci-fi parallel universe, this is possible with existing consumer tech. Cameras are smaller and more durable than ever. Use them!! tl;dr -- This will never happen. Unless it does.

Yep. Reminded me of those kinds of backyard games in high school. I think we probably played a more entertaining game though. ?

AT LEAST as long. Plays like that should be season-ending to the offender.