MPT

I'm a lot more polite before enduring an onslaught of mis-quotes, misinformation, and general douchebaggery. It quickly became apparent that you weren't willing to debate the topic in an adult manner, so I didn't have any qualms mocking your inane obstinance.

In that scenario, they didn't get any points and they didn't get very many yards. That kind of undermines your argument that "yards are not yards" and "points are not points." What you really mean is "not yards are not yards" and "not points are not points." Which is obvious, but still somehow beyond your comprehension. You see, you can't completely fabricate a hypothetical situation in which the Bills don't score any points and then use it as evidence that they don't score points. It's a fallacy, and it's nonsense.

Can you even read, or do you just kinda guess what people say and then mash your keyboard until you're tired? If you're going to quote me, make sure it doesn't say the exact words I claimed it did. Maybe you should call Beane and tell him to sign Matt Ryan. Then you wouldn't have to B word and moan about our QB incessantly. There must be some reason we haven't signed him, though. Can't fathom what it would be. Still blaming the offense for the defense's ineptitude.

You don't win arguments by being snarky and obtuse, sir. When you lead the league in rushing and you're almost last in rushing defense, the clock is always running. This results in lower scores for each team. So, the fact that the Bills still had a top ten offense in points scored and still had an "average" defense in points scored should put to bed any misconceptions about each side's efficacy. I mean, just think about the fact that we led the league in rushing (better than the #2 by a ridiculous margin of .5 yds/carry and 15 yds/game) and we were STILL 25th in time of possession. Think about the fact that there were 4 games total in which a single running back rushed for 200 yards last season, and the Bills were the victim of 3 of them. These are indicators of a defensive failure of historic proportions. You want to ignore these facts and the fact that the Bills were top ten in scoring? Fine, go right ahead. But don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

16th in points against. Average. 29th in rushing yards against. Atrocious.

Actually, I said the other teams "put up more." That's the part we have to fix. Because we are already putting up enough on offense. Curious: how bad does the defense have to be before you lay any responsibility at their feet? Do we even need to field a defense, or should our offense be able to put up more points no matter what? Let me put it another way... If you're running a business, and that business is generating more revenue than most of your competitors but bleeding expenses faster than most, which area do you focus on to improve your bottom line? Seems pretty f'in obvious, eh?

Well one of us has to tell it like it is. Still blaming the offense for the defense's ineptitude. A question mark would be an improvement. At least then, instead of certain defeat, there would be some games against good teams we'd actually have a chance of winning.

And yet, despite countless posts with endless stats and evidence showing the Bills put up points against good teams, you still think the defense wasn't the problem. Exactly. Other teams had to fight back. We put up points, but the good teams always put up more. That's a reflection of the defense, not the offense. The first bolded is simply not true. The rushing stats were generally spectacular against good teams as well as bad teams. You don't end up with the #1 rushing attack by only doing it against bad teams. As for the second bolded, I whole heartedly agree. I was really hoping we'd use the last game of the season in 2016 by putting Tyrod to the test in the passing game instead of wasting it on EJ. If we can be a little more consistent with the passing game and improve our defense to even average levels, we'll be a very good team.

It's average. What's your point?

No love for Eric Wood? I would probably go with either Kyle or Eric. McCoy might get consideration. He has been an enthusiastic representative for Buffalo and is a stud besides. My last jersey was Freddie, and that still feels like a solid purchase. Kyle and Eric are probably the only guys on the current team who have Freddie status.

Tyrod had the 7th highest QBR in the league inside the red zone. He was also tied for 4th in QB rushing TDs inside the red zone. Not too shabby. Actually, I don't think anyone has ever made that claim. You just interpret "Tyrod is an integral part of a top-ten offense and doesn't turn the ball over" as "TYROD IS THE BEST QB IN THE LEAGUE." It's understandable why you'd be arguing against that point, but nobody is making it, so...

First of all, 16th is exactly average. Second of all, field position is a special teams statistic. We had a kicker who couldn't kick the ball through the end zone on kickoffs and a punter who finished dead last in yards per punt in the league (he also tied for first in punts out of bounds and 32nd in longest punt). I am eagerly awaiting the day you blame Tyrod for Carpenter's missed field goals and extra points. Really should have lined up for a 2 point conversion, drawn the defense offside, and then Carpenter would only have to kick a 20 yard extra point instead of a 25 yard extra point. Stupid Tyrod! Actually, I have no idea what would happen in that scenario involving offside during a 2 point conversion and then switching to an extra point. Would be an interesting factoid. Anyway, you get the point. Well, probably not. But, point made.

The best ways to help out a defense are running the football and scoring points. The offense did both of those things very well.

Doesn't the fact that you have to embellish facts to support your position make you wonder about the veracity of said position? BTW, I wouldn't advise using that that particular embellishment with the ladies. It can only end in disappointment.

Ha

Not sure why you guys have so much trouble grasping this, but there is no QB on the planet that could have gotten Sammy 1500 yards. Why? Because he wasn't on the field. And if Flacco, with Steve Smith Sr. and Mike Wallace (neither of whom even sniffed 1500 yards), couldn't get to the playoffs with a top ten defense, what in the world makes you think he could do it with a bottom ten defense and a bunch of practice squad receivers?

The fact that you referenced that article when you thought it supported your argument and then called it "flawed" when you realized your mistake really says everything about your ability to have a rational conversation about the matter. Never said they were. Deflecting is a pathetic tactic. Funny. You don't seem to have learned a thing.

Speculation based on facts is valuable. Speculation based on bias is not.

Got yourself, fam. That article is about TT being better than Flacco. This is why it helps to know the facts before jumping on board a crusade bandwagon. Maclin didn't choose Baltimore because Flacco is a better QB. He chose Baltimore, in part, because Flacco is a higher volume QB and Maclin will be the #1 WR there. Other considerations: his wife being from Baltimore, better contract offer.

Ketchup.

Agreed. The Penguins get a ton of help from the NHL (see: Kunitz's cross check on Subban, matching minors in Game 5 for Crosby bouncing Subban's head off the ice repeatedly, no-goal in Game 1 followed by a 5-on-3 power play for two consecutive dives). Their road to the Cup is much easier because the rules don't apply to them. Sound like any other team you know? !@#$ that. Go Preds.

In 2016? Weeks 2,3,4,5,6,9,15,16. Do you even know what a "fair weather fan" is? There haven't been any in these parts for a long, long time. Also, I'm sure you thought you were clever when you were posting as two different people, but you quoted the wrong account in most of your posts. Kind of a dead giveaway, eh?

Hahaha. Absolutely clueless. This is why you can't take the Tyrod haters seriously. No willingness to deal with reality.

Losing Woods won't make us win fewer games in itself, but it definitely has a negative impact. Losing a #2 WR is not a death blow, but it's not trivial either.

Hosted him. Not offered him a $5 million contract. We have far too many holes to fill with little cap space to do so. Maybe the Bills are hoping they can get him cheap since teams will be wary of his age, or maybe they want leverage for a restructured contract with Clay. Whatever the reasons for his visit, we're not shelling out big money to get him.