mjd1001

6 of the last 10 winning superbowl teams before tonight scored over 30. 6 of the last 11 including tonight. 6 of 11 beats 5 of 10. Someone else did the research on this (read it online, I'll try to find the article to link) but of the recent superbowls...the winning team more often than not had a higher league rank in offense than they did in defense. I'm not sure how far back the study goes, which is why I'll try to find the article.

Not sure about that, but I do know the number of points scored to win the last decade of Superbowls was really high...41, 34, 24 ,28, 43, 34, 21, 31, 31, 27. Of those, 7 of those games had offenses that were lead by likely Hall of fame QBs.

not for me...this is the first time I have felt it or declared it myself.

With a LONG wait until opening day next year. I think the Era of Brady being dominant is just about over. He still may be 'good', but I'm not fearing him much more especially after the last 10 games he played. The Era of Bellichick being great though...that may still be with us.

He coached like a head coach who didn't trust a young QB to make good decisions. The way to play this game would have been too play 3wr and a single back..and spread the entire field sideline to sideline. If the Pats Blitz or run crazy stunts...the QB needs to recognize that QUICKLY. Goff did not.

Defense CAN win championships...but in todays NFL...it usually doesn't. One or two great defensive performance in the last decade do not prove defense wins championships.

I'll agee both that I'd take Smith and that he was the Best Bill ever.

Personally I wouldn't want to take them at all. But for anyone, I think it only makes sense to take them if you think they can help 'put you over the top' to be a legit superbowl contender.

A stadium that seats about 45,000 - 50,000...on a much smaller footprint in downtown is interesting. You can still have a pretty big lot that allows for half the fans (if not more) to tailgate.

I agree almost 100% with you. I'm a fan of the Bills....and I can be just as big of a fan watching on a high-def screen at home or by sitting in the Stadium. I haven't been to a home game in years though. What would get me out there again is a shorter drive (from the northtowns), a roof over my head (climate controlled in the entire stadium) and just a nicer area to hang out in before and after the games. Tailgating is great for some people, but I'd personally rather have a wide variety of restaurants/clubs/bars within walking distance of the game.

I've changed my position on the OL. A decade ago, I still held on to the thought that I wanted the best OL in the league (at least top 5). Now, not so much. A great OL is only important if you don't have a good QB. Of course build the best OL you can, and make sure that it isn't "bad", but OL and RB are two areas I don't want to chase someone and 'overpay' for them.

Ok, you might not be wrong, he might be a mentally weak person....but with the information we know for sure, there is no way to tell that. Truth is, everyone is different. Everyone's mind is different. For some people it is easier to lose weight than others. Some people are artistic, some are analytic. Some people have the mental 'ability' (how their brain is wired) to do some things better than others. It is not a 'choice', I don't know of anyone that chooses to have artistic ability over being good with numbers. The same can be said for how easy it is to quit an addiction. Mentally weak? as I said before, he just might be..and he might be looking for excuses. But there is no way to know that..it is just as likely that how is brain is 'wired' makes him better at some things than you, but makes it harder to quit addictions. People have to learn to step outside of their own experiences and realize that not everyone has the same abilities and everyone's brain doesn't work the same way.

I don't think Gordon is a superstar at this point on the field...but he is a player for sure that is capable of having a big enough game to turn a loss into a win. This has the potential to really hurt the Pats in the playoffs, especially if they don't get the bye and have to play 3 games in the AFC. His 'projected' 16 game stat were for about 60 catches...just over 1000 yards. Only Edleman had more yards-per-game receiving than him...and it was close. With him in there, you might have had to shade a Safety a bit closer to his side of the field...or play your zones just a bit deeper. Without him....you can probably bing the Saftey (or whoever is playing zone) just a tad closer to the line...and make those short throwing lanes Brady loves just a tad bit tighter.

I usually don't call people losers...but It doesn't bother me if someone else does if the person they are talking about has problems like he does....knows he has them...and doesn't want to get any kind of help. If that person at some point recognizes they have an issue and even takes a few steps to try to correct it/get help....that is when I have a problem with the 'loser' label. I want to believe him in his post....and I will for now....but you never know when someone puts something out there that is legit...or whether it is a carefully worded, agent written, after-the-fact suspension issued P.R. move.

I don't consider it really a lost season. The wins this year have been more entertaining to watch for me than the wins last year. Plus this year we got to watch a young QB that looks like the best shot the Bills have had at a potential star player at the position. Lost season? In term of wins and losses only. I have been more entertained this year than watching many games in the past decade.

How about an option for no-one?

Why is it serious this time? In just about every aspect of QB play....wins and losses...points scored...QB rating...QBR...just about any metric you want....where he (or the pats) ranked toward the top of the league most of the time..now they are quite a bit down. And if no measurable metrics do it for you (not even wins and losses or points ranking compared to the rest of the league), then the eye test should. I, like many others on this board, typically see 8 or more Pats games a year. It is not even close...this year there are more passes that WR's are reaching for (that didn't happen in the past) or passes that receivers are basically picking up off the turf or even passes that hit the ground before they get there....more of that than I can ever remember with him.

Suffering is what might happen because most of them seem to be in denial that he will ever be bad. My company has one of our main offices outside of Boston, and I have to admit I sometime glance at the comments sections on patfans or boston.com...but most of what I get is from my Boston co-workers. Right now they are 'slightly concerned', but not as much as I would have thought. They want the by-week, but most of them this morning were just saying the pats are still the AFC favorite, and not having the by-week just makes it a little tiny bit tougher for them. They expect Brady to be elite when it counts (playoffs). At our last annual meeting in Foxboro, I asked them how they thought the 'brady era' would end..and the consensus among the pats fans there was he would likely play 2-3 more years...the Pats would be in the mix for Superbowls ever year...and by his last year...2020 or 2021, there might be some 'slight' slippage in his play and that is when he'll choose to retire so he can still go out 'on top'. Maybe that isn't what ever Pats fans thinks...but they guys in our office there who like to speak up about sports...that sure is their opinion.

I still think he looks good, better than average. But, the difference between good and great is he is making those mistakes now more often than he did. The next month or so will be really interesting. If his play doesn't get any better (maybe even gets a tad worse) AND the Pats don't go far in the playoffs because of it....I want to hear what the discussion will be like all summer about what to expect from him next year. I said in another thread today....even if he does come back, I think the division title is open game for the other 3 teams.

I don't know if I'd call it a 'spiral' yet. If they lose either of their last 2 games at home to the Bills or Jets, then maybe I can get to spiral. When I watch the Patriots, it seems pretty apparent to me they are still a good team led by a good QB, but not great anymore. If things fall into place, they are capable of winning any one single game against anyone...I just don't see them winning 2 or 3 games in a row against playoff caliber teams, but they are still 'dangerous'. The good news for everyone but Pats fans is...while Brady may still be good and capable of beating anyone...he is not what he once was. Earlier in the year we debated this...and his supporters said he has been 'declared done' many times in the past and always returned to greatness. But this feels like longest stretch he has had where he hasn't been consistently great. If he comes back next year to play...I see his slide being more apparent. The Bills, Jets, or Dolphins...whichever of those teams that has the best offseason, have a legit threat to win the division in 2019.

I'd still rather see the higher draft pick, if not to get one of the best players...but instead to have the option to trade down and maybe pick up an extra 2nd or 3rd. Those extra picks can go a long way to plugging the OL holes long term. I agree the game/crown sounded loud. I ran to the store to pick up a few things and in the car on the radio, it sounded like a full house. I'm good with Clay and McCoy not on this team next year. I don't hate the guys, but the team is showing it isn't much worse without them.

I'm going to say that is is mostly the issue/fault with the bad offensive line play. However, I also still think the Bills would be good to move on from McCoy. The number of plays this year where he makes a play that another 'average' RB wouldn't...those are a lot less than they were in the past. Next year, when he is a year older...the situation with him isn't going to be better. The bills could keep him around because they will have to much cap room that his contract won't mean much in the grand scheme of things next year. Personally, I'd keep a player like him around if he was a stellar leader/ambassador for the team. But McCoy is someone who tends to duck the press and sometimes avoid being around for tough questions..and his off-the-field activities are questionable. I really would like the Bills to try to find a different #1 back next year...but as things stand now..I'd rather havea one-year-older Ivory as the #2 next year rather than a one-year-older McCoy

I'm not a huge fan of him, but I think how he handles callers is just the way the industry has gone. Every so often when I am in different parts of the country, I'll find a sports talk show host that I like. They bring up a topic...sometimes not even saying their opinion...and then taking calls and talking through all aspects of the callers opinions (no matter how crazy they are). I LIKE that kind of show. HOWEVER, the way WGR is (and more and more of other shows now) is the hosts give your their opinion....and then when callers disagree with them...often like to tell those callers why they are wrong. It isn't very often where the host are open to having their mind changed...or even moderating a 'fair' conversation between competing views. Personally, I like to form my own opinion and view on things....and the way I have my view reinforced is not by people agreeing with me....but instead by people bringing up aspects of the topic that I never thought of. It seems to me most radio shows are not about that anymore. They are about conflict, because I guess conflict gets ratings and gets people to call in more often.

For Allen, accuracy is an issue more than it is for other QB's, but does it have to be the reason he doesn't turn out to be good? Hopefully not. It is possible for a QB to be more accurate as his NFL career goes on (forget college, lets talk NFL). That can be by either throwing more accurate, or by making better reads and throwing to more open receivers. Every QB is different. Ben Rothlisberger has pretty much had the same completion percentage from the beginning of his career to now. Matt Ryan and Andrew Luck started their first few years with quite a bit lower completion percentage than they have now. I don't think Allen needs to be near 70% to be good. With his running ability and tendency to throw downfield, he might be a very good-to-great QB if he can get to and sustain 62% (even with 'bad' throws). The question is, can he get to that point without them turning him into another "captain checkdown"? We all know the problem with cherry-picking stats to make an argument...or comparing one player to another from the past and projecting stats...it normally doesn't work. But with that said...look at Josh Allen's current stats and success to what Eli Manning did in his first year. A LOT is very similar. May not mean anything..but it is interesting.

Which I think is the argument next year for trading down. the OL. It seems to get an above average-to-good OL in free agency, you are going to pay a TON of money. But, OL seems to be the one place you can draft players from the late 1st to the 3rd round and have a decent chance of getting a good one. Is it guaranteed? No. But if you can gain extra picks by trading down...that might be the best/quickest way to rebuild this line. to get 2 or 3 GOOD starters in Free agency is going to be very, VERY hard.