mjd1001

This year there isn't much that can be done I am afraid. Do the best with what you have. I'd LIKE to see Peterman play, but I don't know if that will be much better. I think the work will be done in the offseason: -If Dawkins improves (or at least looks above average), I think you may see Glenn gone. Not that Glenn isn't good, or he is a bad guy, but I don't see this regime sticking with an O-linemen payed as much as him that isn't 100% reliable and on the field. -Get your future starting RB. Either a guy to replace McCoy...or someone to back him up next year that will replace him the following year. -If they love Matthews, re-sign him. Hopefully Jones improves...and get one more top-flight speed guy (a guy with downfield ability that can get you 50+ catches a season) -QB....whether Peterman or a draft pick or trade...look for a long term solution. Unless they know something about Tyrod that I don't know. The game didn't bother me a lot overall. They lost by a few points...on the road...to a team that has played well the last few weeks...in bad weather...and with a lot of injuries. If they Bills truly are a good team they will bounce back...if they aren't that good...a win here isn't that important for the big picture.

I used to live in the Boston area (2 times for 5 years), and my current job is based out of Boston so I go there for meetings pretty often. Most of the guys and gals at the home office are Pats fans and love to talk about them. The thing is, they are 100% convinced, and I mean 100% CONVINCED, that if the NFL as a league and the officials weren't 'against' the Pats, they would be 16-0 pretty much every season. I came out and asked them about all of their losses the last 2 years...and without any doubt in their head they said all of the losses were flukes. I know fans always favor the home teams, but most Pats fans are SO USED to winning, they can't even comprehend that anyone can beat them if the game is legit.

It was a good win. If ATL had all their weapons for the whole game it would have been a great win, but it is still a good, very good win (being on the road means something, even though the stadium seemed half full at most times.) A typical Bills thing to do would be to lose to Cincy next week. Providing they can win next week, I think you can say this team is a legit playoff contender.

I can see his point about wanting Kelly to talk to them before. Agree with it or not, apparently everyone on the team and the coaches talked about what they were going to do, and probably knew who would stand, who wouldn't, ect. If Kelly wasn't in that team meeting, then it might be a suprise to the players if someone else shows up and does something different. It is the opposite of a show of unity that way.

Tyrod is an average QB. He is not good, he is not great. Hes not awful. He is average. That means he can have some above average games (Seattle and Miami), and some below average games (today). The problem is, average isn't good enough if you want to be a top team in the league.

I'm OK with this...as long as the same rules apply to all teams...come gameday all teams should be at the same advantage/disadvantage.

I guess how it plays out is a big thing with me too. Like many have said, if you are going to lose, try to do so in an exciting fashion and give us something to look forward to next year. The Sabres tank was painful because of just HOW bad they were at putting the puck in the net. I could be ok with losing, if they did so while moving the ball. I hate watching a 'competitive defensive game'.

I'm not a season ticket holder anymore, but I'm someplace between baffled and upset. I said in another thread, they have a lot more knowledge and information than I do, yet it is move after move that doesn't make sense. Even if they are after some kind of 'bigger picture' thinking, it just seems there might be a better way to go about it? Maybe not, but there is so much stuff that boggles the mind...how about more of an up-front explanation? If you want to say they are looking for a certain type of team, they TELL us the reason for the moves. Tell us the real reason, not the P.R. reasons.

OK, I'm supportive of the new staff as much as most....and I'm willing to admit there are things they see and know that I never will, but even thought I keep telling myself that I am starting to turn on them.

I want Peterman to be good, I really do. I want (and hope) to see him in a regular season game once the Bills are eliminated from playoff contention (maybe earlier if they technically aren't eliminated in week 11 or 12 but it is obvious they will be). BUT, I still cant say he will be good, or even average, until I see him throw downfield. I'm talking 30-40 yard fly patterns AND 15-25 yard outs, slants, and crossing patterns. I don't care how good Peterman is on the short stuff, he needs to be at least average on the mid/long routs (15-25 yards).

There is one thing about Peterman in the preseason games that reminds me SO MUCH of Trent Edwards. Where are the throws downfield? I don't mean 40 yard fly patterns, but how about crossing patterns or slants where the ball travels 15-20 yards past the line of Scrimmage? It is like watching Trent Edwards all over.

They call a passing play and only give him 1 wr to focus on...then the coaches evaluate that receiver based on how he runs the route and takes in the ball.

I have to think they are simply going to spread the D out with 3 WRs and try to give McCoy more room to run. They will pretty much run as much as last year, if not more...allowing Taylor to audible to a pass on first down if he sees a mismatch (safety on a WR or a big hole in a zone). The thing that I think is overlooked a alot is the TYPE of WRs they have now. Andre Holmes hasn't played well in preseason, but I read a few articles on him (Raiders message boards and an article on Bleacher report) that say he is very good at blocking for a WR. Jorden Mathews the same thing. They signed Bolden and he is known as one of the best blocking WR's in the game. So basically, they are going to try to spread the D-out a bit...and win outside 'run blocking' matchups with Very good blocking WR's. With Taylor, I think identifying mismatches to audible out of a run into a pass will pretty much be the majority of his pre-snap reads. I'm pretty sure you will see this team have more than 500 rushing attempts this year.

Slightly off Topic, but I have tried to watch some of the 'e sports' tournaments or matches on TV. Whether it was madden or a tournament with something like starcraft. When I used to play video games a lot in the past, I LIKED watching othe people (family or friends who were over) play, so I thought it might be interesting to watch the 'pros' do it. BUT, there is something about the presentation of it on TV that is awful. Its hard to watch.

At some point Brady is going to slow down (unless of course the Pats are still finding a way to cheat and have the offense know what the D is going to do). I'm not sure if it is this year, or next year, but that offense isn't going to be dominant with him at the helm for 5 more years.

Luck is already going into his 7th year in the league, it just doesn't seem like that long. Clock is ticking on his 'greatness' so to speak. He is a very good QB, pro-bowl level, but now with injuries racking up, and the team around him doesn't look like it has a chance to be good for a least a few years...I think the days of wondering when he will take over as the next great QB Superstar (Brady, Rodgers, Manning) are coming to an end. For the Colts sake you just want him to be healthy and be almost as good as a Matt Ryan or a Drew Brees.

I think culture is something that can have a SLIGHTLY bigger impact on a team than 'momentum' can have during the course of a game. I think 'momentum' is 90% bogus. The 10% of the time it means something is when the players on the field believe in it AND let it impact their play. Culture has a slightly larger impact on the big picture. I'm not a huge believer in it, but I'd rather have a good culture than a bad one. Talent, injuries, luck and coaching all are WAY ahead of culture when it comes to final results.

Sorry if this was posted already, but I didn't see it https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/madden-nfl-18-review-simulation-dak-wins-mvp-without-zeke-patriots-dont-win-afc-east/ CBS sports sims the entire year using madden, Bills finished ahead of the Pats and won the division. Some highlights: In much less surprising news than during last year's sim, the Atlanta Falcons went 13-3 to secure the best record in the league. The second best record belonged to ....... (wait for it) .... the Buffalo Bills! The Bills, Titans, Ravens, Patriots, Chargers and Raiders made the AFC playoffs -- in that order. On the NFC side of things, the Falcons secured the No. 1 seed, while the Seahawks were No. 2. The Eagles, Saints, Packers and Cowboys followed in order. Confused about, you know, the Bills beating the Patriots, I did some statistical investigation. LeSean McCoy was No. 7 in the MVP voting (although Blake Bortleswas No. 8, so red flags are flying everywhere). The Bills-Patriots thing is just impossible to understand. If I told you the Bills won 11 games and the Patriots didn't win the division, you would assume both Tom Brady and Jimmy Garoppolo were kidnapped by a crazed Rex Ryan and held hostage for months somewhere in Bristol. Nope. Brady threw for 5,355 passing yards and 34 touchdowns while completing 75 percent of his passes. Even wilder? Tyrod Taylorhad 2,069 yards, 16 touchdowns and five interceptions. Nate Peterman had 2,051 yards, 15 touchdowns and seven interceptions.

There is no guarantee Matthews plays 16 games, but odds seem better he will than Watkins. So does this make the Bills better this year? Matthews for 16 games...or a healthy Watkins for 4, an injured Watkins for 4, and no Watkins for 4. No guarantee that happens...but odds seem to favor that outcome rather than a healthy Watkins for 16. In this case, are the Bills a better team with Matthews?

My big questions, how much did they shop Sammy around? Is this the best they could do?

I agree. I would have thought most teams would have done this already.

While I like watching college football, I tend to think its not the best system. Too much money in it now to change, but in my ideal world, I'd like to a minor league or D-league where the players get paid and can get drafted out of that system.

I'll agree also. Of course I want the Bills to stay in Buffalo...but not at such a high cost for what they bring. For me, it just 60 direct hours of entertainment per year...and if the Bills weren't in Buffalo I'd replace that with something else. Once again, I want the Bills here, but it has to be one of the BETTER deals for taxpayers of everything that has come down in the past 20 years for me to be behind it.

My guess is that Beane will put together the roster, but McDermott will look it over before any roster changes are finalized. Or as others have said, if the Bills need a LB, McDermott tells Beane what he would like in a LB...then Beane goes out and finds 2 or 3, with his recomendation for which one to choose. Most of the time McDermott may go with Beanes choice, but McDermott does have the ability to make the final decision if he doesn't agree. The 'leg work' of gathering the names is up to Beane though.

There is no reason why the Bills HAVE to draft a QB in the first round this year. If they think that anyone available for them to pick in the first round will only be slightly better than Tyrod Taylor (or even equal to him) then it doesn't make any sense to draft him. If the Bills think that someone is there for them AND they truly think that person is going to be a lot better than Tyrod (a top 10 at least, maybe a top 5 or 6 qb in the league very soon), then I think the would have no problem drafting one. But if that isn't the case, the shouldn't draft one.