oldmanfan

Boards like this should be for debate. Positive and negative views, praise and criticism should be welcome. I would hope folks would offer them with some rational basis and not just knee jerk reactions (like in the game threads. Some folks are overly positive about things, some the other way.

Here's another interesting quote from the si article: The lack of NFL level offensive linemen and the return of the run game/running back—with all the fantasy football and rules being made to get points up and passing yardage up, there are not enough offensive tackles for 32 teams to have at least two NFL level starters to execute the passing game at an efficient enough level to win being a "passing, greatest show on turf" type of offense. Still have to run to win. The offensive minded coaches that know how to devise ways to run the ball with lesser talent in the offensive line or when their front line OL are out are the guys that give their guys the best chance to win.”

What do you think it will take to change that?

Nah, we need to step up against their run game. No doubt. But they need to step up against our run game with Singletary, and so on. Two side of the coin. I realize we have some weaknesses. But come on. We won last week and to read comments around here you'd swear we got killed. Can't we just enjoy a victory for a change?

Good pick up. Go kick their butts.

More doom and gloom. The OP indicates they have faced really poor teams, yet the emphasis by most here is how we'll have trouble with their run game. How about that they'll have trouble with us?

Let them ignore the Bills. Fine by me. Just gives the players more incentive. I imagine the team is pretty pissed about being the underdog to a 2-6 team this weekend.

And you don't understand there is a difference between playing in college vs. the pros? You honestly don't get that?

And?

I have no idea how successful this kid will be as an NFL QB. But it's clear he's enormously successful as a human being. And in the end that what really counts.

Great stuff here.

Go back and watch last year's Pats game against us, where they ran the ball to win. The Pats are the definition of a team that can evaluate the weakness of their opponent and exploit it. Your position is clear. You would rather see the team lose games so long as they throw the ball more. That's really sad.

I 'd like to see them loosen the reins on Allen so he plays more in the first three quarters like he plays in the fourth. I think the more experience he gets the less amped up he'll get early in games. It seem to me sometimes he comes out really psyched up and overdoes it, for want of a better way to put it. Maybe script the first 10-15 plays; as I recall Walsh did that even with Montana?

Yes. Obviously so.

I am not defaming you. I am however challenging some of your premises. If you feel defamed my apologies. But you did say if the 2018 Allen played in 2019 we'd be 2-6. That is pretty much the definition of playing the "what if" game. I am glad you also think the TT comparisons are over the top. I would call them apples and oranges myself. I think we agree on wanting to see them take the brakes off of Allen. I started a thread a week or so again titles Let Josh be Josh. I am impressed by what he does in the fourth quarters, where he throws more and has more freedom to make plays. I'd like to see that happen all 4 quarters. When it comes to numbers and statistics, I tend to be skeptical and critical. I have a research science background and as such had to take a lot of stats classes and have to use stats in my daily work. Your thread about the 300 yard passing? If you recall. I commended you for pulling that data, and that you did not place as much statistical relevance to it than it merited. Unfortunately, some took your data and used it to try and make definitive conclusions about Allen's play that were not merited. All I know is this: Allen is a second year QB that is showing improvement. The last several games he has cut down on picks. And the record is 6-2. Forget the stuff about schedule and other QBs and on and on. right now he's in pretty good shape, and the team is in really good shape. I just wish everyone would settle down and actually be happy that the team is where they are right now as opposed to looking for reasons to be so negative.

One could make an argument for that. I think allen is inherently a better passer than Jackson. And not as good a runner.

It will be interesting to see how the rotation at DT changes with this guy. Wonder if any of the other 4 get deactivated Sunday.

You can play "what if" games all day long. But the bottom line is Allen is progressing and playing better this year than last year. List all the stats about 300 yard games in X amount of time by Qbs that have played X amount of games and have had Y amount of good receivers in Z amount of games in the snow and wind plus about a million other variables that one would want to throw into the equation (and actually need to throw into the conversation to make things statistically meaningful), and it won't change the fact that this season the Buffalo Bills are 6-2, and that their young QB is getting better as time goes on. These comparisons to TT are over the top. The big concerns about TT is he was too tentative throwing, and that he couldn't being the team back in the 4th quarter. Allen has had to dial thing s back a bit because he was too aggressive trying to force passes and he is one of the highest rated fourth quarter QBs in the league. Does he need to continue improving? Certainly. Is there evidence he won't? Certainly not.

Jackson is having a great year. The Ravens designed their offense around his unique skill set. Good for him. And that has nothing to do with how good or bad Josh Allen is playing.

Or you could have a QB capable of leading fourth quarter drives to win. Allen is one of the top ranked fourth quarter QBs this year.

Yep. And Tremaine should watch some of Harry Jacobs

I was at the stadium and saw The Hit. The ‘64 defense was one of the all time great defenses.

Here you go: Nextmanup says: If only it was as simple as "opening up the offense" and telling Josh to go throw 300 yards! If it was in him to do that or be that type of passer, he would regularly do it now, and have been doing it for a while now. He is a slight upgrade over Tyrod, with a slightly different skill set, but about the same output. I do NOT want him to be the Bills QB for the next dozen years! I want a good QB for a change! Keep looking! He's not it!

These comparisons to Taylor are silly. The problem Taylor had was that he was afraid to pull the trigger, and he could not perform in the fourth quarter of games. if you recall, anytime we were down in the fourth quarter with Taylor, we knew it was over. Allen is one of the top rated QBs in the fourth quarter, and they have had to rein him in a bit this year to get him to stop playing hero ball. There is no comparison between the two.

I am of the opinion some of this is classical psychological defense mechanisms by Bills fans who are scarred by the past. People see good things happening this year and they repress that so they don't have to be vulnerable if for some reason a loss occurs. They displace their fear by projecting (Allen is horrible, Allen is OK but why can't he be like X). They undergo regression to go back in time and find another time in Bills history where things didn't go well and project that to today's team (a favorite of some here). Rather than celebrate an excellent record when the D plays good, it's safer to one's psyche to bash the team when the offense doesn't score X number of points. Rather that get excited about wins, it's safer to the psyche to say you only want wins if they are entertaining wins, or if they only win by throwing for a certain number of yards. And so on. Classic psychologic mechanisms at play here.