Logic

Whoever's going will be seeing a big Bills win in person. Lucky you!

I do not like to speak ill of the dead. I also do not shed a single tear when war criminals -- responsible for millions of human deaths and countless amounts of human suffering -- die, especially at age 100. So long, Henry. I hope that the fate which befalls you in the great hereafter is one perfectly befitting of a person who lived the life you lived.

To anyone who -- during or after their Thanksgiving meal -- wants to accomplish the dual feats of resuscitating your appetite so you can have seconds AND being better equipped to tolerate your annoying uncle who won't shut up about Josh's interceptions: May I suggest weed? Like a bunch of it. Get good and zooted. Pie never tasted so good and Uncle Marvin's face mole never looked so hilarious, I promise.

Listening to Alice's Restaurant and then the Band's Last Waltz, watching three football games, and eating a feast with the family. What could be better? Oh right, I know: the Bills not playing on Thanksgiving to ruin my dinner with a devastating injury or crushing loss! Hallelujah. I truly am thankful.

The Bills are away and the Eagles are wearing their colors. That's not an option.

Welp, that seals it. Bills by a billion.

Elite viewing.

Ever since I watched the 2007 Giants go 10-6, claim a Wild Card spot, win three straight road playoff games, and then knock off the til-then undefeated Patriots in the Super Bowl, I'll always feel the same way: Just get into the "second season", and anything can happen. PARTICULARLY when you have a team that's fourth in the league in point differential with top ten scoring offense and defense and an elite QB. Besides, who scares you in the AFC? Who would you say these Bills -- if they play as well as they did against Miami and Vegas and the second Jets game -- absolutely CAN'T beat? The Chiefs? The Ravens? The Browns? The Texans or Jags? Just get into the dance and let the cards fall where they may.

Doot it is. Now we've got a Slime, a Groot, and a Doot. Hey, I don't make the rules.

I won't quibble with or dispute anything you say here, EXCEPT to say this: Beane's drafting acumen is exactly what we're talking about here. If he and his scouts weren't able to identify Justin Jefferson as a potential bona fide #1 NFL wide receiver, that can only go AGAINST him in the discussion about how good of a drafter he is. I realize he wasn't the only one. Multiple teams and analysts and fans missed, and hindsight is 20/20. I'm only saying that it's Beane and his draft scouts' JOB to look at prospects and determine their ability to be good players in the NFL. If they studied Jefferson and decided that he wasn't worth the pick and that they should instead use it (plus other capital, plus a bunch of money on an eventual contract extension) to get Diggs instead, then I can only see that as at least a minor indictment on Beane as a drafter. Again, I fully understand WHY the Bills traded for Diggs instead, I fully understand that the draft is a crapshoot, and I have no problem with the trade as it happened. I view it as the rare true win-win for both teams, as far as NFL trades go. Vikes got to start fresh and wound up with a top 3 stud WR. Bills got a leader, alpha, and elite veteran receiver who helped up their QB's game and produce some historic offensive output. But if "ability to draft" is what's being discussed, then in my opinion, Beane should be dinged a little bit for getting the older, more expensive guy, rather than having identified Jefferson as a guy worth drafting and developing. EDIT: Ironically, this same thinking can be applied to the Mahomes trade, which happened before Beane arrived. Yes, the outcome was ultimately good for the Bills: they wound up with Tre'Davious White and ultimately wound up with a great one in Josh Allen. It doesn't change the fact that they traded away the pick that was used to take the guy who may go down as the greatest quarterback to ever play football. A positive outcome from a traded pick doesn't completely erase the consideration of the player that was taken with that pick instead and how that player would have impacted the Bills had the pick not been traded, in my estimation. Boy that was a mouthful.

I didn't wanna say it and steal your thunder. I ALMOST said it, but I just respect you too much to do you like that.

He would make sense if and only if he's willing to sign a cheap one year deal. There's no spot for him long term, as Milano and Bernard will be the locked in starting duo. Further, he's NOT the Shaq Leonard of old that people are picturing. He's really not. The Colts wouldn't have released him outright if he was. At this point, he'd have to be a Leonard Fournette type situation. Sign to to the practice squad for cheap, MAYBE get called up at some point this season. Nothing more.

But if our starting nickel is out, it hurts us big time. There's a big dropoff from Taron Johnson to Siran Neal or Cam Lewis. And if Dane Jackson misses the game, then the Bills are one injury away from 35 year old Josh Norman lining up against AJ Brown or Devonta Smith. Here's hoping our secondary can get right in time for this matchup. We're gonna need every one of them.

So much remains unknown with that. We don't know if Hyde, Rapp, Johnson, or Jackson will play. Hyde and Johnson would be the biggest losses, of course, but missing any of them will hurt a bit.

I get what you're saying, but... The Bills have not lost a game by more than six points all year. There has not been a single game in which they were completely blown off the field. They also boast the NFL's 4th best point differential, a full 41 points AHEAD of the Eagles. And just for good measure, Vegas agrees with the "very winnable" judgement, as evidenced by the Bills being only 3.5 point underdogs despite playing in Philly. Bear in mind that home field is generally thought to be worth three points in betting, meaning that Vegas considers the Eagles to have only a half point advantage over the Bills. Very winnable game.