transplantbillsfan

Word. If he's active, he'll also be a fairly significant part of the gameplan.

Wish I could share your optimism. I've been a Bills fan for too damn long. If I don't have permanent emotional scarring, it'll at least take a few years to heal it.

Interesting... good eyes.

It's really not that difficult to figure out what's a throwaway vs what's a straight up miss if you're watching the plays.

Yep. That's not the 32nd he currently ranks in completion percentage. Pretty massive jump. And I would say he falls very much within the standard deviation of accuracy for good NFL QBs in that range. Remember, accuracy and completion percentage in particular is not the Olympics; you don't have to be #1, you just have to be in a certain range overall. Allen had a higher on target percentage than Brady, Wentz, Goff, Stafford and Mayfield, among others, was 0.2% lower than Kyler Murray and 1.5% lower than Aaron Rodgers. The difference of 10 spots between him at 21 and Russell Wilson at 11 is a mere 3%, which is interesting considering Wilson's completion percentage was 7.3% higher than him. So if you're one of those people who believe where you're ranked in the NFL in terms of accuracy is what's most important, then obviously Allen being 21st out of 32 means he's not very good--though clearly he's a lot better than that 32nd in completion percentage would indicate. But like I said, accuracy is not the Olympics.

Not a bad game to play here. Let's try adjusted completion percentage for Allen taking away both drops (22 was the number before the Jets game) and Throwaways (25) http://stats.washingtonpost.com/fb/tmleaders.asp?range=NFL&rank=232&type=Receiving https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2019/passing_advanced.htm?sr&utm_source=direct&utm_medium=Share&utm_campaign=ShareTool#ks_passing_detailed_accuracy Adjusted Completion percentage = 69% Actually... just look at this reference for advanced passing stats with regard to accuracy... pretty interesting: Highest drop percentage by 1 % (which is a lot) 3 spikes (tied for 4th most) 10 batted passes (13th most) Okay. Adding the batted passes and spikes, Allen's accuracy percentage (and we still haven't looked at passes that weren't dropped but may have been catchable but were well defended or the WR wasn't looking or whatever...): Adjusted Completion percentage = 71.8%

I think that jives with what we've seen. He's certainly improved his short to intermediate passing immensely. For whatever reason, he struggles a bit throwing to the right side of the field.

https://theathletic.com/1505120/2020/01/02/nfl-wild-card-picks-against-the-spread-and-five-favorite-prop-bets?source=shared-article The Bills’ offense has actually been better on the road (12th in DVOA) than at home (31st) this season.

Some poster somewhere on here had a great analogy over the last few weeks debunking the "trend argument" like the one brought up here. These may be the trends over the last half century, but they aren't determinitive for this team. Just like life expectancy. Just because life expectancy for an American Male is whatever it is right now (79 years??), that doesn't mean that's my life expectancy. This trend argument is the type of thing a bettor in Vegas can use when putting money down on teams he hasn't watched. We, however, have watched this football team play. I just don't know how anyone watching this team this year believes that the Bills--as a whole team... not just Josh--played better or even as good at New Era as they did on the road.

Already established the defenses Allen faced at home were very much similar to the defenses he played on the road. 2 top 5 defenses at home. 2 top 5 defenses on the road. 4 top 10 defenses at home. 4 top 10 defenses on the road. What are the other factors?

Then what factors on the list would you put above it? Clearly you think there are many. Then why was he pretty consistently accurate on the road? His completion percentage on the road vs at home is strikingly better.

I actually think the "play fearless" comment was more short-lived than anything.

I did a quick search for the thread that argued this very point--which I've been arguing for awhile, too--but couldn't find it... figured the point is relevant now. The 2019 Buffalo Bills are a road team. And it's not just the whole notion that defense travels, though it does. Our offense scored nearly 5 fewer points at home than on the road. And even if you want to argue that the last game against the Jets skews that, our offense still scored over 3 fewer points at home than on the road. Somehow it all starts with Allen, who I truly believe feels added pressure when he plays at home that makes him play tighter. I hope he can get over this in the offseason, but anyone watching him play probably noticed it. And the numbers certainly bear it out. Allen at home: 54.9% completion percentage, 5.9 YPA, 9 TDs, 5 INTs, 76.9 Passer Rating Allen on the road: 62.1% completion percentage, 7.4 YPA, 11 TDs, 4 INTs, 92.6 Passer Rating 4-4 at home 6-2 on the road More 4th quarter comebacks on the road than at home. 2 primetime games both on the road. Both wins with Allen showing up on the big stage on the road. Can't really argue the defenses he played at home vs on the road because he played an equal number of top 10 defenses at home (4) as he did on the road (4). Josh Allen vs top 10 defenses at home: 46.2% completion percentage, 4.5 YPA, 3 TDs, 3 INTs, 0 4th Quarter comebacks, 56.8 Passer Rating Josh Allen vs top 10 defenses on the road: 61.6% completion percentage, 7.4 YPA, 5 TDs, 3 INTs, 24th quarter comebacks, 88 Passer Rating I am not predicting a win. But honestly, I feel better about our offense and Josh Allen on the road on this big stage in a playoff game than I would have at home, where he seems to play tight under what appears to be added home crowd pressure. What actually has me worried this week more is our defense, which is going up against a runner in Carlos Hyde who is the exact type of runner our defense has proven weak against this year. Not to mention Watson, Hopkins and potentially Fuller. Nonetheless, I'm excited--and terrified--of this upcoming road playoff game and any we might have remaining if we win this one

Sounds like a smokescreen

Robert Foster: 18 targets, 3 receptions, 64 yards, 0 TDs Duke Williams: 19 targets, 12 receptions, 166 yards, 1 TD I'm sorry, but one of these things is not like the other. You're missing nothing. It's sheer stupidity to keep Foster active for any reason over Duke at this point. And unfortunately, I think our coaching staff is stupid with regard to these particular players.

I think you overestimate Robert Foster as a gunner. Dude's not Steve Tasker.

McKenzie is better at them. He's much more elusive than Foster with the ball in his hands. Plus he's been used in the short passing game at times. Honestly I thought Foster would prove to be a good NFL WR this year... boy was I wrong. He's a waste of a gameday roster spot. There's no good reason he should be active and Duke should be inactive. Yet, that's what's going to happen.

1) Wallace is banged up. He's been disappointing this season. Might be a blessing in disguise. Other than Tre and our 2 Safeties, I think anyone in our secondary is interchangeable. 2) I understand the points argument, but haven't you watched the team? Come on... our defense pretty clearly has some glaring weaknesses, particularly in run support. McDermott has assembled a team that I believe will consistently be in the playoffs, but with his approach we won't be consistent winners in the playoffs unless we see some drastic improvement in a few key positions on our defense in the upcoming years to make the D legitimately Elite. Baltimore and New England have better defenses, yet their approach to the game on offense is still largely to attack. 3) Who said scrap everything? Keep playing good defense but be a little more aggressive on offense and give Allen the one big WR on our team on gameday. How is this scrapping everything? 4) Okay. See all my commentary previously. 5) What charity do you want me to donate $50 to for our bet?

Actually I think most of us understand the plan, we just think it's a poor one, especially when it comes to the playoffs. Our Special Teams hasn't been great this year. What's the issue with using a defender like one of the Johnsons as a gunner? They're defenders and would be better tacklers. And our defense, while very, very good, is not consistent. They played the Ravens very well but then gave up the long Hurst TD. They were pretty terrible in terms of yards allowed against the Patriots, but were fortunate enough on the 1st drive to get a turnover on what was otherwise a bad play allowed and got a couple other breaks in the game. Eagles game our defense was terrible. First Miami game our defense wasn't all that good. Cleveland game our defense was disappointing. Dallas game began with Zeke running all over us and then the incompetent Jason Garrett abandoned the run game. I understand our coaches' plan--I just don't think it's a good one, especially in an elimination one and done scenario that the playoffs are. Something I heard the hoodie say on one of the NFL 100 shows as a war metaphor in terms of his approach to coaching really stuck with me, and I think it's emblematic of why the Patriots have been so great for so long and why I'm terrified of McDermott's approach... to paraphrase: You can't just dig yourself in a hole and stay there. At some point, you need to attack. McDermott, it seems as a whole, prefers the foxhole.

Uhhh... sorry but a WR is supposed to be a pass catcher. Ever heard of possession WRs? At the very least, that's what Duke would be. Except as the article points out, Duke is much better at route running in terms of deception than Foster is. He gets open pretty consistently. And Sunday's game should help squash the myth that he's not fast enough to play WR. 2 deep routes on Sunday for him with 1 catch and 1 very nearly a catch. He's also a damn good blocker if you're actually watching him on running plays. The guy should be on the field and as the article suggests we can use Taron or Kevin Johnson as our gunner... they'd be better tacklers than Foster, anyway. Despite all of this, I expect he will be inactive because our coaches are bull headed when it comes to personnel that best fits scheme, despite the lack of actual production from them.

Honestly, I think it's a risky buy for anyone right now with is very possibly going to Kansas City if we win, not Baltimore.

And you would have gone with...? In this case, they could have read The Athletic's weekly All-22 review.

Allen said that in reference to what? A direct question about whether Duke would play?

Bruh... once again... ignore the threads you want to ignore. You constantly scream about how the ignore feature is great for posters, well since there isn't an ignore feature for threads, use whatever self discipline you might have and just don't click on the threads you don't want to read... and then add an extra measure of self discipline--I have faith you have enough--and don't bother posting in it.

I really, really hope this is a sign Duke will be active and Foster won't