Rochesterfan

Love this!! Combine this with what you hear Frank Reich saying in Indy. Guys playing for their teammates and essentially character and team matters. I know McDermott is not perfect, but give me that type of leader all day long over a Rex Ryan it is all about me coach.

I agree and thought they had squibbed one prior to the injury or at least short kicked it.

Has this been confirmed - I was under the assumption the squib kick was because of the weather and the fact that the NYJ return game had been gouging them all game. I never heard hem say the injury was the reason.

Overall - I guess I just do not care that much about this. We watch replay after replay and the vast majority of times they get the calls right. The biggest issue is that there are so many border line plays that even on a board like this we do not get a consensus - was it a fumble or was his knee down? Was it a catch or dropped/knocked away? Was it PI or not. We get 3 angles and one angle looks like pass interference, one angle looks like he does not touch him early and one is totally inconclusive. Holding is the same way - they have set it up so holding in the tackle box is very rarely called (which is why Hughes gets so few calls). The Bills end up with McCoy or Allen breaking out of the pocket and get the holding call on the change in direction. Can they improve - yes of course - everything can be improved, but to assume a guy off the field can watch multiple replays of every play and not slow the game down or create issues especially in hurry-up situations. Or that 2 challenges will work when right now with a team like NO ran out with 3 earlier in the year and that did not include penalties. I think younger officials and more transparent grading would be great, but I think adding technology will create new issues - just as adding replay and all of the slow motion replays have created more controversy rather than fixing things.

This is insane - there is just as good of a list going the other way. Every individual person has to be viewed in their own light. What we do know is that siblings and children of pro athletes have great genetics and typically a better understanding of what it takes to succeed. Sometimes that leads to them being better and sometimes they never live up to the hype, but the older brother/parent being better is not a valid point.

I just do not think Barkley was worth the investment and I certainly do not see them getting 8 years of playoff hunt out of Barkley. Everything they have won is on his back and he is piling up touches - nearly 300 so far, but when you look at top rushing backs - all are under 4 years in the league. By the time the Giants replace Eli (maybe 2019 draft) and you get the competent play from the young QB - Barkley will be 3 or 4 years in and will already at or past his peak. The case may be open on the QBs, but top QBs right now are playing 15+ years in the current NFL. Barkley should be easily one of the top offensive as RBs come into the league more ready to play (see UDFA - Lindsey in Denver), but top RBs start to decline after 4 or 5 years and are out of the league by 7 or 8 years. I would always take a chance on a top QB over a RB just based on worth in the league, what they do for a franchise, and how long they are valuable in the league.

I stayed with Chubb - to me this is easier because they picked up a QB in Case to get them through a couple of years because they still have an elitish defense. I think Vance Joseph is just a terrible coach for that team and that hurts the team. Allen would be the QB I would choose there, but I think they are happy with what they got.

The difficult thing there is after a few steps he is no longer looking to the edge - his eyes have moved inside. I can not tell from Waldman’s angle if Foster is still outside or if he has come off Foster and is looking for McKenzie. McKenzie reaches out and it goes just over his finger tips and it is a bit short and behind Foster. What none of us knows is did they run the right routes because it is weird they are right on top of each other and was he staring at Foster as Waldman suggests or did he come off to his second receiver and overthrow McKenzie who was coming open and the safety was not a factor.

Just saw the judge rejected his stay and he is not allowed to wear the gear this Sunday. The suit will go on, but the initial ruling sided with the Bears that being on the sideline is different than being in the stands. Interesting.

To me - the RB has played well, but even if you draft a QB next year it is probably year 2 or 3 before he is taking the team anyplace - by that point Barkley is in year 4 and looking at a huge contract for a 5th year option or 2nd contract. Therefore to me the wise thing at that spot was to grab a QB, but I get why they did not. It was similar to the Bills the the year before - new GM/coach combo wanting to scout players and choose a good fit at QB. I think for Pat Shurmer and that team - Darnold would be a great fit and having time to sit behind Eli would have made this team better now and going forward, but I get it and as I said in the buyers remorse thread - I do not think they are too upset because Barkley has been good.

I can’t imagine any of the teams that got a QB are having remorse right now. All have shown progress and all potentially give hope to the future. The only buyers remorse I can think is the teams like the Giants that really now appear to need a QB and were in position, but did not take one and they ended up with Barkley who is having himself a good season. Other teams like the Jags might regret missing out, but their draft position precluded a big move up and I am not sure Jackson is what they would have wanted.

Sorry to quote myself, but you can also look at Oakland before and after the trade. Carr’s percentage has dropped over 5% in the games without Cooperand his yards passing per game has also decreased with the big change being the loss 1 single WR within the season.

Overall - I disagree with the original take because reviewing the throws several inaccurate throws were throw aways under pressure. He did have the WTF interception (exactly the same as Darnolds Int by the way - so maybe that is a young QB issue in general). My biggest issue though is your statement above. You don’t climb 12 percentage points from better protection and better WRs. That is patently incorrect. Goff is a perfect example because what changed between year 1 and year 2 - got a new coach, 3 new o-lineman to give him better protection and 4 new weapons at WR and TE. The coaching was big, but even bigger is that he saw better protection to read plays and targets that made plays. Same thing with Chicago bringing in a bunch of FA WRs. To even better disprove the point - just go to Dallas and the Amari Cooper pick-up. One player to catch passes is the only real change prior to their 11/5 week. The 7 weeks prior to the trade - his best completion percentage was just over 65% with an average between 62-63%. He topped out at 270 yards passing with an average of around 200 yards per game. The 6 games since - his completion percentage has skyrocketed to around 72% with one game being above 85%. His yards per game has also gone way up with last week exceeding 450 yards passing. This is in season - Dak did not suddenly become more accurate- one player - one single player at WR - changed the entire offense and boosted his completion percentage by about 10%. Do I expect Allen to become a 65% completion player - no way, but his current percentage is similar to the other rookies and I expect all of them to jump next season. He also has one of the top air yards per attempt- so I expect more inconsistent throws due to where he is throwing and the talent. If after next year we are still having this discussion- then it will be TT all over again, but I think we will see improvement and he will be here for a while.

Just quickly looking at some NE games for example - NE used a time out after getting a first down at the Lions 12 yard line on the second drive of the 3rd quarter with about 10 minutes left - very similar situation. I think this is a common situation.

I apprecite that - I agree that many times teams (most teams including teams considered well coached like NE) waste timeouts inappropriately in the second half rather than take the penalty and move on. I think avoiding the penalty has been an NFL mantra for years, but as games are so close - that thinking needs to be re-evaluated, but in the end for me - I look at it as points must be your first priority everything else falls below points and if that timeout can lead you to points or increase your chances of a TD over a FG - use it. The worst thing is how after the Timeout- the Bills still only got the FG - in that case it ends up more of a waste, but it is impossible in the moment to know the outcome 2 plays later. You could have the exact same situation- take the penalty instead and image the anger if you end up on the next 2 plays picking up 12 yards and did not get the first down because you needed 15 and cost yourself a first and goal from the 2 instead.

I stand where here you look at each situation uniquely. In this case - it is in the red zone of a close game on 2nd down - I prefer to see them use the timeout and get the play correct and not have an additional 5 yards that has even more potential of our young QB making a mistake. I have no issue with the timeout over the penalty, but hate that they needed it there. As it turns out due to pressure on Allen - they had to kick a FG anyway, but I do not mind using it there. The timeouts I hate are 3rd and between 6-11 yards near midfield that seem to crop up for every team. In that case early in the 2nd half - take the penalty. The five yards is worth less than the timeout, but the Red Zone and 2nd down is different. It also matters if you are in a short down and distance versus a longer down and distance. 3rd and 1 from midfield in a close game - the timeout might be critical for that drive because the chances of converting a 3rd and 1 is way better than a 3rd and 6 and you are getting close to a range to get points - that 1st down might directly lead to points - which are more important than timeouts. Conversly if you are in the red zone and it is 3rd and 15 or 3rd and goal from the 15 let’s say - the extra 5 yards is not a big deal because your chance of conversion is low - save the timeout - take the penalty and move on. I think the potential of a four point swing early in the 3rd quarter in this game is worth more than the timeout at the end of the game. That 4 point swing could be the difference in a close game becoming a blowout by forcing the other team to open up and attack or make a mistake.

Come on don’t let the facts get in the way of another garbage Hot Take by the guy. I mean jeez - it is not like he is on a crusade or anything. Maybe in a few minutes we will get another LAMP thread from him about this. LOL

The question still is what proof do you have that he is right? Ratings and Revenue are up once again. They are working to open additional revenue streams like Amazon and are being successful. Same thing with the NBA. Greg Popovich is right the 3’s are killing the game - except TV and Revenue are up in the NBA also - especially since scoring rose and pace of play has increased. Maybe the demographics the leagues are chasing is changing and the older coaches and fans are missing the boat. Maybe the NFL and the NBA have started to adapt - they understand the newer generation of fans - growing up on Madden and other Video Games crave action and scoring. Maybe they see the diehard fans will stick around, but that as we get older - you need to change and bring in younger fans also. Boxing never learned this and they were King until the demographics became older and they never brought in the next generation of fans - baseball is struggling with this also. Penalties suck and have always sucked - the NFL will continue to have a perceived issue until they can simplify things, but that has not caused a decline in viewers or revenue. The issue is the speed combined with the physicality of the game. The human eye catches movement and the refs cover a huge area (even larger now due to speed and QB arm strength) - penalties are based on quick moments that are fleeting, but in reality for all of the complaining- they do a very good job of getting things right. As for the XFL (or other summer leagues - up to 3 potential leagues now) - you state you want them to have an impact on the NFL, but in the paragraph above you complain about the rules making it easier for the offense to score - these two points are contradictory. The XFL and the new league being presented by former players are looking at way to increase offense even more - including potentially going 7 on 7. These changes are only going to reinforce that the NFL was already on the right path. Finally - I am not sure the league will regret the changes - I think they are necessary if it is going to survive - what may kill the NFL (and I do see it eventually dropping down) is the lack of youth participation. If parents keep kids from playing and better athletes play different sports - the level of play will drop and that will eventually have an impact, but so far colleges can still recruit enough players that this has not become a critical factor - this is the area to watch. If several college programs drop football because of lack of players then you will have an issue the NFL can not overcome easily.

Ok - I am sure you have quantifiable evidence of this beyond the ratings being up and more people watching even while total TV ratings are down significantly? It is so dead that not 1, nor 2, but 3 spring leagues are looking at starting up to ride on the coattails of the NFL. Yes the Golden Goose must be dead.

Agreed - if that is really Edmunds guy - there is a bigger issue here because he is totally lost on a basic coverage.

Watching the video - I took a still shot at 0:53 seconds and it is just before Tannehill passes the ball - Edmunds is watching Tannehill - flat footed right in the gap created by the pass rush. I believe it looks to me like he is playing a spy role on Tannehill. At that same moment - the Blitzing Poyer stops his rush - realizes the RB is not going to block him and adjusts his angle upfield. I think the coverage was a bracket between Poyer and Edmunds on the RB and the QB. I believe if the RB leaks out to the defenses left - he is Edmunds responsibility and Poyer has Tannehill. If the RB comes across to the defenses right as he does - he becomes Poyers man and Edmunds spy’s Tannehill. The only guys who know for sure would be the team and coaches as they watch film. I just do not want to lay this on Edmunds as it looks like he is spying Tannehill and assume he blew the coverage- maybe he did, but he sure never reacts like it was his man.

Honest question- was it really Edmunds man or did Poyer over commit. I heard them talking on SiriusXM NFL about the play and they thought man coverage, but when the RB leaked out to his side it became Poyer’s man and he got over anxious to try and get the big sack. I am not sure, but if that was Edmunds man - he never even moves to cover that area even as the RB is sprinting out. He starts to run after the TE shoves him that way past the wash. Poyer on the other hand gets several steps in and seems to have an “Oh No moment” where he sees the RB break - Poyer widens the rush up field to get in between and jumps before giving chase. I am not sure because typically in straight man that should be Edmunds man based upon lineup, but did they expect the RB to block the blitzer and therefore Edmunds drops coverage? It just seems weird because he has his eyes on the back, but never even moves to cover. I would love to hear what the coaching staff had called and if this was something designed just for this type of play and the safety got over excited- like the delayed Bush blitz if the TE stays in.

This is why I love this team - great job guys !

Saw this - feel bad for him and a big loss for the Broncos. It may end up being the final shovel of dirt on Vance Joseph’s grave - I don’t think they make the playoffs again and this will hurt.

No I think they would have kept him because cutting him now would roll another 4.5 million into this year and they do not have the money for that and that would not include the rest of the cap hit for this year. I think based upon the contract next year is the first year they would save money cutting him. I believe he would cost 9 million next year and only 4.5 if they cut him. I don’t think they are happy with him, but the contract dictates many things including keeping him through this year. I do think they will look to trade him before the draft, but if not he may stick through training camp to see if they can get the last year or not. Make sure a replacement is available before opening the hole up.