Rochesterfan

Not a horse collar or a penalty.

I have no issue at all - TT trying to run and the Jag making a tackle - this is a non issue in my eyes - it happens in football. You out want to stop that - put a collar on the players to stop the head snap.

Yes - the bills had been averaging less than 2 yards a run and you have KB 1:1 against a smaller CB -with a good QB that is a touchdown all of the time.

Yes - he has been calling roll-outs , called QB runs, RPO’s etc. They have moved the ball - they need better play from some of the players.

Based on what - not passing yards, Rushing yards, TDs, - not sure what he is better at.

He has been calling a great game - doing everything people wanted. The play appeared to be an RPO - so that is on Taylor. In addition - everyone has been complaining- pass on first downs and get KB involved. When they try that people complain - run the ball 3 times if needed. Just crazy.

Done this a bunch and TT has not taken advantage.

Happy - it did not need to be that tight - ball needs to come out on time.

O’Leary runs into a DE preventing him from getting out - right play call bad luck.

And it was not on the pass we threw.

Bad Whistle

You act like that group got us to the playoffs the last 3-4 years. They have not and Sammy even admitted his attitude created issues - so No I do not automatically think the Bills would be better. We know Dareus had issues. The staff made changes that ticked the fans off and made people assume we were tanking, but the acquisitions of Hyde and Poyer and Kyle providing leadership brought them together as a team and whatever McDermott did - the culture and the attitude to play for each other worked. I think they have less talent, but are a better team and that has made a huge difference. Just look at the reaction when Brandon Tate made a first down or Kyle scored a TD - that is a team playing for each other and that is why I think they are here. Therefore I do not assume players with me first attitudes (Sammy/Dareus) would of helped get this team to the playoffs. Additionally - it was not a 9 win team - they had not won 9 games in 2 years - they were a below .500 team with those players you spoke of last year.

Ok - so using that logic how would you feel if the Bills fumble there and a Dolphin player clearly out of bounds recovers the fumble and is awarded the ball. Is that ok? That exact situation comes up several times throughout the year including early this season for the Bills where the review took forever to see if a ball fumbled near the sidelines was touched or recovered by a player out of bounds. I am not sure what you are looking for with intent - intent is what is causing the catch rule to be very difficult ( where exactly does possession occur and football moves). This is a black and white rule that we should be looking for more of. No matter the reason if a ball is loose and someone touching the out of bounds boundary touches the ball - it is dead. There is no interpretation or gray with it - therefore it can be interpreted the same each time - even if the guy was not trying to recover the ball - he just happened to touch it. The issue with the rule is typically it is not clear because with the fumble usually there is a mad scramble and a pile of bodies and to see exactly who is in bounds and who is out of bounds is the issue - the rule is not the problem it is the increase in camera angles and HD frame by frame film that changes the game and is making replay very difficult compared to 5 or 10 years ago.

Sorry you really lost me with this one. The ruling was that ASJ lost possession before breaking the plain and you can clearly see that for a second the ball is completely free from his hands. They cross the goal line and hit the pylon - out of bounds. Therefore the ball was ruled dead at that spot - since the ball was the Jets and the fumble crossed the goal line and then was considered out of bounds - by rule that is a touchback for the Patriots. This is actually consistent with the ruling in the Bills game. ASJ was deemed out of bounds upon full control and therefore if it had been at the 2 yard line like Landry’s the Jets would have maintained possession - the difference is the fumble crossed the plain and therefore a different rule takes effect where if the offensive team fumbles before reaching the goal line and the ball crosses the plain and goes out of bounds it is a touchback for the defending team. There are several issues I have with that ruling because you can not tell when he regains possession, but if the decision was that possession was not regained until he hit out of bounds - they got the call correct. If he had possession before hitting the ground it is incorrect. I personally think he regained possession and it should have been a TD, but I hate the Pats so that colors the decision.

I totally disagree. The rule is pretty specific - if a loose ball is touched by a player out of bounds - the ball is out of bounds. There is no intent. You are making it much more complex than it needs to be. If he was out of bounds and touching the ball at all - it is out of bounds. It it would be the same issue if the defender touched it out of bounds. Additionally if a kickoff is in bounds, but the receiver reaches and touches it and he is out of bounds - the kick-off is considered out of bounds.

Actually it appears he is and they got the call right. Nice picture 2 posts after yours showing it.

Please read the thread directly about the fumble. I believe there was confusion because the ref stated it was a fumble. The fumble was confirmed. The issue is after losing control - Landry’s shoulder hits the out of bounds boundary as his hand is still on the ball - therefore correctly ruled out of bounds. I think when the refs said the fumble was ok - the sideline misunderstood the ruling including Preston.

The issue is not the fumble - they ruled it a fumble, but Landry is still touching the ball as his shoulder is out of bounds. Therefore by rule an out of bounds player touched the loose ball and the ball is considered out of bounds and the play dead. It is close, but I think it is the correct call. This vid is fine - his left shoulder hits barely out of bounds and the ball is still touching Landry’s hand. The jarring of the ground is what bounces the ball away from Landry’s hand. The NFL and the crew ruled it a fumble as the ball was obviously no longer controlled before Landry made contact with the ground, but the fact that he was still in contact as he hit the out of bounds caused the issue. I think that is also part of what threw Brown off. I am guessing the Ref on the Bills side said it was a fumble - which they took to mean a recovery and they no longer listened to the explanation. There were several players beyond Brown that celebrated - although he made the biggest fool of himself.

LOL - I thought that also.

Tha has always been the case. You can even catch a kickoff with one foot out of bounds and it makes the kickoff out of bounds. It was anothe very close play - it is what I suspected the outcome to be called - the one angle looks like as Landry’s shoulder hits the boundary he is still touching the ball. Very close and would love to see some vids of it. That was the call a fumble, but Landry touched the ball while out of bounds.

As was 2016 and 2015........ The QBs with the spotlights show the warts and everyone moves away and then 3-4 are drafted in the first round because of the importance of the position. This year will be no different everyone will find fault and then in the end scouts will look at the body of work and several will get drafted early and one or two will work out and one or two will bust just like nearly every year. I will be interested to see who decides to come out and who goes back because if Darnold goes back - wait for it... the 2019 class will be great ??. ?

He may not be great, but he leads the NFL in tackles with 144. He he needs to be better at times, but they could also do a lot worse. If if you can get him at a reasonable rate - keep him around and try to improve.

Just awesome- thanks SDS

Good call AFL!

Considering he is still paying big money to several coaches and GMs - I do not think money is a big issue with this owner. If It was a guarantee- I think the Pegula’s would pay almost anything for a winner, but nothing is guaranteed- so I still think for this organization - missing on picks would be worse because that would cause issues for several years.