Rochesterfan

I agree - the way the Bills D-Line played was specifically done to limit the running game. The Bills rushed trying to contain the gaps to prevent runs and also rushed with an eye to screens - rather than trying to get a ton of pressure on Rivers. It was pretty obvious to most people exactly what the game plan was and it worked through the first 3 quarters. Don’t let them run and force Rivers to beat you all the way down the field. It lead to 10 Indy points and a 14 point deficit through 3 quarters in a game Rivers was nearly perfect.

See - this is going to be a narrative that just is not true and it is going to be stated numerous times no matter who we face next week. Let’s take a second and dive into the run defense in this game. Overall the Bills gave up 163 yards on 30 carries - yep looks like they got run all over. Now let’s take a second and look at the 4th quarter where the Bills were up multiple scores. The Bills went back to their Nickel off ball coverage that did not focus on the run game. They gave up 93 yards on 6 carries when not focused at all on the run. The first 3 quarters when they played with a focus on the run - they gave up 70 yards on 24 carries about 2.9 yards per carry. It was not like they ran all over us when the game was close. As a matter of fact in all drives that the Score was within 1 score either way - the Bills gave up a total of 78 yards on 26 carries. They also bowed up and stopped the Indy team from running on a goal line drive and on a 2pt conversion attempt from the 1. What this game tells me is the Bills when they want to focus on the running game they have the ability to contain the run with how they attack the line of scrimmage with their DL, LBs, and CBs. When they move to attack mode late in the game and up 2 scores - they lose lane discipline and the LBs are not quickly filling the gaps leaving lanes to run through - then they get gashed for big games. The 2 drives that the Bills were up 2 scores and ran a more attacking DLine style with LB and CB support dropping off for passing - they gave up 85 on 4 carries or about 50% of their rushing total on 2 drives where they were ready to let them run. Indy is a good team and Frank got the absolute best out of Rivers in that game, but it was Rivers making good reads and quick short accurate passes that kept them in this game not the running game. At least in my opinion

Again - not to give any life to our ability to be pissed off about things, but in both cases of Davis sideline catches - his going out of bounds stops the game clock and therefore the review comes almost immediately. There is no reason to wait because the clock is not moving. In the case of the Indy fumble - the clock is moving so the job of the replay team is not to stop it until the snap to ensure it gets stopped at the last possible point before the play to ensure they do not give the offense more time - in this case it appears to have been about 5-6 seconds of game time. Now how they get the call wrong is beyond me, but the timing makes sense based upon the clock. It is similar to the TB/WFT fumble that they get wrong and could not overturn.

Doc - with a running clock they never immediately review a play like that. The referees must wait until the ball is about to be snapped. Let’s think of this another way - if right at the conclusion of the fumble they decide to review with 34 seconds left rather than right at the Colts snap of the ball - it essentially would have given the Colts another free play in the game based upon the ruling. Look McD was very smart to call the timeout just to ensure because in the current system there is no way for him to be sure they are going to review, but there is also absolutely no proof that the Ref was not buzzed at the snap. Not everything needs to be a conspiracy- especially when the most logical and typical response mirrors what happened and mirrors the stated outcome. The NFL ended up not needing to “save face” on that play any more than the should of been fumble in TB yet the difference in timeouts was obvious - so there must be a reason why Buffalo got their timeout back and TB didn’t. It certainly does not scream to me that the NFL favors the Bills and therefore wanted to return the timeout versus Tom Brady’s team net getting their timeout back. The most logical explanation is the timing of the timeouts versus the timing of the replay buzz and that was the explanation given in both cases. The current NFL replay system stinks because of these reasons with a running clock - it is never fair to either team when the running clock gets stopped - so they try to do it is fairly as possible, but it leads to things like exactly what happened - a needless timeout and a potential play by Indy that gets stopped mid play because of review, but if they stop it earlier it gives free time to Indy to reset and get an extra play.

Exactly - the difference was TB did not get their timeout back because they stopped the clock well before the next snap on a running clock and therefore well before the replay team buzzed in to the ref and therefore the timeout stood. The Bills got their timeout back which suggests that it was simultaneous to the replay buzz.

Do you have any proof of this? The facts are - the replay booth on these types of plays with a running clock do not buzz down until immediately at the snap to prevent giving the offense a time advantage. Several of these plays happen where the ball is snapped and the ref blows the whistle stating he got the notification. 2nd - McD not being sure if they got the buzz used his available time out just before the ball was snapped and the referee clearly stated that he was buzzed at the same time and therefore the Bills were not charged a time out. 3rd - several hours later in the TB game - TB calls a time out right before the half to get the Refs to look at a fumble. He called it before the replay team buzzed down and therefore TB stopped the running clock. They decided to review the play and determined it was not a fumble and TB still lost the timeout because they stopped the clock. The announcers clearly stated if after the review - it was determined to be a fumble - TB would have gotten their timeout back, but because they called the timeout before the review was initiated with a running clock - if it was upheld TB lost the timeout. If you view that in the context of the Bills game - if McD called the timeout with a running clock like TB and it was not simultaneous to the ref getting buzzed - Buffalo would have been charged with the timeout just like TB, but the ref clearly states Buffalo was not charged the timeout because the replay team buzzed in at the same time. Therefore based upon the available facts @Simon is 100% correct. We have no way to know the exact moment the replay team buzzes in, but usually the offense snaps the ball and begins the play and the ref blows it dead when the clock is moving to ensure the offense does not gain a time advantage.

Yet - he was 5-0 in wild card games. This was a game he typically wins. Kudos to the Bill for finding a way to win.

Analytics is a tool you are correct, but since you do not know when it is going to work and when it isn’t - you either have to be all in or not. It is easy after the fact to second guess things, but the analytics should provide you with reasons. I had no issue with them going for it on 4th down - I believe that decision was made once they got inside the 5, but the 3rd down play was terrible and really should have changed their mind to the FG to build their lead. There was a chance for the Bills to score, but they should have taken the points when they lost yardage on 3rd down. Going for 2 was a bit mind blowing to me because it had little impact if they got it. It could have prevented a tie, but getting/failing on 2 pts. did not significantly increase their chances. In the end it balanced out with the successful try, but then that was critical. I thought Frank played an ultra conservative gameplan, but then made ultra aggressive decisions and that does not always go together. If you are going to play a run heavy, short passing attack to keep the clock moving and really limit possession- then you need to score when you have chances and he cost the team points that mattered in the end.

Nope - I believe the receiver ends up dropping the ball backwards out of bounds. The Ref signaled to start the game clock upon getting the ball ready for play. I think it was done perfectly and that was part of the delay in McD calling the timeout. He wanted it right before the snap to get as much time as possible off the clock. Well coached and well played - especially as he still had to be seething about the non fumble call.

The replay team is supposed to wait until the ball is about to be snapped. If they stop it earlier it benefits the offense like a free timeout. What we don’t see and can’t know is exactly when the buzz comes, but McD did it right to make sure.

I actually thought it was good that it was taking that long. I thought they were looking for the new spot and time. Just crazy they missed the call with every in booth Ref calling it obvious.

Duke was elevated in the event Beasley could not go. That was the only reason. Since he can go - Duke is inactive.

Duh - way to go out on a limb here Ian. This was about the most obvious statement there is.

I get the idea, but if Diggs and Beasley both start - Duke is inactive - I have to believe. You have Brown, McKittrick, Davis, and Roberts after Diggs and Beasley. I do not see them dressing 7 WRs. Duke is just in case Beasley can’t go. Then they can still dress 6 guys. This is what happened earlier in the sea un he was called up. He was inactive then also I believe. If Gilliam was not back then maybe you go with just Knox and Smith and use Duke as a TE style, but I just don’t really see that with the health of the roster.

I think there was a thread about this: Reed = McKittrick Lofton = Davis Beebe = Knox McKeller = Diggs Thurman = Moss I believe that was the title before it devolved about 30 times. LOL 😂

Look McD loves position flexibility- QB/DE perfect. Plus what a surprise for the Colts - Rivers getting dumped 3 times by JA. Perfection.

Come up with whatever you want as long as it rhymes - then we can all agree.

I am pretty sure we can all agree this thread is something that rhymes with “barbage”. Some might have a stronger rhyme, but that is ok. That is about the extent of it.

I think that opens it up for Urban in Houston. Lots of talk that was who he was looking to bring into Jacksonville. I wonder if they go as a package deal there once everything is finalized.

I think no matter what the regular season is a success. They set goals and accomplished those and more. That does not mean they are satisfied or it won’t be a let down with really any outcome other than Super Bowl win. The team is still growing and getting better and it is imperative that they find ways to win in the post season to continue the growth, but with everything accomplished I would be remiss not to call the season a success. At the start of the season, we all have our own ideas about what we think the team can accomplish and I am pretty sure most fans would have been over the moon with everything listed above. Once you get to the playoffs though - the goals shift - you now have a shot at the ultimate championship and even if you are the 6-10 WFT - you have thoughts of a 4 game run to win it all and any loss now is a disappointment and takes away the feeling of success for everything else accomplished. So my answer is yes it is a success, but Super Bowl or Bust is still legitimate.

I actually think that the Hail Mary in Arizona harkened back to that loss for some of these players. Dion says they realized not every game was their Super Bowl, but I also think some players had over a week to sit with that bad taste and it reminded them of the Houston Taste and they have been a different team since. I think every so often you need that kind of loss to remind and push you forward. It ends up as a blessing in disguise.

I don’t think so myself. Josh still has year 4 and the 5th year option - so I don’t expect that is where the Bills start. I think Josh knows what is coming and will be patient. I think they figure out Williams, Mongo, and Milano first and then work to fill the roster with talent. Once that is done - similar to Mahomes and White - Josh will get done late summer/training camp or just as the season starts as the Bills look to the 2022/2023 salary cap for extra relief.

Not over Diggs/AJ. I would rather have a modern NFL passing offense than any Replaceable RB.

This is just as bad as if you asked - bring Gailey back. No reason to bring back failed former people - promote from within or go get young innovative OCs that fit your scheme.

They needed people on the PS just in case of any last minute issues with the WR team ( like Brown being a close contact last week). It takes a week to get these guys through protocol - so both guys were brought in when Kumerow was signed and were there just in case they needed call ups for the last game. Once we got through last weeks game and Stills was ready to sign - these guys were always going to be gone. They were just guys for an emergency. It happens to fringe players all of the time.