Shaw66

Exactly. You know, all through the drought, the Bills had only one 3-win season, one 4- win season and one 5-win season. The Bills actually were always almost, but not quite decent. They generally weren't horrible. I don't remember being as disinterested as many Jets fans seemed yesterday. My recollection is that we were generally more of the mind that if only we could get a QB, or if only we had a better linebacker, or is only we didn't have Rex. It didn't seem like the team was in the proverbial ****ter. Six to nine wins, year after year, got to really just wear on us. Those fans yesterday were looking at a true dumpster fire, and they knew it before they arrived at the stadium. I mean, they ended the game with Joe Flacco playing QB. That would be like the Bills bringing Kyle Orton back. I think you're correct about this. The Bills are better at two positions when they have Spencer Brown at tackle. Still, at their best, they're blowing no one off the line of scrimmage, and that's a problem.

I don't like parking there. I don't like because you don't have options. You just come in off the highway, following all the traffic. It never seems to be the same twice - cones are set up here and there, and guys are directing you to turn this way or that. People in the left lane who want to go right stop in the middle of these roadways around the stadium, and the guys stop traffic and help him turn, so he can find his way over to some other spot. It all seems disorganized, but you have no choices, so I just follow the directions and get to someplace where there are spaces and park. Then I find my way to the gate. Getting out isn't great. We didn't leave until ten minutes after the game, and all the Jets fans should have been cleared out. Still, we were in heavy stop-and-go traffic, everyone trying to get out and get on 95 north. At KC a few weeks ago, I didn't know where I was going, but it all seemed to be pretty well organized.

I covered the freshman basketball team for the school newspaper at my college, a long time ago. The team was excellent – great talent, well coached. I think they finished the season 15-2. After one early-season win blowout against an outclassed opponent, I wrote that the team’s win was “unimpressive.” The coach went ballistic and complained to the editor. To me, it simply had looked like a good college varsity against a bunch of high school kids. Why wouldn’t it be a blowout? What’s impressive about that? So, I won’t call the Bills’ Sunday win over the Jets unimpressive but really, a win like that says more about how bad the Jets are than about how good the Bills are. The league seems to have developed a formula for slowing down the Bills’ offense from a season ago. The formula seems to be to play cover 2 or something similar, but whatever it is you play, do not allow the Bills to throw deep. Do not play their deep threats one on one. Force them, one way or another to win with 6, 7, 8-yard chunks instead of 15, 20, 25-yard chunks. The Jets seem to have missed the memo. Despite having the worst defense in the NFL, the Jets decided that one-on-one against the Bills deep threats was a good idea. Robert Saleh seems to be a good guy and I wish him plenty of success, but he needs to explain to his GM why a supposed defensive genius could expose his team that way. By way of comparison, Dick Jauron made bad Bills teams respectable by following the formula that Saleh ignored: Nothing deep, ever. For the Bills, it seems to be feast or famine. The Bills feasted on the Jets defense, but the win doesn’t establish that the Bills have solved their occasional famines. Josh Allen must have felt like an eight-year-old turned loose at a party at Chuckie Cheese. He could play whatever games he wanted, eat whatever he wanted, laugh and cheer and run around all afternoon. Only an ill-advised tipped-pass that was intercepted kept him from having a more or less perfect passing day. His comfort in the pocket and delivering the ball was obvious. Time after time he looked, found what he was looking for, and threw comfortably where the ball needed to go. Brian Daboll understood that a creative running attack could attack the Jets on the edges, and the usually anemic Bills rushing attack went for a respectable 139 yards. Sanders and McKenzie struck the two big blows on back-to-back sprints around the right end for a touchdown to open the second half. When Sanders turned the corner with Gilliam ahead of him, they were looking at 15 yards of green, all of which was green turf and none of which was Jets green jerseys. Daboll knew something about the Jets’ run defense that the Jets didn’t know. The Jets don’t have the offensive firepower to deal with the Bills defense, which coasted to an easy win, forcing punts and turnovers almost at will. Each of the five starting defensive backs had a takeaway. Klein filled in nicely for Edmunds, making a lot of tackles and ranging easily to the sidelines. The Bills went seriously bend-don’t-break in the fourth quarter, giving up a lot of yards and two TDs; before then, they were same stingy defense we’ve seen most of the season. I have a friend who often shares with me his tickets about three rows behind the Bills bench at MetLife. It’s great to watch the game from that perspective. A few things I saw: 1. There always seems to be conversation going on between a coach and a player or two. They’re looking at tablets and discussing something the Jets were doing and how to attack, why something didn’t work the last time on the field, something where the Bills will have an opportunity. Or players are talking among themselves about what just happened or should happen next time. Special teams, especially. It seemed like Taiwan Jones and Matakevich and McKenzie and others were talking about technique a lot. 2. In the fourth quarter, Webb kept warming up, and Bates, and Doyle kept loosening up, expecting to get into the game to mop up. It didn’t happen until two minutes were left. The Bills weren’t treating anything as mop-up time; with eight minutes left in the game, Allen trotted onto the field instead of Webb and dropped a 43-yard bomb to Diggs, leading to the Bills’ final TD. 3. My ten-year-old friend was completely consumed by the sights and sounds all around, and when nothing seemed to be happening, he watched the video screens. During one timeout, he watched as a Pepsi logo was hidden under one of three Jets’ helmets. Then the helmets changed places, up, down, back and forth in the familiar shell game. He watched intently as some fan guessed (wrong). Blissfully unaware that millions of people were watching commercials on TV, he turned to me and asked, “They stopped the game for THAT?” 4. Jets fans have given up. I’d guess there were something between 5,000 and 10,000 empty seats in the stadium when the game began. The Jets fan who has the seats beside us, a serious fan, wasn’t there. A lot of fans left at halftime, and more kept leaving throughout the third and fourth quarters. Even in the first half, the Jets fans didn’t make much noise, not even on third down. Allen was pretty much free to communicate orally at the line of scrimmage. After they get a first down, the Jets do that thing where the announcer says on the PA system “And that’s another Jets,” and all the fans are supposed to yell “FIRST DOWN!!!” It’s pretty cool, actually, when it works. Sunday, he'd say “And that’s another Jets,” and it was followed by silence. It was funny and pathetic; no one cared. 5. The game began with, I’d guess, 10,000 or more Bills fans in the stadium, a lot in the seats behind the Bills’ bench. By the end of the game the stadium was mostly empty seats and a lot of blue. Bills fans didn’t make much noise, either except when the Bills scored. As the game was winding down, the Bills fans found their way down to the seats behind the bench. They were trying to get the attention of any of the Bills players, chanting Josh’s name, yelling to other players, singing happy birthday to Dawson Knox. The players ignored the fans for the most part, only occasionally turning to smile and wave. Another cluster of Bills fans greeted the team as they entered the tunnel to the locker room. 6. Diggs’s spectacular catch and run up the left sideline and White’s equally spectacular interception both happened right in front of us. The talent of these guys was on full display on those two plays: Allen’s recognition and effortless throw, dropping the ball right in Diggs’s hands. Diggs’ equally effortless catch. Although both seemed to be playing pitch and catch casually, their concentration and ability to relax under extreme pressure was obvious. White’s run, turn, and catch was even better. Just amazing athletes. White was ecstatic on the sideline. 7. Diggs really marches to a different drummer. During pre-game warmups, he was near the Bills’ bench, the stands were half-full, and a lot of fans were calling out to him. He pointed to some fan most of the way up the lower deck, 15 rows behind me, and threw a football to him. It was thirty-yard throw, minimum, and he hit the guy in the hands. The guy caught it and threw it back to him, short. All just for fun. Occasionally, both before and after the game, Diggs would turn and acknowledge the cheers from the crowd. After the pre-game was done and the entire team had left the field for the locker room, Diggs lingered behind. He walked along the bench, looking up into the stands. Then he seemed to be preparing his spot on the bench, so that he had a towel or something just where he wanted it. When everything seemed just right, still taking his time, he headed to the locker room. It reminded me of Diggs alone on the field after the AFC Championship game. It’s as though he has a personal relationship with the field and what happens there. The Bills are 6-3 and have one of the best records in the AFC. Their playoff fortunes will depend on the team they become over the next eight games. It’s a process. They still need a better running game, and they need to be able to move the ball against defenses that are better than the Jets put on the field yesterday. The Colts come to Orchard Park next week, fighting for their playoff lives. They will be a better test for the Bills. GO BILLS!

I think you underestimate McDermott. He understands, and says it often, that he's responsible for the performance of the team. If the offensive linemen have lost sight of the physicality that's required, play after play, then McDermott knows he isn't getting the job done. If it's a core aspect of the game, he cannot allow his players to lose sight of it. I think it's a lesson learned for McD. And I agree, I think we'll see some changes made in the off-season.

I think this quote from McDermott is really telling: This quote is McDermott critiquing himself. By implication, at least some on his team have lost sight of physicality being a core aspect of the game. If players have lost sight, which at least some undoubtedly have, then their coaches are failing at their job. And if their coaches are failing at theirs, McDermott is failing at his. I am certain he would freely admit that is true. I keep trying to compare McDermott to Belichick. Belichick lives in the core aspects of the game. His teams never lose sight of the need to be physical. His teams bring it every week, with everything they have. And, by the way, the latest glamour-boy in the league is Mike Vrabel, for exactly that reason.

Bears are getting wholly jobbed. It's pitiful tonight.

McDermott definitely would not agree with you. Rolling to the right, running away from a tackle, going horizontal, only QBs who aren't in control of their thought processes, try to complete that pass. Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Matt Ryan, Russell Wilson, everyone throws that ball away. Everyone. The interception he threw to Josh Allen was a flat out, dumb rookie mistake that is trained out of every quarterback who is a real success in the NFL. It's football. You get tackled, sometimes a lot. You do not throw the ball up for grabs.

No doubt about that. However, Josh's job is to make the right decision in every circumstance. On the play that he fumbled, he should have given the ball to Singletary. The hole was there, and they only needed two yards. Josh wanted the ball in his hands, despite what his eyes should have been telling him. On both of the interceptions, he threw late, under duress, without having seen the field well enough to know where the defense was coming from. His job was to eat the ball in each case, or throw it away. He did neither. If I have to blame the offensive meltdown on anyone, it's on Daboll. But Allen played like a rookie, again.

That's like a dagger to McDermott's heart. That's pitiful.

I agree. First and goal from the five, or whatever, and Josh never threw the ball over the goal line. I was fuming over that. Gabriel Davis has disappeared (except for his critical drop late in the game), and without Knox the Bills are left with no credible big threat in the end zone. That doesn't help - Sanders, Beasley, Diggs, and McKenzie aren't guys you can count on to win jump balls. Still, there have to be plays better than a pass from the five to the four.

Bob - This is good stuff. Thanks. I agree, except about a few small points. The reason I say the penalties weren't the problem is that the Bills offense was essentially unable to do anything all day. Yes, the penalties may have cost them a first down here or there. I agree about the procedure penalty on fourth and two - we didn't get to see the replay, but the only movement I saw on the the Bills' line was in response to someone on the right side of the defensive line clearly coming across. However, I saw nothing from the Bills yesterday that suggested that even if the officials had gotten that one right, the Bills would have scored a TD. They needed a TD, all day, and they couldn't find a way to get one. As for the unnecessary roughness on Williams, I think that was another one of those penalties where the referee gave the wrong number. He did it several times over the day. It's hard to imagine that anyone would have called unnecessary roughness on that play by Williams, so I think it was probably on someone else.

The only surprising thing is that people are surprised that the Pats are a threat. Once they named Jones the starter, we should have known the Pats would be trouble. Jones was a Brady-style QB, and when he was elevated and Cam let go, it was a message that Jones could do what Belichick demands. If the Bills are going to have success this season, they've got to win some really tough games ahead of them.

And much as people liked beating on him, Feliciano was an important part of the line. Morse is a finesse player, not a power guy, and putting Feliciano and Williams on either side of Morse strengthened the middle. In another year, Brown may be the best offensive lineman the Bills have, and it that's true, then Beane is the one who has some explaining to do.

I'll join here without having read much of this thread - just some of the recent comments about the offense. First, Gunner and others are right - it's about the offensive line. If you don't win in the trenches, you don't win, especially this time of year. NBC's broadcasters, pregame and during the game, all missed the point. They were heaping love all night on the Rams, and it wasn't until there were about 4 minutes left that Collinsworth finally said, "You know, the Titans are built to win the battles in the trenches. You don't want to have to play them." Well, duh, haven't they been watching the Titans for the past few weeks? They've been awesome, starting with beating the Bills. Why? Because they win in the trenches. Second, Collinsworth has been bashed around here a lot, but he says some insightful stuff. In particular last night, in the first half he kept explaining how McVay had gotten away from his Goff offense because Stafford likes to stay in and throw from the pocket. Last night, he was getting murdered in the pocket, because the Titans were merciless with their pass rush. Unlike, Daboll, McVay had an answer - the Rams came out in the second half and gotten Stafford out of the pocket. They ran a lot of misdirection, with wide-zone blocking to one side and Stafford rolling to the other side. In the second half, Stafford had time and the offense started to move. (Still, the Titans forced field goals instead of TDs, so the Titans won.) Now, the Bills probably can't make play action work by running wide-zone play action, because they haven't run the wide-zone very effectively. The point isn't what McVay did; the point is that he analyzed what the Titans were doing to stop the Rams and in the second half he began to nullify that strength of the Titans and attack where their defense left them vulnerable. It's Daboll's job, and McDermott's, to do that. There's always a place to attack. If you have good football players, there's always a way to exploit weaknesses in the defense. That's why Belichick is so difficult to beat. He always can move the ball, and he always can find a way to slow down your offense. That's what McDermott is trying to be, and it's how his defense is playing. His offense is another story.

The Buffalo Bills, the coaches and the players, have a lot of work to do. All the fans have to do is remember that it’s a long season, and what matters is the next game. Every week, it’s the next game. The Bills lost to the Jaguars on Sunday afternoon, 9-6. The Bills have been looking worse and worse, week after week. Kansas City, Tennessee, Miami, and now Jacksonville. To be fair, it’s not the Bills who have been looking worse and worse. It’s the Bills’ offense. The defense has motored right along, somehow not looking dominant but getting the job done. The defense held the Jags to 218 yards, way below the Bills league leading 262 per game, and to 9 points, way below the Bills’ league leading 15 per game. Jacksonville’s offense did more or less nothing and was fortunate to get three field goals. Fortunate, because Sean McDermott inexplicably declined a holding penalty and left the Jags in field goal range on 4th down. Josh Allen was more or less horrible. He threw two interceptions, and fumble on a play where he should have handed off for a key first down. He missed some guys, and he stood in the pocket looking endlessly for openings. Either the opportunities weren’t there – likely, or Josh didn’t know what he was looking at. In his defense, Allen took an absolute beating. The offensive line imploded. Once again, they were largely ineffective in the run game. Allen had all the meaningful runs, and they were on scrambles, not designed runs. And the offensive line repeatedly failed to protect Allen. Allen was sacked four times and hit eight times, and he was running for his life on multiple other plays. Williams at right guard and Spencer Brown at right tackle are a much better combo than Cody Ford at guard with Williams sliding over to tackle. Williams is clearly better at guard than Ford, and Brown better than Williams at tackle. Brown needs to get back in the lineup. Dion Dawkins wasn’t winning any prizes, either. Penalties were bad, but they didn’t determine the outcome. If your team gives up only three field goals in the entire game, how bad could penalties have hurt? Penalties didn’t cost the offense three touchdowns. The penalties were just an indicator of how far from a good team the Bills were on Sunday. Fans kept waiting for the offense to wake up, for that Allen magic to take over and win the game. One TD would do it, and there were glimmers of hope when Allen connected with Singletary and Diggs, but the final drive was like the rest of the game – missed opportunities, and Allen under too much pressure. If the Bills can’t run the ball, they have to get Stefon Diggs more involved. Dawson Knox’s return should help, when it happens. But if the line can’t protect Allen, it’s going to be a struggle. Repeating last week’s theme, this is the part of the season that separates the good teams from the rest. One thing the good teams do this time of year is figure out how to make their offenses work, now that the league has figured out how to stop them. The Bills are getting stopped, the Chiefs are getting stopped. This is the part of the season where the running game has to start producing the tough yards. The Bills offense doesn’t look like last season’s offense, primarily because the 8-15 yard completions over the middle, the crossing routes and the little Beasley slants that always produced first downs. They’re not there because teams are ignoring the play fake and simply taking away the passing lanes. Teams are ignoring the play fake because they know the running game won’t hurt them. Maybe the Bills’ offensive line, particularly with Feliciano gone and Brown down, simply isn’t good enough. Maybe Brian Daboll doesn’t have the creativity to revitalize the offense. But it’s a long season, and it’s played one game at a time. The Jets are the next test. They will be ready. The question is whether the Bills will be. GO BILLS!

I agree. I think that's exactly what's happening, and it's all happening by design. And that design has both a short-term and a long-term benefit. Long term, of course, it means, that when a guy leaves in free agency or retires, his replacement, or at least a decent candidate to be the replacement, is already on the team. It's in the short term, however, where we will see the real benefit, and it's the benefit that Belichick was able to achieve. In the short term, when a player goes down, there's a young player who already knows the system and who plays surprisingly well. One reason he plays well is that the system is designed to be a cooperative defense, and when a new players steps in, the coaches can tweak the assignments of other guys to lighten the load for the new guy. They can protect him as he really works his way into the defense. Belichick has done for two decades - some player goes down, and an undrafted second-year guy steps in with no apparent effect on the quality of the team play. There's always a Boettker or a Bates or a Jaquan Johnson or a Dane Jackson or a Zimmer who's ready to step in, and the system always can adjust to the new guy's strengths and weaknesses. All in all, it's just a better way to build a defense, and a team, because you're never dependent on guy. Except the QB.

I didn't intend to get into a debate about the talents of individual players, mostly because I simply am not well informed about that. I admit my language was sloppy. When I was talking about studs, I was talking about the 10 or 15 names that are regularly talked about as "the" guys. The premier shut-down corners - Gilmore had that reputation, the Jalen Ramseys, the Watts, the Aaron Donalds. The guys who are standout players. As I said in an earlier post, I think in a different defense, White might be one of those guys. If Belichick had him, he might be on an island every play, all game, against the number 1 receiver on the other team. But White isn't used that way - he's in a system that plays a lot of zone and has a lot of wrinkles. In that kind of system, a player's pure physical greatness is hidden to some extent, because the player isn't turned loose to be an extraordinary playmaker like Bruce Smith was or like Troy Polamalu was. White's asked to do a lot of things that help his teammates rather than show off his pure physical skills. And White is really valuable to the Bills because he's willing to do it. He understands that having a good team is more important than being named All-Pro. So, I'm not going to argue with you about how great White is because frankly, I don't know. What I do know is that he is great within this system. And, to some extent, I feel the same way about Hyde, and maybe Poyer, too. In a different system, at Arizona, Hyde may have the rep that Budda Baker has. I think Hyde's incredibly talented and really smart, so if you turned him loose, he might be spectacular. But the whole defense is about using the talents of each player to make his teammates' jobs easier. Win your share of your one-on-one battles, make your share of the tackles (and don't miss your tackles) - that's the physical, one-on-one stuff, but also play your position really well - know your assignment, manage your gaps, protect your zone, do a lot of routine stuff that isn't glamorous but that makes the whole machine run smoothly, that makes each of your teammates better. It's designed to be truly synergistic, to have the whole be better than the sum of its parts. My point throughout this hasn't been about who's a stud and who isn't. My point is that this system doesn't require studs. If Hyde and Milano and Rousseau are short of true stud status, McDermott doesn't care. If he and Beane can come up will 11 near-studs like those three, then McDermott is going to have a top-five defense year after year. What really puts him over the top is have a true stud or two mixed in, a White if you want to call him a stud, and an Edmunds, if he could raise his game another notch or two. But for McDermott, the studs are less important than the synergy he gets from getting good football players to play a a sophisticated team concept.

Pitchers and goalies aren't the same. It is at some level about simple mathematics. The question is how much of credit does one person get for a win or a loss in an athletic contest. At it's most fundamental, the amount of credit one player gets is the ratio of his contribution to to other players' contribution. All things being equal, a basketball player gets 1/5. He's one player out of five. Okay, you should factor in minutes played, but for discussion purposes assume five guys go the whole game. So, a basketball player gets 20% of the credit. A tennis player playing singles gets 100% of the credit. Same with a golfer. A hockey player gets 1/6. a baseball player gets 1/9 in the national league, 1/10 in the American league. A football player gets 1/22, forgetting about special teams. So a hockey play gets 16%, a baseball player gets 10%, a football player gets less than 5%. So without looking at it any more carefully than that, its obvious that crediting wins to one football player makes a lot less sense than to one pitcher or one hockey player. Then you make adjustments for position. A hockey goalie isn't 16%, he's more like 30%, and a pitcher who goes 9 isn't 10%, he's also more like 30%. A quarterback gets more than 5% of the credit - maybe double, or 10%. Or maybe even 15%. But probably no more than that. It's just obvious on the numbers that QBs as less responsible for wins than goalies and pitchers. Or golfers. Football is the ultimate team game. Football is the game where teamwork and team precision creates a huge value added beyond the actual talents of the individuals. Yes, it doesn't. What I said is that it's the best way to evaluate PASSERS, and a good way to evaluate quarterbacks. At the end of the season, with very few exceptions, the guys with the best passer ratings were both the most effective passers in the league AND the most effective quarterbacks. Why? Because you to have a high passer rating you have to be among the best at reading defenses, because reading defenses is how you find easy throws, and easy throws gets you a high passer rating. And the best QBs in the league are the best at reading defense. So, yeah, you have to add in rushing yards and TDs and fumbles. But seriously, other than Lamar Jackson, and Murray, and Allen, rushing yards for QBs are negligible.

Doc - Passer rating IS total yards, TDs, turnovers and completion percentage. It's the best single number to measure passers, and probably quarterbacks generally.

Thanks. That's well said. However, where I think you WILL start to see some correlation is when the category changes from wins to fourth quarter come-from behind wins and stats like that. I would guess that cream rises a little better in that category. QBs who win a lot in the fourth quarter tend to keep their jobs. I haven't looked, but I'd guess that Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Jim Plunkett, Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Doug Williams don't rank high on that list. Whatever, I agree that in a QB-QB comparison like this, wins really aren't relevant. Over the 32 games, I'd say Mahomes has had the better OC and probably the better talent. On the subject in general, I wouldn't have guessed that Allen was Mahomes's equal over that period. That's quite cool. Plus, there's rushing yards and the running threat he presents. Watching Mahomes the last few weeks, I've begum to wonder whether he hasn't plateaued somewhere below his star years. He might have flashed early and now has settled in. Can he move on from where he's been to wily veteran? Can you see him playing at a sustained level like a Rodgers? I think Allen has a better shot at being the equivalent of Rodgers - one of the very best ever to play the position.

I agree with all of us and I appreciate that people are talking about it. I didn't see it until this conversation. The interdependency of the players is key - they know each other and they are committed to this - well, uh - this process. You can see how they've gotten better, building on year after year, getting more sophisticated, nuanced. Part of the process is going to be working younger people in, because there has to be a continuous rotation. Someone has to be behind, a new corner has to come in to replace Wallace and be the successor to Tre. It's a constant building process, with young talent coming in and learning the process, raising their game to the level of the veterans. They have to be in line waiting. We won't realize they are there and that good until the vets start getting let go, to our dismay. Remember how amazing it was when the Pats caught Lawyer Milloy, and then the Bills signed him? He was part of their powerhouse (or so we thought) safety combination. The Pats, we were told, had mismanaged their cap and didn't have room to sign Milloy. He wouldn't do a team-friendly deal. The Pats said, well, then, good-bye. Turned out Milloy was a very good but not great player who succeeded because of the great team defense he played in. He was the first of many Patriot "stars" Belichick let go. Little by little, we're going to see that happening with this team. Guys we really like are going to move on, and the Bills always will have someone behind him. It's quite impressive how this team is built.

That's great. I think you describe it exactly. Taking a step back, what's in credible about this defense is that it really is a team defense. Everyone succeeds because his teammates are succeeding. Tre gets beat. Levi does. Taron does. But they make a high percentage of their plays. That means that the dline knows that if they just work hard at their jobs, they'll be able to create pressure. Everyone's success in this defense depends on the others. Gotta give a lot of credit to McDermott for that. He and Beane have seen that a certain kind of player who truly buys into a team concept is more valuable than a star, because the power of team can overcome individual talent. So, yes, when a Mack or a Watt becomes available, they'll look at the guy, but only if the guy is that kind of team player. So, as I think about it, I think this really may be an elite defense. Part of the problem with calling it "elite" is that we tend to compare what we're seeing to what we think we know about the historic great defenses, or even about whoever was the best defense in the league even a couple years ago. What we really know about those defenses is mostly our memories of their highlight reels. Almost all of them have times struggled at times. We tend to think that if no player LOOKS as good as a Bruce Smith, then the pass rush can't be as effective as a pass rush with a stud. McDermott essentially is teaching his players that they can win more by committing completely to a team scheme. Take Tre White as an example. He's 100% into the team concept. He does what he's supposed to do every play. He doesn't always make the play, be he does everything the way the team defense wants him to. In another defense, he might have more freedom, and he might be known around the league as a shut-down corner. It might be worth more money to him to have that reputation. But White understands that the best defense is a team defense, and he's willing to pass up the personal accolades for the wins. Part of the genius of this type of team defense is can be great WITHOUT the elite players at any positions. None of the Bills defensive backs plays the game like the very best players at their position, but every one of them plays maybe only a notch below. Very solid, rarely out of position, every guy trusting the other guy to do his job, and all of them recognizing that playing that way will result in more wins, even if they struggle at times. And then, every once in a while an elite guy comes along who's willing to play that team style, and then it can be REALLY special. Not to start a new debate here, but I think we've seen a different Edmunds this year. We're seeing a guy who is attacking more, who actually may be growing into the kind of force we hoped he'd be. It's all very Belichickian. That's how the Pats defense has played, and every once in a while they'd have a stud somewhere, a Gilmore or that other shut-down artist they had, or a Wilfork. When Belichick has a real stud at an impact position, he can rely on that guy taking on a bigger role in the scheme, and the responsibilities of all the other positions shrink a little bit, allowing all of those players to be a little more effective. But Belichick doesn't NEED a stud. Look at Devin McCourty. He's never struck me as a true stud, but more of a really good football player at his position who's been taught to play a complicated scheme. A lot, in fact, like White, or Hyde, or Poyer, or Taron Johnson. And Levi really is only a small notch below that. Think about it. Nobody's calling any of those guys studs. What they're saying is these guys are just **** good football player playing a great team scheme.

This too is a very good point, and even this point is more complicated than that. You're saying the probability of converting the two point try is better after a long drive. Maybe it is. But it also may be better after a pick six, or after a kickoff return for a TD. The probabilities no doubt vary, and I suspect that all of those probabilities go into the calculations, too.

Yours is the only analysis that comes close to the reason you go for two. Most everyone else thinks the answer to the question is found by thinking about probability of getting one point or two points, and maybe about whether the other team will score again. The actual analytics calculation is much more complicated. The question is whether, down eight, our chances of winning the game are better if we go for one or go for two. Chances of winning the game. That calculation depends on the probability of converting this two point conversion, chances of converting the next one, chances of converting each PAT, chances of scoring again, chances of the other team scoring again, chances of the other team making the PAT, chances of going into overtime, chances of winning in overtime. All of those probabilities are team-specific - that is, if I'm playing Jacksonville, a lot of those probabilities are different than if I'm playing Arizona. The probabilities are recalculated every week, depending on how your team is doing and who your opponent is. During the Auburn-Ole MIss game they talked about it a lot, because Kiffen goes for it on 4th down a lot and goes for two often, and they said his decisions to do so are based on different analysis each week. The classic example was when Belichick went for it on 4th and 2 from his own 30 with a minute left, up three against the Colts. He didn't make it, Peyton drove the 30 yards for a TD and won the game. Belichick was absolutely ripped in the press for not punting. A few days later, the math came out, and he was right. His chances of winning the game were better going for it. He had something like a 70% of making the first down, and if he made it, he had a 99% chance of winning the game. So going for it gave him 70% chance of winning. If he punted, he could give up a return for a TD or for big yardage, or Peyton could drive in the time remaining. Punting meant the chances of the game being tied and going to overtime were pretty high, in part because it was Peyton. If it went to overtime, your chance of winning was 50-50, more or less. Or you could lose in regulation. When you calculate all the probabilities, it was clear that punting gave Belichick less than a 70% chance of winning, so going for it was the right call. All I know is that when the Dolphins got the two points, it was a six-point game and I was very uncomfortable. That alone made it the right decision. Your opponent is going to play more scared with a six-point lead than with a seven-point lead.

I don't think McBeane would agree with you. I think they've built the offensive line just the way they've built the defensive line. They aren't looking for the standout stars; they're looking for versatile dedicated athletes who will work together within a scheme. The Bills don't have an Aaron Donald or Chris Jones or Kahlil Mack or JJ Watt on defense, and they don't have whatever the comparable names are on the offensive line. The Bills don't strive to have a feature guy on either line. Look at the draft choices - Epenesa, Rousseau, Basham - none of them is a flashy sackmeister. Look at the 1-tech tackles - none of them is the monster in the middle. That's not what the Bills want to play with. And they've built the o line the same way. So, to call the o line subpar is correct, if you're talking about raw athletic ability and special playmaking ability. If that's what you expect, yes, the oline is subpar and you're going to be disappointed. That's not the ideal that McBeane are after.