Shaw66

McAfee is a piece of work. I love at the end, when Josh says he threw it 83 yards on college. Josh set himself up, of course, by saying it was high elevation, and the ball was some Nike ball, so McAfee comes right back at him about the thin air and the thick laces on that ball. Good fun.

Yeah, it's fun listening to someone who likes Allen and the Bills, and this is very good stuff, as far as it goes. Where I think it falls short is that Simms expresses surprise that the defense has gotten better. He said he didn't know what the defense was doing early in the season. Well, I'm a little surprised, too, but we shouldn't be. What we're seeing is what McDermott does. His coaches and players are trained to find the best way they can win this week's game. Every week, they're working on a new style of play to attack what they're going to see from the opponent. Early in the season they get mismatches, where what they try to do doesn't work, for one reason or another. So they learn from that and move on to next week's game. The result of this approach is that when December comes, the Bills have learned to do a lot of different things on offense and on defense. They can play different styles, and they've learned approaches to the game that will work on offense this week, or on defense. Preparing for the 49ers, they're saying "hey, remember what we did against Tennessee's run game? It was a good idea but didn't quite work because of a, b, c. Let's adjust it; we'll still use a and c, but let's go with e and q from the Seahawks game. Here's how we'll disguise it. The Bills are built to be better in December than in October. It shouldn't be a surprise.

Maybe this, maybe something else. I think he's too talented to stay on the sidelines. I'd guess that McD and Frazier and their staff are looking for ways to get him on the field. For example, we already know that the Bills are creative on defense. White's had two INTs this season where he's dropped his man and fallen into underneath coverage. That's not an accident, and it isn't White freelancing. It's by design - players are taught to recognize routes and to adjust, and it isn't just White. When he recognizes the opportunity, his teammates also have to recognize the opportunity, because they need to adjust to cover the gap that White is leaving. That on-field awareness is what makes Hyde and Poyer so valuable. It's awareness that, I think, Klein had to develop before he could do the things he's been doing. Norman has that kind of on-field thinking ability. He learned it playing for McD in Carolina. And I think before his injury he played better than most people give him credit. I could see the intelligence in his play. So certainly if the Bills are in dime coverage, and maybe even nickel, they're looking for ways to get him on the field. He's not a natural nickel back, but in the nickel, White could move to the slot man and Norman play the wideout. Certainly in the dime. And yes, maybe he's a safety. I don't think we've seen the last of Josh Norman.

And we're forever grateful to you.

Thanks for the recap. McDermott kind of guy.

I have two thoughts about this play. I didn't study the replay very carefully, so I don't know if it was unnecessary. As you say, it was borderline. My problems are these: 1. I'm afraid the officials actually buy what Bosa said - something along the lines of "how am I supposed to tackle him, he's huge!" In other words, the usual rules shouldn't apply because I can't tackle him. What? I'm entitled to kick Gronk because he's too big to tackle? If you're a 190-pound DB and you can't bring down Derrick Henry, you can't break the rules. What you do, and what Bosa is supposed to do, is hold on until help arrives. If you can't hold on, then too bad, the guy gets away. You are not allowed to make an illegal tackle just because the guy is big. 2. My second problem is related to the first. I think the officiating is really inconsistent this season. In the Steeler game today some guy got called for roughing the passer when he made a picture-perfect tackle of the QB just as the release was happening - in no way was it late, high, or low. He tried to break his fall. Flag. So why is that flag thrown and none thrown on Bosa's play. If the league is going to protect the players, it has to protect all the players.

Bado - This is excellent. What you're saying is that the Bills consciously traded bulk in the middle for quickness and speed. Of course, they assumed they'd have Star in the middle, but it's noteworthy that once Star opted out they didn't show any great desire to bulk up in the middle. I'd guess that the run defense philosophy is based on having two really quick linebackers in Milano and Edmunds and two excellent run-stopping safeties. Now they've figured out how to make Klein effective, too. Very interesting analysis. Thanks. But Thurm, they play eight deep on the D line, and they did nothing to get a second 1-tech guy. One might say they were counting on Philips in that role, but that's very un-Beanelike. They want competition, but they had no one to compete for the 1-tech. That suggests to me that they're taking a different approach, different from the traditional 1-tech, 3-tech approach.

Dr. D. - You should start a new thread with this. This clip gives a very interesting insight into how unusual Allen is. We keep hearing about his size and all, but this is an actual opponent giving a spontaneous explanation. You can tell that Allen's size and power is in his head, and that means it's in the head of every defender, every week. They know Allen's coming at them, just like they know Lamar Jackson or Kyler Murray are coming at them in a different way. I think back to the play against the Rams when Aaron Donald pretty much couldn't tackle Allen. Bosa's telling us that Josh is a special weapon.

I didn't give back and look, but I've had a similar thought lately. I've watched a lo tr of football, and I'm amazed at how bad some of the teams look, especially on offense. The Eagles last night. The Bears. It seems to me now like it's impossible to be that inconsistent, that flawed. Then I realize that that is how the Bill's used to look. It's coaching. There was a dramatic change from Rex's last season to McDermott's first. Bulls had a dysfunctional ownership/management/coaching structure for a couple of decades.

Thanks. That's interesting. Not many rookies learn that stuff in college, in part because it isn't very often that even have a defender around them. In the NFL, playing the ball should be second nature; the best play the man, too. It kills me when I see a guy on a deep route, behind the defender, who doesn't come back to high point the ball and/or create the INT.

Hey, Gunner, I only have a vague recollection of that play, but I thought it was on Allen, who didn't see the underneath guy. Do you think Allen saw him and was supposed to throw it because Davis was expected to make a better play on the ball? I get what you're saying about Davis, but it looked to me like a ball Allen shouldn't have thrown.

Jackie, Joe, Jimbo, and Josh. The Four Horsemen of Jockalypse!

I think this is wrong. After their first quarter explosion against the Bucs, the Chiefs had a lot of trouble moving the ball and scoring. They had three punts in the second half, including two three and outs. The average point total for the Super Bowl winner is under 29 points. Only three winners went over 40. That's not a point explosion. And you're wrong about the effect of going conservative. When you go conservative, ball control, run the clock, yes, you reduce the score. But reducing the score has one very important effect, which is that it also reduces the size of the lead in the fourth quarter. If you outscore me 4 to 3, late in a high-scoring game I'm down 40-30. In a low-scoring game I'm down 20-15. Keeping the score low is a time-honored way to stay in games, and being in the game at the end is what coaches want.

Yeah, many of us, me included, tend to forget about that benefit of running the ball. At it's heart, football is about defeating your opponent in hand-to-hand combat, and that combat happens at the line of scrimmage. If win that battle, you usually win the game. If you lose, you usually lose. Still, most Super Bowl winners have great QBs, pass the ball really well, and don't dominate with their run games. Jim Brown, Jim Taylor, Franco Harris - those were the days when you count on winning by wearing out the opponent. The 49ers tried to do it last season; the Ravens, too. It's a tougher way to win these. So, I get what you're saying, and I don't disagree. You have to be able to run. But you don't have to be able to pound the ball down the opponents' throats. The reality is that the effective short passing game the Pats ran and that Mahomes runs so well, when added to a decent running game, is enough to control the ball.

There really are two different things going on when we talk about stuff like this. You're right, of course, that the game was close. You could tell it was close by the emotions you were feeling late in the third quarter. It was closer than any of us liked. But the reason we talk about whether the game was close is because we're trying to talk about whether the team is good, and how good. One measure of how good the team is whether and to what extent it controlled the game. The OP suggests that some fans think that their team isn't good because the game was close. Whether the game was close or not, the Bills controlled the play for most of the game. By that measure, the Bills are a good team. The fact that the game got close is a fact, but it doesn't mean that the Bills are not a good team.

When Belichick was in his fifth season as a head coach (25-35), was he on anyone's list as the best in the NFL? Payton was 25-23 after three years. Tomlin inherited a team built by Bill Cowher, a team that won a Super Bowl a year before Tomlin took over. Reid was 27-21 after three seasons. McDermott was 25-23 after three seasons, and now he's 33-26. What's the problem? Coaches grow and develop.

Fine with me. It was a bang-bang play. I just think in terms of QB decision making, that was a bad decision. It would be interesting to know what Allen he thinks. He knows what effect the hit had on the accuracy of throw. If he's asked publicly, he'll just say he didn't throw it well enough. He'll take the blame. But the truth may be, and knows the truth, exactly what you say - that if that finger hadn't fallen on his arm, he completes that pass.

Sure, but you rarely lose your kicker on Saturday. You lose him on Sunday, when he gets injured. How many kickers have been lost to COVID this year? How many to injury?

Right. He's supposed to have the presence of mind in that situation to throw it out of bounds. Now, the problem is that if he's throwing a split second earlier, heis job is to throw it and get the ball deeper and toward the sideline where only Diggs can get it, and if he's throwing a split second later, he should just be taking the sack. We're asking the QB to make those distinctions - not easy, but that's what Allen's job is.

Thanks. Another pin to stick in Lynn. I'm telling you, there is no way at this point in the season that a McDermott team or a Belichick team miscommunicates on that audible. Everyone is prepared, everyone does his job.

I agree with this, but not because I think McDermott is a run-first coach, or anything like it. As I discussed above, McDermott wants his team to be able to play any kind of football - run this week, pass next. The team obviously knows how to pass, although it always can improve. The team needs work running. I think part of Daboll's job every week is to figure out to the Bills can run on the opponent. Little by little they've been getting better, mostly because they keep coming back to it. Having said that, the Seattle game shows that they aren't going to run just for the sake of running - if they think they can win the game by passing all day, they'll do it. I do think that an important part of this philosophy is to that McDermott wants to force the opponent to prepare for everything. He wants the film to send a message - "If we can find a way, we'll run on you. If we can find a way, we'll pass on you. You deal with it."

I think this making excuses for Allen. I've watch the replay several times, and yes the defender got a finger or possibly two fingers on Allen's arm, but it's very hard to imagine that the force of that finger made the ball fall two yards short of where it needed to be. Allen threw the ball under extreme duress to a double covered receiver. That's a bad decision, all day, every day. His priority at that point is to throw the ball someplace where only his receiver can touch it, and if he can't find a place where only his receiver can touch it, throw it where NO ONE can touch it.

I think you say it well, and I think it's more of a crapshoot. I think the whole point of McDermott's system is to identify the kind of person - the work ethic, the commitment, the selflessness - etc. is necessary to succeed at the job he's being asked to do. Yes, he has to meet some minimum physical standards, but if he's God awful slow, he's not going to be you cornerback. But once you meet the raw physicality minimums, that McDermott wants you to be the right kind of person. What McBeane did (that Cleveland, the Giants, maybe the Jets, and the Broncos didn't) was figure out that Allen was the right kind of person. It was a bonus that his raw physicality was off the charts. I don't think it was luck. The opposite is true, also, as you say. If you're the right package at QB, you still have to land in a place that will nurture you properly. How you need to be nurtured varies from QB to QB. I feel really bad for Darnold. As a rookie, I thought he and Allen were indistinguishable, and I thought they both had bright futures. From day one, however, Darnold has lived in a dysfunctional environment, and Allen has had mentors building his skills. Here we are, one and a half seasons beyond their rookie seasons, and the difference in their capabilities couldn't be more apparent. I think that's in part due to who the two guys are, but I think most of the disparity is caused by the environment created by the owner, GM, HC, and OC.

That's very true. But it's a vicious cycle. The fans like hearing about the stars, so the announcers keep saying nice things about the stars, so as not to alienate the fans. That's why players like Allen seemingly burst onto the scene - the announcers are too busy building up the reputations of creaking old stars rather than building the reputations of the new stars. Mahomes is the exception. Tua's gotten hype way beyond anything that makes sense. As I said earlier, why are we still talking about Brady in such glowing terms, when Herbert, with worse coaching and worse receivers, is way, way outshining Brady? Why? Because the announcers know who the fans tune in for.

When it happened I thought it was close, but then I realized they stopped him. No one signaled first down, right? So what you say is correct - how could Lynn not be verifying with someone that they got the first down. I mean, he knows that from a sideline vantage point it's pretty tough to see exactly what happened, so he should be asking all the time. In some ways, thinking he got the first down without being sure is worse than knowing it was fourth down and deciding to go for it. Going for it is just a bad decision; not knowing the game situation is fundamentally unsound.