Shaw66

Absolutely. When you have a shot at the win in overtime you take it. No question we would have kicked it.

Really nice to hear someone say Allen belongs in the same group. I've said for a year that Allen will be an elite QB in this league. I think the odds of him being one of the elite 5 years from now are actually better than the other two. I think the Bills have already shown how to contain running quarterbacks. They contained Jackson and Watson, and I think other teams will do it, too. I think size AND a strong arm will always make for the best QBs, and I think even Mahomes may struggle. But regardless of where those two end up, I think Allen will be there.

Absolutely. Again, absolutely. Still, it really hurts to lose a playoff game because the officials were incompetent.

It's not a replay situation. It's a situation where the officials discuss what happened on the field and what the appropriate ruling was. It isn't a question of another official overruling the guy in the end zone. . It's a question of the officials discussing whether the returner could be deemed to have given himself up and the ball declared dead before the ball was tossed. So they talked it over and decided that the original ruling on the field was incorrect.

No, you misunderstand. Yes, as called, the ball was live. The official knew it was a live ball, and he let the play run out, and the Bills recovered. But after discussion, the officials ruled that it was a dead ball before he tossed it forward. That's what the official ruling was, after discussion. So that means the illegal forward pass didn't happen, as the ball was dead before he threw it. That, of course, is nonsense, because the the officials had no authority to declare a dead ball.

It isn't a question of being poor sports. It's a question of enforcing the rules as they are written.

That's how I feel. I'm really pissed about the call as a Bills fan. But like you, I find it very bad that the refs thought they could make rulings based on what they thought was the player's intention. That opens the door to all kinds of things. As I said somewhere, if they're going to rule on the kickoff that way, then they should have ruled that Cody Ford didn't intend to violate the blindside block rule.

Well, we're really splitting hairs here, but it's an illegal forward pass as soon as it leaves his hand. As I said, it may be true that once it falls incomplete in the end zone it's a safety.

I hear you, but even with that clarification, I don't see how you know it hasn't happened in 100 years of NFL history. But what the official signaled is irrelevant, in all situations. The initial signal on any play is just that, initial. Completion, incompletion, TD signals are made all the time and overturned as the officials further discuss the play. So what the official signaled is irrelevant to the analysis. I don't know if you're a lawyer. I am. The rules of statutory construction require that you look first to the statute - the rule - and you look beyond it only if the rule isn't clear. But in this case, all the rules are clear. Clemson, although interesting and ruled correctly, isn't necessary to the analysis, because the rules are clear. Finally, there is a rule that says that an illegal forward pass recovered by the defense in the end zone is a safety. That's what the rule says. I saw it somewhere, and someone else just referenced it.

I don't know. I read a rule yesterday, considering all of this, and the rule said the defensive team had to recover it for it to be a safety. Maybe you're correct. Whichever is correct, in this case it was a safety.

I don't think so. This isn't a replay situation. There was absolutely no debate about what happened. It's strictly an interpretation of the rules. I've thought about whether McDermott should have challenged the ruling, claiming that it was a fumble or an illegal forward pass. An illegal forward pass can be challenged. The problem is that the referee likely would have ruled that the ball had been declared dead before the ball came out, and that therefore it's not reviewable. Still it would have forced the officials to take a clear stand on their position that they declared a dead ball even though there is no rule permitting them to do it.

McDermott will learn. I'm not worried about him. That thing about D fundamentals: For me, the worst play the Bills made, by far, was having the entire pass defense shell take that ridiculously deep drop on 32rd and 18. Some defender or defenders needed to move up when the back came out of the backfield. It was inexcusable to give a free ten-yard run from where he caught the ball.

First, I think we generally agree. Second, I don't know that the situation is unprecedented in the NFL. No NFL returner ever caught the ball in the end zone held it, made no effort to advance, and then let go of the ball without taking a knee? Never in 100 years of NFL play? I'd guess that you're wrong about that. I'd guess that it happened, sometime. Third, you're wrong about the first place to look is something similar. The first place to look is the rules. And the rules are completely clear and unambiguous on this subject. The rules say, in some way, that play continues so long as the ball is live. When it's a dead ball, nothing can happen, but while it's live, all kinds of things can happen. So the first thing we know is the returner, when he caught the ball, was holding a live ball. We know that. The second thing we know is that one way the ball could become a dead ball was if an official blew a whistle and stopped the play. The official in the end zone certainly did not do that; just the opposite, he was waiting to see what the returner was going to do, because although he was standing motionless in the end zone, so long as he was standing and holding the ball, he was free to try to advance it. Okay, so the returner is holding a live ball. He is entitled to make it a dead ball. How? The rules say how. Slide, take a knee. There is essentially no other way. One basic premise of interpreting rules is if the ruless explain how to do something, then that is the exclusive way to do it. There aren't other ways. So if the returner wanted to make the ball a dead ball, he had to take a knee. What happened next? He didn't slide or take a knew. He intentionally tossed it forward. He tossed a live ball forward. That's a forward pass, as defined by the rules. He didn't throw it backward, and he didn't fumble it and have it go forward. He intentionally threw it forward. There doesn't have to be a receiver in the area to make it a forward pass. All he has to do is throw it forward. So he threw a forward pass, and it is against the rules to throw a forward pass on any play except a play from scrimmage. Can't do it on a kickoff return, can't do it on a punt return, can't do it on an interception or fumble return. This was not a play from scrimmage. So he threw an illegal forward pass. A Buffalo Bill recovered it. What happens when the defensive team recovers (not intercepts but "recovers") and illegal forward pass in the end zone? There's a rule for that. The rule says it's a safety. So for every step along the way in what happened, there is an unambiguous rule governing the step. We don't have to look at the Clemson game, although the officials in the Clemson game reach the exact same conclusion I just set forth. The ball was live, the returner threw an illegal forward pass, the Bills recovered in the end zone. Safety. The ONLY way that we'd reach a different result would be if there is a rule that says that the official can declare the ball dead because for some reason he thinks the play is over even though nothing in the rules says it's over. That is, he can declare it dead because he thinks it should be dead. That's what AlphaDawg says can happen, but there's nothing in the rules that says the official can do that. The official can blow the whistle, ending the play, but the official closest to the ball didn't blow his whistle, clearly didn't, and I doubt any other official blew his whistle, because they generally defer to the official whose call it is. Think about this: on a punt, ball is rolling on the field, return man has run away from the play and the ball is surrounded by members of the kicking team. Does the official blow his whistle and declare the ball dead? No. Never. It's not a dead ball if it's moving on the ground, and the official doesn't exercise his judgment that since the return man has run away, the ball his dead. The ball is live until the other team touches it or until it stops moving. The officials have no discretion to declare the ball dead, and the official in the end zone on that play knew he had no discretion. He was waiting for an event that would allow him to declare it dead. Once the return man caught, the ball was live until he took a knee, ran out of bounds, scored a touchdown or was tackled. It was a live ball, and everyone knew it except the returner. He threw it forward. It was an illegal forward pass. The Bills recovered in the end zone. It's a safety.

You're almost right, but you're wrong. When he threw it forward, it was an illegal forward pass. The rules say that when an illegal forward pass is recovered in the end zone, it's a safety. Two points to Buffalo, and Houston kicks from their 20. That was the correct call, and there is no questions about it.

Dawg, I think you're wrong for a good reason that I saw someone give. The official was standing in the end zone, looking at the returner, waiting for him to do something. If he had taken off up field and run for a touchdown, what would have happened? The Bills would have argued that he gave himself up because they saw him old his arms out, and the Bills would have lost that argument. No chance in the world the refs are going to call a touchback. As far as the official in the end zone was concern, it was a live ball. If it's a live ball, the play is responsible for his actions. As others have pointed out, the guy running unobstructed who drops the ball before crossing the goal line is not credited with a touchdown just because everyone knew that he was about to score. It's a live ball, and he's responsible for it. If he drops it early, that's his problem. As someone else said, if I'm the QB in the victory formation, running out the clock, I take the snap and without taking a knee I turn and flip the ball to the ref, what does the ref do? He steps out of the way, because it's a live ball. They're all the same thing. The kick returner didn't have to catch the ball. He could have let it fall into the end zone, which would have been an automatic touchback. But once he touches it, it's a live ball until the play is over. If he chooses to flip the ball toward the official, well, that's really stupid, but there's no rule that allows the ref to arbitrarily forgive really stupid. There is a rule that covers the illegal forward pass in the endzone. If it is recovered by the defense, it's a safety. There are rules that cover every aspect of that play, there was no ambiguity. The officials on their own chose not to follow the rules. As I've said elsewhere, that referee no longer be permitted to officiate NFL games. He demonstrated a total ignorance both of the specific rules and of the more general notion that he doesn't have any authority to ignore the rules because it thinks it's the right thing to do.

That's nicely said too. It was a 50/50 game. Yes, you want your team to make the plays to win, like the play Watson made, but unfortunately they made it and the Bills didn't. But as I've been saying, and what gets lost in the disappointment of the loss, is that down the stretch the Bills got a three and out, held on fourth down, drove for the tying score, got a three and out in overtime and drove for what should have been a field goal attempt to win the game. That's high quality stuff from a bunch of guys most of whom have never been in a playoff game.

Hey, Gomper, I think you're right about choking. I don't know if, as you think, the coaches choked, but the oline choked on the second last series of regulation and left Allen out to dry. And you could see the look on Allen's face - did anyone else notice how red-faced he was. The blood was pumpin'. The play that kills me is the last play from scrimmage, where Allen overthrew Duke. The bills needed 20 yards to get in field goal range, and the play was a simple 10-yard throw to Duke who, I think, was going to pitch to Singletary coming up the sideline. It was a good play call. Allen can make that throw all day, and he air mailed over Duke's head. It was a total choke. And your last point is the correct one. Let's hope they all learned from it. True.

Right. And I'll add that the Bills got a three and out from the Texans on their first possession in overtime, and the Bills then drove into range for a game-winning field goal, only to have a very weak or totally wrong call take that away. So that's two three and outs, a game tying drive and a potential game winning drive. That's 8 minutes on the clock during the most important part of the game where the Bills were in control. Systematic collapse simply doesn't apply.

Rule requires block with head shoulders or forearm. None of that on this play.

There it is. Thanks. It HAS happened before, and it HAS been officiated correctly. The continuing incompetence of NFL officials is pretty amazing.

This is exactly what McBeane would say. Exactly. Sustainable success. Improved athleticism. Fiscally responsible. Players WILL leave. What's key is understanding which plays are key to long-term success and keeping them. Everyone has room for growth is at the heart of McDermott's process. Everyone. Thanks.

The hyperbole around here is unbelievable. A four-play defensive stand, when one first down would have ended the game is a systematic collapse? A beautifully executed 11-play, one-minute drive on the road, with two shots at the end zone and game tying field goal is a systematic collapse? What you say is nonsense. The Bills just played an incredibly competitive football game, including in the final 20 minutes of the game, and happened to lose. In no way was what we watched a systematic collapse. Nonsense.

I don't think that it is at all time to reexamine McDermott's overarching strategy. I think you just stated his overacrching objective. He's not trying to be Beane's Levy. That team was built in a time where teams could accumulate talent. NOBODY in the last 20 years has acquired the likes of Reed, Thomas, Kelly, Lofton, Smith and their supporting cast of characters. Nobody. But McDermott's overarching strategy is not and never was, as you suggest, to depend on the defense to carry the team to the next level. He's been very clear that his vision is excellence in all three phrases. It turns out that in part because of his talent, and because he was able to add Poyer, Hyde and White to go with Kyle, Jerry and Lorenzo, McDermott was able to build a good defense faster than an offense. He had pretty much no offensive line, no receivers and no quarterback. Yes, he had Watkins, who clearly had an attitude problem, and Woods, who they should have kept. So the defense is ahead of the offense. But it's ridiculous to suggest that he somehow isn't interested in the offense. And you're going to be sadly disappointed if you expect them to go on some wild spending spree to put them into the stratosphere. This isn't 1990 - you can't buy a top notch team. And they've told us, over and over, that their objective is not to get to the top fast; their objective is to get to the top in a way that is sustainable. They're going to build to make 2020 better than 2019, and then they're going to build to make 2021 better than 2020.

Come on. Tennessee shut down a totally anemic offense with a QB who doesn't look anything like the GOAT and with no receivers. Seattle beat a 40-year old journeyman backup leading a team that was playing without its entire starting receiving corps. The Bills were playing against a top 10 QB and a consensus multi-year All-Pro wideout. All these comparisons are silly. The Bills were a good but not great team. The Bills had flaws. They lost on the road to a good but not great team with flaws. Half the teams that played this weekend lost.

One thing that I worry about going forward is that both Milano and Edmunds great strengths are as coverage linebackers and less so as tacklers and punishers. The league may be coming back to more of a running league, and the two of them may not be ideal for the defense the Bills will need in the future. It's not completely surprising that Milano didn't make the tackle on Watson. Watson has the strength and balance of the best power backs in the league. He is tough to bring down. Still, Milano and Neal should have made the play.