Shaw66

At some point, Nantz and Romo were complaining about penalties on every play, but I agree with you. It wasn't the refs' fault. You might have argued with one call or another, but they were obviously bad calls. They were the result of guys trying to make plays and committing fouls. As I said, I agree with about the fans. And I agree about bad bounces. That's the breaks of the game. But when officiating could be better and the league doesn't do anything about it, I do feel for the players. I calculated once that true full-time refs, with real weekly training and real weekly evaluation, so that the refs would be as good as they could be and the worst officials were regularly removed the field, would cost about $30 million a year more than they pay for refs now. That's $1 million per team. These franchises are making $100 million a year, and they refuse to spend a tiny fraction of that money to minimize human error in the officiating.

Good point, as far as the fans are concerned. However, for the players, it's a different story. They are trained year-round, to be physically excellent and mentally excellent at a very demanding game. They are damaging their bodies playing the game, because they desperately want to win. It's a shame for those guys to lose a game, like the Lions did last night, because the officials aren't held to the same standard the players are.

My wife watches a lot of football with me. She's pretty knowledgeable for a casual fan. Last night a guy caught a pass, ran thirty yards downfield, got tackled, lost the ball when he hit the ground. The defenders ran to pick it up. I told her it wasn't a fumble. She asked why, and I explained that the ground can't cause a fumble. A little while later a guy went into the air, clearly caught the ball, landed on his back in the end zone, the ball popped free. She asked why it was incomplete, and I explained that on a pass, the receiver has to maintain possession through his collision with the ground and concluded by saying "it's exactly the opposite rule for running backs." She didn't say anything, but I know she was thinking "that's dumb."

I don't think the refs have been any worse than usual. It's a really hard job, the speed of the game is amazing, and they do the best they can. Having said that: 1. I agree that they should do replay more like college, and have an official watching the video and able to stop the game at any time to review calls/non-calls. It doesn't slow down the college game, and it allows the refs to get the correct call more often. 2. They should have full-time paid refs, whose only job is officiating. They should have more training, they should be evaluated more often and better. They should have more refs, so when one guy isn't getting it done, they can take a guy off the bench, just like the coaches do. That guy who made the illegal hands to the face call last night should be benched, immediately. The fundamental rule for officials in all sports is don't call it if you don't see it. He didn't see the hand on the face, but he called it anyway. He had the equivalent of a two-fumble game for a running back, and he should be benched.

I think we all misunderstood what the rule change was about. They are not reviewing pass interference to see if it could have been called differently, or even should have been called differently. They are only overturning calls where the official missed the play the way it was missed in the Saints' playoff game. That is, they are only going to overturn the call if the defender deliberately interfered with the receiver knowing he was interfering, and the interference clearly made the receiver unable to make the catch. That play you show does not meet the standard, at all. The defender didn't take out the receiver - it was just really tight coverage. Yes, it absolutely was pass interference and should have been called on the field, but they aren't going to overturn it just because the ref probably should have called it the other way. The refs clearly are allowing more contact without calling interference, and that's a good thing - the game is going back to where it was five or ten years ago, before they screwed up the catch rule and started calling every touch pass interference. It's better this way. But on replay, when they see that kind of contact, they aren't going to overturn the refs call. It has to be much worse than on this video before they'll overturn anything. It's easy for the coaches. All they have to do is ask themselves if the play looked like Nickel-Robey's hit in the Saints game. If it was outrageous like that, throw the flag. Otherwise, you have to live with it. I don't think the review rule is written the way I describe it, but that's clearly how they're interpreting it.

I've always thought this was the case. If you challenge successfully, it should never cost you a challenge and it shouldn't cost you a timeout. You should not be penalized for having assisted the officials in making the correct call.

Yeah. They didn't have many graphics, so there often were plays where you didn't know was going on. What were the refs talking about? Who was piling up stats. Who made that tackle. It wasn't very enjoyable.

I know, but when you're putting Mahomes, McCoy and Hill on the field, you're a threat to beat anyone. One game between the Bills and Chiefs, I think it's a push, at best. By the end of the season, if the Bills offense matures, I'll give you the top two or top one. With the offense as it's played, they just aren't good enough.

I have one ticket for sale for Sunday's game at New Era - Bills-Dolphins. Section 331, row 2. I've sat there for several years. Good view of the whole field. $75. PM me if you're interested.

Well, I'd want to look at it a little more, but I think it's a stretch, just because I wouldn't be quick to say the Bills are better than the Chiefs.

Funny. I said something similar in the thread about the Jets game. I think "depositing wins" is what I was talking about. The Bills just know how to win. They have a knack for it. They need to stick to business. It feels way too early to me to be thinking all the Bills could end up a wild card team with a better record than the division winner they play. Could it happen? Yes, and describe how it might. But it's much likely that some part of your scenario won't play out as you say. More likely that the Bills are genuinely only the 5th or 6th best team in the playoffs, or even not in the playoffs at all. As for the rest of the AFC, I wouldn't be so sure. We're seeing some real shifts going on, teams winning that didn't look like winners a couple weeks ago. A lot of new QBs making plays, and a lot of "established" strugglin. Things are changing in the league. So I don't think there's any predicting of how strong or weak teams are. I mean, you watch Darnold today, and if someone told you the Jets could be good enough to finish 9-7, I'm not at all sure that's preposterous.

I bought, to some extent the narrative that the Bills have opened with a really easy schedule. At some point you have to recognize that the Bills just don't let teams beat them. The Jets with Darnold didn't - couldn't - do anything against the Bills like they could today. And the Bills did enough to win. They always do enough to win. The Patriots couldn't do anything against the Bills defense, and the Bills generally did enough to win. They made-let-the-Patriots-make four or five big plays; otherwise, it was the Bills game. The Giants have started showing a lot more than people gave them credit earlier. The Bengals stood up to the Ravens today. I think the Bills are a good team that has a lot of room to grow on offense. Duke could change the passing game for the Bills, by running the possession routes that Brown has been running so far this season. Then Brown is a threat all over the field. Singletary could add another dimension. As we've always said, it comes down to Allen. He has to execute the offense, he has to make some plays, and he has to maintain ball security.

The change this year is, apparently, that after the second overtime period, all succeeding overtimes are only one play for each team, a two-point conversion. So it's like a shootout. No more starting at the 25 after the second overtime. That's a good idea.

Interesting comments about a couple of different things. First, although it feels natural to us to underestimate the Dolphins, all of the preparation this guys do each week, every week makes it almost impossible for the players to underestimate them. They see film, they're drilled to perform certain ways, and they ALWAYS are ready on game day. It's not like the NBA, where it's pretty clear some guys are unprepared for some games. The Bills will be ready;. Of course, the Dolphins will be ready. If they're in the NFL, they have talent. The coaching may or may not be getting everything out of the players. Every season some of the teams who look horrible early on in the season turn it around and play .500 ball or better. It wouldn't seem that's something the Dolphins will do, but I wouldn't be so sure. The NFL is strange. It's another good test for the Bills. If they are who we want them to be, the Bills will take control of the game early, build a lead and win comfortably. Doesn't mean there won't be rough spots in the game, but if the Bills are good, they will control the game. "Good" means Allen has another 95+ passer rating, playing under control, the running game flashes (ideally with Singletary), and the defense is solid. Less than that, there will be questions. As for Rosen, you can say all you want about how tough it is to play on bad teams, he didn't make enough of an impression to stick in Arizona. Coaching change, of course, doomed him. He's not making people rave about him now. He doesn't have a great body. I don't see a bright future for him, despite the fact that he will make some big plays and some beautiful plays. Frankly, I have the same feeling about Mayfield. I think you have to wait and see about them, and I think Allen is much more likely to be elite than either of them. Still, that doesn't mean anyone should take him lightly. The guy made plays all through college, and he's continued to make plays in the pros. He's no bust. And, if you believe Belichick, he'll be up against a defense he can't read pre-snap. It's a difficult game for him to succeed in.

Yup, pretty much unwatchable. I've felt that way for five years or more. I never watch it. Those idiots on Fox on Thursday night, broadcasting outside from NYC, high-fiving excited fans as though we were watching the today show are the worst. They're all bad.

I don't know. The run pass ratio is tilted to passing, but the B I ll are 7th in the league in rushing attempt.

Interesting points. Bills are 12th in yard per carry, too. Nice. But I think the concern of the op is durability. Those are tough yards Gore is getting, and it is not reasonable to expect it for a full season. Yes, he may do it, but it's not reasonable to assume he will. Unless Singletary gets back, it's a worry.

I think you make a good point. However some of what you're saying is just "injuries suck,." Singletary is the lead back and he gotnhurt. If THE Bills had kept McCoy andcut Singletary and Shady gotnhurt erdnbe in the same position. So some of it is just luck. The problem is that one backup is toon O kd and one is too limited. It isn't ideal. Hope for Singletary to come back soon and stay healthy. He is the key, and he's the reason I don't think Bills are actively looking for a Gordon. They aren't replacing him as thw numerous 1, and there's not much reason to replace the other two. Just not an ideal situation.

Hap If be more inclined to agree with you if I hadn't heard Lee Smith, Josh Allen and Matt Barkley all say jea a special guy.

Nice. Thanks.

Thanks. That was fun to watch. Guy is intense. Like someone else said, I've been a Duke fan since I saw the video of him catching the ball in Canada. He just looked special. The very best thing I've seen about is Lee Smith being interviewed by John Murphy and Tasker on Monday, I think. Now, Smith has been around the league a lot, and the Bills brought him back because he's a leader. Smith couldn't find the words talking about Duke. He said something like this: "Every once in a while you run into a guy who is just different. You get to know him and you know that you just want to be around him. You want him on your team. Duke is one of those." I mean, Smith could have just said "yeah, we all were really happy for him because he worked so hard to get here," sort of like what a guy would say about a kid brother. But, no, he essentially said he looks UP to Duke, because he has a special kind of intensity that is rare. Quite cool.

It's odd to me that there are Bill's fa s who have never seen a game in Buffalo. How doesNJ one become a Bills fan without being from Buffalo? I mean, I know how, but it seems odd. So good for you! If you've enjoyed being a Bills fan without going to a game, you're REALLY going to enjoy this. Jave a great time. And if you want the real experience, you have to get your beef on wreck at Schwabl's.

I agree. And articles that do that often have crap writing and analysis, like this one. Shallow.

No.

Thanks for this. It's always good to hear the personal side of these stories. Congrats to Appha. His was a creative thought, and when I saw it I knew he was right. My take always was Zay had to make the top 3 or he was in trouble. He DID make the top 3 but played himself out of the position. Once he failed to make plays against the Pats, he was done. Thanks Alpha.