Shaw66

Did it make you feel all tingly?

Well, yes, they should spend money, but I'm not sure there was much to be done. Who has narrow snowblower for the rows of seats? Where dobyou blow the snow? What about the wind? How do you get the snow out of the stadium? And all those contractors have customers to serve. I'm not sure there's any solution. Heat guns to melt snow? Don't burn the seats.

He did get a chance a few times. I didn't think he looked very good. He looked like poor power and no wiggle. Power doesn't do it these days, wiggle does.

Yeah, that's interesting, too. The guy on CBS's broadcast, the former ref who comments on these things, said that if the ruling being reviewed is whether there was a clear recovery in bounds. That implies that the ruling on the ruling on the field was a fumble. Then he said that in that circumstance they cannot look at other aspects of the play and overturn the ruling on the field, so the ball being out of bounds before the recovery wasn't supposed to be reviewed. But that's different from what I've heard at other times, which is that the review CAN include other aspects of the play. They can't call penalties, but they can review other aspects. I haven't gotten too wrapped in it, either at the time or later, because I think that it's not worth worrying about reviews of bang-bang plays like that. But I thought one replay showed the ball didn't hit the helmet, so it seemed clear to me it was a fumble, and everyone here says it also was clear that the recovery was completed in bounds, so the Bills should have gotten the ball. I'm glad the game didn't turn on that play.

You miss the point. Die hards and season ticket holders will go when there is NO ROOF. That's why putting a roof on is the financially stupid move. They'll get the same ticket revenue either way, so why spend the money for a roof?

That's what I thought when I saw the replays during the game. That doesn't mean we can't have a discussion about what the rule is.

I've been thinking a lot about Josh today. I think he is still maturing; not there yet, but getting there. Last night was one of those games where you good see his maturation. I think you can see it in his eyes. My wife calls it the "deer-in-the-headlights-look," and I think she's right. Sometimes you can see it when he's on the bench and the game isn't going well, sometimes pre-snap as he looks over the defense. It's fear in some form. He isn't like that every game, just sometimes, and less and less. Last night there was none of that. He was superior athlete, locked in, in command of all of his abilities, of the game plan, everything. That's why there wasn't a throw that was close to interception, except that ball he threw a little high that Ty Johnson tipped. No throws into double coverage. He did throw across his body, on the run, to Diggs for a nice first down, but that throw isn't a high-risk throw for Josh. You could see that he was in control on the TD run. When he stopped (and the longer I look at it I think he WAS thinking about going down), he made a decision in the moment, the right decision. He could see that all he had to do was break an arm tackle and go. I thought one of the more interesting plays was when he got wrapped up for a sack and he stopped fighting. He went more or less limp and waited for the whistle. At first I was disappointed that he quit, but in fact it was a sign of his maturity. It was Josh saying, "Okay, it's not happening this play. Maybe next play." That was always a sign of Brady's confidence - he gave up on plays, too, went down easy or on his own. Josh is still learning. He's learning which risks to take and which not to take. He's learning defenses better and better. He's learning to think better than everyone else, on the field, on the sideline, and in the locker room. Every season, he's a bigger and bigger nightmare for defensive coordinators. He throws better than almost everyone (Mahomes is a great thrower), he runs better than almost everyone (Lamar is otherworldly), and now he's becoming one of the best on-field decision makers - not there yet, but he's come a long way, and last night was the evidence. He has playmakers all around him, all of whom coordinators have to plan for, and he's also the best playmaker on the field. Josh is figuring out which playmaker to use on every play, and coordinators don't know what to do about it. Hard to believe, I know, but the best is yet to come.

There is no distinction. When you're touching out of bounds, if you touch the ball, the ball is out of bounds. Possessing is just a different form of touching. Now, I find it interesting after reading a few posts here that the Pitt player whose helmet did or did not touch the ball actually was in the air over the line but not touching out of bounds when the ball did or did not touch his helmet. If that's true, then even if the ball did touch his helmet, the ball's still in bounds. And on the broader, more sinister point, I wouldn't be surprised if New York has been told (probably not in writing) that if it's close, rule in favor of the losing team that is down by more than 8. I've thought for years that the officials have been told that if it's close, spot the ball for a first down and move the chains immediately, because the NFL wants more offense.

Thanks. I understand. So a receiver can be standing out of bounds and tip the ball to a teammate inbounds, and that's a catch? That COULD be the rule, but it violates the basic idea that the game is played inside the lines, not outside. I note that it's the same rule in basketball: if you're out of bounds and you touch the ball, the ball's out of bounds and the play stops. I agree with you that the rule COULD be that the ball is only out of bounds when it (1) touches the ground out of bounds or (2) is possessed by someone who is touching the ground out of bounds, but that isn't the rule.

So if a receiver is standing out of bounds and catches the ball while the ball is still inside the line, its a completion? When any part of a player is out of bounds, his whole body is out of bounds. When the ball touches any part of the body of a player who is out of bounds, the ball is out of bounds.

Good one! I used to wonder why he was still on the team. Then, year by year, he showed me why. When he finally left, his spot was a big hole to fill

I didn't mean just run support. I said more, including the scheme, which is what you're saying here. They drafted him to play corner on this team, and he hasn't shown yet that he can do it. Got you. He's a heckuva talent to have in reserve. He'll be getting a crash course this week in practice. Good thing Hill wears that ugly Dolphin color now.

In your world maybe, but not McDermott world. If you're a corner for the Bills, you have to tackle running backs, and you have to know and execute the pass defense scheme, which is a zone scheme. The Bills drafted hum because he was talented and they believed he could learn and execute the scheme.

Love you, man, but I think this way off. In McDermott world, and most other coaches, too, you have to do it in practice before you get to do it on the field. That's why Benford beat him out. Players EARN their playing time. Elam is where he is be cause he hasn't shown in practice that he can do it. Shorter is another example. Isabella another. Williams another. If you can't do it in practice, there's no reason for the coaches to put you in. Shakir, Benford, Torrence, Kincaid all are guys who did it in practice first.

Exactly. It seems like people reaurrected their observations from 2022 and repeated them here. We've only had one game to watch him, and what I saw seemed encouraging. If he was so easy to beat, why didn't the Steelers attack him?

Yeah, I didn't have a problem with their decision. It was close, and the whole point of replay is to fix obvious mistakes. That play wasn't all that obvious.

I actually thought they showed a replay that made it clear the ball didn't touch the helmet.

If the ball touches his helmet while he was out of bounds, then the fumble is out of bounds. That's the rule. That would make what Cheffers said true.

The NFL needs to modernize how games are officiated. They need officials looking at monitors correcting calls regularly. It isn't right that the Bills had no more challenges based on that play. It was a.good challenge, and in fact a challenge shouldn't have been necessary. It should have been reviewed automatically. As I've said before, it makes no sense that TDs and takeaways a automatically reviewed, but plays that WOULD be takeaways or TDs aren't reviewed.

Wow. Didn't realize watching on TV that inside the stadium was such a mess. I thought this thread was going to be about the noise. Watching the Lions Sunday night, I was envious that they have a roof, because those people, so starved for a winner, made a lot of noise and it all stayed inside. I thought that there was no way the Bills fans could be that loud. Did anyone notice that Nantz and Romo were actually shouting some of the time so that they could be heard over the noise from the crowd? People really showed up, in the way they often have, to give real support to the team. It was amazing. Looking forward to the Chiefs!

I have a different take on Elam. I think he's a project, and his best games are ahead of him. We all know he struggled as a rookie. But plenty of players struggle as rookies. Bernard, for example. Dotson. Spector. Williams. All of the looked liked liabilities as rookies, and all of them have been valuable contributors in the last few games. Yes, Benford stepped in and played early, but he was a guy accustomed to playing in a complex defensive backfield scheme in college. I expected Elam to contribute this year, but then he got hurt and was unavailable until a month ago. In meantime, as we would expected, he hasn't been sitting at home watching cartoons. He's had his entire rookie season and most of this season to sit and study. He has the physical tools, and it isn't surprising that with a chance to learn and understand concepts better, he could be put on the field on he could perform. As someone pointed out, the play he got run over on was an obvious mismatch as it was happening. I didn't know who was out there, but I knew he was about to get blasted. It was ugly, but it wasn't surprising. A tackle there would have been a great, great play, and a missed tackle was the likely outcome for most corners. The interference call, as someone else said, was a good play. Every corner gets beat sometime. Every single one. Everyone holds. Elam's play saved a touchdown. The INT was an important play at a key point in the game, for sure, but what I liked about it better than the INT was, along with the other INT, how good his coverage was. In BOTH cases, his coverage was excellent, he was in position to make a tackle or a play on the ball, AND he showed the athletic ability actually to make a good play on the ball. Elam's a good example of what perhaps is McDermott's greatest talent - player development. His system is complex and demanding, on both offense and defense. You don't play until you can play within the system. He creates an environment for people to learn and grow within the system, to become "the best version of themselves." I'd forgotten that Isabella was on the team. They signed him and put him in practice for how long - three months? - before he was called on to contribute. In McDermott's system, no one is plug and play - you have to learn and develop. But his system works, because he creates a TEAM, a group that works together, and together they are better than as individuals. It wasn't just Elam yesterday. It was Klein and Williams and Dane Jackson and Cam Lewis and Damar Hamlin and Isabella and who knows who else. The Bills had a lot of guys ready to play, and they without them, there probably would have been a different outcome.

Not necessary. With that lead, just get out of the half without giving up points.

Why Brady? Doesn't the HC tell th OC about clock management issues? I'd think McD would be on the line to Brady telling him to run the clock.

Bass is probably the backup

Right. Romo was right. Up by 21, keep the clock running by running on second down. Force Steelers to use time outs. And you're right about the field goal. No need for it there. McDermott really does have clock issues.