Shaw66

Well, given that the guy was headi g toward thw back of the end zone, yes. But my point was that I think most coaches' modern take, just like going for it on fourth down and going for the 2 point conversion, is that an INT is an opportunity to make a big play. I think players are no longer taught to automatically knock down a fourth down throw.

Wow! Thanks for the still. Completely obvious how far open Kimcaid will be in a step or two. Thanks.

I've thought about this before, and I don't thing you guys are right about this. Players do what they're coached to do and don't make decisions on the field based on their contracts. I mentioned Taron Johnson bringing it out against the Ravens. The DB took it out after Josh's other int Sunday. DBs do it a lot. Why not take the touchback? I think the modern thinking is offenses aren't taught to defend against punt returns, so coaches see INT returns as big play opportunities. That's why we see many guys go for the interception 4th down and on any down take INTs out of the end zone.

Thurm I haven't watched he'd the all 22 but completely accept your analysis and others that Josh had Kincaid for the first down. If I had to guess, he saw and misread something that made him uncomfortable and decided to go away from that throw. You're right, what I said is correct only once he's closing in on the sideline and has limited options. Early this season I got grief around here because I kept saying Josh has to learn to take the short gain high probability throw rather than the 50 50 throw downfield. It's a west coast concept - make every play a positive play, which is always better than a loss, an inompletion, or a turnover. Positive play, every down. Josh was doing that in the big wins early in the season, and he's regressed to the way he likes to play.

But there's only a 1 in 8 chance it would three times in a row.

There are only 5 active coaches with at least as many playoff appearances and a better won loss percentage. Every other head coach either has been to the playoffs fewer times or won less or both. There are more measures of success than winning a Lombardi. He was a good hire, both for the regular seasons and the playoffs. Every team wants to win the Super Bowl. Do you really think any team with an opening would not hire McDermott be ause he hasn't won one? Any team? You're being unhappy doesn't mean McDermott hasn't been a success to date.

This is a thread about history, not the future. The history is simple: over his tenure, McDermott isnone of the most accomplished coaches in the league. I'd say, if you want to talk about the future, start your thread.

So hiring McDermott was a bad decision?

Well, two things about this: First, as good as a punt is ONLY said when there actually WAS an interception. No one says it on an incompletion. Second, a fourth down throw into the end zone has a significant upside - a touchdown. There's a much greater possible reward on the throw than the punt.

Thank you for responding. I knew my post would generate these negative posts, and I have trouble keeping my cool responding to them. If the Bills fired McDermott today, how long would it be before New England hired him? Seattle? It's absurd to demean a guy with his regular season record AND his playoff record, as you point out.

I liked him once I heard his first press conference. It was pretty clear he knew what he was doing. Of course, his press conferences have gone downhill ever since!

Man. Talk about a good decision. Seven years later, four straight division titles. Playoffs six times. After all those years of failure.

Well, I continue to think there are opportunities to game the system. One problem is the arbitrariness of the time these rules apply. Why is this rule and the out of bounds rule a 5-minute rule but the 10 second runoff is a 2-minute rule? If the Dolphins were getting the benefit of the clock stoppage, why not also offer the Bills a 10-second runoff? I agree with Gunner that the rule probably is designed to give an advantage to the team trying to come back, but why should that be? If my running back gives himself up and passes up chance get more yards so he can keep the clock running, why should my opponent be able stop the clock by committing a penalty? Whatever. It should be rationalized some way. If you can stop the clock in the final 5 by going out of bounds, fine. But committing a penalty?

Bills were great on that play at the end of half. Diggs or Josh or both recognized that the Dolphins were giving them the first down, so they took and got out of bounds. Real smart football.

Yes. Congratulate everyone every day they're sober.

Why is that the rule? What's the rationale. Once the penalty is enforced, why shouldn't the game be put back in the same position it would have been if no penalty had been called? If you're winning and on offense, the rule denies you an opportunity let the clock. If you're losing, while the penalty is being enforced you're calling the next play and getting up to the LOS. Only thing I can think is that they want to advantage the losing team, so they can have a more exciting finish.

Pics or it didn't happen!

I agree. Someone throws a flag, and at the end of the play the clock stops. I get that. Officials need time to sort out and enforce the penalty. But once that's done, why shouldn't the game resume in the same posture it was. If the clock was running when it was stopped for the penalty, it should restart with a 25-second play clock. Why should a team get the benefit of a clock stoppage when EITHER team is flagged?

I was fine with the decision by Josh. In retrospect of course, it cost the Bills a field goal, and I get the argument that therefore the throw needs to go into the end zone. But in the moment, that was a play that looked like a touchdown. A throw to a running back on the two, on the run, is almost always a TD. You have to trust your teammates to make plays. Josh made that decision. The Dolphins just made a better play.

One of the important differences in playoff football is the officiating. They allow a lot more. Not that it was correct, but the noncall on the Knox I interference was another example.

Great story! I was there, too, and I saw every step. I was really worried that the game was slipping away on that drive. It was so intense, and then Johnson was on his way.

Miami and Dallas led the league in points scored. Against the rest of the league they averaged over 30 points per game. In three games against the Bills they scored 20, 14, and 10. Those are good!

Uh oh. I guess he picked up the game early!

Right about how the coverage worked. Hyde's may have been the best INT I've ever seen.

Ooh. I won't be watching, but a GDT is a great idea!