Mikey152
-
Posts
511 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mikey152
-
-
Lamar is an extreme, and because of that there are a wide variety of opinions. Most people will agree he is a great football player, but I think where you get a lot of differing opinions is when you start talking about him as a quarterback.
Lamar is not a great thrower of the football by NFL standards. He just isn't. On top of that, he doesn't throw a lot of timing/anticipation passes. Despite that, he had CRAZY passing stats this season because he and Derrick Henry are possibly the best running attack in the history of the NFL, and easily the best this season in a time where most defenses are geared to stop the pass. This leads to lots of heavy boxes and tired defenders, and also leads to teams being afraid to play man and let him scramble all over them. So, a lot of his relative weaknesses don't really get exposed because his strengths prevent teams from exploiting them (most of the time).
In the playoffs, it doesn't work as well. Defenses can slow down the run without being complete sieves in the passing game. If they can force him to be even sort of a traditional QB, he gets exposed. It isn't easy, and he is improving from bad to below average as a passer, but he's just never gonna be a great QB in the traditional sense.
We will never know if that actually matters, but it is a great experiment. I feel like Jayden Daniels is an even better version, and one day someone will come along who can truly do it all and be unstoppable.
-
1
-
-
23 minutes ago, DJB said:
I still can’t believe that Tua got the bag from the Dolphins. This is damming evidence against him and what most of us thought anyways.
Manufactured touches
I take these with a grain of salt...these guys don't know the progression or the keys. They are guessing.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, GASabresIUFan said:
That isn’t what Josh said in his post game interview. Josh said the ref didn’t like being criticized.
He didn't say it like that...Vinovich clearly wasn't scolding him.
I think Josh is just a classy guy who put that situation on himself instead of the refs. They will appreciate that.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:
It's not really satirical though because he's obviously using this sarcasm as a basis to defend McD's overall body of work in the postseason...which is objectively not very pretty
That narrative is 100% true.Let me ask you this...do you think McD's side of the ball and game management in the postseason overall has been a strength for this team?
I would disagree with the bolded part about Josh in "prior seasons". He's largely been fantastic in the playoffs, the Cincy game really being the only total clunker. Coaching and defense have been the biggest reasons why we haven't had success in January. I mean if you didn't see calm and poise in the 13 seconds game I'm not sure what to tell you.
The problem is, "you" talk about McDermott like he is just the DC. He is the HC. He is in charge of the defense AND the offense AND the special teams.
Everyone talks about how great Joe Brady is, but it is McDermott who fired Dorsey in the middle of a season in favor of Brady, and who hired him in the first place. It's also silly to think McDermott has no say on our offensive gameplan, active roster, etc. You guys used to laugh at him when he said complementary football, but look at what the idea of a balanced team has brought.
McDermott has had a top offense practically his whole time here in Buffalo, and most here would have you believe the Bills accomplish this almost in spite of him. but the defense? Oh, that's 100% his fault.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
He high stepped over him and then was giving it the thumb over the shoulder towards Surtain like "what's that joker's problem?" you can't do either of those things. It is taunting. Correct flag thrown.
Agree with @DrDawkinstein on the spots. The line judge on the far side from the tv view must have been drunk. He blew at least 4 that I counted. 3 Bills, 1 Broncos.
Agree 100% on the spots...like a full yard off on several occasions.
-
I think it’s the assistant coaches…
Joe Brady and Bobby Babich are considerably younger and less stuffy than the previous guys.
Not sure if that reflects Sean loosening up, or caused him to loosen up, but either way they really seem to have him focusing on being a head coach and motivator these days.
-
6 minutes ago, PBF81 said:
So we need "leaders" when playing against Henry?
Well, OK. At least things are clearing up.
LOL
I don’t know what to tell you…no Johnson, no Bernard, Rapp hurt early tackling Henry. The middle of the defense was in rough shape. Bishop, Lewis, Spector, Morrow…yes, they were missing leadership on the backend
-
25 minutes ago, FireChans said:
Because your definitions of "solid" and "top-tier" is not based on the reality of the NFL.
Do we think this team is riddled with All-Pros that all got snubbed?
Of course not.
You are correct in one regard. Half the people convincing themselves that Allen is "doing more with less" were also praising the Bills for building a super talented team. It's a total contradiction
The Bills are…well planned.
Lots of depth, lots of complimentary pieces. Leads to a good team that’s greater than the sum of its parts.
All that said, it probably doesn’t work without a guy like Josh Allen running the show.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, PBF81 said:
The only player in "the middle of the field" that would have made a difference in that game is Bernard, and we've allowed quite a few less than stellar rushing performances with him in there.
We're not ranked average in rushing D because of that one game, in fact, remove it and it only marginally impacts our rushing D stats.
It's a lot more likely that Henry just ripped us a new one because we have a smallish front-7 and didn't scheme around that.
You missed the part where when the Bills went to three LB without Milano and Bernard, they got destroyed by the RB passing game to Justice Hill and passes over the middle.
Spin it any way you want, but Bernard and Johnson are two of their 5 best defenders, and arguably the two most important leaders.
1 hour ago, PBF81 said:Alright, so having said all of that, what, specifically, do you think that the people voting for it look at when they make their decision?
i.e., why doesn't Josh get it then?
The same reason he was voted most overrated.
-
15 minutes ago, PBF81 said:
The same could be argued here.
Getting into the nits of each team is an endless argument every which way. As to the above, you're taking some extreme liberties here. Are you comparing Burrow and Tua? Burrow led the league in passing yards and TDs. Jackson has most of the other superlatives in passing. Miami had the easiest schedule in the league and still couldn't score more points than they allowed. At least Cincy was +38 in point differential to Miami's -19. That's a half-a-TD per-game difference.
Over half of Cincy's schedule was playoff teams, and despite having been 2-7 therein, of their 7 losses, two were 1-point losses, two more were 3-point losses, and 6 of the 7 were one-possession losses. Miami played four games against playoff teams, all four were losses, two of which were against us, and their only one-possession loss was against us in Buffalo.
Most people would consider that to be both significant and relevant.
Again, a never-ending argument in every which way. All teams are banged up, I've never seen it be as much of an excuse as it is here.
I give up, why not? I don't think that having either of those players back is going to impact what Henry does however.
At the end of the day I don't think that there's a fan here that wouldn't ultimately rather play Miami than Cincy if it had come to that.
Apart from that, Miami's pretty hapless. Tua's overrated and not long for the league, McDaniel, ... LOL Burrow will end up being one of the best QBs in NFL history.
We already went over this…Tua was hurt for a significant portion of their season. Last year, He threw for almost 4700 yards and 29TDs with almost 100 less attempts than Burrow had this year and RBs that scored a ton of touchdowns.
make any excuses you want, But Burrow played 17 games this year and didn’t make the playoffs. If Tua had been healthy all year, it’s all but a lock they finish with a better record than the Bengals. Its disingenuous to call them garbage and the Bengals basically a playoff team, especially because both times the Bills played the Dolphins Tua was on the field.
i am not retconning anything, btw. I am just pointing out that twisting records or statistics to make a player or team look better or worse shouldnt and doesn’t fly.
At the end of the day, the only team of any consequence that the Ravens beat was the Bills, and they beat them by abusing the backups in the middle of the field. They also lost to two of the worst teams in the league.
-
57 minutes ago, PBF81 said:
It was a pretty simple line there, not much to disagree with. The Ravens were 7-3 against playoff teams.
The beat us, which is hardly insignificant in the argument, and in grand fashion, they beat Washington, Tampa, Denver, the Chargers, the Steelers, and the Texans. They lost to the Chiefs, Steelers (divisional opponent), and Philly.
We had a dozen games against non-playoff teams and went 2-3 in the others. We didn't beat any two playoff teams back to back. When your schedule is such that you play 60% playoff teams, it's much more difficult to get up that often. We have a tendency to get up for big games in the regular season, hence our 4-0 vs. KC in the RS, but 0-3 in the postseason. Same for Detroit which we got up for.
You mention division winners, sure, Detroit and KC, but we also lost to two of the weakest teams in the playoffs, the Rams and Texans, neither of which even had a positive point-differential. And of course getting annihilated by the Ravens helps cement the argument there too. Throw in the Bengals which weren't a playoff team but were close, and which were arguably better than several playoff teams, and their division was worlds more difficult than ours having played 12 games against playoff teams plus Cincy. Would we want to play Cincy in the playoffs? Anyway, contrast that with our dozen games against non-playoff teams.
If you asked, I can't imagine that anyone would rather have had their schedule than ours, and it's probably not a great assumption to guess that we would have been 13-4 with their schedule. As it is, our point differential against playoff teams was negative, -15. Theirs was +112.
That's what a lot of people doing the voting are looking at.
We'll see, but we first need to get past Denver, the toughest D we'll have played all season. Cook generally hasn't performed well against such Ds. We'll need players to step up besides Allen. After that, we'll play Baltimore at home unless they lose to Pitt, and if we can't win that game it would further cement the argument.
Some people count another division as a successful season with Allen at QB, but I'm not one of 'em. We at least need to win the AFC.
That’s a lot of retcon and one-sided arguing…
Take the Bengals for example…how are they much different from a team like the Dolphins? Honestly, they’re really pretty similar, and even finished pretty much the same way. The only difference is the Bengals were bad because they let defensive players walk and the Dolphins were bad this year because their quarterback was hurt (but he played in both games against Buffalo). Just like the 49ers were bad because Mccaffery was hurt (but he played against the Bills). Same with the Texans and Rams who were, you guessed it, healthier for the Bills game.
At the start of the season, the Bills had a WAY tougher schedule on paper. Most of the teams that didn’t perform did so due to injury…but they weren’t injured against the Bills.Speaking of injury, why does nobody mention injury when we talk about that first meeting with the Ravens? Bernard and Johnson were both out and Shakir got hurt in that game…and that is exactly what the Ravens targeted. They won’t be able to do that this time around.
-
11 minutes ago, PBF81 said:
I can't imagine that Allen cares.
Also, the Ravens were 7-3 against playoff teams whereas we were 2-3 against playoff teams. They also played in a notably tougher division and obviously had a tougher schedule. At the end of the day Jackson posted better numbers across the board.
Let's win now and win the AFC, otherwise it cements the argument.
I don’t think I agree on the schedule.
those 5 games for the Bills were all division winners and included both #1 seeds. They also played both #1 seeds and the final 4 from last season this year.
meanwhile, more than half of the ravens games against playoff teams were against wildcard teams…they also lost to the best AND worst teams in the NFL.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, JGMcD2 said:
There are years that Josh Allen hasn’t been voted the best one or two at his position in the league… so what does that mean then?
I’m not saying it’s a conspiracy, just quit clutching on to some writers voting on games they don’t even watch.
To me, that is the real key. Anybody who uses stats to say Lamar is better (or Josh for that matter) is instantly tuned out in my book.
I have watched a handful of Ravens games this season, and a bunch more over Lamar's career. There isn't one single time I have EVER thought Lamar Jackson was a better player than Josh Allen...not 1. Heck, there are still some routes he can't reliably complete. He is not a complete quarterback. But, Baltimore does a great job hiding his weaknesses and playing to his strengths most of the time, so he is productive and they win a lot. Derrick Henry was a stroke of genius.
To me, Lamar as MVP is a joke. He's the definition of a system quarterback.
-
1
-
1
-
-
6 minutes ago, Yobogoya! said:
Oliver was pick 9, but I appreciate your point overall.
But Chris Jones was a 2nd round pick. TJ watt was pick 30. Amon Ra was 4th round. Trey Hendrickson was round 3.
It should go without saying it’s not “easy” to find these types of guys, but given the sheer amount of time the current regime has had to do so, you’d almost expect them to luck into at least ONE other guy besides Allen. Worse front offices than ours certainly have.
my bad on Ed…I knew I was missing one.
And yes, I know it is possible, but chances go way down. And for the record, they HAVE DRAFTED all pros. They drafted Tre White, Matt Milano, and Taron Johnson. Injuries suck.
-
1 hour ago, Yobogoya! said:
McDermott’s scheme is capable of getting efficient to highly efficient play out of JAG players, but it seems damn near impossible for him to get an already good player up to a dominant level of production — other than Josh Allen, who is a cheat code.
It’s the biggest concern at this point that in 8 drafts + offseasons the McBeane regime hasn’t produced a single other dominant player. Lots of solid players, a few borderline great ones… but nearly a decade of scouting for Beane and in nearly a decade of coaching from McD, we’re embarking on yet another postseason run without top tier, “All Pro” production from anyone except the QB.
To be fair, Josh is also the only pick they made in the top 10 of the draft, and most of their first picks are in the 20s. The odds of grabbing elite players goes way down back there. It’s not impossible, but it is more difficult.
-
29 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:
Anyone making the case that McDermott and Reid's playoff records are similar by comparing McDermott's playoff record with Josh Allen to Reid's playoff record with guys like Donovan McNabb, Kevin Kolb, and Jeff Garcia is not making a great case for McDermott.
No disrespect to McDermott, but there's simply no comparison between him and Andy Reid, who I think is going to be known as the GOAT when he retires.
Andy Reid was in the top 10 all-time in HC wins before Mahomes ever took a snap for KC. For comparison, McDermott is currently 54th on the all-time list with 86 wins. Reid is currently 4th with 273 wins, 29 behind Belichick.
Reid is the all-time leader in HC wins for 2 different franchises.
The knock on Reid was always "yeah, but he can't win the big one." So comparing his Eagles playoff career to McDermott's Bills playoff career doesn't make sense if you're trying to make a case for McDermott. Reid had McNabb and other assorted QBs, who were fine to good but not all time greats. McDermott has Allen, who will go down as an all time great. Not even close in terms of QB talent to work with.
Now Reid has 3 SB rings as a HC. So much for that "can't win the big one" argument.
What happened with Reid is he finally got his superstar QB prospect late in his career so he had a reputation as "can't win the big one" from coming up against better QB talent early in his career. Reputations get baked in early and it takes a lot to change them.
It's the Brady/Manning argument all over again.
Manning actually had a winning record against Brady in the playoffs (3-2) but Manning "couldn't win the big games" to many NFL fans.
All the above said, the stories of all these guys' careers are still being written. McDermott can absolutely win a Super Bowl. But he has to prove he can do it.
McNabb's 2004 season (the year they went to the SB) was his FIFTH probowl season in a row, and objectively very comparable to Josh's 2024 statistically and record wise. He might not have been Josh Allen, but he wasn't exactly a scrub, either.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, FireChans said:
I mean, saying his production is bad and has 3 games of under 10 yards and still supporting the trade is kinda interesting.
It’s almost like he does things outside of the stat sheet to open up the offense.
Puts him in a tough spot to admit that though. Otherwise, it would be a wasted 3rd round pick for bad production, right?
Nobody is saying it isn’t true…just maybe a bit exaggerated, while in turn minimizing similar indirect contributions of other players.
It starts to feel like a narrative.
cooper cost a third round pick and his contract is dirt cheap. It was a great deal even if he is just a role player, especially if it is a role that was sorely needed. Where you are getting push back is when you try and spin it as an indictment against the team and the WR situation heading into the season, where they didn’t have a number 1 or any good receivers, because Cooper isn’t fitting your own criteria here in Buffalo. It feels hypocritical.
but I get it…it isn’t really about WR at all. It’s about not trusting this team to get it done because they always fail.
-
1 hour ago, BillsVet said:
Few posters go full hyperbole so quickly when someone disagrees with them like you do. Dude, remove the bunched panties from your fourth point of contact and don't take it this personally.
This thread is like 200 pages long…subtle debate died long ago.
but yes, the hyperbole was strong in that post and intentional.
For me, this isn’t about being right or wrong…I couldn’t care less. It’s the negativity. As a wise poster once messages me "I'm not at all convinced that everything is going to work out well, but on the other hand, there's nothing wrong in thinking it should."
The reality is, this thread was never really about WR. It’s about trusting (or not trusting) the people at one bills drive. My position is and always will be that one bills drive has a plan and it COULD work, not that it WILL. For whatever reason, there is a sizable number of posters on this message board that just cannot get on that train. I get they are frustrated, but at what point do you take a look in the mirror and realize you’re turning against your own team and fellow fans due to your anger?
-
12 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I said that the WRs were bottom 3 in the NFl. I don’t necessarily believe that was wrong pre-Amari. In fact, the numbers would probably support it from those 8 games. The numbers in the 6 games with him vs. the 8 games without him are way different. Allen may throw for 4,000 yards without a receiver over 1,000 yards. Shakir is their top producer and he’s 29th in yards. Keon is next and he’s 76th. Keep in mind that is the production with the MVP at QB, arguably the top OC in football, a really good running game and a top 5 OL.
This, right here, is the hypocrisy I am talking about.
Amari gets TONS of credit for the offenses performance the last 8 weeks ( despite only playing in 6 games). His INDIVIDUAL PRODUCTION (snaps, targets, catches, yards, TDs) doesnt signal #1 receiver on this team, and they sure don’t signal # 1 we in the NFL.
But, you know…he’s Amari Cooper. Hes making a huge difference you just can’t see it in the numbers. He dictates coverage, even when he is on the sideline he is so good.
the rest of the receivers, though? Still trash. I mean, look at their numbers! They’re better than Amaris, sure, but that’s only because the whole team covers Cooper when he is on the field and they run the ball when he isn’t (and we all know WR have nothing to do with running the football).
Amari Cooper is a good player. I am glad he is on the Bills..but this need to be right in your negativity is compromising your common sense.
Regarding your charts from earlier…the offense also got better with Coleman and Kincaid out of the lineup. Do they make us worse? Or maybe, just maybe…it’s more complicated than a single variable.
-
12 minutes ago, FireChans said:
But that's the thing. Guys that dictate coverage don't grow on trees. Expecting them to come out of a washed MVS, a flameout in Claypool, or a glorified gadget guy in Samuel with 1 good year was a mistake.
And while its great that Mack is a good blocker (really he has to be), imo, he's still not more important than Cooper, Coleman, Shakir or even Kincaid I think. Like not even close.
Important is relative...
Hollins, Knox, Anderson and Coleman dictates coverage just as much as a package with Cooper does, just in a different way. Put Cooper in for Hollins and it doesn't work as well.
This was the whole point. All the receivers play a role on this team. Cooper didn't change that, he just majorly upgraded their weakest role player.
Let me put it another way. Having a guy that can punish man coverage is a a weapon that helps the offense. Forcing the ball to said player to keep him happy or not having other options when he is covered/hurt holds a team back. That's really it. I didn't think Samuel could be 2020 Diggs, but I thought he could be second half of last year Diggs and the other guys got better.
So now Cooper is second half of last year Diggs (without the crazy) and the rest of the guys are better and the offense is great.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:
It certainly works that everyone can make plays. That’s what they want. I’m suggesting 3rd and 8, down 5, late to KC, Amari is the first look. That’s because he is most likely to “win” his rep. For years he’s been an elite route runner. Shakir finds space as does Kincaid. They will be the next looks if Allen doesn’t take off.
Meh, depends on the look. Against man, probably. Against zone? Unlikely.
Again, what you are describing is an important player...but I can tell you that I think they play better if Cooper is out than if Shakir is. I also think I'd take 2024 Hollins and Coleman over 2023 Davis and Diggs.
5 minutes ago, FireChans said:I have discovered the disconnect.
You think with a healthy Samuel, we wouldn't have needed Cooper. Most of the folks disagreed with you in the summer on that point, and disagree with you today on the same point.
To this point, I think we have gotten about as good as could be expected with Coleman/Shakir and even Mack. The issue that we had in the summer and still have today was the idea that if we got best case scenario out of Coleman/Shakir/Mack and Samuel, we would be okay. Not only was that unlikely, as was argued back then, the far more likely alternative to the ideal best case scenario was exactly what happened, the group as a whole being torn apart by a well-coached team like the Ravens, who don't even have a good defense because they wouldn't be good enough.
The reason why its not the same argument for Mack is that Mack does not dictate coverage the way that Cooper does. To my eye, Shakir has not seen #1 CB coverage again this WHOLE SEASON to the extent he saw Humphrey vs the Ravens. Mack was playing the boundary and he was an afterthought in the passing game and rightfully so.
Amari changed that. You think Samuel would have too potentially and maybe you're right but I also thought you were far too high on him this summer.
Really, it was some combination of Samuel/MVS/Claypool et al, but yes. I think I (and the Bills) thought they could burn an aggressive defense with Samuel and MVS. Clearly that was wrong.
But by the same token, we WERE right about something that seems to get lost in making that point. The idea was a good one, they just signed the wrong guy. Clearly this everybody eats philosophy has merit, and it really isn't made for a "true" #1 that commands 100+ targets either. I don't think Diggs would help like Cooper does, for example. Same threat, different attitude breaks the offense in a different way.
And yes, Mack doesn't dictate coverage. But he does improve the run game and the RAC game significantly. It is not a coincidence that we have more long YAC and rushing plays this season. Downfield blocking is a big part of that.
-
3 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
I mean I realize folks are slow to come off bad takes but I honestly did not expect this to be bumped😂😂as far as I'm concerned this was settled once they made the move for Cooper
Guess recency bias is a factor here...yes Allen has been incandescent but sorry no the offense has not always looked like this
Cooper was an indictment on Samuel and MVS, to a lesser extent..not the WR room or offensive philosophy.
I think this would have been a very different thread if someone had said "This offense could work, but they're really gonna struggle against pressure man looks because CS and MVS aren't good enough there and Coleman is too young"
Instead, most of what we saw in this thread was you need a #1 WR that gets 100 targets and 1000 yards to be successful.
-
1 minute ago, Kirby Jackson said:
Fair
The original point was that the “WRs quietly got better.” They didn’t. I am on record that they were a bottom 3 group prior to the Cooper deal. I’m not sure that was wrong. They were too limited. One player, at the top of the depth chart, changed the entire room. He may not end up as the most targeted but on 3rd and 7 when someone needs to “go win” it’s going to be Cooper that they look to. That’s a part of his value. It isn’t about volume. It’s about the ability to change team’s game plans and to open up space for everyone else. It has worked.
I sort of a agree and sort of don't.
I do think that Cooper plays an important role on the team, and raises the floor. But I don't think he is the go to guy on this offense. I'm not even sure he is the second or third guy. But that's just it...that don't really play like that anymore. All 5 skill guys are that guy in the right circumstances, and that's what makes them hard to defend.
-
11 minutes ago, FireChans said:
That's true. I have some counter facts though!
Since trading for Amari, Shakir is averaging 8.375 targets per game.
Prior to trading for Amari, Shakir was averaging 4.2 targets per game.
Factually, we know that Shakir targets correlate with winning.
We also know that trading for Amari correlated with with an increase in Shakir targets.
Ergo.....
Yes, indirect correlation...I get it, and I even agree. His presence keeps teams honest and lets Shakir operate against more zone coverage. That was likely Samuel's role and why most of Amari's snaps correlate to CS and not Keon, Mack or Khalil.
The reason I find it amusing isn't because I think you are wrong...it's because that was the same argument for why guys like Mack Hollins are more valuable than their stats. The key is balance.
Van Noy - "I've never seen them (Bills) do this as conservative they played"
in The Stadium Wall
Posted · Edited by Mikey152
Honestly, they came out of the gate swinging...looked like they just lost a bit of steam at the half. Hard to keep that kind of energy the whole game, especially against an opponent who wasn't backing down from a fight.
Luckily they won enough rounds early in the fight to hold on and still win it.