Richard Noggin

It's super obvious and he was definitely short. No debate, unfortunately.

For sure he holds it and makes big chunk plays all the time. But on THAT drive, in THAT game, we needed to possess the ball and get first downs (and ideally score some points). And on the play I originally cited, we really needed Josh to come off his aggressive intentions and move up in the damned pocket (as the Titans rush left a RARE lane right up the gut for him), and either run for 4-10 yards or toss it to Sweeney for 4-10 yards. I had been praising his measured approach and willingness to bring his eyes back to his outlets for much of the game. But he went myopic on us there.

He didn't, though. The ball was not extended when his initial arm/elbow hit, spotting the ball short. They got that call right, unfortunately. You don't get his rolling momentum. You get the initial ball location when he is first down or out of bounds.

That was KINDA my point. It was a bad series at a bad time in the game, when the offense could have sealed the deal by simply doing what they'd been doing previously. But of course it happens. Just can't happen then when the defense is getting run over. He was so composed and under control for the most part. Taking check downs, avoiding bad plays (despite poor line play and Titans scheming the Bills seemed a bit unprepared for). The same kind of approach would have worked on that drive, seemed like.

Huh? Growing up involves being both a fan of the team and a fan of good, entertaining football. That game had everything. I effing HATE the Bills' squandered opportunities and the broadcast-led national ball chugging of Derrick Henry, but that was a classic battle.

Allen had ONE bad drive, late in the game, where he stopped taking what the D gave him and got greedy (the bad 3-and-out). He could've climbed the pocket and run or found Sweeney to the right flat wide open when instead he drifted right into pressure and got sacked. That was old school, inexcusable Josh play. And put us behind the sticks. Otherwise he was mostly a stud.

Grow up. That was exciting back and forth football! The Bills left some points out there on offense, and the defense fell victim to the Henry effect as the game remained close. But it was good, entertaining football. Don't be blinded by fandom.

Could it be in part because Josh Allen is the enemy of analytics-based scouting, and Collinsworth is financially tied to...a conflict of interest?

Best outcome for Bills. Strength of schedule tiebreakers and all...

So...do the Titans want to stop "our run game" overall, as posited in your article summary, or...are they saying (in the actual quote you cite from the Titans DC) what every opponent continues to say leading up to facing the Bills, which is that they need to stop JOSH ALLEN'S running? The DC (in that quote cited...I'm about to actually read the entire piece) is repeating tired tropes about Allen being a big QB who functions like an RB blah blah blah. Didn't we hear that exact same thing in the leadup to last week's game? (Now I'll read the actual article in its full context.) Edit: looking at the actual published piece, there isn't a single primary source indicating an emphasis on stopping the Bills running game. The actual quotes are about Allen's tools exclusively (obviously his running is part of that).

Perhaps the bye week in your example disqualifies the Pats on some level? Maybe...eff them and they can just suffer the indignity of not owning this particular record? I mean, ya hate to see it.

Right, which is why I'm idiotically arguing a point that no one else is, and now trying to steer you all into my fun world of tangents. Won't you join me?

That's all smart stuff, and of course I'm with you. But what I'm thinking about (and doing a poor job of representing clearly) is when a team is down two scores and NEEDS a 2-pt conversion just to TIE (this can be either an 11 or 15 point deficit). You take the sure thing the first time around (FG or TD+PAT) to stay alive for a chance after the second score. I think this is a case of miscommunication on my part.

But if you miss the 2-pt conversion immediately after the first TD that pulls you within two scores (a range that can vary from 9 to 16 points, but in this case means at least 15 points), you're suddenly down MORE than 8. Whereas if you kick the extra point, you're still alive for a one-score comeback. Kinda like if you're down 10, you go ahead and kick the FG early sometimes to preserve the clock and ensure you actually have a chance at a final possession win/tie. If you fail to score the TD instead of kicking the FG, the game effectively ends then.

But don't you go for it on the 2nd one to ensure that you're not statistically out of it right away if you fail to convert? Stay alive as long as you can, which means keep them within one score (plus 2-pt conversion) as long as possible.

I'm just here for my delicious crow. And I'm hungry.

Little tip moving forward: you mean to type "through" here. "Threw" is the past-tense of the verb "to throw," (whereas "through" is a multi-faceted word indicating passage, progression, or movement, in either literal or figurative ways) as in: Josh Allen THREW a 40-yard laser beam to Emmanuel Sanders for the Bills's first TD THROUGH the air.

I just typed almost this exact point in response to someone on FB. (Shared this article with friends, which is something I rarely feel compelled to do with sports writing.) Not only did Daboll deliberately withhold and then unveil an unexpected set of formations, personnel-groupings, and tendencies in order to defeat a specific opponent...but he also just suddenly gave every future defensive opponent THAT much more to prepare for ahead of time and react to on the field. Potential paradigm shift we're witnessing. A multiplication of play-calling possibilities.

There is still plenty of solid journalism out there. (True, long form sports journalism in particular doesn't seem to have a huge target audience these days, when I think of the attention span of the average fan.) Unfortunately, it is now awash in a warm sea of shite.

Between the customary "I love you Josh Allen!"s in the tunnel, and the captioning of Knox's celebratory screams or woos as *Noises* and then *More noises*...this is comedy gold in the collective post-conquest afterglow.

The thing that rings so true in his analysis, even though Connolly never explicitly acknowledges the link, is that: the E-P passing offense Daboll is schooled in relies on running the same route concepts but out of different formations and personnel groupings. This allows for pre-snap motions (which help the QB diagnose coverage) and the illusion of schematic complexity/diversity when in fact the offense is just dressing up the same core route concepts and combinations in different looks. Take the following example of the first Sanders TD (in which the Bills stick with their preferred route concepts while using a different offensive school's formation):

"You don’t serve Châteauneuf-du-Pape at a family barbeque; you crush margaritas." -This MF spittin'

I think both things can be true.

This post is aging...rapidly

This point makes me wonder: does defensive dominance LOOK different in 2021 than it has previously? The Bills defense is absolutely shutting teams down (and yes, holding the Chiefs to 20 at home qualifies). But they're not doing it with a ferocity or physicality or schematic aggressiveness that iconic defenses have historically displayed. Maybe 2021 defensive dominance involves putting "a lid" on explosive offenses and playing disciplined and opportunistic defense underneath?