Jump to content

HomeskillitMoorman

Community Member
  • Posts

    2,055
  • Joined

Posts posted by HomeskillitMoorman

  1. This is always going to be an issue with McD here. And he's missed on OC's half the time. So lets say we win tomorrow and Brady gets hired away...we're now at the mercy of another McD pick and if it doesn't go well like Dennison or Dorsey, we throw away another 1-2 years and take the gamble on the next OC? And if it does go well, we most likely lose that OC after just a season or two and we start the cycle all over again. We're doing all of this just to keep McD here? A guy who's not even a good in-game head coach?

     

    It's just not a great long-term plan. These are precious years we have with a franchise QB. 

    • Disagree 1
    • Agree 1
  2. 1 hour ago, Augie said:

     

    Okay, we’ll just put our heads in the sand and ignore the current facts for you. It’s not an excuse, it just is what it is. I’m not upset or whining, but I just like to pay attention to what’s going on. I wish it was different, but it’s something I have no control over. 


    I think what they’re saying is if you’re looking at it as we’re going up against them at a disadvantage because of injuries, then wouldn’t you also say we lost to them when we had that advantage 2 years ago? 
     

    I think being able to win under circumstances like that, especially in the playoffs, is what separates good from great. 

  3. 7 minutes ago, Generic_Bills_Fan said:

    The only coach I can really think of that had great regular season success and some but not a lot of playoff success that was fired is Marty schottenheimer and his playoff record was a heck of a lot worse than 5-6 lol historically this would be a near unheard of firing.  

    People will say dungy but really that’s evidence we should keep McDermott honestly…gruden won a superbowl with dungys players that dungy likely wouldve won himself and when he finally wrestled control away from dungys guys he promptly ran the franchise straight into the ground 😂. They thought they had parcells lined up who changed his mind and they got stuck with gruden.  Then, the raiders were having no regular or postseason success and dungy won a superbowl with a different team

     

    thats the danger for me, if you could line up a new coach before firing your current coach then yea its a much easier discussion.  But the way it works the odds are high the guy you want chooses a different team and you’re out a pretty good head coach that has perennially given you a shot to win it all.

    the whole ‘we haven’t won a Super Bowl yet what do we have to lose’ argument makes no sense to me…there’s a lot to lose 

     

     

     

    I don't see how he's perennially given us a shot to win it all though. We got blown out in the AFCCG 3 years ago, he himself choked away 2021 with 13 seconds, we got blown out last year, and if we lose this Sunday that would be 3 straight exits in the Divisional Round, which with an elite QB is a huge disappointment. This isn't a guy that's been knocking on the door of winning it.

    • Agree 1
  4. 7 minutes ago, Ramza86 said:

     

    Would you fire him if he pulled another 13 seconds?

     

    I think a lot of people here wouldn't. There's a lot of fans who think just making the playoffs, even if they are consistent Divisional Round exits where the coach makes blunders year after year is a success. 

     

    There isn't really a right or wrong answer. If simply that makes people happy, that's what they're going to advocate for. 


    I personally think the standard should be higher. 

    • Agree 2
  5. 7 hours ago, ProcessTruster said:

    Agreed,

     

    However,  if the Bills lose Sunday, most of the crazies on this board will be calling for McD's head within 10 minutes.   the vitriol will be sprewing everywhere.

     

    write it down. 

     

    But there is a pretty solid argument for that. Some of you act like there's no nuance there.

     

    If we lose, McD will be 5-6 in the postseason overall and 0-3 vs the Chiefs including a home game against the weakest version of them we may see for a long time and one of those being a direct chokejob from him personally, assuming that doesn't happen again in Meeting 3. And 3 straight years of Divisional Round exits since hitting the apex back in 2020-21. 

     

    It's not crazy...it's pretty logical. That would be a very disappointing body of work with an elite QB. 

     

     

    • Agree 1
  6. On 1/16/2024 at 10:42 AM, Tommy Callahan said:

    Day in Day out the farmers tell us why the right is bad.

     

    but never what the democrats offer that helps or is good for US.  Cause that platform is horrific for Americans.

     

    So, they gaslight about the right nonstop.

     

    The script is boringly predictable. 

     

     

     

     

     

    But Republicans do the same exact thing about the Left. They both do it, you sell out for "your side", it's no different. 

     

    I don't know why so many of you are willing to compromise and sell out on principles to support/defend Trump or Biden. They're both trash. Corrupt trash. 

     

    It's hard to take anyone seriously at this point that complains this much about political corruption and then bends the knee every single time for one of the candidates from the two parties. 

    • Eyeroll 1
    • Agree 1
    • Thank you (+1) 1
  7. 3 hours ago, Man with No Name said:

    McD has been excellent as a d coordinator. if anything he just needs a right hand man to keep him out of his own way at really crucial times. a trusted voice for 13 seconds, or somebody he trusts that would have told him how dumb the second straight zero blitz against Denver was


    This is a fantastic argument for why McD should be a DC and not a Head Coach. 

  8. 12 hours ago, Governor said:

    McD isn’t really safe yet. He has to beat KC at home or all hell is gonna break loose.

     

    As it should. If we lose this game that's 0-3 in the playoffs vs KC, 1 of which was directly his own massive chokejob assuming this one isn't either, and 3 divisional exits since we made the AFC championship 3 years ago. 


    That's a big problem. That is not where we should be with an elite talent at QB. 

  9. 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said:

    Still lower than all the other viewership by a substantial margin. You can twist it no matter how you like. It may be good streaming numbers but honestly doesnt have much competition. And when compared to games shown on both its not even in the same ballpark

     

    Dude, nobody's trying to twist anything. I doubt literally ANY person here is on Team Peacock. 

     

    This is just reality. Considering that this was purely on streaming and on Saturday night...they are very happy with these numbers. Given the context, they are good numbers. And that's something that pretty much all of us were rooting against. 

    14 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

     

    well...the money generated for the broadcaster for that one game is a direct cash infusion.  Not so network broadcasts, where there is no direct link between any one game and revenue.  The network games are prepaid by the network to the NFL for years in advance, so the per game cost is fixed for them.  The revenue made back is on advertising and (if cable or streamer) subscription fees (which do not cover any one game in particular, but the entire streamer's or network's costs of doing all their business) over the subsequent years.

     

    So this is a HUGE deal for streamers---would people pay to watch a single game (or better yet, sign up and forget to cancel their annual subscription!).  The answer is a resounding "yes".  That one game had as many viewers as the entire 5 game World Series in 2023---which was broadcast on network TV. 

     

    It's a proof of concept that will pave the way to actual per game PPV for playoffs or the Super Bowl.

     

    I doubt it'll ever happen for the Super Bowl, but for the playoffs were are definitely going to see more of this in the future unfortunately. My biggest issue isn't for the money necessarily, it's all the different apps and things you have to sign up/sign in for. 

     

    I have these old neighbors I used to have that I still keep in touch with that love the Bills but they're just old and signing into all this stuff is hard for them and I get on the phone with them and try to walk them through all the different things they have to do and it just sucks. The NFL is just making this so difficult. These are people that would probably pay any price, they just have trouble with all the technology. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  10. 1 hour ago, Kmart128 said:

    Wow they were flexing that 23 million viewership and they were by far the least watched game... even loosing to a 4:30 monday game

     

    It's kind of a big number for streaming though. Most people were hoping it would totally flop. It didn't. They're going to do this again. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  11. Just now, Logic said:

    It's really quite simple.

    Nick Wright is a carnival barker. An old timey wrestling heel, like Rowdy Roddy Piper or Ric Flair.

    He is PURPOSEFULLY playing the role of "antagonistic villain", because it gets viewership, clicks, and online engagement, which equals more money for Nick Wright and his employers.

    He is playing a persona. A character. He's like Skip Bayless or Stephen A Smith. If you've ever heard Nick Wright speak seriously on a topic, then you know that the "Nick Wright" you see on your screen every week is nothing more than a bit, a put-on, a ruse.

    His character loves the Chiefs and hates on the Bills. It works again and again and again, because Bills fans take the bait again and again and again.

    I stopped getting mad at him a long time ago because I recognized what he is and what he's doing. You should, too. All I can do now is stand and applaud him for being so good at what he does, which is to antagonize and troll people into continuing to engage with him and the programs he's featured on.

     

    I think he enjoys it on top of the clicks/money thing. That's probably what makes him more hateable to the people who get triggered by him. He's even more of a character than a guy like Stephen A though because you actually do have moments where Stephen A steps out of it. 

×
×
  • Create New...