Jump to content

HomeskillitMoorman

Community Member
  • Posts

    2,348
  • Joined

Posts posted by HomeskillitMoorman

  1. 13 minutes ago, CaliBills said:

     

    I feel judging a coach aggressiveness vs conservative in hindsight is unrealistic.  It is easy to say after the results show themselves that a different decision should have been made.  

    The same people calling for him to be more aggressive like he was yesterday would also be the same people complaining if we lost due to that said aggressiveness(not all, but some). Like Staley has hurt the Chargers by being too aggressive.

     

    For instance, 4-1, on the final drive, we don't make it.  Regardless of play call, we do not get it or he goes for a FG and we miss, and the Pats then drive the field and score a TD and we lose the game.

     

    Those exact same people saying he needs to be aggressive, would say, well he should of punted and made them drive the whole field.   

     

    Every coach makes game time decisions that can go either way and ONLY in hindsight is it proven right or wrong.  

     

     

    This is for the most part so incredibly untrue though. Yes there are people who live in hindsight and will complain no matter what if things go wrong, but there are so many that understand that the right call doesn't always mean a successful outcome individually, it just means over time, the team will benefit from consistently making the right decisions. 

     

    To give you an example, I am not a McD guy, but I was here totally defending him for the call to go for it at the end of the Titans game. I hated the playcall because we never, ever get push on those QB sneaks up the middle as we saw yesterday even on a good day, and McD is part of that decision, but the decision in of itself to go for it was 100% the right one and I'd want us to do it again if that situation arises again. 

     

    Regardless, its not about the individual people who complain. It's just about making the right decision. Going for it there on 4th and 1 after our D just pretty easily gave up a TD on the last possession, with Josh playing the way he was, was the right move whether he juked Jaime Collins to get the 1st down or not. When the chips are down, you go to your best. We didn't do that in the AFC Championship last year and that was with our D getting slashed. I don't think we would have won the game anyway but I don't feel at all that McD gave this team the best opportunity to win that game. And you just can't afford for your head coach to do that, especially in the

    playoffs. 

     

    The main point is the outcome does not determine whether it was the right decision or not. If you're down by 2 and you have the ball at the opposing 20 with 3 seconds left and you go for the FG, is it the wrong call if you miss? No. Same as if that coach decided to go with a fake FG and ends up getting the TD, I don't think that was the right call unless the kicker was hurt or something. So yes, you can judge a coach by their decision-making regardless of the outcome. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  2. On 12/16/2021 at 4:57 PM, Azucho98 said:

    Bills were 9-7 in 1989 and one and done in the playoffs after a 12-4 season in 1988 and making it to the AFC Championship game.  

     

    Several fans were yelling and screaming saying Kelly should be benched and Levy fired....  You all know how that turned out.

     

     

     

     

     

    You mean with no Superbowl wins?

     

    Levy notoriously coached tight in those games, the same complaint as many of us have had about McD in the majority of his big games. 

     

    With a QB like Josh, we SHOULD be in the playoffs annually, as most elite QBs are. Looking at that solely as an accomplishment vs Dick Jauron having Trent Edwards or something is setting the bar so incredibly low. We have a franchise top 5 QB now, the bar is at winning a Superbowl, and that's where McD should be judged and determining if he's the guy that can do that. 

  3. 12 minutes ago, FireChans said:

    Patchwork OL. Banged up receiving group. Some absolutely head scratching performances (Sanders and Kumerow in the anti-clutch department).

     

    we still put up 30+ against the best defense in football, and had ONE drive not end in points today (outside of the victory formation).

     

    He called a masterful game. 
     

    I wonder if McD will think twice about benching an offensive weapon like McKenzie again.


    Yup I thought Daboll was pretty good today overall. 
     

    McD…I liked that we went for it as much as we did…but a lot of that is football today and he’s just been behind. I also thought he once again called a brutally bad timeout in the 2nd half and I didn’t like giving up the possession at the end of the first half. Thankfully today those things didn’t end up hurting us but we’ve seen in the past how it can. 
     

    I don’t know who’s call it was, most likely McD’s, but benching/deactivating McKenzie was stupid from the start. I’m glad we kind of lucked into him getting this opportunity today. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  4. 7 minutes ago, njbuff said:

     

    Up two scores, 1st and 20 at the 10 and they get the ball to start the second half.

     

    I got no problem just getting to the break there.

     

    Plus, only one timeout at their 10 yard line.


    Why do we need to get to the break? They were the team reeling right there.  Pedal to the metal. We also have #17, it doesn’t matter a ton that we’re at our 10. 

  5. 29 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

    Based on that alone, it would make sense to take a wait and see approach rather than do something that can't be undone, at least to me.  

    There are many instances of negative responses to the vaccine, which is something that can be expected given the volume.  

    I see guys on here arguing about what their doctor said.  I know two doctors that are completely against it, and one doctor that has taken it, but refuses to let her children get it.  Speaking out against the vaccine publicly comes at a price, and that is even more concerning.  

    With the playoffs looming in the very near future, I think the league should level out the playing field on the protocols.  There just isn't enough evidence out there to support the discrimination.  

     


    Ultimately what it came down to for the players was weighing the desire to do what’s best for the team vs the fear of taking the shot. 
     

    Not saying one is wrong inherently right or wrong, that’s just what it boiled down to. 

    • Like (+1) 1
  6. 18 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

    https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-covid-19-tracker-week-16-tyler-huntley-dalvin-cook-among-more-than-170-players-on-covid-list/#:~:text=NFL COVID-19,Reyes (Dec. 15)

    I know everyone has their opinion, but so many people are acting as if they know more than they really do.  

    Look at this article.  They go out of their way to point out who is unvaxxed.  There are 3 players (2 being Bills) on this list.  

    I'm not a mathematician or a scientist, but based on this sample, it would indicate that the vast majority of the infected players are vaxxed.  If that is the case, and it appears to be, why are there different protocols for the vaxxed and unvaxxed?  Why are the unvaxxed being "punished" when the virus does not seem to discriminate?  

    We need these guys on the field, and league rules might prevent that at the worst possible time of the season.  

    I know some of you guys will cling to the idea that every player should fall in line, but doing that requires that you discount that players/persons belief system and right to make an informed decision based on sound information (which there seems to be very little of).  At this point, it seems like pointing the finger at the unvaxxed is a hard argument to back up.


    I think it’s moreso that those guys were aware that the penalties were greater if you’re not vaxxed and still chose not to. Even after all this time when there’s no evidence that the vaccine actually does anything negative. It may not help as much as many once thought, but it also doesn’t seem to be a threat in any way. 

×
×
  • Create New...