Avisan

Should we care whether or not we have somebody that takes over games if our offense scores 34? We spread the ball around, had high passing efficiency, and scores a bunch of points. Why is that not the objective?

Bro they scored 20 points on offense with a phantom penalty assist spotting them at least 4-- were you expecting the '85 Bears?

Hi, I was promised incompetent receiver play and an offense that can't score-- I did not get what I ordered, where do I submit for a refund?

ThE dEfEnSe Is A pRoBlEm Bro did you notice we won the game or are you operating under the assumption we lost? Y'all are unbelievable.

?????????? ????????????????????

I, for one, am absolutely shocked that the Venn Diagram of people who have a problem with this approach and people who apparently think they can beat up Sean McDermott is a circle.

Yeah. Andreessen needs time to season but he flashed genuine NFL talent as a UDFA without having spent much time in a major college program. Very good chance another team would have taken a flyer on him had we not kept him.

I mean I'm sure some other combo theoretically could have, but ultimately he did nothing of note on the field after leaving Buffalo.

I'm not sure where the disconnect is? Fitz and Stevie had very good chemistry which allowed them to be very productive outside of the bounds of typical play structure. Typical play structure in the modern era is highly regimented in terms of timing and exactly where players are on the field. That structure is what allows players to be "schemed open" on a given play. Johnson was effective as the #1 option in an offense helmed by a QB that could freestyle with him, but was not nearly as effective outside of that setting.

We aren't really discussing Diggs' career, though, right? This is a discussion regarding the Bills' offensive output this year using last year's performances as a data point, is it not?

@JauronimoDiggs was objectively awful during the Brady stretch of the season. ~44 yards per game on ~8 targets per game. It was rough. This is not the rhetorical hill to die on.

Odd reaction to a factual answer to a fact-based question.

Cain, as mentioned. Haven't seen him reported as cut, yet.

Stevie was often to the spot late and not necessarily at the right spot. Fitzpatrick had a very good sense of when/where Stevie would come open and could get him the ball anyway. Very strong connection, and very difficult to defend. Also not something every OC and their systems can/will tolerate. It places a severe importance on mutual execution outside of the design of the play.

It just means they are reporting second-hand and are not directly privy to the interactions of involved parties.

Man. 34 mil per year is STEEP. That's a pretty big chunk of the cap for one player. Wild how much the top end of contracts has exploded.

The Chiefs gave us an excellent upgrade in draft capital. One could say the same to them.

Being abrasive isn't usually distressing, fam, it's just off-putting And it's notable that frequently folks who are not in favor of McDermott continuing to be head coach seem unable to just have that opinion without making an inherently personal comment, mild or otherwise, towards those who do not share their opinion

I mean frankly posts like this are a huge part of the issue-- not wanting to fire McDermott does not mean that people are "enchanted" by him using any conceivable definition of the word. It's an inherently antagonistic framing that diminishes the quality of conversation, and has zero cleverness to boot.

It means you have an opinion? But that opinion is no more true than anyone else's, and nobody really has the data to back a given position up, either. All coaches have shortcomings and make mistakes, and winning vs. losing a given game dramatically affects the level of scrutiny a coach will fall under (even if the winning head coach made more head coaching mistakes during the game). McDermott has had some very visible errors that have led to losses in the playoffs, but there have also been some pretty outlandish circumstances (Texans game, for example) and discrepancies in player performance (last year's Chiefs game). Reid is now a HoF-bound coach, but he was long considered a choker that couldn't handle the big game. The Manning/Coughlin Giants were middling teams that got hot/lucky at the right times with good enough position group matchups to take down the GOAT dynasty twice. The whole thing is just kind of a crapshoot, so any given opinion on the matter is just our own howling into the void.

Except those "hard truths" are always something like "Beane is a bad GM," "McDermott is a failure of a coach wasting Josh Allen's career," "The Bills are going to struggle to move the ball at all," "The Bills will go 7-10 and miss the playoffs," etc. And the kicker is that the objective data we have available to try to evaluate the potential truth of these subjective statements is, without fail, mixed or antithetical to those "hard truths" being doomed around the board. The ACTUAL hard truth is that the Bills are by all reasonable estimations a well-run football organization and one of the most objectively successful teams not named the Chiefs for the past five years, and that winning a Superbowl is really, really hard when you have to go through a dynasty in your conference to even get to the big game in the first place.

Yeah. Not, well, good, but adequate. Obviously we wouldn't be throwing 500+ passes to Mack Hollins, but when pressed into service he is, in fact, serviceable. I liked things better when he was looking like he would be our #5, and not our #2.

Taron Johnson is just an absurdly good football player. Dang.

The last time Hollins was pressed into service was 2022 for the Raiders, and he was perfectly adequate. Per target averages just under Allen's 2023 per-attempt averages.

Steelers are in extremely rough shape at the QB position.