The Red King

Misdirection and constant pressure. Force the QBs to make quick reads and decisions until they show they can beat it.

So...sounds like we're not really anywhere different. Sounds like AJ is consistant, without the "wow" factor. Peterman is still struggling with zipping the ball in, and Allen is a rookie WIP. ...honestly, not really surprised. Some of our recievers appear to be surprising (in a good way), so there's that.

It was an actual, official rule back then. The home crowd couldn't be too noisy, so the visitors could still communicate. Found it...was introduced in 1989... http://articles.latimes.com/1989-03-22/sports/sp-219_1_winter-meetings Shula had a hand in it...imagine that. ?

That was a great trip down memory lane, thanks for it. But man, I had completely forgotten that asinine rule the NFL had in place back then where the crowd wasn't allowed to be too loud, and players couldn't encourage fans to make noise. I mean, that was definitely a rule for the WTF book, glad we don't have anything that silly these days. Seriously, asking the home crowd to keep it down? ?

"Wait...look what Peterman's doing with his helmet! Is that allowed?"

...until Tyrod doesn't throw to him. XD I'm fascinated that a team that went 0-16 is getting more love and higher marks from the press then a team that went 9-7 and broke a decades-long playoff drought. Just what's in that Cleveland Kool-Aid? ...zero to hero, I suppose...

Um...what? ? Thanks all, this is what I was curious about, opinion-wise. There is a tendency to give teams that were good the benefit of the doubt and a bit of a pass because they've been good. And, equally, we're prone to knock teams that were bad even when showing improvement. There is a part of our mind that expects a team to "fall back to form". I think we're seeing that even now when several outlets predict the Bills, a 9-7 playoff team last season, will only win 2-4 games. The idea being...they'll resume sucking because they're the Bills, and the Bills suck.

It just occurred to me. If the Bills somehow come out of the gate on fire, for example 5-2, what will the news stories be? The Bills have jumped out to big starts in the past, but the drought has always dominated the headlines..."Will the Bills Make the Playoffs?", "Will the Bills End the Drought?". Well...the drought is over. So I'm more wondering how the media would handle a Bills team coming off a 9-7 playoff year roaring to an early start in 2018. Would they see a team that was good last season continuing the trend and talk about the improvements? Or would they be mired in memories of the drought waiting, like some fans even, for the other shoe to drop...refusing to give them credit because, well, they're the Bills! In the beginning it was easy to hand wave away some of the bad things happening to the Bills because hey, Super Bowls! I think we might see the flip side of that now, hand waving away Bills improvements and accomplishments because hey, drought!

Actually, I have no issue with that. But when people point to the luck factor, most do so in a way that does throw out the effort, saying it was just luck, or that the Bills were lucky to get there. Every team needs a few lucky breaks here and there. Would NE have made the Super Bowl if they didn't have home field? Home field provided by a win against Pittsburgh that was no less lucky then the Bengals win. Yet people aren't talking about how NE was lucky to get home field. I get it. It's Buffalo. There is high resistance to giving this team credit. Given its play during the drought it's easy to assume the worst about this team and given the length of the drought it's easier to attribute making the playoffs to luck rather then actual ability. But that isn't fair to last season's squad. They did overachieve, yes. And I'll admit, they got some breaks. But there is a difference between saying the Bills got a bit of luck, and saying the Bills only made the playoffs due to luck.

So, you don't think there will be signifigant public backlash from parent and activist groups should the NFL condone it? Even if the general public is more accepting, there would still be a massive backlash from a vocal minority. Would the NFL want to face that?

Again, it's not about right or wrong, it's about public opinion. The NFL already has PR nightmares (see Anthem Protests), they're not going to outright condone pot right now when the backlash from parents and activist groups would be scathing. I'm curious, do you not think there would be severe backlash, or do you think the NFL would push through despite it?

And here I thought hard work, tough defensive play and making just enough plays got us to nine wins. Silly me, the playoff fairy decended from above and waved her wand, turning a 2-14 team into a playoff team. Always vexes me how people handwave away the Bills hard work and effort last season, attributing everything to pure luck. Buffalo put themselves in a position to take advantage. That wasn't luck. That was Baltimore making a mistake that showed they were not a playoff team. The same kind of boneheaded plays the Bills have made in past seasons. That D was good enough for nine wins, and this D looks to be better, so I stand by my prior statement.

That's the interesting part. Despite facing all those terrible stats people mentioned above, we made the playoffs! So, even if our defense is the same as last year, and personally I think they'll actually be better, so long as our offense plays as good as or better then last year (lot of question marks, but not a high bar to cross) then this team could well ride its defense into the playoffs again. The offensive weapons get added this upcoming off-season.

There is a difference between pre-existing, like the NBA, and changing, which the NFL would be doing. Is it hypocritical? Maybe. But you know the moment the NFL makes that change the media would blast it, noting the "NFL Goes Green...Condones Pot!" Parent groups would get whipped into a frenzy like a poked beehive. The backlash would be enormous.

Good lord. He might be a bust, he might be a star. We won't know until the bullets fly. I want a good QB. Not just a QB with good stats. A good QB, one that wins games. McBeane saw the same stats we did, the same scouting reports, the same metrics, and they drafted Allen anyway. They obviously think they can tweak what needs tweaked, and that he can hit his huge potential. Time and again last season, the Bills made moves that had us screaming and questioning, but what did it get us? A playoff birth, and a buttload of draft picks. In my eyes that earns them the benefit of the doubt. There has been a plan here, and calculated moves with benefits that weren't immediately obvious. That, and I'm a damn Bills' fan. All together, that means I'm going to support the kid and see what they can do with him. Am I saying he can't fail? Not at all. I just see no reason to automatically assume McBeane has no idea what they're doing and condemn the young QB to the trash heap before he takes a single snap.

When you are slandering someone, everything is blown out of proportion.

That's utterly unfair! Prior to this we had a president assassinated here, iirc.

So, despite his friend serving her child, the ex claims he never asked her to leave? ...and I'm sure McCoy is all like...

Just a matter of tossing one of several quantifiers out there. "I believe...", "In my opinion...", "I honestly expect to see...", "What I think...", replace "when the" with "should the" ...anything that changes it from sounding like an absolute.

...actually, the broadcasters themselves, on multiple occasions, pointed out when Bills' receivers were wide open and Tyrod just didn't throw to them for some reason. They even mused and wondered aloud why TT didn't throw to them. Sorry, that loss is 99% on Tyrod.

Way too many assumptions going on here. Some people are already assuming Shady did it. Some are already assuming he was framed. Some people assuming that if you consider the idea she either set this up herself or took an unrelated attack and lied to blame Shady at least plausible that you are a horrible human being for even considering such a possibility. Some people are assuming that if you suggest there might be a possibility McCoy was set up that, by default, you are blaming the victim and are a horrible human being. And far too many people assuming others have already made up their minds, even if they specifically say they want to wait for some real evidence to appear before deciding one way or the other. That this woman was beaten is absolutely horrible, regardless of who did it. At the same time, that beating in no way sways my opinion on whether or not McCoy was involved...an opinion that has, and continues to remain "There is nowhere near enough (if any) evidence to determine whether or not McCoy was involved and I refuse to declare him innocent or guilty until we have enough evidence to determine that." I refuse to join a lynch mob based solely on hear-say and speculation. If that makes me an uncaring monster, so be it. It is plausible that Shady did it. It is plausible someone did it on his behalf unbidden, it is plausible the attack was completely unrelated and she's lying to frame McCoy. And the least likely, yet still slightly plausible possibility is she did this to herself, or had someone do it to her...so she could frame McCoy. Four completely plausible possibilities and as of yet, no way to discredit any of them. So, wild as this sounds, why don't we just let the police do their job and come to conclusions based on fact and evidence, rather then bias and conjecture?

So, to be clear...should he be cleared of all these allegations, you won't be coming back? ?

Friendly Reminder: Nothing has been proven in this case, and there has yet to be any hard evidence presented against him. Before I pass judgement on McCoy, I'm going to wait and see what facts come out of this. But if you want to jump the gun, make assumptions and prematurely declare him guilty based on nothing more then here-say, you do you.

Yep, just walk away. MURPHD6 was proven wrong and still has yet to provide any proof his definition of 'plausible' is correct. He's spinning his wheels. Lemmie help illustrate the differences... Possible: Bills get 16 wins Plausible: Bills get 10-12 wins Probable: Bills get 6-9 wins