The Red King

Is it? Points surrendered...the three terrible games bolded. Keep in mind the defense did this even given the number of 3-and-outs we had. That was one tired D that could have thrown the towel in, but didn't. vs. Jets: 12, Panthers: 9, Broncos: 16, Falcons: 17, Bengals: 20, Bucs: 27, Raiders: 14, Jets: 34, Saints: 47, Chargers: 54, Chiefs: 10, Pats: 23, Colts: 7, Dolphins: 16, Pats: 37, Dolphins: 16, Jags: 10 Aside from that three game collapse, the D gave up an average of 16.7 points a game, despite being stranded out on the field by our ineffective offense. First Pats game was 9-3 at halftime, second was 13-13. Those three games aside, you don't think that defense played wonderfully?

Oh, to be clear, while I still predict 9-7, I openly admit there can be regression and do not attack/insult people who suggest there might be (people who say there will is another story...I hate opinion states as fact). I fully respect people that put them around six wins even if I don't agree with them. Two wins, while technically possible, is just silly (and if they win two or less games I'll openly admit I was wrong). Buffalo plays Miami and the Jets twice, and those two game alone are normally worth 2-3 wins. So, the argument is either Buffalo will win two against those two teams, and fail to beat any other team...or Buffalo won't even win two of four against those two. Now, I realize the Jets drafting a rookie QB automatically makes them a much-improved, better then Buffalo team by default (wait, did I forget /sarcasm tag?), but still...

Click-bait idiocy. This year's "The Bills season is over before it started." Seriously, did a Buffalo Bill pee in this guy's cereal or something at some point? ?

You took a shot at me, as if using common football terms were akin to using quantum physics. So I simplified it. No high horse here. Good lord, indeed. *shrugs*

...heaven forbid I use something confusing like common football terms to explain. Lemmie try again... Our QB will throw the brown thing deep this season. That means the people in football uniforms that don't match Buffalo will have to play further back. That means less of them at the line of scrim...sorry...that line the ball stars on each play...and that means less people right on top of the runn...sorry...the Bills player that carries the ball. This will make it easier to run. Better? I can draw a picture if it will help, but I hope this is good enough. No square roots or dog's tails.

Look at points surrendered. There was a horrific three-game stretch, the other thirteen they did wonderfully. They held the Jags to ten points in their own stadium. They kept the Bills in both NE games for a full three quarters when the offense did absolutely zilch. Nine points surrendered in a loss to Carolina, another playoff team. You still want to claim it wasn't a great defense? Shifting gears to the run game. Yes, the running game had hiccups. That's to be expected when your QB refuses to throw deep allowing the defense to stack everyone in the box like a poker player pushing his chips all-in. Regardless which QB plays this year, they should at least stretch the field, forcing opposing defenses to play more honestly, giving our running backs something other then a brick wall to run into every down.

Still appreciate what they did, and will continue to pull for them until they get in our way. ?

Rodak said the Bills' season was over before it started last year and has yet to eat a feather. There will be no crow, as there is no accountability.

It seems like an easy enough job if all the other media outlets are an example. Predict Buffalo to go 4-12, mention trading Tyrod as a positive, yet penalize the team. Question Allen no matter what he does...exaggerate the negative, question the positive. Generate click-bait by simulating contraversy and rile up fans. ...that about covers it, right? XD

Utterly absurd. The Bills went 9-7 last year with a new head coach. They went 9-7 thanks to the strong play of their defense. They leaned hard on the D and prayed the O put up enough points to win. That defense has a year under their belt in this system and personnel changes have only made the unit stronger. The crutch the team leaned on is all the stronger, yet we're somehow going to drop from 9 wins to 2? Defense alone will win us at least four games this season, if not more. I know the offense has people nervous and doubting, but let's be honest, the offense wasn't our strong suit anyway last season.

Regarding Gronk, a soldier can still kill a man with a combat knife or his bare hands, should someone knock the gun out of his hands. I still like my chances a lot better if the soldier doesn't have the gun. Saying the Pats can still win without Gronk is akin to saying a soldier can kill without a gun. Yes, technically true, but a hell of a lot harder to pull off.

Let's get daring... 1) Edmunds is DROY. 2) AJM is the starting QB unless injured or the Bills are eliminated from playoff contention, at which point Allen will step in. 3) The Bills win one of two games against the Patriots.

Help is there, he had the opportunity to take it, and instead mocked the idea (and one person offering help) publically on Twitter. So, I see both sides. I can give him a bit of a pass based on mental illness, but can still fault him for rejecting the help so many offered.

Still the same owner, still the same coach. Really, nothing more any of us can say to sway the others at this point. We all have opinions, time will tell who is right. Regardless, this will be a fun thread to revisit halfway into the season. I hold to my earlier prediction. Cleveland wins six, Buffalo wins nine.

Nothing new here. D is improved...offense, that comes down to QB, the ultimate ?. I don't think we downgraded. I think AJ will at least be on par with TT. But that's the crux. I don't know for sure, nobody does. Your opinion on past and current QBs make all the difference here. Personally, I see an improved D and an offense at least on-par with last year, and younger faces to boot...so I see a better team. But that's my opinion, nothing more.

No, his bias does that. He is a known Pats fan who takes every opportunity to take shots at the Bills, especially after choking on the crow he was forced to eat last season when he said the Bills season was over before it started. If he ever actually says anything positive about the Bills in an article, you better believe there is just as much negative in there as well.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Time will tell which of us was right. This is going to be a fun thread to revisit halfway into the season. I have never seen anyone, nonetheless so many people, pick an 0-16 team to win 8+ games the following season.

Which is another area of concern. You add that many players, it takes time for everyone to gel. That's why I see them as a force in 2019, not 2018. Drastic, one year turnarounds are incredibly rare. I won't pull a Rodak and say it can't happen. All I'm saying is that in my opinion it's all a bit premature, wishful thinking. The Browns are a 1-31 team until they show they're not. People seem ready to christen them a legitimate threat in the AFC already based solely on offseason moves.

It doesn't matter what receivers he would have had if he never threw to them. He didn't have the best receivers last season, true, but even when they did get open he'd often still fail to throw it. Unless his receiver was 100% open, in the clear, he wouldn't throw to them. It's a fear/limitation I hope he overcomes in his time with Cleveland, as that fear played a large part in his ineffectiveness last season.

I still love how some people are so quick to buy into a team going from 1-15 to 0-16 suddenly becoming playoff contenders after a few "sexy" off-season acquisitions while still under the same head coach. Isn't this the same thing I've heard about the Browns the last two years? And how did that work out for them? Do you really expect them to go "zero-to-hero"? Going from zero wins to 4-6 wins would be an accomplishment, a solid season. 7-8 wins would be a stunning turnaround. 9+ would be a miracle. I do see the Browns contending for a playoff spot...the season after this one.

It's ego. The players know they have options. It's just the typical "What? You think I'm a f'ing lightweight? I can drive!" *crash* Hell with taxi cards, if I'm an owner I'd install breathalizers in the ignition of every players' car. >.<

Never said I wanted him to lose his job. We're talking about people making a living here. However, I simply maintain that the man is extremely biased, and what he says has to be taken with a grain of salt, that's all. I don't just want good news, or people pandering to me. The truth though, is that in Rodak's articles on the Bills, there is always as much negative, if not more, then positive. It's more then a trend, it's a constant. I quickly learned to take absolutely nothing he says at face value as a result. Then when he stupidly went out and said the Bills' season was over before it started last year...not presented as an opinion, no "I think..." or "It looks like..." ...nope, the season was most definitely over, any respect I had for him or anything he wrote, went out the window. I remember telling myself, "Man, I really hope the Bills make the playoffs this season so I can use this to smack that smirk off your face!"...and lucky me, exactly that happened. The Bills made him eat his words and look like an absolute tool. I giggle more then I should every time I think about it. If the man wrote a few positive articles, I wouldn't mind the negatives. But let's be honest, at this point the Bills could go 19-0, win the Super Bowl 52-0, and Rodak would still criticize the Bills for something asinine like putting the second string in too early, or not early enough. It's just who he is...and my point remains, you need to keep that in mind when reading his articles. I said nothing about the man losing his job. Not sure where you got that from.

If he quit because of Allen, he's an idiot. ...that being said, I don't believe for a moment this was because of Allen. The draft is simply an excuse. He had to have other reasons for wanting out.

Bolded it for you. Basically, you will never find a Rodak article about the Bills where the positives outweigh the negatives. He's biased, moreso now after looking like a chump for his "over before it started" prophecy. In this case, I was shocked to see an equal mix of pro and con, rare for him.

Not everyone is polorized. I'm quite the opposite. TT was the ultimate baseline. He never took a risk. Ever. Not taking risks kept him from losing game through mistakes, but kept him from winning games with big plays. He was able to do enough to get us to the playoffs, and not enough to win a playoff game where the opposing team scored just 10 points. TT elevates bad teams and drags good teams down. Last season the Bills finally outgrew him. However, the 1-31 Browns are the perfect team for him. He can elevate them to mediocrity, and by the time the Browns outgrow him, their rookie should be ready to go. That lack of risk-taking did catch up to him, though. When time is almost expired and you need a comeback, a winning drive, well...you have to bite the bullet and take chances. TT couldn't, or wouldn't, and that's why his 4th quarter comeback numbers are so terrible.