Johnnycage46

Agreed. Suppose it's the same for most events the media report on. The more news I watch the more bitter I become...mostly sad, depressing, or frustrating news. But as you both said...plenty of good out there.

Refreshing news to highlight instead of the usual negative sports stories put out by the media.

This. There is no such thing as backing into the playoffs. I and other have said it in other threads but imagine if the Bengals and Ravens game from Week 17 had been played earlier in the season and some other game was during Week 17 that had no barring on the Bills playoffs...then it is win and in for the Bills...which they did. The pass from Dalton to Boyd, while improbable at the time, and an amazing way for the Bills to get into the playoffs (with the whole Bills team watching it unfold), was magical to see...BUT the Bills did not back in to the playoffs. It seems the same people who can't even be happy about the Bills making the playoffs last year are the type of people who would win the lottery...and then say, "yeah, but I picked the numbers randomly and I backed in to winning the lottery...so this SUCKS!"

The candy that keeps on giving lol. Part of the fun of eating them are the "seconds"

Housed a box of those Saturday night.

Yes...because the line got him concussed.

And the line finally gets Allen !@#$ing injured. What a **** show by the front 5. They should be ashamed.

Honestly...why not challenge that in preseason Mcd?

Thats too bad, I always thought he was one of the more pragmatic and reasonable refs.

Probably reaching and giving the benefit of the doubt because he came from New England...which is ironic considering their coordinators haven't fared so well after leaving the friendly confines of have Tom Brady and Bill Belichick.

I actually think that boils it down for me. Callers are sometimes nervous and aren't ready to be on air and they do NOT make it any easier. It reminds me of athletes or other entertainers who couldn't give two @#$%@ about their fans...the fans MAKE you what you are (i.e. getting paid). As the great Michael Scott once said...don't listen to your critics...listen to your fans!

I can respect that approach but it's very hard to do that as he just has such an arrogant, crappy attitude. I tuned in on the way home earlier this week to see if they had a guest on or if any news was breaking and a caller was telling his story about some potato chip thing Schopp and Bulldog had been talking about and the caller said something kind of embarrassing and finished his call by saying "ok, you guys can feel free to rip me limb from limb, I'll hang up and listen now"...and Schopp just HAD to respond with "Ok, THAT didn't need to be said...of COURSE we know we can comment on whatever we want". What a crap person. Did that NEED to be said? I think all the listeners know its Schopp and Bulldog's show and they can say what they want but it just comes off as so arrogant.

I actually couldn't disagree more. I think Sal C, while a homer to an extent is still very pragmatic. Schopp just seems to think HE knows more about how to run an NFL team with his nerdy stats and analytics than actual NFL coaches and front offices. I think his take on culture is way off base. An example of how bad culture can be a factor in a team is likely what people are seeing in Hard Knocks this season. The Browns culture seems to suck as far as discipline, accountability, etc. If you start a new job and you come in late and you take extra long lunches and you leave early and maybe cut corners elsewhere as well and your boss doesn't even care, that is probably an example of where culture can be a relevant aspect of a workplace's (team's) success. I don't think culture automatically equates to wins, but if you look at what McD has brought to the Bills and you think culture doesn't matter I honestly don't think you WANT to believe that culture matters (i.e. you are purposely down playing it to fit your original argument). Just my take. Also, I do NOT get why fans of a team X...don't like people who are homers (i.e. fans of team X)...isn't that the whole point...being one group who likes the same team. Its so frustrating that some people seem to just want to be contrarian for the sake of it (i.e. Slopp...oops I meant Schopp).

I can get on board with this. You see this a lot in everyday life. Some people are intelligent, come from a good family, went to a good school, and appear on paper as though they have a bright future...but maybe they are smart...but lazy and just settle for an ordinary life. I think analytics can be like this sometimes. Its obviously not an exact comparison but I think analytics will probably always work GENERALLY...but as you said, some case-by-case scenarios don't fit within its parameters of analysis. Here's to hoping this is the case with Josh Allen! That may be true...from a numbers perspective...but stats only tell one part of the story. Did a QB throw a pass 1 yard in the air and the receiver broke some tackles and went 30 yards...crediting the QB with a 30+ yard completion. From watching Josh Allen thus far, I would say he is NOTHING like EJ Manuel. You can compare any game's stats and try to say they are the same but the devil is in the details.

I agree to an extent, but with Tyrod we saw many examples over the last 3 years from all 22 reviews where guys were open and he either didn't see them or was afraid to rip it. I think the fantasy with Tyrod is more delusional because there is a lot of NFL tape out there that would indicate he will be a .500 QB and a game manager-esque QB. I think the Josh Allen hype is purely wishful thinking with little real NFL tape to show how he will do.

I can't believe I watched the whole thing but it was fun rooting for the oddball 5 to 0 final score. He did have a nice play moving to his left and then escaping back to his right and a deep dime to Clay against Atlanta that led to a TD. In fairness that play was sweet.

Fair enough and I can respect that.

That is all well and good but the take of "newbie has to start his own thread. LOOK AT ME" is what I was reacting to. It's the equivalent of picking at someone's grammar during a debate over physics. It just seems unnecessary and irrelevant. Edit: just to be clear my take is only regarding the idea that new posters are somehow illequipped, by default, to hold an intelligent debate. I need a safe space stat

Newbie to a message board but likely not a newbie to planet earth. This has nothing to do with the thread starter's post but it is insane how people think that a person who just joined a message board or has limited posts is somehow less qualified to post or comment than someone who has a ton of posts. You do realize that people exist outside of message boards right? We have thoughts and ideas even though we may not post them. To dismiss someone's take due to them being new to a message board is pathetic and something I have never understood. And yes I am also a newbie to the message board but not to life

What a pile of spoiled pumpkin f@$#÷=s Imagine being THAT dejected after losing a Super Bowl...after having won 2 of the last 3...and having 5 total championships in the last 17 years (averaging 1 about every 3 years). Jesus.

I never got that when he said it during the draft...accuracy in large part is due to mechanics...which CAN be taught.

To Mike Tolbert

Oh it's a thing....and its warranted. He is a punk and seems like crap teammate. The type that would be upset the team scored because HE didn't score.

A soldier and a raper guy