VW82

This is an example of hostile attribution bias among others. Instead of taking a third party’s most likely unbiased view at face value you assume they must be saying negative things because they are out to get Josh or are protecting their previous critical stance (as if they would care more about doing that than just being right).

So you think Benoit, a respected NFL writer, authors a piece exclusively about Allen, provides numerous examples of plays in it where he details not only the play designs but the coverages and reads of those plays, but he didn’t watch the games? There are many things we can point to in support of our guy but this “others don’t watch the games and I do” argument that is oft repeated on this site is such a head scratcher to me.

This article does a really good job illustrating what many of us have been trying to say wrt Josh's issues. Lots more in the link.

I suspect there are a lot of times in the NFL where the best thing to do is sit a guy out for a week, especially a young player, and have him work on his weaknesses and watch someone else do it to provide a different perspective. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen because of the politics of the game. I think this concussion provides a unique opportunity to do that with Allen. Also, just because he gets cleared doesn't mean he wouldn't be less susceptible to getting another concussion if he sat out until Miami. Like most injuries, you have a better chance of avoiding a repeat occurrence the longer you wait to test it again.

I agree there was an element of bad luck in a couple of those turnovers but also some very good luck in having one ugly INT called back and another easy INT dropped by the Jets secondary. The fact is he made a lot of mistakes vs Jets and in the end we only scored 17 points, so even though he did some things very well in that game it isn't fair or accurate to only credit him with the good stuff. I can't comment on Josh's college career but he certainly has improved since the beginning of last season. Very few would dispute that. The problem is that the areas where he struggles (accuracy, decision making, etc.) haven't improved enough to say he's now a franchise NFL QB. You seem to acknowledge this fact. The question we're left with is this: is it realistic to think he's still going to improve enough moving forward to get there? I don't know the answer to this but I've tried and struggled to come up with a recent example (as the game has changed a lot in the last 5-10 years) of a QB who only became good after multiple years of playing. In every instance I can think of the QB was either good by his second year or never got there. Eventually there will be a shallow learning curve guy who bucks this trend , and maybe it's Josh -- he certainly would fit the profile of that type of player given his talent and background -- but finding examples of that in today's NFL is becoming much tougher.

It all depends how the message is delivered. McD is eminently capable of putting a positive spin on it; something along the lines of, "Great job on getting through the protocol so quickly. You're one tough MFer! Brian and I talked it over with Terry and Kim and we've decided to play it safe on this one and go with Matt this week. That was one hell of shot you took. You're the future of this team and we want to be 100% sure we're not jeopardizing that. Plus, if we're being honest that was a rough performance Sunday. There are some things we want you to work on with Brian over the bye -- footwork, reads -- so we come back strong vs. Miami. You're doing great, just keep working." If Josh can't handle an explanation like that and loses his confidence over it then perhaps we've all misjudged him. I think it's easier to get over the idea that you're being held back than going out there and failing before you're ready.

I trust them too which given the history with Bills coaches and GMs since Levy/Polian is a strange feeling. Have to give the Pegulas props on both those hires. I also agree with the bolded for most players/positions but I think even the poorly run franchises treat franchise QBs differently. There are two issues at play here: the concussion and Josh's confidence. If he's completely free of concussion symptoms already and participates in all the meetings and practices leading up to the game then great. If he'd performed admirably prior to the hit on Sunday then there'd be no question about him starting, but that performance raised questions IMO. Not everyone learns the same way. Maybe what's best for Josh's development is to get right back in the ring, so to speak. Maybe he'd be better off watching Barkley and regrouping over the bye. Miami is a much easier opponent to come back against and should help restore that confidence of his which is arguably his best quality. The worst outcome is he comes back, performs poorly again vs. a tough Titans defense -- Baker is still having nightmares over that pass rush -- or gets concussed again, and actually starts to doubt his abilities. Maybe I'm overthinking it but we have too much invested in this kid to be putting him in positions to fail. This might be the last time we get to use an injury as an excuse for a teaching moment. All I'm saying is that McD might be wise to use it or at least consider it. If he doesn't I'm sure he'll have good reasons. Like I said, I actually trust those guys.

That’s fair though I do question how much autonomy he really has. Are we sure McD gave him play calling duties back after he took them away last year?

When the topic of conversation is my personal thoughts about something then yes. Are you or transplant or Joe seriously trying to tell me you know more about what I think than I do? As far as whether I’m right about whether Josh should play right away after being concussed or any other issue, I’m not pretending to know anything for certain. It’s just my opinion.

Love how the defense is playing. They deserve all the credit though I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that we could lose Leslie Frazier tomorrow and wouldn’t miss a beat. McD is the one calling the shots here.

Huh?? I don’t want Barkley to be the long-term starter. He’s a career back up at best. Like I said, there are multiple benefits to giving Josh the week off considering both his performance to start the year and the brutal shot to the head. There are also drawbacks to throwing him back out there too soon. Seriously what is with you guys and putting words in other people’s mouths!? Maybe stick to worrying about your own opinions because you obviously have no ability to decipher anyone else’s.

Thank you. I thought so too.

You know what's not fair? Cutting up someone's posts so you can remove context in order to misrepresent what was said. At least have the courage to quote the whole thing and bold it. Do us both a favour and stop quoting me unless/until you want to have an actual discussion that doesn't involve BS attempts to put people on blast.

No, you're not going by my post history. I challenge you to find any post of mine where I say I hate him or want him to fail. When I'm critical, it's because of something specific I've observed with his play on the field. You're taking those criticisms of his play and inferring that I must hate him and want him to fail. It's illogical. I'd understand your position better if you argued that I don't think he's any good. There's definitely evidence in my posting history of that -- for the record, I think he's raw and wild, but has incredible talent. It's anyone's guess at this point if he'll be good.

Let's be honest here. You want to believe I hate Allen so you can justify completely disregarding anything I say regardless of whether it has merit or not. I'm straight up telling you I want Allen to succeed. I'm forming my opinion on the subject of sitting/playing him Sunday based on what I think is best for him long-term as the team's starter, but rather than accept that perhaps we may have differing opinions you perform mental gymnastics to fit your anchoring bias -- that I want Allen to sit because I hate him because that's what you first thought and so you're sticking to it. It's a huge reach and definitely incorrect. You seem to also be exhibiting hostile attribution bias. Anyone with a critical view of Josh must be out to get him. It's ridiculous.

He wasn't suggesting that, nor was I. He just meant that even if Josh clears McD will likely leave it as a game time decision and force Tenn to have to prepare for both, which given the difference in styles is actually a big advantage for us.

Maybe, maybe not. Confidence is a fragile thing, especially for NFL QBs. Coming into the season Josh had it in spades. Sunday vs. Pats was the first time where it looked to me like maybe he thought he couldn't do it. Now you want to put him in against one of the best defenses in the league coming off a concussion and with less than the usual time to prepare (due to said concussion)? That sounds like a recipe for another poor performance. Also, and this is perhaps a secondary consideration, but Barkley's best attribute is making quick decisions and getting the ball out which is exactly what we need vs. Titans' D.

This can't be ruled out. Good thought.

I hear what you're saying but I don't think it needs to be that black and white. If he clears we can still dress him as QB2 and justify it by saying that it was a big hit and we wanted to be on the safe side given how important Josh is to the franchise. Plus, the team prepared with Barkley as the starter all week. So it doesn't have to publicly be about performance issues despite that being part of the issue in reality. Do you truly believe we rushed Josh back last year after the injury? Or did we maybe slow roll it a bit and use the extra time to coach him up, make sure he was 100% ready to go, and put him in a better position to succeed? I think it was the latter. That's all I'm suggesting in this case.

If he comes back and plays and gets concussed again or performs poorly, that's the kind of thing that can ruin a career. If Josh had been lighting up the Pats D on Sunday then I'd agree you bring him back as soon as he clears assuming the coaching staff feels like he's prepared and ready to go. The fact he was so out of sorts prior to the hit suggests he might need a little extra time. Bills have a lot invested in this kid. It's not just about one game with him.

The thing with concussions is you never really know. Josh can get cleared by the best neurologists on the planet. It's still an educated guess. Like I said, there's also the added benefit of letting him watch and learn for a week. That was a brutal performance on Sunday and he's struggled at times in the other games too. Maybe sitting out a week will help him learn that every possession counts.

It would be insanely dumb IMO to play Josh on Sunday. Even if he's able to clear concussion protocol prior to game time why not give him the game off and be 100% sure he's OK. Bring him back after the bye vs Miami and let him find his feet against a weak opponent. You also have the added benefit of letting him watch and learn, and take the necessary time to digest that Pats loss and his up and down start to the year. It worked last year.

I think Dabol deserves a tonne of credit for how he's handled Josh and the offense this year. I had no problem with his actions on the sideline Sunday. What's he supposed to do? Josh was single-handedly losing the game for the team. It's not like Dabol was all over him right away either -- he waited until like the tenth screw up to really get on his case. If anything he should have got on him sooner. I especially liked the way Dabol audibled away from the game plan in the second quarter when it was clear Josh was in deer-in-headlights mode, and put the ball in Gore's hands to slow the game down and give the defense a breather. Then, after a lively pep talk at halftime, he put the ball back in Josh's hands to start the 3rd. He showed faith. Unfortunately Allen just didn't have it Sunday. Dabol deserves heavy praise for the way he handled a very tricky situation. Sometimes I wonder whether I'm watching the same team as everyone else.

I still have the game tape and there's nothing in that play which would suggest he got concussed. He saw Van Noy coming, turned and braced himself for the hit. His helmet did not bounce off the turf. I just watched this play like five times in a row to make sure. Ninkovic's knee grazes the side of his helmet when he flies by after the play is over but I'd be surprised if that's what did it. I'm not saying he wasn't or couldn't have been concussed on that play -- Morse had concussion-like symptoms from non-contact drills in training camp -- but there's no smoking gun there based on video evidence of the actual play. I suppose there's lots of evidence afterward depending how you want to view his performance.

The helmet to helmet part of it was flagged for unnecessary roughness. I'm not sure what else you expect the league to do unless you're advocating for completely removing hitting from the game. I have a feeling if it was Hide and Poyer hitting Lamar Jackson we'd be arguing the other side of it. Josh wasn't defenseless. His forward progress had not been stopped. He was not on the ground or still in the air after catching a pass. He was not being held up by a tackler. It was a bang, bang play. I think some of you guys are being a little unrealistic about how fast the game moves and how little time there is for players to adjust. Josh got hit twice in the span of less than a second -- the first one changed his momentum and the angle of impact of the second hit. It really was bad luck more than anything.