JoshAllenHasBigHands

The LA study was the first one, I think. I know there have been others that concluded similarly. https://news.usc.edu/170565/covid-19-antibody-study-coronavirus-infections-los-angeles-county/

Really? You haven't seen any of the studies indicating that a sizable portion of the population contracted COVID-19, but went undiagnosed until antibody testing started?

Its hard to believe there are people out there that care so much about football that they take the time to post on a message board, but can simultaneously just so fundamentally have no idea what a head coach does, why McD is a very good coach, and think that getting a team with a 17 year playoff drought to the playoffs in two of his first three years is a, frankly, historic accomplishment.

I think Edmunds would be a better OLB than MLB. However, I think the Buffalo Bills defense is better because he an MLB, and not an OLB. Edmunds isn't just a rare talent because he can chase TEs and slot WRs down the seam. He is amazing because his size and speed deters QBs from throwing over the middle, and pushes everything underneath and down the seams. I don't think any other LB in the league could do that. That skill is more valuable than anything else he brings to the table, and it will never be captured in the stat sheets. Fans will never appreciate, except when once a year or so a Cover1 or other x/o junkie writes some not-so-circulated article about just that.

I don't know if I would say pretty good, but he is way better than he is treated on this board. Still, I love this take.

Edmunds is a fun player because he is so polarizing. Though not so much the case today, this time last year a large contingent considered him a terrible MLB, if not a bust. In the end, it sort of boils down to what you think a MLB should be: a thumper from the 1990s or a pass defender of the modern game. If you think this is a passing league, and you think what he does clogging up space in coverage is more important than filling the gap, you tend to think Edmunds is a phenomenal player. If you think MLB's primary purpose is to run stop, you probably think he is average.

The 2 for 1 is built on around the idea that, regardless of the first possession's outcome, both teams are each left with one more possession. The success of that first possession does not impact the outcome of either teams subsequent possessions. The same is not true in football where, if you have a turnover, you create a possession for the opposing team that they would not otherwise have, thereby increasing their chance to score. The logic of going for the score only makes sense if you are relying on the analytics, without any consideration of the context of the game. I cannot express just how stupid this basketball comparison is.

There are situations when you should, and there are situations when you should not. It is easy to say you should always go for the points because the more possessions, the more scores. It is also true that the more possessions, the more turnovers; or, the more possessions, the more 3 and outs. Alot of things can happen, and its the coach's job to read the situation. That doesn't mean just the math, that means reading your team, reading your QB, reading the other team. There are myriad factors that require consideration that cannot be captured in just applying a mathematical formula. I guarantee McD considers all those issues.

Yeah, those two are not situations are not at all the same. There are plenty of situations where running out the clock at the end of the half is advisable. To say it is not up for debate is just wrong.

WR: McBeane inherited a unit that would not have been a top 5 unit but required tens of millions per year in contracts. The unit isn't just good "on paper." Our top three WRs each finished in the top 32 of one or more categories for WRs. Show me another unit that can boast the same. RB: It isn't a head scratcher, at all. Singletary didn't get more touches because he was a rookie, and the staff clearly wasn't comfortable unloading that much responsibility on a RB. That could be right or wrong, but the answer is obvious. TE: The hardest part about drafting a TE is finding someone with the athletic ability and intellectual know how to play the position. He has that. Drops are a big deal, agreed. But they are not uncommon for rookies and players often grow out of it. QB: The Mahomes thing was a mistake; I thought you meant 2017, not 2018. My bad. The rest is gibberish. Sure, JA hasn't to compare to other QBs in the league. However, QB has a relatively long learning curve. QBs in their first and second year are held to different standards than vet QBs. I mean, does that even need to be said? The offense as a whole was not good enough last year. But did anyone really think it wouldn't be? It was an entirely rebuilt unit. The QB, a guy having the reputation of being the biggest project QB to come into the league in years, played his first full year; they had 9 new starters; and they hadn't rookies all over the offense. The offense performed exactly as well as offenses in that position do. Does it need to be better next year? Yes. Was last year cause for indictment? Absolutely not.

It is all about framing. WR: We went from one a bottom 5 WR corps to a top 5 WR corps, despite the fact that none of those guys are playing on top 10 WR contracts. There is no scenario where this is not considered an overwhelming success. RB: McCoy was not good after he was traded, and he walked into the year expecting to be the #1. That was not a recipe for success. As far as Singletary's touches, the issue was clearly trust. Right or wrong, the coaches did not want to put too much on the rookie's shoulders. You can tell because Gore always got the handoffs in situations where we could not afford a fumble. Either way, as it sits, we now have two RBs (on rookie deals), one of whom is a proven producer. That is ideal management. TE: Knox was already one of the best rookie TEs in the league. Take out the drops, and he is already one of the better TEs in the league. TE is tough because there is so much bust at the position, and it is rarely worth a high pick. I'm not sure how much more they could have done. If they bound themselves with bad contracts, it would be one thing, but they haven't. OL: They have an above average OL, have one guy on a major deal, and are returning all 5 starters. There only weak point is a guy who just finished their rookie season. Again, that is a best case scenario. QB: Drafting Mahomes would have been awesome! But I can't take anyone seriously that suggests that they were in the wrong for not drafting Mahomes. That is some real hindsight is 20/20 stuff. Completely unreasonable. As far as his "peers." Aside from Jackson, he is the best QB of the group.

It is pretty incredible that anyone could call McD hard headed. He fired his first OC, spent tremendous resources rebuilding the entire offense, and gave up in a reasonable amount of time on offensive players that he brought in but did not pan out. I can't even wrap my head around what he would have to be to not be considered "hard headed."

I'll be honest, I didn't realize he had those stats on third and long. They are much better than I thought; I was, after all, going off of his performance against the Bills and in big games. The remainder continues to miss the point, however. This isn't a stat debate. This is a play style/coordination debate. His passing success flows from how defenses have to play him. If he is injured, and not able to run, he will fail. Teams don't play nickel and dime defenses against him, because they play so many 2/3 TE sets and because he is always a threat to run. Those sets are on the field, even when he doesn't go off play action.

Lamar isn't a good passer. His running forced defenses to run heavy sets, leaving his WRs in isolation and TEs with mismatches. Play action in this setting left him with wide open receivers and ample opportunity for yac. Though the situation rarely came up because they gained so many 1st and 2nd down yards, Lamar fell apart in 3rd and distance situations, where he had to complete a pass to get the first down. This was because there were more guys in coverage, and more DBs than in base sets. JA didn't hit the deep ball, but he was as good as you can hope for on intermediate passes, which is where all those passer traits you look for in a QB really come into play--arm strength, decision making, reading the defense. JA may not be better than Lamar, but that's only because he can't run like Lamar.

This just fundamentally misunderstands passing defense, how offenses works, and Lamar Jackson and Josh Allen's short comings.

I don't like talking about it, and I'm usually the type to furiously argue the positive side of things. That said, I don't have a hard time imagining us falling apart this year. We barely beat some bad teams last year. The opposition is much stronger this year. The Jets and Dolphins will not be the same pushovers they were last year. The Pats will still be good--not just because of BB, but because their defense was so good last year and still above average this year. There are a bunch of good and strong arguments why everything I just said could be flipped upside down. I'm just saying its not crazy to think that things fall apart next year.

You should have let the 7-5 v. 7-4 go. You lose alot of credibility defending bad arguments. All that being said, do you also therefore agree that Lamar Jackson is just a flash in the pan?

You are right. I'll be super honest--I can't mentally differentiate 7th round from UDFA. I know a 7th rounder is drafted, but barely...

Daryll Johnson has to be a cut - He is an UDFA, and we have a ton of DEs in front of him. Maybe he'll beat out Trent, but I doubt it.

It's bizarre to me that people can in one breath call Lamar an MVP, then in the next breath say JA's rushing TDs don't count. I just don't know how you reconcile those two opinions.

National average of what?

I didn't know those were the numbers. That is alot... I mean, relative to your point, you aren't wrong. But, in a vacuum, if 1 to 2% of participants in an activity are being arrested, that is a real problem.

This thread just has it all. "Cause he's black, he's guilty?"; "what about the kneeling?"; "She could be lying"; "believe victims!"

I can't even wrap my head around how WR could be anything but A.

If you don't see the relevance of a Jordan Palmer article, even if it doesn't directly address JA, you haven't been paying attention.