Nextmanup

Edmunds aggressively over pursued toward the sideline and the offensive lineman blocking him just helped him run out of position with a big push and just kept his momentum going to the edge, knowing the run was going up the middle. In fairness, most of the D over-pursued; Milano did the same thing Edmunds did. Lots of Patriots were winning 1 on 1 battles all over the place. We had 10 of 11 players within 4 yards of the LOS. Hyde was the only guy back and he just didn't play it well.

да! Yes! I thought her video seemed well edited and pretty smooth for a homemade "raunchy" sex video!

Since you brought up penalties, did you notice we had a relatively low 3 penalties for 20 yards, while New England had 6 for 47? I guess they are really not mentally tough! But wait, they won! I would ask how that fits into your scheme of things, but you don't have one.

Why? There hasn't been a home field advantage in the league for several years now. We've also already lost 3 games at home! Don't get me wrong, I think we win the 3 "lay up" games easily. The NY Times simulator says if we LOSE to Tampa and New England, but win the 3 easy games, we have a 89% chance of making the playoffs. How is that close to missing the playoffs? Are you assuming we are going to drop one (or more) of the 3 "easy" games?

And at some point, too, you'll get one for free when they call DPI. Gotta be in it to win it! THROW THE BALL

It was a huge reason! Most folks here won't agree with you however; that doesn't mean it's not correct.

Trading up is such a bad look. I can't believe these guys like to do it as much as they do.

If we are to assume the Bills play better as the underdog than they do the favorite, the timing of this season is working out perfectly. We've gone from the toast of the league and SB favorite to wondering if we'll make the playoffs. If and when we finally play a playoff game we are going to be thought of as an also-ran, and that might just perfect for this team. And playing on the road might result in a less nervous Josh Allen.

Overall, I think that would be a bad idea. Having said that, Josh would undoubtedly do a few things that would aid the offense. 1) He would throw the ball all the time, or call QB designed run plays, both of which are our strengths, because he wants to be in the center of the action. 2) He would likely keep it simple, cutting back on errors and allowing players to get into a groove. 3) Plays would unfold quicker than they do now, also allowing Josh to get in a rhythm. All that would help the team, not hurt it. For a series now and again, it could be an interesting experiment.

I agree with you, but why in the world would we "want to be" a run and stop the run team? There was talk today that Daboll may have been under pressure from McDermott to run, that's why he ran as much as he did in the MNF game, and in key circumstances. My God, I hope that is not accurate.

Mmm-hhhmmm. This is 2BD my friend. I think you mean "mute" point.

It's an interesting proposition, but who knows with stuff like this. A lot of decisions have to go a certain way for this to play out in that manner. Also, I feel like Daboll's stock is lower than it was a year ago, and he was passed over then. If something like this plays out, so be it! We can discuss then, but it's so far away now, it's hard to get too caught in the speculation.

This made me laugh out loud! Like the fact that he will be fired is a foregone conclusion. Which it probably is. Still funny though.

What does that mean? Trouble? Trouble relating to what? I assume you meant making the playoffs. You mean it will be a sign that we just aren't that good? We could lose to Tampa and then run the table to win the Super Bowl....who knows. I wouldn't draw any conclusion from a single loss.

Are you sure? I just wrote in a another thread that if we LOSE to Tampa AND NE, but win the other 3 easier games, we have a 89-90% chance of making the playoffs!

Non volevo offendere, amico!

Like they did against Steelers and Ravens last season, right? I don't understand how someone watches a football game or games and concludes the team isn't "mentally and physically tough" enough. How in the world would an outsider to the team make that conclusion? What are you basing it on? We were in the red zone a lot on MNF, near the end, and just couldn't score a TD. We were maybe 1 or 2 passes away from winning the game. But the team (all of them?) isn't mentally tough enough? That's the problem? 👎

Seems like we always win 1 (or 2) that we should NOT win, and then lose 1 or 2 that we should win. It's easy to identify the games we should have won, already. Have we already played the team we should have lost to, but beat? Was that KC? Or is that game this week against TAMPA BAY? It doesn't feel like we have played that game yet, and none of the remaining games fit the bill like TAMPA would. We could win on this basis alone! What do you think?

"Goddamnit! I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought it'd do any good." -General Beringer, "WarGames".

"Riding high in April, shout down in May. That's life." -Frank Sinatra

That's largely because it's practitioners are morons...and drunk. That's the daily double right there! For whatever reason, football games, especially in Buffalo, attract the lowest societal common denominator. You should love this one---guy snaps his leg in half.

Yes, you did, by writing "Of course not." There's a lot of tone and intention in those words. It's called "language" and why often things are lost in translation, because nuance, intention, tone do not make it from language A to B. Honestly though, I don't give a rat's ass about this! Sorry to make the comment.

That's not his job. Though fans at this forum often think it is.

So McDermott and Daboll are part of an evil, NFL run cabal designed to...make Buffalo lose? And they are down with it? What would their motivation be? And then when they go to work for 18 hour days, 7 days a week, it's all just a show?

I understand your point, but the league isn't moving back to a run-centric type of offense. Not even close. Should the Bills D be modified to be a bit better suited to run stopping? Perhaps. Should we rebuild as though it's 1984? No!