.png.395d368d8b720b1e31cfea1d1789947a.png)
Mikie2times
-
Posts
8,002 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mikie2times
-
-
3 hours ago, Mat68 said:
All that I said is well and good, Superbowl Sunday im handing Allen the ball and going through him. Maybe pull out some plays where he is a decoy early. Come out passing to set up the run game later. Get them going left and right with naked action and motion going away from Allen. Im 100% confident Allen carries the Bills to a Super Bowl like Farve and Rodgers. That Rodgers Super Bowl win he just was on fire and the Steelers knew the plays jumped the routes and it didnt matter. Allen will do that when he gets his shot.
I hope. Run him early. Let him get hit a few times.
-
1 hour ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:
If I had moved 30 or 40 years ago from Western NY to NC, I probably would have more given up on Bills as much harder back then to follow an out of market team. Today doesn't make a huge difference whether you live in Orchard Park or SE Asia, can pretty much follow just as well from anywhere. Just takes a little more money with subscriptions to things not needed as much if local.
Just kidding man!
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:
So I now live down in North Carolina for close to about 17 years now. After the 2015 season, the Bills were pretty much losing every year so decided in 2016 I'll maybe start following the local team the Panthers. They're on TV every week, in the local papers to some level, not like in western NY and they just finished 15-1 and lost in the SB. I wasn't going to ignore the Bills, but wouldn't bother trying to find a way to watch a Bills game when had the Panthers on local TV and newspapers.
They went from SB lose to 6-10, finished in last place and started the season 1-5. After that start I kind of gave up on them and went back to the Bills who actually finished wit ha better record in Rex's last year here. Haven't wavered since
Front runner
-
3
-
-
19 hours ago, uticaclub said:
Boss: 1.5 sacks
Rousseau: 8.5 sacks
AJE: 6 sacks
Jackson: 4 sacks
Solomon: 6 sacks
These are very low end estimates and you get there pretty easily, hopefully we smash these stats.
I think this is closer than the original. I would probably go something like this
Boss: 5 sacks
Rousseau: 9 sacks
AJE: 5 sacks
Jackson: 5 sacks
Solomon: 2 sacks
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Mat68 said:
I saw another post about the running game limiting Allens mistakes. That and this is 100% right. Allen can do this once or twice a game and it is what makes him unstoppable. Those plays dont sustain offense. Look at the years Manning, Brees, Big Ben and other Qbs on offensive led teams had poor run games and defenses. They would have years at the top of the league in ints. Its not rocket science. They have to do more. They have to fit that window, they take the 50/50. 2/10, 3/10 plus its what you have to do. 2nd 6 and under, 3-5 and under is a different sport. I go back to Sean Payton talking about his best seasons with Brees. When as a play caller he was able to limited the times Drew had to drop back and be great. For Allen the fewer amount of times he needs a cap the better. Hand off, screens, sight quick passes. Vs this coverage this guy is open here. Those are what makes a good OC. That is what Brady is doing. Not a surprise he is from Paytons tree. The opposite is what Dorsey did and what Daboll did at the end. Allen is so good it is easy to put it all on him. But really you need to work harder to take more off of him. So when he is great it elevates the offense instead of sustains it.100% and double 100% to the rest of it. It was a complete 180 with Brady vs Dorsey. Dorsey was dependent on downfield/low % throws from Allen, Allen's rushing, Air Yards, and limited running game. We had almost no way to be methodical. It magnified Allen risk taking. With Brady nearly the entire offense is designed for on schedule plays. Screens, high run%, check downs, all YAC. Then we mix in Allen's big play ability and his legs. That's who we are and it's a great recipe, but teams can certainly create problems for us at times (as they can for everybody). Assumptions that we will always be prolific like this thread seem to call out are just off base.
If you jump on us early, we abandon the run game. If teams have the ability to play press effectively and play close to the line of scrimmage, our screen game isn't as effective and we struggle beating teams over the top. If you keep Allen in the pocket so much of his running game and improvisation is neutralized. We do not have any consistency in our on schedule medium/intermediate passing game. Baltimore did a very good job in both games exposing this. We saw it at times in the playoffs with lesser competition and execution.
The Eagles are built to execute what I'm calling out. I think with the Super Bowl jitters Allen would start slow. They would jump on our shaky defense then condense the field on our offense. Our screens wouldn't be as effective. The run game wouldn't be as effective. This is exactly when our talent level at WR does matter. It would snowball fast and look a lot like Baltimore's first game, which will likely look a lot like our first game this year (IMO). That is, unless our defense can keep it close. That can at least help us stay away from pure Allen ball.
-
On 7/8/2025 at 1:26 AM, BillytheKid said:
Your argument that if they don’t “do this play” or they “don’t do that play” is a horrible argument.
Every team can say that about every single game. Every QB has games, especially the good ones where they pull crap out of their butts half of the game for their team to win.
I could go back and watch the Denver game and that Pittsburgh game and do the same exact thing for those two teams vs Buffalo and say well if Denver doesn’t do this and Pittsburgh doesn’t do that then they would have been down by even more points than they were and they shouldn’t have even scored.
That’s a ridiculous argument. The fact is Buffalo did make those plays just like plays are made in every game. Buffalos offense was good now matter how much you want to disagree with it or not.
Your argument is horrible.
Actually, the difference is, what is repeatable vs what is not repeatable. The Ty Johnson play vs Denver was not repeatable. It was not part of our offense. It was Allen doing Allen things as Allen does most the year. This offense is a mirage. It's Allen off script creating for a large part of the production which losses consistency at random times as it's not a consistent way to generate offense. You need to actually understand the game a little to make such an observation.
-
No, is that clear enough?
-
43 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:
I'm wondering if the "Mike McDaniel is a pushover, Chris Grier, the GM, has no backbone" is because they hyped up Jr's agent with how much they'd love to have him but then low-balled Samuel's camp and told them they cant offer more because the owner doesnt want to spend. Which would be due to Ross knowing he's going to fire both of them at the end of the season and doesnt want them locking in any expensive long-term deals.
Certainly possible, I just never viewed MM as having the demeanor to hold it down for multiple years.
-
2
-
-
Sort of what it looks like from the outside but I would say lack of respect vs sensitivity. Motivation, balance, is sort of a requirement of coaching. Being sensitive doesn't mean you meet the requirement or don't meet it (Dan Campbell or Dick Vermeil are both VERY sensitive as an example and both meet the requirement easily). Players ultimately have to respect you. That is what has to happen. If they don't it gets ugly after a few years which I expect we will see more of this season.
-
2
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Maine-iac said:
The Broncos were number 1 in EPA and we hung 30 on them and Cook ran all over them. Remove the one awful Bengals game and the offense is averaging 26 points in our playoff losses and we're losing by less than a TD even though the defense is giving up over 30 in those games. It's your opinion and your entitled to it but I'll stand by my opinion that the offense is capable of keeping us in any game. Maybe I'm getting bad info but I thought the Ravens were 8th overall and 2 spots better than the Eagles vs the run.
You did watch the Broncos game? We converted a miracle 4th down play. Otherwise that is a 7 point game heading into the 4th quarter with us scoring 13 points despite Denver not sustaining a drive. It was the same thing the year prior against the Steelers. 7 point game, 4th quarter. Offense couldn’t put them away. Then total fall asleep mode against Baltimore in the second half. Failed clutch drives vs KC back to back years. Colossal egg vs the Bengals. Completely asleep for the Texans in the second half. Failed OT drive to win.
So what, against some KC teams with a bottom ranked defense we could trade scores only to fail when it mattered most. That is postseason locked it in to you?
We have a host of games vs wild card scrubs. Another set vs KC when that Defense sucked. The offense has been far from consistent on a drive to drive bases and isn’t reliable when they have been needed most. Probably a result of depending on Allen pulling crap out of his rear for 50% of our offense.
-
16 minutes ago, Augie said:
I’m not sure if the problem is the talent of players, or the quality of depth. When we get to the playoffs it seems our defense is decimated by injuries. Part of that may come from being fast but “smallish”, but we seem to run out of “guys”. We should not be interrupting AJ Klein’s vacations to help us in the playoffs. Maybe going so deep on defense in this year’s draft helps that, because I’m as sick of it as anyone.
We can't do this forever can we? Even if it has been true some years. It largely wasn't last year, but some people expect 100% health at this point. Would it surprise you this year if Benford gets hurt? How about Bernard? Who is backing Bernard up (hint, get Klein's number ready). If the defense is only as strong as those players we have a really big problem with our defensive philosophy.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, SoTier said:
What is surprising about good offensive teams struggling against good defensive teams? Moreover, it's unlikely that the Bills would have given the Eagles as many chances to score as the Chiefs did in the first half. Aside from 2 TOs, including a pick six, the Chiefs had a bunch of 3-and-outs early on.
Nothing is surprising. The Eagles were a complete team and the best in the NFL. People around here are mistaken if they think if we just get past the Chiefs somehow we will be Super Bowl winners. Our offense is still incredibly dependent on Allen, we still haven't shown the clutch playoff gene, Allen can still get sugar high. Assuming our offense is going to juggernaut in that spot and save the day is a HUGE assumption, one I don't agree with, and if it doesn't the game looks like the first Baltimore game fast.
-
2
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, dave mcbride said:
Not saying the eagles’ D wasn’t good, but this doesn't account for change over time. The ravens’ D was the best D in the league in second half of the season.
An we wouldn't have won a shootout or even been competitive in a shootout with Baltimore.
-
34 minutes ago, BillytheKid said:
I disagree.The Bills would have played the Eagles a lot closer than the Chiefs did. The Eagles defense wouldn’t have stopped the Bills offense. The Bills offense was number 1 in EPA last year. Nobody in the NFL stopped them last year once they got Cooper at Wide Receiver and everyone was healthy.
The Chiefs offense overall sucked last year. The Bills would have scored plenty on the Eagles no matter how good their defense was. The Bills offense scored on everyone.
The problem would have been the Buffalo defense. The Eagles would have scored also. So it would have come down to which defense could get one more stop than the other and that most likely would have been the Eagles.
Also the Bills didn’t turn the ball over last year at all. The Chiefs had two costly turnovers to start the game which put them behind.
That wouldn’t have happened most likley to the Bills since they didn’t turn the ball over and the Bills offensive line was far superior to KC’s O-line last year.
Would have been a one score game either way. The difference in the Eagles game vs KC compared to the Bills is that their d-line was more capable of hurting KC’s crappy O-line and Buffalo’s d-line wasn’t.
We weren’t exactly juggernauts vs the better defenses. Denver held us to 13 until the end of the 3rd quarter when Allen connected with Johnson on the improbable 4th down. We scored 10 against Baltimore the first game and 6 in the 2nd half of the playoff game. Cooper was basically invisible in the playoffs. What other top 10 EPA defenses did we play last year? Houston? That didn’t go well. Detroit? (The same Detroit that allowed Washington to drop 50?).
Offense has turtled in big games before. We can virtually guarantee the Eagles would drop 35 on us. But absolutely no guarantee Buffalo can produce against the higher end playoff squads in that moment. Philly was considerably better than everybody else and we couldn’t even get past the team they blew out of the building.
-
1
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
-
17 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:
Eagles run defense wasn't better than the Chiefs. Eagles, Chiefs, and Ravens all would have given us similar problems. Enough defense to make it hard to break it open and a run game that would keep our pass rush in check leaving our secondary that couldn't cover. We had enough offense and just enough defense to beat Lamar. We had almost enough offense and not enough defense in a winnable game vs the Mahommes. If I had to guess we would have been in another close game where we would need to pull something out to win if we had ended up playing the Eagles. I certainly think the offense is ready to win a championship. The defense has to find some playoff swagger somewhere. Even the years with pretty decent talent when the game is on the line we don't make the stops we need in the playoffs. They certainly are trying to infuse the defense with difference makers so I can't say they're not trying.
The Eagles were 3rd in EPA defense Overall, 2nd vs the Rush last year. Baltimore was one sport worse vs the the run and 11th overall. Eagles dropped 37 on us the year prior with a less productive offense and a better Bills defense. They had the 4th worst defense in football that year. We have shown no history of playing up in weight class in the postseason. I don't think it would be close.
-
1
-
-
The Eagles were more of the things that we feared when playing the Ravens than the Ravens were. Horrible match up for us. We couldn’t stick to the run game vs the Chiefs. Eagles had one of the best run defenses in the NFL. I don’t see it being close last year but not surprising some here think it would be.
-
1
-
1
-
-
18 minutes ago, BigAl2526 said:
The Bills thru the eyes of an Eagles fan site
SB Nation is the parent organization of Buffalo Rumblings, a web site cited from time to time here at TBD. They have fan run sites for all NFL teams. This is an article looking at the Bills, one of the Eagles' opponents in the 2025 season. I thought it was interesting. Essentially, they believe that Buffalo did precious little to change the team after yet again failing to surpass the Chiefs in the playoffs. The is a reference to the old adage about the definition of insanity "doing the same thing over and expecting different results. No mentioned by name, the article says Buffalo brought in old injured veterans (Tre White, and Joe Bosa) and "warm bodies" (Josh Palmer and Isaiah Moore?) at WR. No mention is made of Buffalo's focus on defense in the draft.
So, are the authors right - Buffalo is destined for another playoff run that will again fall short, or are they underestimating the potential effect that newcomers could have on the team?
My own perspective is that Buffalo's near misses in its attempts to reach the Super Bowl are not a reason to go into a full scale rebuild. The relatively minor retooling that the Bills have done is due in part to salary cap constraints and an effort to preserve the team's long term outlook, rather that "blowing the wad" on a one-time effort to get over the hump. I think there is still reason to believe that small changes could be enough to give Buffalo the improvements they need to not only get to the Super Bowl, but to win it. They were not that far off.
We seem to have followed the process this offseason. We just don't know if the process will ever end in a Super Bowl.
-
5
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Sorry my post should have a full stop after "combo."
He has pure size/speed. But the other things you need for football talent are sadly lacking.
He’s not just a combine athlete. He might not be refined, but that is what a good head on his shoulders could do (if he ever has that).
-
9 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
Physical talent, sure. If you just mean the size/speed combo Football talent? Disagree.
I don’t know what you’re saying. He’s 6”4 240 pounds and ran a 4.4 not looking just like stop watch guy in the process.
-
1 hour ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:
R u saying he acted out when with the Bills? There were no reports or even whispers about that. Of course we don't hear everything. But I think it is accurate he started on the bottom of the roster and was getting more and more reps.
I don’t know what happened. He got hurt. But I find it suspect that he’s still unsigned, including by the Bills, if he’s 100% healthy and Buffalos perception of him is all roses. This is an exceptionally talented player. His services would be in high demand if healthy and viewed as being a more committed player. At the very least we got the closest look and he would be back on the roster. But he’s not, nor is he on anybody else’s roster.
-
1 hour ago, MJS said:
Why? He is a failed NFL WR who has done nothing in years. He'll be lucky to get invited to an NFL training camp.
He has only failed because of personal issues. Everybody agrees his physical talent is that of a #1 WR, he’s unquestionably more physically talented than anybody on our roster at WR. So if he suddenly saw the light and this isn’t just offseason BS to get signed, we would be complete fools to
not bring him back. More likely than not, it’s not 100% accurate from the Bills perceptive. Let’s see if somebody tries to sign him.
-
3 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:
Depends on his options. If another team gives him a better shot to make the roster he'll go there. Coleman, Shakir, Samuel, and Palmer are pry locks based on their contracts or draft investment in Coleman's case. There's nothing in Elijah Moore's contract that guarantees he has a spot locked down come this fall so maybe Claypool could push him for that WR5 spot.
I was told something similar with Amari Cooper a few months ago. Obviously it would be impossible to know for sure, but I feel pretty strongly that he would be signed by now if demand existed.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, DapperCam said:
Likely angling to get camp invites, but still cool to hear player say nice things about the Bills.
It would be borderline negligent of the Bills to not look at him again if this story is 100% accurate. I have to think Buffalo doesn't see it exactly like this.
-
2
-
-
On 7/2/2025 at 8:18 AM, BearNorth said:
As far as kickers, its a close call, and obviously Christie kicked in more meaningful games, but Rian Lindell had a higher FG% and XP% than Christie, and his kickoff average was slightly longer as well. Lindell missed 1 XP in 10 seasons.
Except by doing it this way nearly every kicker in a more modern era would be better. Same with QB’s. The FG% has just gone up at a faster rate league wide. Relative to era they’re about identical. Christie gets the nod for clutch/important kicks and following Norwood, which can’t be easy.
Were there ever years you were disinterested in the Bills?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
In case anybody needs a memory jog. I think some of this also has to do with what is going on in your life at the time and how much emotional bandwidth you have to invest. I actually found the Wade Phillips, Gregg Williams, Mike Mularkey era fairly enjoyable compared to other drought eras. Probably because it was still close enough to successful times or maybe just because I had more in the tank those years. Some interesting players as well.
The demise for me started in the Jauron years. It seemed like hope just leaked out little by little each year after. To the point where I probably should have enjoyed the Gailey years more as the players of that era were enjoyable (Fred, Stevie, Fitz) but I just didn't think the team was any good. So it was hard to win my emotions over or overly devote emotional bandwidth to the team.
I started to come around more again in the Marrone years, then I felt Rex, at the time, was interesting and needed. Even if he was a toe sucker. We needed something different and he was certainly that.
It felt like we were getting closer at that time in some ways. The wild card drought breaker really came at a perfect time. Prior to Josh and so unexpected. That wasn't a playoff team but it didn't matter. It was just so good for the fans and I was thrilled or Kyle who was one of my all time favorite Bills. I could watch the celebration/clubhouse video a million times and it would never get old. For me it allowed some more patience and interest in the new regime. Once Allen started playing it's been pretty much early 1990-2000 must see TV every game.