Mikie2times

That’s like 3-4 drinks out here. I’ve been in Michigan all week and I’m enjoying the hell out of sane beverage prices

I'm convinced I could drop a high 70 in Romans system. So QB friendly. If you combine running+deep ball+check down+limit turnovers it's going to get you some wins. Certainly at replacement level or higher. That formula won't work as the competition increases. But it will put you on the brink of the playoffs if you can play some defense. As a hypothetical, I think New England would take that vs Mac Jones.

Interestingly, for all his short comings, he had the best deep ball of any QB I have seen in a Bills uniform, which goes back to Kelly. Also was (until Josh) the best runner we ever had at QB. That was enough to do some things. But his ability to hit intermediate throws and make downfield reads was his demise. It felt like for about 20+ years until Josh we just didn’t have a guy that could hit a 15 yard dig or shallow post. Taylor is a good dude. I see him in a very positive light, but ranking him is probably somewhere around Trent Edwards or JP Losman area all things considered.

https://thevikingage.com/2020/12/14/stefon-diggs-admits-minnesota-vikings/ If you replaced the team names, it's basically the exact same story.

McDermott is very measured with his words. He covered for Diggs last year in the Thanksgiving game and did it again in the Bengals game. He has done so in private with Diggs several times. Maybe he didn't fully calculate the outcome, but his intention was to put Diggs on notice and let the team know he wasn't beyond the process. It was completely out of his character to air this publicly, which sort of makes his intentions obvious (my opinion).

His approach to managing his concerns is either being passive aggressive on social media or losing emotional control on the sidelines. His behavior encourages the drama which would make me inclined to think he is ok with it. It was the same thing in Minnesota. Sort of this, well, he wasn't an outright bad teammate but something just wasn't right. Well this, what we are seeing, is what wasn't right. Consider the numbers that have made him feel this way. 1st in targets in 2020, 4th in 2021, and 5th in 2022. Also consider how this all started off as him just being a "competitor". Just wanting to win. This isn't about that. He is unquestionably the best WR on this team. We need him. But if I was to put money on it, he has just as much chance of forcing himself off the team by next year as he does being on the team and almost no chance we can make it a whole year without one of his "competitive" episodes. I wish I didn't feel this way, but his actions don't exactly inspire trust.

It was Manning and company that made them so consistent and it was Manning and company in the playoffs that made them so inconsistent. I mean Manning was awful. Even in the Super Bowl year, 3 TD's and 7 INT's. The defense was ok, but it really struggled against the run most years. I agree, it was not the defense that did it. More or less, it was just getting there so often, which was based on Manning's regular season success. When you're in it every year you set yourself up that often luck ends up on your side. Drawing a very weak Bears team and in some ways in how they beat the Patriots was a product of that. I feel as if Buffalo will inevitably fall into the same situation. Which I think for many sounds like a white flag, but we are also trying to do this, like the Colts, with an active dynasty. Much like Maddens Raiders with the Steelers if we want to search for another example. Ideally, I hope we can overcome enough to be the team to beat but until that happens.....

Wanted sauce, felt it was worth unloading picks to get him. Knew it would never happen. Felt the same way about Kyle Pitts. A few of these guys are as close to can't miss as it gets. Usually it's a result of physical gifts and natural playing ability. It's one thing to just be a combine hero, but when you're a combine hero and the tape shows it translating on the field as it did for Pitts and Sauce, I think it starts to become worth it to consider taking quality over quantity especially when you have a clear window like we do.

We also scored 19, 24, and 10 in 3 of the 4 losses with the 24 being more of a fluff score in the AFC Championship vs the Chiefs. So while the narrative has been it's the defenses fault, the reality is, outside of 2021, the offense hasn't exactly been lights out. Had we held the Bengals to 13 points the conversations around here would be much different.

True, we could also say Josh has performed better than Manning so far in the playoffs. Again, not a perfect comparison. Lots of angles to this.

We spend more money on the offensive line https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/breakdown/ it's not engineering, it's publicly available data. We drafted 2 more players since 2018 in the 3rd round or better. If you eliminate the 3rd round, and just go with "premium" picks, we have drafted 5 players each in the 1st and 2nd round. If you eliminate 2018, KC has drafted 1 more player in the 1st and 2nd round. If you eliminate 2018 and 2019, KC has drafted 1 more player. If you eliminate 2018, 2019, and 2020 it's even. If you eliminate 2019, 2019, 2020, 2021.... get the point? You can't calculate this in a way to make you correct. Even worse, KC has had more "Premium" draft choices. If your argument is KC has used more resources in these areas, the definition of resource can't be your opinion. I would assume if your intent is to say we didn't care enough about it as much as they do, then you would see it in the dollars spent or draft picks used. Neither show up. So as I said, for the 3rd time, your complaint is about how we have used the resources. Not the use of the resources.

I'm not trying to prove you wrong. I think it would be better for you to say you don't like who the Bills have invested resources in. The Bills have unequivocally spent more money on the offensive line than KC has. They just haven't done it in a way that some prefer. They ranked 3rd in 2020, 5th in 2021, 14th in 2022, and 10th in 2023. KC only spent more in 2022 and it was by 3 million dollars. From 2019 to current, 5 of 12 KC 2nd round or better draft picks were on offense. Buffalo had 4 of 9. Buffalo has drafted more offensive players as a % of draft picks in the sample you gave and spent more on the offensive line. These are not my opinions. So again, I think it's more a matter of who they have went after and how they did it (in most cases more by committee and not WR) vs what areas.

We just don't know who he will become yet. He could be Marty or he could be Madden. Statements like this are why the board is so polarized. The year the Colts won the Super Bowl, Manning had 3 TD's and 7 INT's. Prior to that year, in playoff losses he had 2 TD's and 7 INT's. Manning hardly pulled Dungy to a Super Bowl. They won it as a result of swings at the plate which is exactly what McDermott has done. With swings at the plate the likelihood of success is greater. Dungy certainly not the first example of a coach that took awhile when an active dynasty was erupting. I know you wish that active dynasty was us, perhaps it can be. I don't believe it's just a coach away. If you do, so be it.

Good post and I'm not trying to be negative, but I don't think the data indicates the Chiefs invest more on offense than the Bills. In literal money, the Bills have 101.6 million outside QB going to the offense and KC has 95.2 million in 2023. KC has only selected 4 picks in the last 4 drafts in the top 3 rounds on offense. I also had the same perception which is why I knew the numbers. I was shocked when I saw them and remember looking at the total salary spread and thinking we have basically mirrored the allocation of our salary to them. I would say we differ a pretty good deal on LB and DB. They also spend more on DL, but we spend a lot in that area as well. They just REALLY spend.

Sean McDermott and the Bills have some striking similarities to those Colts teams in the 2000's. Sean McDermott and Tony Dungy have some striking statistical similarities as well. What we are seeing amongst our fan base is actually very similar to what Colts fans experienced in those years. The NFL has had 145 coaches who at least had one year during the Super Bowl era and also coached at least 5 seasons Tony Dungy ranks 8th all time in regular season winning % in that sample, Sean McDermott ranks 12th Tony Dungy ranks 1st all time in % of years coaching that resulted in a playoff birth (85%), Sean McDermott ranks 2nd (83%) No coach in NFL history (outside Sean McDermott) with 5 or more years in coaching, and led his team to a playoff birth 70% of the time has failed to win a Super Bowl. This also includes Tony Dungy. Other qualifying coaches are John Madden, Andy Reid, Mike Holmgren, Pete Carrol, and Bill Walsh. At even 60% or greater, 33 Super Bowls are represented with the only coaches to not win one being Bud Grant, Marty Schottenheimer, Dennis Green, and Mike Vrabel. 19 of 24 coaches that led teams to the playoffs 60% or more of the time won at least one. In the above context Sean McDermott has not just been good, he has been historically good. Same as Dungy, and both were good in somewhat similar situations. Both defensive minded, zone defenses at that, elite QB's, facing off against the combination of a juggernaut QB and coaching tandem. Colts first season with Dungy they lost in the Wild Card Colts second season with Dungy they lost in the AFC Championship Colts third season with Dungy they lost in the Divisional round Colts fourth season with Dungy they lost in the Wild Card Colts fifth season with Dungy they won the Super Bowl As far as playoff losses, those Colts teams have been very similar to what we have seen from Buffalo. By no means was the path linear and I would argue that part of what allowed the Colts to finally breakthrough was just showing up year after year. The historical data on just showing up that often becomes pretty overwhelming. Dungy would go onto coach 2 more years. Ousted by the Chargers in the Wild Card round both times. In this time, Dungy was a polarizing figure. That Colts team, like this Bills team, was elite. Expectations were very high. Most Colts fans would argue they didn't achieve what they should have despite winning a Super Bowl. So when people support Sean McDermott at a high level, he deserves it. Further, when people are not supportive. That's understandable as well. Plenty of space exists for both opinions and neither disqualifies you as a fan. Sorry in advance for another McDermott related thread, I just think the history of the Colts team can teach us some things on why people feel the way that they do. It doesn't need to be so polarizing. We all want the same thing. Go Bills!

I wonder if the narrative changes if we lost to the Colts who completely outplayed us at home. They had over 450 total yards on offense and over 150 on the ground. More than 25 first downs and over 50% on third down. That would have been two years we got ousted in the first round.

I'm not weighing in on a side on this as much as I'm saying it doesn't make you a hack or troll to just be concerned over some of the things being discussed. 51 coaches have at least 8 playoff games, .444 winning % in the playoff ranks 42 of the 51 If you evaluate variance between regular season winning% and playoff winning%, he ranks 45 of 51. It can all change in one year. It did for John Madden and Tony Dungy, who surround him in the second metric, but it never did for Dennis Green or Marty Schottenheimer who are also very close to him in the same category. I view the next few years as being pretty important to either cementing this narrative or blowing it up. That's all Einstein seems to be saying.

He would be bordering on incompetent or loyal to a fault if he did not move on from Frazier and either answer would have been enough to put him at risk next year if something similar happened. Playing the game of what shade of grey it was is even more adorable than just saying it's grey.

SDS commissioned me to write overly complicated Bills content in different historical eras......

I asked ChatGPT to change the post a little Gentlemen and fellow enthusiasts of the game, I beseech your attention as I present my findings on the Super Bowl endeavors of the past septenary. A revelation of utmost import has emerged - the delicate balance betwixt offense and defense holds the key to triumphant conquest in this grand sporting spectacle. Pray, let us commence with an examination of the most points conceded during these Super Bowl escapades. The average doth tally at a daunting 30.14 points. Yet, lo and behold, the zenith of excellence was reached in 2020, wherein a mere 26 points were permitted. Recall, if you will, the Denver Broncos of 2015, their defense a paragon of mastery, the last victors to hoist the Super Bowl crown without succumbing to more than three touchdowns throughout the playoffs. Now, let us delve into the profound metrics that lay afore us. I have delved deep into the Expected Points Added (EPA) performance of both the offensive and defensive factions, and I have unearthed intriguing patterns that demand elucidation. Only two teams in these bygone years exceeded the EPA thresholds: the Rams on offense and the Eagles on defense. However, what doth bewilder is the remarkable occurrence when one side faltered, the other rose valiantly to the fore, compensating for their comrades' lackluster showing. Such a symphony of resilience showcases the essence of interdependent support during times of tribulation. Yet, I must draw your attention to the plight of the EPA, for a negative or feeble offensive EPA doth signal dire straits. To mine astonishment, in the span of 49 regular season encounters from 2020 to 2022, our team hath languished in such wretchedness on but four occasions. These rare moments were mollified by the resplendent exhibitions of our stalwart defense, who steadfastly rectified any offensive frailties. Likewise, a defensive EPA amounting to 20 or more is deemed lamentable. Fret not, for our team hath partaken in such ignominy but thrice in these bygone years. Marvelous it is to perceive that, when our defense stumbled, our offense delivered veritable masterstrokes, surmounting all odds and transcending adversity. What tidings doth this portend for our team's audacious quest for Super Bowl supremacy? Verily, the collective strength of our entire ensemble is paramount. We must uplift one another, eschew catastrophic misadventures, and ensure that both factions achieve exaltation. It is essential to note that, barring a solitary year of aberration, our defense hath remained stalwart. Nonetheless, to vie for the Super Bowl with genuine prospects, we must restrict our defense from amassing an EPA exceeding 15, lest our prodigious quarterback, Josh Allen, work prodigious wonders. Though the notion of constraining our adversaries to fewer than three touchdowns throughout an entire playoff odyssey may prove fantastical, we must strive to maintain a delicate equilibrium and shield both sides from grievous foibles. History doth impart wisdom, revealing that triumphant Super Bowl assemblages have weathered encounters wherein one faction bore the burden or resorted to unconventional stratagems for amassing points. Their triumphs hinged upon overcoming such arduous tribulations, aided by the unyielding support of their compatriots. Let us rally with unbridled ardor behind our cherished team as they strive for Super Bowl glory, cognizant that a harmonious and mutually supportive performance shall forge the path to hallowed triumph. Together, let us script indelible chapters on this voyage toward gridiron supremacy! I eagerly await your cogitations upon these revelations. How, pray tell,

They allowed 24 points to the Chiefs and won by 3 and 23 to the Rams and lost by 3. Then 23 to the Chiefs the next year and lost by 3. If anything, I think you're making the argument that they haven't been able to score enough. My work emails suck 😂

I rambled.... We will have to overcome 30 points in the playoffs to win a Super Bowl (more likely than not) The narrative on whose fault it is when we have to drop that 30 will likely come down to how the offense plays We can't implode on either side of the ball, which we have on both sides in all but 2021 As much as people blame the defense, the offense should not be getting a pass either

In the last 7 Super Bowl runs, the winning team had to overcome an average of 30.14 points when you look at the most points they allowed during that run. The lowest total was 26 in 2020. 2015 was the Broncos elite defense and the last team to win a Super Bowl without allowing more than 3 TD's during the playoffs. 2022= 35 Points 2021= 27 Points 2020= 26 Points 2019= 31 Points 2018= 31 Points 2017= 33 Points 2016= 28 Points When you look at EPA performance on Offense and Defense, only the Rams (offense) and the Eagles (defense) in the above 7 year sample had any games that resulted in either of the below EPA thresholds being hit. Each of them had 1 game qualify during the run they had. In each situation the opposite side of the ball played well enough to make up the difference Rams (Offense -6.76 Defense -4.46) Eagles ( Offense 29.26 Defense 27.61) An EPA (Expected Points) that is negative or worse on offense is very poor. We only had 4 such occurrences in 49 regular season games from 2020-2022 2022 our lowest offensive EPA in the playoff came against the Dolphins at -2.41 other side of the ball Defense (-15.56 dominating) 2021 our lowest offensive EPA in the playoff came against the Chiefs at 25.24 other side of the ball Defense (32.62 Turd) 2020 our lowest offensive EPA in the playoff came against the Chiefs at -3.61 other side of the ball Defense (30.34 Turd) An EPA (Expected Points) at 20 or greater is very poor. We only had 3 such occurrences in 49 regular season games from 2020-2022 2022 our highest defensive EPA in the playoff came against the Bengals at 22.03 other side of the ball Offense (3.52 Turd) 2021 our highest defensive EPA in the playoff came against the Chiefs at 32.62 other side of the ball Offense (25.24 dominating) 2020 our highest defensive EPA in the playoff came against the Chiefs at 30.34 other side of the ball Offense (-3.61 Turd) When you look at the Super Bowl teams one thing becomes really obvious. Every year they had to have at least one game in which the offense had to carry it or they had to manufacture points. They also had to avoid the catastrophic meltdown on either side of the ball and if they underperformed on one side they needed to be good enough to make it up on the other. In most of the years you look at, at least one game existed where you would say that teams offense failed them or defense failed them. That wasn't said because the other side of the ball picked them up and nobody remembered how it all played out, just that it did. VERY similar to how the narrative on this team wasn't about our defense being awful in the playoffs after 2021 year, when in fact it was the most awful according to EPA of all the awful in that game. The offense erased that thought in most of us. Just like the defense erased that thought about the offense in our divisional game against the Ravens. All we remembered is we won. Again the next year in our home game against Miami, with a -15 defensive EPA. This isn't just about our defense. This is about the team collectively being good enough to pick each other up, to avoid the meltdown. Which thus far has not happened on both sides of the ball outside 2021. We can't allow more than about a 15 EPA on defense to have a shot. Not unless Josh goes off. But for those that think the path would most likely be to hold our our opponents under 3 TD's for an entire playoff run? That isn't going to happen.

This doesn't sound like CTE

I would rather see Tyreek Hill at a marina than sign Elliott