Mikie2times

On No, I'm not important again

We entered the season with clear goals and clear concerns. In the category of key goals was an AFC Championship and perhaps more. Playoffs were assumed and nearly laughed at when people said that could be at risk. Key concerns was winning close games. Better game management. Better defensive performance in late games and as a whole. The Taylor Dunne piece and Dorsey firing changed everything. Now a three game win streak in the regular season and a possible playoff birth has people talking about how an early playoff exit isn't even a failure. How we have overcome adversity to get here. Bla Bla Bla. We created the adversity in getting here. We have only added more questions to the key concerns. I don't understand how the goal posts have shifted this much. We have one of the best QB's on the planet, a pretty decent roster, and a horrible conference to work with and our base is happy with a wild card. We will see how this goes. If it's anything like the past I will probably take a break from posting if the same people want to justify it.

I think Dungy is a very accurate comparison. Always have. Even focuses on a similar defensive concept. Ironically, Caldwell, a JAG HC went to a SB the first year he was gone. Then the same thing in Tampa. Nobody would say Dungy wasn't a good coach but he captures the argumenty perfectly. How did those Colts only manage one Super Bowl? Which we can get into. Manning in the playoffs, the Patriots, etc. But I would say Allen and McD actually have a more favorable landscape. Brady and the Patriots were more daunting than Mahomes and KC. Thinking about Dungy just makes me want McD out even more. He's just enough, just like Dungy always was. Just enough is probably more dangerous than bad. Just enough to lose a lot of time.

Matt LaFleur and Marty are the two others.

I went ahead and paid Tony. If it acts up again hit me up on my beepa

100% agree with this. I've never been impressed with Lamar. He can't throw in rhythm and eventually that will get you in trouble.

As it stands McD is one of 3 coaches in the Super Bowl era who has a .600 or better regular season record and no conference championship. He is 4-5 in the playoffs. 4-4 with Allen. Reid is 11-3 with 3 AFC Championships and two Super Bowls with Mahomes. One is trending toward Marty and the other is trending toward football immortality. Comparing the two is just lazy to be honest. Unless you want to compare Philadelphia Andy Reid, but even then he got an NFC championship in his 6th season.

Not new, stil d-bagery.

Agreed. But I would really not like to have 2 HOF QB's and no rings.

Slow down Chris. Strippers are entertaining.

Stud

The 49ers have multiple turnovers in scoring position and it had no impact on the game. Got it. Holy crap.

Its Shtick

It is now blasphemy to say Mahomes is better, have fun with this.

Waddle runs a mallard rescue in the offseason

So, looks like we might see a flat Ravens squad take on Miami

Causation / Correlation, as you have tried to use about 8 times would mean that in the process of winning, one of those outcomes would be more likely to increase or decrease which would limit our ability to view that data independently. As an example, TD's or rushing attempts. But when it comes to turnovers, it is completely independent of points. It is also not influenced by points such as the case with rushing attempts. It is largely independent which is why it is viewed as the holy grail by anybody with an understanding of the game. As I said earlier, the Bills are 29-26 when they're even or worse in the turnover battle. They're 31-2 when they have a +1 or better. So again, it would REALLY seem to matter to this team how they fair in the turnover battle. Other things do matter, yes, nobody said this was the only thing that mattered. But it's probably the most correlated data point to winning % in the NFL.

Christmas is ruined

We seem to have the fishes number but Cleveland or Baltimore will put us in a Broncos, Chargers, Jets style game. More confident against Baltimore just based on historic success against Lamar despite knowing he is in a new system. We do well against mobile QB's. It's sort of funny, top down, I really don't fear anybody but all of them will put us in a FG game it would seem.

Really not a fan. I get frustrated at Josh sometimes for being off schedule. Lamar doesn't have a schedule.

The line by Vegas would indicate that these are in fact singular outcomes that have lots of factors involved. That any one game can be played multiple times with multiple results but it seems like somehow you look at these games as if they're were always going to go one way no matter what. Almost like you don't believe in an alternative game script. Perhaps like if we didn't commit all those turnovers to Denver we would have never needed to be in a position to have a game winning drive from Josh. You had literally dozens of games to hand pick to fit whatever argument you want and you hilariously picked games in which turnovers actually did play a huge role.

The Patriots were driving to tie the game at 7 when Hyde made one of the best INT's in Bills history. It swung the momentum like a tidal wave. In the Colts game it was 7-0 Colts, we throw a pick and now it's 14-0. We claw back 14-7, they kick a FG so now it's 17-7, we fumble and they score again making it 24-7. Turnovers alter how the game is played and the outcome of the game had they not occured. Some games it doesn't matter that much. Like the Bengals game in which the turnover happened at the very end. But if you think we can keep showing up top 10 in turnovers each year and not have negative consequences as we are somehow absolved because we have Josh ( yet it has mattered for every HOF QB just the same and we are a .500 team when the TO differential is even or worse). I'm not making this about Allen. Brady forced us into a conservative style against the Chargers and it partially shielded us so that can work when we can go that way. In the past fumbles have hurt us just as bad as INT's but Josh has really cleaned that up. It's turnovers as a whole. Whatever that recipe is to maximize success and limit turnovers is the right recipe. Your attitude is more aligned with Dorsey. Lets throw 50 times, who cares what the risk is.

It's like being stuck in the snow. In the past we would just gas it and try and get out but it only got worse. This time we methodically worked our way out and it wasn't pretty or exciting but it worked. Historically these are the games we throw 50 times, Josh tacks on a few more INT's and we lose. See Jets game. I thought the conservative play calling was just what we needed.