Mikie2times

Give me an example of something I can't manipulate if I have enough money? The only thing that would ever stop such a thing would be individual morality. It wouldn't be motive or ability. That goes for just about everything.

“You don’t learn how to become a good sailor in calm seas”

Couple things. I think BB has an interesting relationship with the Giants. On one hand he spent a lot of time there. On another, he never was never offered HC as Parcells largely ruined the chance at that happening. He was also beat by Eli, NYG, and TC in many critical moments during is Patriots dynasty, including his undefeated season. His texts also throw a bit of chaos into a divisional opponent. Not as if they needed anymore to begin with but it certainly doesn't hurt New England for Miami to become a dumpster fire. I also highly doubt BB likes Roger Goodell given the way he and NE have always been investigated and even if us fans feel punishment was light, I'm certain BB does not feel the same. The long story short, did BB "screw up" this text on purpose?

I wonder how I can throw the ball more..... Damn I sweat a lot in suits

I assume our fans understand he will still have some bad games. All players do. As far as the special treatment goes, we got plenty of it all year. Don't let Josh scramble to his right. Don't blitz him. Don't give him anything deep. Coaches used all these techniques with success until eventually Josh got a handle on it and it ended up making him even more formidable. Outside of Josh, what I expect most from this team next year is to be consistent and attack home field advantage in a way we haven't seen from them. The team along with Josh took everybody's best shot this year. They know what that feels like. I expect a very pissed off, very focused, and very determined team next year.

Agree. Burrow is more of a pure passer and in my opinion reads a defense quicker. He's also got mobility. That said, Josh is just so much more athletic. It's dramatic enough to make up for any advantages Burrows has.

They both got to him, Bengals are just finishing

https://www.footballzebras.com/2019/09/penalties-on-touchdowns-now-can-cost-1-or-2-points/

It's at the discretion of the coach to take it on the Extra Point or the kickoff. They would have never considered going for two on the 18 yard line if we took the penalty on the extra point. Most coaches take it on the kickoff because it provides a better expected outcome. In this situation I think we probably would have taken it on the extra point given Butker was not having his best game.

With a 48 yard Extra point. Who cares.

I actually think the refs called a very good game as well 👍

1. I don't like taunting penalties and thinh they're stupid. Doesn't change the fact that's it's a rule they have been calling it an awful lot this year and this was as obvious an example as one could find. 2. I simply find it interesting nobody has discussed this at all this week. I don't find it to be the reason we lost or could have won or anything outside of an obvious penalty in an important situation that nobody discussed which is somewhat shocking for how our fan base behaves 3. IT WOULD HAVE STILL BEEN A TD, 75% of you in this thread do not understand how this is called. It's a dead ball foul after the play is over. Which means we could have elected to apply the penalty to the kickoff giving us great field position OR THE EXTRA POINT, which would have made it a 3 point game if KC misses, and it would have been a 47/48 yard Extra Point try.

How do you know the answer to that question? Would you have rather seen the play called as it was all year and then have the option to have KC kick a 48 yard extra point or kickoff 15 yards deeper likely giving us the ball around the 40? Either situation potentially leads to a different outcome. I'm not debating that in the end with the way the game played out it didn't "seem" to matter, but it's sort of hard to say it didn't matter. After KC just missed a normal XP, I would have loved the idea of only needing 3 if they miss a 48 yard Extra Point. At that point we are draining clock down to the last drop and if we do score they need a TD to win, a FG does nothing.

No, it's considered a dead ball foul. We would of ended up having the choice to either take the penalty on the kickoff which would have (at least at that moment) seemed to be a pretty massive penalty. We could have also elected to have it enforced on the extra point which would have made that a 48 yard Extra Point attempt with a miss putting us down by 3 vs down by 4 prior to Allen's last TD drive.

Certainly agree with that

Am I the only one that see's how dumb the general thinking in this thread is? It didn't matter because we scored. If we didn't score it would have been one of the most controversial plays in the game. So the phantom PI call in the TB OT game mattered because they scored a TD and won on that drive. Had we stopped them, it wouldn't have mattered (although in each of these, wouldn't have mattered hypotheticals, it leads down an entirely different set of circumstances, play calls, and outcomes). I'm not like up in arms over this non call, I guess it's just sort of humorous that goes from meaning nothing because we scored vs probably being one of the most talked about plays of the game if we don't.

It's a bit silly to say it wouldn't have mattered. At that time in the game if I asked you does it matter if the Bills start around the 40 or the 25, you would certainly said it mattered. We could have also elected to take it on the Extra Point, which had he not converted would have also mattered. Just because the outcome ended up being a TD does not excuse the penalty not being called, nor give us a crystal ball that says the exact outcome would have happened either way. No matter how you slice it, if that penalty gets called, as it should have, you're introducing an entirely new set of variables into the last minute than the ones we ended up seeing. Who knows if those new variables influence the outcome or not.

Mods, please forgive me if this was mentioned. I'm only posting about it at this point because I'm sort of shocked I haven't seen it discussed. I'm not one of these guys that blames the refs, usually just more frustrated by by selective application of rules. You could not draw up a more textbook taunting penalty on Hill than what we saw on his TD in the final two minutes.

This also needs some context. Like Super Bowl 25, we missed a FG. The game was in doubt for the majority of the way. We missed a FG that was usually about 60% of in that era on grass. So the play itself wasn't anything that unlucky. It was almost a coin flip outcome, it was just what was at stake that made it so bad. 13 seconds felt a lot more like MCM, but I will give you another comparison that I feel is more accurate. Houston got the ball first in OT for "The Comeback". Odoms picked him off, Christie sealed the game shortly after. If Houston would have drove the field and kicked a FG and we lose, it would have felt the same as 13 seconds. It was the constant emotional jerking around that made the game so difficult. Even MCM was more like a gunshot to the head. You really didn't even know what happened and had little time to process. 13 seconds was like the comeback in the sense that it was a complete emotional roller coaster and you were aware of being on it. No Gunshot to the head. Time to process, time to become ecstatic only to become demoralized, then have it repeated multiple times.

I have seen a lot of regular season games mentioned. I'm surprised "Just give it to em" has not been brought up.

I just can't. Even with Moulds fumble. I still give the nod to Moulds, logic does not prevail for me here. I was a huge Moulds fan.

Even 10 years into your fanhood, let alone 30 or 50, no Bills fan thought it was over when we scored. Despite how inevitable it seemed, I barely celebrated. We have just found ways to render our fan base emotionally paralyzed that would make the plot to Saw seem like a touchback.

Underrated in it's misery because I think we all knew that was going to be the last one and most of us didn't really give the Bills a great chance. I think Dallas still wins even if Thurman doesn't fumble, but that was as much of a landslide play as I've ever seen. It's like everybody immediately knew when that happened, despite still having a lead, it was over.

Wild Card or not that Bills team in the MCM was one of the best defenses we ever had at a time when that really meant something. It's very possible we make a SB run that year just as the team we should have beat did. I just can't rank 13 seconds ahead of MCM. At least with 13 seconds everything happened within what would be considered normal football. Even if it was incredibly unlikely. Much less shocking to me than seeing a throwback on a kickoff to the house.

Well, do we? I mean, did we not run the same defense against them last year or was this our version of learning? You have disagreed in a way that leads to good dialogue and I appreciate that. I guess I don't like defensive systems that are too "system" oriented which we seem to be. Next week we will see KC have issues with the Bengals because the Bengals shred man defense. I can unearth some stats from advanced sites, but it's like two different teams, man vs zone. KC plays virtually all man. Buffalo is a dominant zone team, generally more shell/bend but don't break principles. We did seem to play brackets a lot against them yesterday. I don't know if I buy the "gassed" part. Hill just beat Jackson inside because Jackson had improper technique for what was called. That might have been because he was tired, I don't know. Kelce was just given a seam route to set up the FG with no attempt at slowing him down. That was not from being gassed. These two players combined are better than any two offensive threats we have. As one poster pointed out, what player do we have that can take a slant to the house like Hill or is a HOF level receiver like Kelce? We have caught up in the arms race. We are perceived to be ahead in the defensive race. All I can land on is they have two of the most dynamic offensive players in football. So much so that they make Diggs and Knox look normal. The production against us stands out even if it is somewhat flawed as far as when it occurred.