[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

7 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

If it’s not a reason why we lost the game I don’t care

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.   

[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

Just now, Joe Ferguson said:

If Hill was flagged for taunting, what will be the penalty? Are they going to waive the TD?

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. 

[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

1 minute ago, Success said:

Bad rule anyway....

 

Certainly agree with that

[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

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.      

[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

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.    

[Taunting not called on Hill's TD]

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.

 

 

 

[What are the top three worst losses in franchise history?]

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.    

[What are the top three worst losses in franchise history?]

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

[Gabriel Davis on GMFB]

4 hours ago, Doc said:

I remember being amazed by Eric Moulds' 9 catch 240 yard 1 TD performance against the Dols in the 1998 playoffs.  This was better.

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. 

[What are the top three worst losses in franchise history?]

8 minutes ago, DuckyBoys said:

fact we have some many contenders speaks volumes to the level of grasping defeat from the jaws of victory the Bills have mastered  This last one takes the cake  Not sure I can watch another season of the bend dont break defense McDermott seems to favor

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.  

[What are the top three worst losses in franchise history?]

5 minutes ago, billsfan714 said:

Superbowl 28 we actually had the lead at halftime.   Still never felt confident, knowing what they did to us before.

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.   

[What are the top three worst losses in franchise history?]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

This doesn't even make my short list. It was a great game played by great teams. We lost and that sucks, but we didn't get the rug pulled out from under us by external forces or collapse in on ourselves. We just lost.

The MNF game to Dallas felt worse. Stevie Johnson drop against the Steelers felt worse. Losing against the Steelers backups and launching the career of Willie Parker felt worse. Watching our 5-1 season slip away was worse. MCM and Wide Right were WAY worse.

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. 

[Beat KC? Beat Hill and Kelce, 41 Catches, 536 YDS, 4 TD's]

18 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

misleading, because the OP suggested some schematic flaws. I think Hill and Kelce came on late not because of schematic failures, but because the D was gassed. I don’t think we would change how we defended them. 

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. 

[Beat KC? Beat Hill and Kelce, 41 Catches, 536 YDS, 4 TD's]

1 minute ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

sorry, but I respectfully disagree. The game plan was smart. They bracketed both guys well. Hill had 6 catches for 30 Yards until he busted his late TD after the D had been out there for most of the second half. 

if you want to blame anyone, blame the offensive playcalling— they squandered the 3rd quarter on 2-yard RB runs. Kept the D out there all second half. 

 

Fair enough. I'm not focused on yesterdays what could have we done better. More the future, what do we have to do better. Play calling, game management, and talk of 13 seconds doesn't wildly change future outcomes. If we get aggressive sooner, so does KC. At least you could make that argument. 

 

Even though we contained them for some time in yesterdays game, the explosion late did cost us the game. It's also incredible the level of total production those two have against us in just two playoff games. I also don't think Diggs is the impact player Hill is, regardless of the stats, nor do I think Knox is the impact player Kelce is at this time. I do see those two players as being the difference in this rivalry as we move forward. Our defense is better, although basically equal when facing this level of competition.  Our QB's are all but equal. Our skilled position players are very good, but KC's has two of the most dynamic in the league. Hill's speed is incredible and Kelce is a Hall of Fame TE. 

[Remember John Elway's "The Drive"? Josh Allen did that and then some.]

14 minutes ago, Beast said:

I remember thinking that Josh Allen had his own chance at immortality last night when he started deep in Buffalo territory and methodically started moving the Bills down the field, in an attempt to win a playoff game on the road in a very hostile atmosphere.

 

Allen not only succeeded one time by putting the Bills up 29-26, he got the ball back again, drove 70 something yards, and won the game twice in enemy territory! Simply amazing! Except for one little thing....his team lost.

 

What Allen did was twice as amazing as what Elway did in Cleveland in 1987.  Elway has "The Drive" and the glory that went with it. 35 years later it is still being talked about.

 

Will we (not me, I'll be dead) be talking in 2057 about the night Josh Allen willed his team down the field two times against the Chiefs at Arrowhead Stadium?

 

Maybe. Maybe not. One thing is for sure...if the Bills held that lead? They'd be talking about Josh Allen in the year 2157 and his night in KC 135 years earler.

 

It simply was that incredible.

 

Thank you, Josh.

I thought about the same thing right when the drive started. The loss was also so much more frustrating just knowing what a win could have done for Josh. People talk about why he doesn't make Pro Bowls or isn't in the MVP race. That all would have ended in one game if we win. With the loss it will be forgotten about rather soon. It's just the nature of the game.   

[Beat KC? Beat Hill and Kelce, 41 Catches, 536 YDS, 4 TD's]

Just now, Big Blitz said:

Was Hill out there for the last kickoff with 13 seconds left?

No, but Hill was for the first completion of that drive, then Kelce for the second on the seam route to kick the tying FG. 

[Beat KC? Beat Hill and Kelce, 41 Catches, 536 YDS, 4 TD's]

2 minutes ago, Miyagi-Do Karate said:

These stats are so misleading. The defense held those two guys pretty well in check until the last like 4 minutes of the game. The defense was gassed by then. 

Meh, you had other angles to work, like how we sort of shut them down more in a regular season game this year when the KC offense had yet to find it's form or how we sort of shut them down last year in a rain home game. The "defense was gassed". Ya, no thank you. If anything you're emphasizing the point of needing to shut them down. When we did, as you're stating, we at least slowed KC down to some degree. Until we no longer could shut them down and not even close when it counted most.  

[Beat KC? Beat Hill and Kelce, 41 Catches, 536 YDS, 4 TD's]

Like most of you, today’s aftermath was pretty brutal. I’m searching for any silver lining or factoid to understand more.  

In this game, yes, it came down to 13 poorly managed seconds. That said what will it come down to in the future? This is a young enough Chiefs team currently on its 4th consecutive AFC championship game and possibly 3rd consecutive SB. They aren’t going anywhere. Even if more competition is being added in this thing will run through KC for the foreseeable future until proven otherwise.

 

I don’t look at this anymore like it’s about beating Mahomes. We matched QB play yesterday and I feel comfortable saying only two QB’s in the NFL can literally do anything on the field. Burrow and Herbert could be incredible players but they will never be like Mahomes or Josh. The improvisation and athletic ability on both while slightly different, is unique to only those two.  

 

What has really been the difference maker in the two playoff games and how do we get over the hurdle?

 

Hill and Kelce in two playoff games have been targeted 48 times, they have 41 catches, 536 yards, and 4TD’s.  That is the problem with KC. Our defense, going into the game knows the two players who will be highlighted by KC and it’s not that we can’t stop them. I don’t think anybody can stop them. The problem is they perform BETTER against us than they do on average.

 

If you broke down these stats to individual averages, they average 10.25 catches, 134 yards, and 1 TD per game against Buffalo the last two years in the Playoffs. This year, in 16 games started by both, they averaged 6.34 catches, 73.86 yards, and .56 TD’s. They average close to double the production against our defense than they do in the regular season.

 

Even looking at the final two minutes of yesterdays game. You let Hill take a crosser to the house and then just give Kelce the seam for the FG. Our “better” defense becomes more neutral with QB’s this good. Even though Diggs is special and Knox looks like he might be, they’re not at the level of Hill and Kelce at this time.  

 

Some might say we need to focus on getting home against Mahomes or we need to get a home game. These things can help with the above issue. Bottom line, we need to be better at defending the two clearest threats of the KC offense and up until this point we have shown to be absolutely awful at it. It feels somewhat schematic driven as we are built to defend the pass more than the run so reduction in defensive performance against averages just seems improbable.

 

Is anybody else seeing this similar to me right now? Outside of Allen and Mahomes, who changed the trajectory of the game yesterday? Clearly Davis, but he’s not ready to be in this conversation just yet. Outside that it’s the usual suspects that we don’t seem to have any answer for.   

[These threads are unbearable after losses]

People need to deal with what they're feeling. That's why you see it get like this. Sure, with context, we had a solid year. We also just missed the best chance we had at winning a SB since Wide Right and lost a playoff game in the most excruciating way since MCM, so it's not like this is just a run of the mill. This will go down in Bills lore. Further and I'm sure others exist in this camp, but what is the takeaway from this? Last year we had a takeaway. How do we beat the Chiefs? How are the Chiefs not a step even closer to becoming the Patriots for us just on the biggest stage? I don't have a silver lining right now and saying things like we used to suck so we should be thankful or a few weeks ago we never thought we would even win a game. Those don't really work as silver linings a year removed from an AFC championship appearance and blowing a lead with 13 seconds. 

[2nd Worst Loss in Bills History!! Only wide right was worse!]

It's one of the worst losses in our history for multiple reasons. The gravity of the situation (I do believe the winner goes to play for the SB). The insane multiple comebacks only to fall short. Left to wonder what else can we possibly do? What is the learning experience from this game for next year? How the hell do we beat KC? Plus you just wanted to for Josh and our team so bad. Just to get over the damn hump. This was as bad a MCM. In both games we took the lead with about the same amount of time and lost. 

[AFC Championship Tickets]

5 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said:

A Ponzi Scheme involves decepton & fraud, all I'm doing is betting legally & hoping the Bills come through for me & help pay for my ticket.  If they lose I'm out a lot less than I will be spending anyway, if they win I've got a Super Bowl ticket basically for its face value with the money I initially put in.  

I think if your main goal is to go to the Super Bowl at a reasonable cost, it's a rather brilliant approach. 

[Twitter dunking on Aaron Rodgers haha]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I dunno, that seems to be selective memory.   

 

Guy has 18 comebacks and 27 GWD, including 2 postseason GWD and a comeback (2014, 2016), both years GB contended for the conference championship.  He made some breathtaking, game-saving risky throws at times

 

 

Again, that seems to be some sort of Monday morning analysis. 

 

Favre and Rodgers have the same # of SB wins with GB - 1

Rodgers 5 conf. championship appearances to Favre 4, Favre 2 conf. championships vs Rodgers 1

 

At the time Favre was playing for GB, it was a common point of criticism that he would "throw the game away" by taking those risky throws.

 

We're not on the practice field with Lazard and Cobb and St Brown and that TE trio to know how much they deserve or don't deserve Rodgers trust

 

Rodgers passed up what looked like a clean shot to St Brown or Lazard on 3rd down in favor of a risky, interceptable throw to a double-covered Adams last night.

 

He's 1-4 in NFC championship games and a decade removed from his last Super Bowl. I know you didn't compare him to Favre, but if I was, it would be to say they have had a very similar ride. Almost stunning. Individual accolades and fame received for being either the best or among them pale in comparison to team hardware.

 

I don't know how much blame I would place on Rodgers. I'm too far outside the GB organization to know the innards of that team. It is rather remarkable they can never seem to make it past the Divisional or NFC Championship.

 

I think if people were to ask right now if Allen has an identical career to Rodgers do we consider that successful? I don't mean in the context of when we drafted Allen, but right now given many feel he is among the best in the league for years to come. I would think anybody should answer that without hesitation, Rodgers is looked at among the all time greats, but given the lack of success in SB wins and appearances, I don't know if I would be happy. More tormented and frustrated that it never amounted to more.

 

It's a weird situation and I'm curious if he leaves how that ends up looking for all involved. Please keep him out of the AFC.    

[Mafia outside the USA -- Sound Off! Where will you watch?]

This is a great thread, it would be so interesting to meet some of you and find out how you arrived where you're or if you have always been there how did you come to be a Bills fan. Sounds like some good offseason discussion.

[Does playing for Home Field next week add incentive or just more pressure?]

4 minutes ago, SinatraSinger said:

Maybe my problem is that I look at things as what I am and that's an amateur competitor.  Little things like that can play havic with my mind.  I've seen many friends while competing when adding additonal pressure will just crack under it.  

 

We may be able to say that about Tannehill and Rogers yesterday.

 

Did you see Josh's post game after New England? It wasn't an act. He really didn't care what just happened. After a year of being a Super Bowl contender and taking everybody's best shot. An AFC championship loss. Two straight playoff losses. We are dealing more with a team who understands how hard it is to get to the Super Bowl and is no longer content in just making the playoffs. I hope no more lessons need to be learned. It doesn't appear like it right now. Josh was so cold blooded last week after that stunning performance. 

[Does playing for Home Field next week add incentive or just more pressure?]

2 minutes ago, SinatraSinger said:

Did you actually read the question.  It only makes sense before the game.  After the game it will all be in hindsight which is useless.

 

If you were one of the players would playing for home field next week mean added pressure or more incentive?  Simple question.

 

I don't think it matters at all. I don't even think last week mattered to them outside knowing they needed to do what they did last week to get to KC.