Tanoros

I understand the Bills are already elite and have been for a while. My point was more about how I would feel if I were on the Packers side of things. Yes, Green Bay was a contender before the trade, but they were not widely viewed in the same tier as the very top teams. This move, at least for now, puts them there, and time will tell if it holds. I get your point about the cap and roster implications that come with making a big move like this. Those things do create pressure, and if the ultimate goal is not reached, it is easy for fans to look back and say it was not worth it. Sports often get reduced to win or lose in that way. But as a fan, I do not think it has to be that black and white. I love seeing the Bills as one of the class teams in the NFL and will always value that, even while recognizing that nothing lasts forever. Right now, the Packers feel like a team that can take on anybody, and that is a great place to be. Not winning a Super Bowl does not erase that. Sure, many fans would complain about a move like this if it does not end in a championship, but just as many would remember and enjoy the ride of watching their team compete at the very highest level. We love our Bills and enjoy the seasons especially now that we have 17. There are so many memories we have that we think fondly of. No matter what happens, I will always look back at this time fondly and with good memories and I will not consider it a loss.

Exactly, this is how I see it too. As a fan, of course the ultimate hope is always to win the Super Bowl. But I also love when the Bills are among the elite, when they are clearly one of the top teams in the league. That is where the Packers sit right now until proven otherwise, and I am sure their fans are happier with that than they would be sitting just outside of that elite tier. If the Bills made a move like this and did not end up winning it all, but it elevated the team into the class of the NFL for several years, I would look back thinking we could have and should have won a Super Bowl. At the same time, I would also have incredible memories of watching my team compete at the very highest level, and that would mean far more than framing it simply as a failed trade.

I do not think the trade for Micah Parsons should automatically be defined as a failure if the Packers do not win a Super Bowl. Winning a championship is always the ultimate goal, but football is far more complex than star player equals Super Bowl or bust. A great example is the Bills trading for Stefon Diggs. Buffalo did not win a Super Bowl in his four years there, but that move completely transformed the team. It elevated Josh Allen into an elite quarterback tier, gave Buffalo one of the best wide receivers in the league, and made them a legitimate contender every season. By almost every measure, that was a win of a trade, even without the Lombardi. I would argue the same logic applies here. If Parsons helps elevate Green Bay from good to consistently being among the elite with deep playoff runs and multiple NFC Championship appearances, then that is a success. Where I agree with the criticism is that simply going one and done or consistently finishing 1-1 in the playoffs would not cut it. Consistent high level contention has to be the bar. And we cannot ignore the reality of football. One injury to Jordan Love or other key players could derail a season regardless of how dominant Parsons plays. That does not erase the value of acquiring one of the very best defensive players in the league. We have seen other examples of this across the NFL. When the Vikings traded for Jared Allen in 2008, he immediately turned their defense into a top unit and helped Minnesota become a true contender. They made playoff runs and reached the NFC Championship but never won a Super Bowl. Still, that trade is remembered as a huge success because Allen was a transformative player who made them elite. Another example is the Bears trading for Khalil Mack in 2018. Chicago did not win it all, but Mack turned their defense into one of the most feared in the league and made them an immediate contender. That move was viewed as a win because of how much it elevated the team, even without a ring. The point is that acquiring a generational talent is about consistently giving yourself a real chance. Without Parsons, the Packers are a good team. With him, they are an elite team that everyone has to take seriously. And to me, that is worth it, because so many factors beyond Parsons will ultimately determine whether or not a Super Bowl is won. Perhaps instead of a binary: win/loss it could be best viewed as F - A+ with an A+ being the Super Bowl win and B+ being elite and championship game appearance(s). There is just so many layers to success or not, although I want the Bills to winner a Super Bowl beyond anything else, I also greatly appreciate when they are elite and I appreciate the steps that make them elite and I consider them being elite and with a chance to win it all a level of success beyond fighting to make the playoffs if that.

Context is always important to recognize and one week is not enough information to determine who is and isn’t the best defense or offense in the NFL this season. Because of the lack of data, the best thing we can do is draw from how we have faired in the past, that offers more context then one game against a very good team. Think of the Saints after two weeks last year, one of the best offenses and that didn’t last. Going off the data without enough context is little better than a random guess. Historically, our defense is a really good regular season defense, but also struggles against these power running type of teams. However, Fields isn’t Lamar and I believe our defense comes out looking a lot better this week.

If I remember correctly, the ball was snapped a little in the quick side. Bishop may have thought he had time to sneak his way up pre snap.

To set up the two matches per week, it was a setting available in the commissioner tools. I believe it may have been a default setting too. It said something like, “two matches per week” and I had to click the information button to see what it meant. I’m excited to check it out. It seems like every year there are those people who either have all of the good matchups or the unlucky matchups.

Has anyone tried the Sleeper App for fantasy football? I started a new 10 league this year that’s 1 ppr, redraft, with blind action waiver wire. I’m 9/10 and we pick tomorrow morning. I’m also the comish in a 12 ppr, redraft, blind auction waiver, ESPN league. We’ve done this league for over 10 years now, probably close to 15. After seeing Sleeper, it puts ESPN to shame. I love mock drafting and Sleeper doesn’t great job at it. You can see all of your past mocks, plus invite people into the mock draft, making it easy to practice with others. There is also a feature I’m trying out this year. Everyone in the league has two matchups each week. A regular head to head and then you play against the average score of everyone in the league. So you can go 2-0, 1-1, or 0-2. I’ve had a lot of fun over the years expanding the playoff field, which keeps just about everyone in the hunt until the very end, so I’m excited to see how things shake out with the two matchups a week.

No joke here. Me and my extended family aren’t watching this year. Also, a lot of people I work with aren’t watching, whether they are lying I don’t know. But my family has a Super Bowl party every year and we aren’t this year. I’m voting with my viewership. Also, the only Chiefs game I’ll watch next year is when they play the Bills. Otherwise, I’m not watching the Chiefs again until they aren’t favored so blatantly.

Even with the refs really screwing us, a few different plays calls or better execution (Kincaid catch on 4th down) and we win the game. We are so so close. We don’t need significant change as many here seem to be implying. If we do that, chances are we change for the worse, not the better and we waste prime Josh Allen years worse than we are now. There is no guarantee a big shakeup will result in better performance. The fact of the matter is our team has been dominant 5 years running with the highest point differential in the league. We just need better play calling and more elite talent to make/execute the plays in the biggest moments. More than a major shakeup we need tactical tweaks to put us over the top. I’m on the opposite spectrum of all of you who can’t get past the pain of the loss and are expressing your pain as, “burn it down, we need major change”. What you don’t realize is, the chances are high that the major change will be in the wrong direction. I think we have a great coach, great GM, and the most gifted QB. We just need more elite talent, which means better drafting in the first and second round. But even with that being said, Beane has built an incredible roster and has done such an amazing job with late round picks. I’m just glad we have an owner who DOESN’T think like all of those who can’t get past of the pain of the loss.

Were you a fan during the drought years? If so, yes this hurts but it’s WAY better than those years. Our team is awesome and so close to going all the way. They have the ability to donut any year with Allen at qb and I think anyone during the drought would have gladly had a team that has a chance ever year. Be happy for what we have.

I think you’re right about going big to match the Ravens, but taking Taron out a bunch is really hard to do. He is so special. But I don’t think he can go in at safety either, so that might be the only option when the Ravens go big. We definitely need a plan other than staying in nickel.

For clarification he actually says that the Ravens played very little 11 personnel. They played with 6 o-linemen 22% of the time, and he didn’t say how often Richard was out there when in a 6 o-linemen formation. He also stated the Steelers allowed just over 3 yards a play when they had 3 db’s on the field, and 4.1 yards per play with 4 db’s on the field, however they gave up over 9 yards per play with 5 db’s on the field. They Steelers played 5 db’s just under 50% of the time. Sounds like we need a plan to counter when the Ravens go heavy with 6 o-linemen and/or bring Ricard out. We should have an idea how to play 6 o-linemen because the Bills led the league during the regular season in that formation. Thanks for sharing the video.

Great pick! Let’s see it come true

Between Mooney, Shakir, and Coleman which two should I start? I’m leaning Shakir and Mooney but I’m 100% convinced.

The Seahawks blue like ours is their retro jersey and you don’t see many of those at Hawks games. It’s mostly the new darker blue jersey they have. My best friend is a Hawks fan with seasons and I go to a few games every year. Most of the blue yesterday was Bills blue, I promise. There was just a sea of Bills fans. I’ve never seen so many fans of an away team at a Hawks game.

Before the game I talked to someone at the stadium who said there was 57% Bills fans. Just looking at the crowd it did seem close to 50/50.

I was at the game, and I’ve been to many Hawks games over the years. There was some loud moments, but all in all not as loud as most other games there. I heard from someone before the game that there was 57% Bills fans, and I believe it. Buffalo fans were EVERYWHERE!

I don’t know answers to most of your questions but I can answer a few. You should be fine getting to the airport after. It takes about 30-45 minutes to get out of the parking garage near the stadium if waiting until the very end of the game to leave. Once out of the parking garage things move a little faster. Alternatively the light rail is a great way out, and you can take it to the airport. If you use the light rail be sure to get on at “Stadium Station” which is near the parking garage. As far as places to see while in Seattle. Pikes Market is the more famous place. They have a large open air market, there is a great Piroshki place down there, the great wheel is fun to check out, there is also the gum wall, and the seafood market at Pikes is where they throw fish and catch the fish. There is also the Space Needle which has been remodeled within the last 5 years. It’s cool up top with a clear floor you can look down from. The seats are also clear and feel like you will slide off of the seat. Right down the street from the Space Needle is the Museum of Pop Culture aka Jimmy Hendrix Museum. This is a pretty cool place, cool music memorabilia and also there is a cool portion dedicated to movies and accessories from various movies. I hope you have a great trip and leave Seattle celebrating a Buffalo win!

I’ll be at the game. I’m from Washington and this is my second Buffalo game @ Seattle. My best friend is a Hawks fan, so let’s hope I walk away from this game with a big smile on my face.

You’re not considering how good offensive coordinators scheme their attack knowing and anticipating how defenses will adjust, and already having plans to counter those adjustments. Good coordinators are always calling certain plays, or using certain tendencies to set up other plays/tendencies. I highly doubt Joe Brady doesn’t already have a plan as to how he is going to adjust. The way you articulate your perspective is as if Joe Brady is calling his best shot now, and will have to figure out a new way as defenses adjust. I think he deserves having belief that he has a plan on how to adjust. In the end, we will see.

I didn’t study the film so I don’t have a rating. But speaking from a purely logical standpoint, an A+ should be on the table for every position group every game and context must be an important part of the grading. You state the WR position group couldn’t be an A+ because they only had 151 yards. Yet they had a high catch rate and they can’t force the QB to throw to them or dictate the game plan. Additionally, catching isn’t the only thing the WR do. They block, they run routes when not targeted. Those are also important aspects of the job and should be included in the grade. To base the grade on yardage only would be a very poor way to grade and not looking at the whole picture, which is the point of the grade.

I think many are implying Beane didn’t do enough at WR because they don’t like who he picked up. We lost Diggs and Davis and replaced them with Coleman and Samuel (2 for 2). Coleman is unproven, but Diggs fell off at the end of last season and Gabe has always been so hot or cold. We also lost Sheffield and Harty but we picked up Hamler, Claypool, Hollins, Cephus then we have Shorter coming into year 2. Sheffield and Harty weren’t doing a whole lot last year, so it’s def not a net loss and maybe even a net gain on this second grouping here. in addition, our TE group is very strong with Kincaid and Knox, both better than many teams #1 TE, not to mention Kincaid coming into year 2. There is a good chance he becomes the #1 target much like Kelce with KC. It certainly can’t be ruled out as a possibility. Then we have Cook who is no slouch receiving. Overall we lost many targets and receptions in Diggs and Davis, however, we also saw how the offense performed with Diggs being largely invisible the second half of last season. Now with Brady having a full offseason to build his offense around the guys on the roster, it shouldn’t be surprising if our offense has another strong season. We have a lot of potential on our offense with many of the key contributors being young and ascending. Plus, we have Allen who is amazing and I’m super excited to see him in year 2 of Brady’s offense with it being anyone’s guess who Allen ends up targeting the most. Allen will put the ball in a good location on most of his pass attempts and will most likely spread the ball well. Lastly, we didn’t really have more than 3 capable WR’s last year. We had Diggs, Davis and Shakir (who started last season unproven). I don’t know many would have considered Harty or Sheffield as capable prior to last season. Honestly, any team that looses their top 3 WR is going to be in a tough spot. So I don’t understand where that comment is coming from. We also have two solid TE’s and a very capable receiving back. i don’t think our offense will struggle as much as many are alluding too.

If you read closely, you’ll realize that first paragraph is about Kincaid, NOT Davis.

Like all things, moderation. I also don’t gamble much but I enjoy roulette and when I play I play with $100. If I make money on the night I then double it down (sometimes what I gave over $100 others all of it) on red/black or odd/even. my dad loves slots and is one of the luckiest people I’ve ever seen on them (I’ve seen him win $16,000 his first pull after I got up, my last time ever playing a slot btw). I learned to play roulette I do in order to pass the time and make my money last. I can generally play for hours with that $100. In my time I’d guess I’m around even give or take a few $100. Now a days my dad spots me the $100 so someone will with him. Moderation is the key to life in regards just about everything.

I think it’s all in regards to perspective. Losing the super bowls themselves was definitely bad, but the whole timeframe in general was not bad (my viewpoint atleast), especially when compared against the 17 year drought. I’d rather lose the Super Bowl every year than not make the playoffs. The question really comes down to game itself or the season itself. Just depends on how someone interprets the question.