Long Suffering Fan

Because it is true. We had beat the Giants earlier in the year, on the road, without Kelly. We had just obliterated the Raiders. The offense was the best it ever was. We only got 19 minutes of possession because the Giants knew we were better than them and they wanted to shorten the game. Belicheat's defense won the game for them because the Giants got stops. Not counting a kneel down at the end of the 1st half, the Bills had 10 drives. - 1 FG - 1 FG Miss - 2 TD - 6 punts For comparison, I just looked it up. In the previous playoff games, we punted 1 time in scoring 44 points against Miami and then we punted 2 times in scoring 51 points against the Raiders after the game was already essentially over. 3 total punts and only 1 first team punt in the playoffs before the SB.

While this is all true...drafting a generational QB in the 6th round will boost a coach and Belicheck is sub 500 without Tom...it shouldn't denigrate Belicheat as a coach. - His plan/defense won SB25 for the Giants. - His Browns won a playoff game (it was almost 30 years before that happened again) - He beat the Bills in that stupid wind game. The Pats had no business doing that. - He got the Pats to the playoffs with a rookie Mac Jones. He's a cheater and he was helped by Tommy, but he is still a great coach. Thank God he is a terrible GM (and I mean that literally).

I agree. It is normal churn and almost all teams have it. However, the real question is this: Did we get better with our churn or worse? For me the answer to that question is Levi Wallace. I expected him to get a fairly fat contract as a starting corner. When he only got $4M/year, I was taken aback. We made a $3M gamble on a TE coming off an injury. If we wanted Wallace to be our CB2, we would have signed him at that price. That signaled loud and clear that the Bills thought that position was a problem and that they wanted to get better there. When he struggled to win the starting job in Pitt, I think that thought was confirmed. Add to that thought that both the DL and OL have gotten better this year (IMHO) and I think we didn't just get better, we got much better in the churn. Side note - it is fun to have a chance to use the word churn. I kept thinking of Amos Burton as I typed this. Second side note - I do fully expect our defensive stats to be worse this year (because of schedule) even though the defense is better.

Joined

Super interesting. Best content of the pre-season. Josh is always good, but Chris really brought up good questions and led the interview well. He might not have been a good QB, but the fact that he was a QB in the NFL gave him some insight to get the most out of Josh. FWIW he was also the first national guy that I recognized getting on the Josh Allen Train. Definitely worth a watch.

When you are a hammer, everything looks like a nail. I usually find it mildly amusing which makes up for any misses. Hey, its not all going to be gold.

Thanks so much for posting this video this morning. I desperately needed real football content to "cleanse the pallet". Here is my hot take. Beach Chair might be our most important off-season addition. The offensive line looks reborn. Countless times we lost yardage or had minimal gain running against light boxes last year.

I have no doubt, Inigo. I bet you would do that if someone hurt anyone in your family.

I do not have faith in the legal system like I did 20 years ago. I'm not sure if the legal system has really changed that much or if I just got wiser and more jaded. Justice is rarer than you think, so many lawyers are untrustworthy/expensive, and judges, if not corrupt, have biases.

This is an interesting thought experiment and I am interested in how it plays out, but I have my doubts. It's not like they moved on from their studs and the studs signed mid-level deals. People paid a king's ransom for them. The KC-Miami deal especially. KC not only saved on their cap (which can be used elsewhere), they got serious draft capital. For Sabres fans - it was one of the reasons why the trade for O'Reilly was bad (IMO). Not only did we give up a lot of assets for him, but then we immediately paid him a contract that would hurt our cap situation later.

This is yet more proof that culture and work ethic matters. There are always those that say things like: - They're professional athletes, they all work hard - sure but some are more driven and work harder and they get better. If this were not true, you would not have contract clauses on weight, study, etc. or stories about QBs who hadn't studied the playbook. - I would rather have talent over culture - sure, but I would rather have talent AND good culture. The way I phrase it is - good culture is a talent multiplier. I love McD's philosophy of a leader in every room.

I could never do that...I have a soul.

I've been camping in his front yard for a year now and cheering loudly for him whenever he gets the mail. He seems to like it.

In fairness, some of that is right. I didn't figure it out right away, but for about the last 30 years I have screamed at the TV when some announcer said that they have to establish the run. Coaches in an echo chamber repeating a mantra from the 50s and not realizing the game had changed. When that saying was really a thing, DBs could practically jump on the back of WRs and force them to give them a piggy back ride. Of course you should run the ball, especially if you can do it against a light box, but the last 10 years have proved that the best teams tend to throw it more. All through the drought the fraidy-cat punts by the Bills drove me crazy. Again, the last 10 years have shown that teams should punt less and the best coaches punt less. On the rest, I can see your point.

This is tough to do. There are 10+ easy cuts at this point and determining which are the first to go out of that batch is hard to predict. My bet is that the Bills are at least partially motivated (on this cut) by whether or not someone is a "glue guy"/popular. All things being equal, someone who is "good in the room" likely gets held on to until the last cut. The problem is we don't get to see any of that so it is hard to judge.

jwhit34 is Jim Nantz! It is an honor to have you on this board.

The famous saying is - you can indict a ham sandwich - meaning that it is relatively easy to get an indictment. An indictment is just a decision to go to trial, which is why if it is even close, they come back with an indictment. An indictment essentially means that it looks like something possibly could be there so let's get all the evidence out at trial. I am affected by the media coverage just like everyone else, so I was shocked when two grand juries refused to indict him. We'll never know why, because that stuff is all sealed, but that likely means that there is less evidence than we are being led to believe. I honestly went from nuclear against Watson to puzzled and slightly confused. It was two different juries - not a rogue judge, but a jury - not one, but two. I have no doubt that Watson propositioned most or all of these women and that he is a scumbag, but I don't see how I can take issue with the punishment. In addition to the 11 games without pay and the fine, he didn't get to play all last season as this was being decided. It seems like a severe punishment. Isn't it the most severe in the history of the NFL? All of this stuff where people pontificate and thump their mighty chest about how the NFL missed a chance to stand for women...sigh. If they don't mention the fact that they refused to even charge him...it comes across as virtue signaling. It is the popular take that everyone will like and makes you feel good - look at me, I support women! And, if we are going to hate on the NFL, shouldn't we hate on the player's union more? They pushed for less punishment. What a surprise, ex-players come on these shows and blame the NFL and not their own union. Again, just to be clear, I think Watson is scumbag and deserves his punishment.

I thought it looked great, but then I'm stuck in the 90s.

I agree with all three statements, but Belicheat is breaking down the Dolphins, not the Pats. He certainly isn't giving anything away. He came a lot closer to giving stuff away than Lil Dirty did. I like Cover 1 and I like that the Bills are allowed to participate. The generic stuff about what happened on a particular rep is good for us to learn, but is certainly already well understood by everyone in the league. When you start giving out your own personal "rules" like - this look here means my QB will throw it there and I know it pre-snap, now you are giving away something that can only be guessed by looking at tons of film and coming to that assumption - even then it is still an assumption. I've not seen any of our guys give away that info, but Hodgins was much closer to the line.

Describing every Bills' tailgate.

Hey, AB, just watch Steph Diggs live. He's even better. Narcissist.

I'm good with realistic negative. Constructive criticism is fine and many of his criticisms were on the mark. What soured me on Sully was his appearances on WGR. He had this thing he would say sometimes: "So, how do you like your football team?" Now, that is a fine question to start discussion about the merits and deficiencies of a team...but he always seemed to say it with an accusing tone. Sometimes it was almost like he was daring anyone else to defend any aspect of the team. He seemed to enjoy it so much. Maybe it is dangerous to read too much into tone, but he seemed happy the Bills were bad. I couldn't read him after that.

Didn't Beasley used to do that?

What are you talking about? They have always been the Commanders. Also, Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia

I've spent the last several years building an immunity to iocane powder.