Ecmic82
-
Posts
92 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ecmic82
-
-
35 minutes ago, Draconator said:
Thought this would be the best place for this. As always, everyone is coming to Buffalo. Now Myles Garrett. (I wouldn't hate this).
The next three or four years will probably be Josh Allen's absolute prime. At some point, the Bills would be negligent to not mortgage some portion of the future in order to maximize that four year window.. I don't think there's a player out there that would fit that maximization better than Garrett. He's a talent unto himself and would be expensive to get (I think another poster did a good job of laying that out), but would make every player on defense more effective to a degree that I think would dwarf the impact of any couple late first rounders the Bills would otherwise bring in.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
I think you’re over-selling it just a bit. Most teams play hard every week, sure, but their defense is having trouble stopping bad offenses in the fourth quarter, not during the first few drives when teams can sleepwalk a bit. Their D is not playing well.Yeah, it’s a hard sell that the Chiefs were the better team in the final 5 minutes of yesterday’s game.
Didn’t sense a flipped switch, or an activated superpower. The Raiders, through no influence or imposed-will of the Chiefs, shot themselves in the foot on one play (I’d argue two plays going back to the end of their previous drive) during a crunch-time scenario in which they otherwise thoroughly outplayed the Chiefs.
-
3
-
-
16 minutes ago, SaulGoodman said:
As worthless as the biased opinions of armchair refs?
There are no stats that support the narrative.
That may be true.
But the stat in that article doesn’t prove what the author seems to think it does.
you used the correct word. But there is no “proportionate” representation in the author’s analysis. He uses only raw quantities, and falls on his face.
-
7 minutes ago, SaulGoodman said:
Lol. And there it is. You guys really want to believe the conspiracy theory.
If KC consistently benefited disproportionately from calls/no-calls in these situations, as we're told, they wouldn't be #1 in this stat. It's okay to admit the league isn't fixing games for the Chiefs.
That’s a worthless stat. You use the word “disproportionate”, but that’s not even a proportionate stat.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, SaulGoodman said:
Following up on the ref conspiracy theories...
The myth: The officials favor the Chiefs late in close games.
When the Chiefs began 9-0 with seven wins by a touchdown or less, there were conspiracy theories about referees favoring them. Was the league trying to guide Kansas City to a three-peat? Was the idea that Chiefs wins are good because the league is trying to attract more Swifties to the NFL? Who knows.
Why it's a myth: Looking only at late- and close-game situations (eight points in either direction, second half or overtime) and including both declined and offsetting penalties, the NFL team with the most flags is ... Kansas City. It is tied with the Colts, having 29 penalties in such situations. Only the Jets and Saints have more penalty yards than Kansas City's 218 in late and close situations.
KC fans don't challenge the conspiracy narratives because they're insecure. They challenge them because it's complete nonsense.
The two teams that spend the most time within these “close situation” parameters have the most penalties against? Really? That’s not insight.
the Chiefs have spent about 234 out of a possible 310 minutes within these parameters. That’s a relatively high ratio. The Colts as well (they’ve played like one game that didn’t end as a one-score game). Since this is a Bills board I’ll use them as an example: they’ve played about 166 minutes out of a possible 330 within the parameters (since the article uses only second half minutes, that translates to about three games fewer that Kansas City).
Teams that generally play tight games will, generally, have more total flags against them in tight game situations than do teams that play within these situations less often. That article chose to write a narrative in search of a stat. They did it backwards.
-
2
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:
Now explain XP % indoor and outdoor? Point is that it’s not as simple as what he’s doing in Dallas would immediately translate to us.
Lol I’m not a dancing monkey, was just adding context to a post specifically about field goals. I’ve usually found that if I’m gonna ask something of someone else, I should first ask myself if I’m capable of doing it instead.
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, st pete gogolak said:
I went back and looked at Aubrey’s stats (didn’t break down dome v. outdoors). Folks are correct. He’s not automatic. He missed extra points last year and a few missed FG this year. The crazy stat is how good he is outside of 50 (20 out of 21 is insane). This thread is hypothetical because Cowboys aren’t going to give him up unless they receive a crazy offer and neither the Bills nor anybody else are going to make a crazy offer for a kicker.
So he’s 19-23 outdoors, if I’m correct. 7-8 from 50+. Nailed a 66 yarder in Cleveland, but a false start took it away.
Has had two kicks blocked. I know a blocked kick is a blocked kick, but I don’t think they’re all created equal. I don’t blame Denver’s kicker for the block against Kansas City, and Washington’s block on Aubrey was the exact same overload strategy, and Dallas’ blocking was even more egregious than Denver’s. The guy pretty much took it off Aubrey’s foot. the Steelers block was pretty much the Steelers being the Steelers. Defender got up about 10 feet and his hand happened to be in the right place, which is what the Steelers do 🤷♂️. Wasn’t an “indoor/outdoor” situation.
-
10 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:
But the question is what would you give up for it and its crazy to me to think Aubrey is worth a 4th round. Particularly when he has as many misses as Bass and he plays in a dome! Getting the best kicker has some value but its a tricky game cause their play can be very streaky.
Agree the line has moved back but Bass has the leg for it too so its not like it moves the line back much (again Aubrey is kicking those in great conditions). Aubrey has played 3 games outdoors and he has 2 misses in those games. I aint paying a 4th for that.
Yeah, I get it. I predicated my post with the acknowledgment that I probably value elite-elite kickers more than most people do. Maybe it’s a blind spot for me.
For me, the piece of mind of going into the playoffs with a kicker like Aubrey is worth more than the value-add of a late 4th round pick, particularly when factoring in timelines. As an example, Davis has been a great surprise for me this year, but I’d rather pair Allen with possibly the best kicker in the NFL(maybe yet to become the best in history?) for the rest of his playoff career than probably anything else that could be, on average, had in the 4th round, but that’s just my value judgment, and could be short-sighted 🤷♂️.
-
1
-
-
42 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:
Lol at all the 60 yarders. Im not gonna assume those are all in. Noone is automatic from that distance (Aubrey has as many misses this year as bass playing in a DOME!!!!!)
the 64 yarder against Bal is the first drive? I have that as a 67 yarder as the ball was at the 50.
the 66 yarder against Houston is risky business as they didnt score that next drive. if they get the ball in our territory they very well might (probably a FG).
the 62 yarder against Houston is a TD if it misses cause they settled for a FG after a long drive.
KC i have another 67 yarder as ball was at midfield. Considering they had to punt on the subsequent drive I wouldnt give them the short field either.
Would love to have an automatic kicker but its way more complicated than you make it out to be (I dont consider anything <90% automatic lol).
I didn’t mean to imply he’s automatic from that range, which is why I tried to be careful with my words. Small sample, but he is 6 for 6 on field goals of 57+ (and 3 for 3 on field goals 60+, with a 64 yard make negated last night, and a 66 yarder called back against the Browns).
I am not referring to that particular Baltimore drive, and I’m not referring to that Kansas City drive.
of course the negative EPA from potential misses should, in a perfect analysis, be factored, but the negative EPA from actual misses should then also be factored, and Aubrey actually misses far less than most other kickers.
And, I know it’s funny to be referencing all the 60 yarders. I get it, but in THIS NFL, where teams are more incline to try 55+ yarders than ever before, the line of demarcation between kicking and punting has become those 58, 59, and 60+ yarders. That’s just the reality of it.
-
23 minutes ago, YattaOkasan said:
So you have to consider points greater than what we have, which is Bass. Hes left a total of 13 points on the field this year (little known fact, if he hits his next 2 FGs its his best kicking % of his career). Please let me know if theres any situation you think McD would have kicked instead of punted (cause that would add to the total). So thats 1 point per game that bass has left on the field versus a perfect kicker. I think Ray Davis's 428 yards have resulted in 13 points (see the Jets game) over replacement, so I def think a 4th round pick at a position offers greater return. You can start convincing me maybe in the 5th, but really the 6th. And again this is against a perfect kicker.
There are a few instances where the Bills might have kicked a field goal with Aubrey instead of what they actually did (usually punt). A 64 yarder vs Baltimore, a 62 and 66 yarder vs Houston, a 64 yarder vs Kansas City. Maybe they try the 51 yarder vs Kansas City to go up 16-7 instead of going for it on 4th and 3? I’m not mad at the decision, but Aubrey might change the math on that one.
These numbers look a little crazy, But Aubrey’s been close to automatic at these distances (he nailed a 64 yarder that had at least 3 or 4 extra yards in it last night, but it was negated by a defensive penalty).
Mostly, I’d want a kicker like Aubrey for the playoffs, where the impact of elite kickers is often magnified due to relatively evenly matched teams.
-
I’d definitely give up a 4th, probably even a 3rd, but I probably value the elite-elite kickers more than the average fan. He’s probably worth 1-2 points more per game than a league-average kicker, which is a better return than I think could reasonably expected from a late 4th round pick.
I also think he could’ve made a meaningful impact in the playoffs last year.
-
46 minutes ago, Billsatlastin2018 said:
This is incredible parsing, designed to find the slightest subjective fault to determine a legal catch.
He caught the ball with two feet.
He crossed the GL, possessing the ball.
He then went to the ground, with the slightest movement with the ball never coming close to touching the ground.
In the minds of the highest percentage of football fans, that was and should always be a catch!
If the ball is not slipping through one’s hands at the point of catch, should be ruled a catch- always.
Making it not, exposes the NFL to ridicule.
Yeah with catches like this there’s going to usually be some degree of parsing.
But the player in the above photo does not have possession of that football. His left hand isn’t touching the ball, and if his left hand doesn’t come over to quickly resecure it, the ball is going to be on the ground within the next second, because his right hand no longer has possession. If the left nor the right hand have possession (another way to put it is “control”) of the football, the player does not have possession of the football.
the GIF that this screenshot was taken of (another poster posted it earlier in the thread) further illuminates this.
it’s a close call, but by the rulebook (and, that’s the important metric, not fan opinion) I think the refs called it right.
-
47 minutes ago, Einstein said:
How is turning upfield not a football move? Coleman definitley did that.
Turning up field is a football move, but only after the second foot comes down.
Most of the turn occurred before the second foot came down, so most of the turn cannot, by the rulebook, be considered the “football move” for that play.
the rulebook outlines three phases of a catch: (1) possession of the ball, (2) two feet or one other body part must touch the ground, and (3) an act common to the game (a football move). And they must occur in that specific order.
Everything Coleman did before his second foot came down should be ignored when looking at the third phase of a catch.
-
2 minutes ago, BearNorth said:
How does that work with a toe drag? Receiver is moving towards the boundary, makes the catch, and pretty close to simultaneously does the toe tap. There is very little done other than catching the ball, getting two feet down and falling out of bounds. The football move here is simultaneous to the catch and getting parts of both feet down.
An acceptable act, according to the rulebook, is simply possessing the ball long enough to theoretically make a football move, whether the player actually makes a football move or not isn’t the determinative factor.
So, going out of bounds on a toe drag, that’d look like maintained possession of the ball for a time beyond the moment the player touches the sideline. Surviving the ground while falling out of bounds would fall under this category as well.
-
Just now, Meatloaf63 said:
Nope, it’s two feet down and a football move, not two feet down and then a football move. The too move can start as soon as there is possession/control.
The rulebook states, “after (a) [player secures the ball] and (b) [player touches the ground with both feet] have been fulfilled, [player] performs any act common to the game”
-
Another thing to consider is that the “football move” cannot be considered to have begun until after the second foot is down.
He’s already at least halfway through his turn by the time his second foot comes down. Therefore, most of that turn is ineligible to even be considered as a football move that’s part of the catch.
He loses control of the ball fractions of a second after his second foot comes down. In my opinion, barely enough time to begin, let alone complete, a football move. I think it was a good call. I would’ve been pissed if a Bills’ opponent pulled off that play and it was ruled a touchdown.
-
The top two players in MVP betting odds right now are Lamar (+225) and Mahomes (+475), so if you’re inclined to think that voters would be hesitant to give Lamar a third MVP (IMO a real consideration) and that Mahomes WON’T be MVP (he will not) this week is probably the perfect time to place MVP bets on a portion of the rest of the field.
-
On 12/26/2023 at 7:51 AM, Gregg said:
Are they any scenarios for week 17 where the Bills can clinch a playoff spot or do we have to wait until week 18 to clinch.
I think there’s five scenarios if the Bills win. Losses by either…Pitt and Cin
Pitt and Jax
Jax and Cin
Pitt and Hou and Indy
Cin and Hou and Indy
-
2
-
-
15 minutes ago, BillsFan130 said:
If bills win next week and bengals lose/steelers lose..
Would the bills clinch a playoff spot?
As colts/texans play week 18 so one team there will be out
No, the Broncos are lurking at 7-7 (with the head to head win) and a very easy closing schedule. IMO they’re the biggest threat right now to keeping a 10-7 Bills team out of the playoffs.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, stevestojan said:
Ok, so who am I rooting for today?
i assume (but am often wrong) we want:
Falcons over Colts
Texans over browns? (Not sure on this one)
Bucs over Jags
Cowboys over the fish of course
Pats over Broncos.
And tomorrow Raiders over Chiefs.
i think that’s right; just need help confirming Texans/Browns. A Houston win puts them both at 9-6, but a Browns win drops the Texans pretty much out of the picture.
it’s convoluted but a Browns win gets the Bills a lot closer to the playoffs as a 10-7 team than would a Texans win.You basically want at least 4 wild card contenders (including the Broncos and Steelers) to get to 8 losses. For the Browns, that’s not likely. It’s a definite possibility for the Texans.
-
1
-
-
Fourth time this year a minus 3 turnover team won a game. First time this year a minus 3 turnover team won a game while also committing more penalty yardage.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ColoradoBills said:
If the Bills lose the game against Miami and need a Wildcard spot with a 10-7 record, you are correct about the Browns.
In the 10-7 Bills Wildcard scenario, what people are not seeing is the Bills want the Browns to win and take Seed #5.
The Bills will not get the 5th seed.
Where it gets tricky is finding who needs to win and lose for the Bills to get one of the remaining seeds.
That will be clearer after this week's games.
I’m one of those rooting for the Browns to win their final few games (or at least their games against the Texans and Bengals). Yes, the Bills can go 3-0 in the final three weeks and essentially write their own fate, but it’s the NFL and crazy sh!t happens in the NFL and I’d like to afford this post-Dorsey team some grace in proving who they ultimately can be.
give the Broncos and Steelers a loss at some point, and give 2 of the Texans, Colts, Jaguars, and Bengals another two losses, and the Bills will have that grace. It’s not an inconceivable ask.
-
2
-
-
I do believe this is the only scenario in which the Bills win out but miss the playoffs.
a shorthand for the Bills to go 10-7 and still make the playoffs is:
Denver and Pittsburgh lose 1 more game, and
2 of Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Houston, and Jacksonville lose 2 more games.
(other scenarios exist, including paths where the Browns lose 3 games, but are somewhat less probable 😉)
if you’d like to mitigate the emotional toll of the worst-case scenario, you can get north of 1000-1 odds on the 13 leg parlay.
-
The main takeaway was their effectiveness in the red zone. They’ve been pretty bad all year, and I’d guess it’s one of the few common threads that tie together all their losses.
And I don’t think it’s simply a matter of variance that they had a good game in the red zone. They’ve obviously shifted philosophy to incorporate the run more (overall, but also in the red zone) and while sometimes not extremely effective from a pure “yardage-on-a-particular-play” perspective, I do have hope that their successes are at least partially due to the finally-real THREAT of a run in the most congested part of the field, which might open up their uncreative red zone passing game.
-
1
-
1
-
Is there an NFL team with a weaker WR group than the Bills?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I’ll add that the entire league shifted focus last year, so quickly and so starkly, that analysis probably hasn’t had the opportunity to fully catch up to where the league may be headed.
If it was just Buffalo who “suffered” in the passing game, then there might be more to the Bills’ wide receiver hand-wringing (and I think there still is something to it). But, in a 17-game season, the league saw fewer 4,000 yard passers than in any season since 2010, back when teams still played 16 games.
That’s a HUGE turnaround for a league that’s been leaning hard into passing offense for most of this century. Sure, Buffalo could use an upgrade at wide receiver, but the numbers don’t point to a “them” problem, but rather a deeper league-wide shift in offensive philosophy. I think the goal should be to understand the reasons the entire league’s offensive philosophy shifted so drastically, and then do your best to exploit those reasons.