dave mcbride

One could argue that it's a team game and the league's best defense had at least something do with that 3-0 record.

The Falcons game was very cold, which led to a bunch of drops.

Oh, I get it, but that stuff doesn't show up in any statistical assessment even though you and I both know it matters. Opponents' collective team passer rating in these same three games: 50.6. It's what I've been saying all along - the Bills passer rating differential has been 20+ in virtually every scenario you can concoct in long stretches of games. It doesn't really vary much. I think you're kind of missing my point ...

They don't, though -- you just have to look at all of the stats in combination and with a different perspective.

More than that - if you factor his rushing plays into his performance as a QB (see above; I edited it), the numbers go way up.

Over the final three games, Allen's passing numbers were terrible, statistically speaking: 73.9 passer rating 5.7 ypa 53.4% completion rate Yet in those three games he also was not sacked a single time and ran for 214 yards on 27 non-kneel down carries -- good for 71.3 ypg and an 7.9 rushing ypa (plus 2 rushing TDs and no fumbles). The Bills won all of these games by at least 12 points. Indeed, if you treat his rushing plays simply as completed pass plays at 7.9 ypa, his rating goes up to 86.8 -- 62% completion rate and 6.1 ypa overall, with 7 TDs and 3 TOs (again no fumbles and no lost yardage). Statistically, he has been extremely hard to judge this season - a true outlier. In terms of advanced passing stats, he was literally league average: 100 using PFR's advanced passing stat system, in which is 100 is average. Yet he led the league in rushing ypa and was sacked at a rate of 3.9 percent, which is really low given what the sack rate would have been for practically any other QB in the league playing behind this line. The other notable stat: The Bills' team passer rating for the entire season was 91.3 and the opponent passer rating against our D was 65.3 -- a ridiculously high disparity of 26 points. In these last three games, opponents' team pass rating is 50.6.

The last line here is good:: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/01/10/absentee-ownership-directly-contributes-to-weird-outcomes-like-the-firing-of-brian-flores/.

I think this is a very good take from Florio and it addresses the real issue: a bad, absentee owner: https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2022/01/10/absentee-ownership-directly-contributes-to-weird-outcomes-like-the-firing-of-brian-flores/

If we do that, then we probably won't be enjoying the advantage that comes with opponents who only put up only 5 total passing yards against us a week after putting up 224 total passing yards vs. the Super Bowl champ Bucs.

Not last season.

Ross is a bad owner. That explains it, I think.

Ha.

Wow.

The Bills’ D finished the season number one in points allowed - surpassing the Pats - by a little and in yards allowed by a LOT.

That was just inexcusable.

No. Just no. The weather was awful, and the opponent couldn’t handle it at all. Always factor in the broader context — that is, how the conditions affect the opponent too. The Bills had literally 8 times the number of yards as the Jets. Think about that.

Weather matters. The Jets had 5 pass passing yards total and 53 overall.

I honestly think Louis Riddick is the most insightful color guy on the air right now (in terms of breaking down plays). And he’s not as full of himself (to the point of doing nepotistic hires) as Collinsworth. Finally, he has a good delivery.

You’re banking a lot on the idea that football players make business decisions based on domes and weather. I find that implausible. Players want to win, they want to start, and they want to get paid. That’s pretty much it. Also, when it comes to free agency, no team is dumb enough to base payment decisions on raw stats. The Pats, Jets, Giants, Browns, and Packers have had no problem attracting and competing for free agents in recent years. I am pretty sure you have no evidence for this supposition, yet you bring it up a lot.

Wilkerson was awesome - right up until he got paid.

Between 2009 and 2019, the Jets spent five first round picks on d-linemen.

Absolutely terrible secondary. You can't win with that sort of secondary no matter how good the front seven. It's really the secondary. Opposing teams have a passer rating of 104.7 against them.

The thing is, Flutie played really well in 2000 (in the five games he started). For all of his flaws, they were an 11 win team with him in there. Johnson was horrible that season. Flutie's numbers were better than what it seems given that he put up bad numbers in the two Dolphins games after they were out of hand and he went in to replace Johnson, who had been sacked out of both games. Take away those two garbage time outings, and he had a rating of 92.8, which in 2000 was really good. RJ was sacked at a 13.8 percent rate that year (49 times on only 355 dropbacks!!), which is just unacceptable (Flutie was 4.1 percent). I do think the STs cost them too -- they were really that bad -- but if I had to pick one thing, I'd say it was the sack-taking by Johnson. It killed so many drives. Again, 49 times on 355 dropbacks. That was a nightmare to watch.

Their cooking section is incredible. The best around, and it ain't close.

As a close reader of the Times for decades, their sports section is both bad and very politically oriented (to be sure, they do have a couple of excellent writers like Tyler Kepner on baseball). For years, they led the “war on football” (they published the first concussion stories), but they seem to have given that up in the last couple of years given the sport’s continuing resounding popularity (i.e., they seem to know they lost the “war”). They also treat sports that very few in the US care about -- the premier league, the WNBA, etc. — as the equals of major US sports. They treat soccer in particular as somehow major, as if they possess the power to push Americans to embrace the world’s true global sport. It’s kind of laughable. It’s all quite political and fairly obvious too. That said, the paper’s reporting on politics, its international coverage (especially), its coverage of culture, the economy, etc. remains second to none when viewed as a totality.