dave mcbride

Disagree about the Saints game. There was a ton of hand checking, and the stronger person won. That happens all the time and TEs get away with it all the time. The decisive play was the one right after Lattimore left the field. You can't let Thielen get behind the defense on a play that was as easy to predict as the sun coming up in the morning (because their best DB was out).

Agree 100 percent - I just think that refereeing tilts (and there clearly was one in this game) can be decisive in close games. Of course, the refs didn't cause Duke Williams to drop a TD pass, Allen to carelessly fumble at midfield, the Bills to play behind the sticks on a 3rd and 18, and Neal/Milano to fail to make an easy tackle on the game's decisive play.

Um ... he had three sacks in the game.

Thanks. That's a pass that has to be caught.

What missed calls were there against the Texans? And what unfair calls were made against them? Any at all that you can point out besides the unbelievably high number of in-play penalties called against Houston over the course of nearly five quarters? ?

The rule of reason is about approaching anti-trust reasonably - that is, if a natural monopoly emerges but doesn't result in restraint of trade/harm to consumers, then let it go. So yes, I do think it applies in a general sense. There are a ton of penalties that go uncalled every game because they're away from the play. And tons of ticky tack stuff doesn't get called because it's, well, ticky tack. Anyone who denies this is either a fool or a knave. Going after a returner for doing the arm sweep followed by the toss to the official on a play that was effectively and obviously dead (7-8 yards deep in the EZ) and in which intent was CLEARLY obvious is beneath sports fans (as opposed to game-y -- in the hardcore boardgaming sense -- rules obsessives always looking to lawyer their way to a better place).

Bottom line for me: winning an athletic contest through a non-athletic event that has some hazy and recently dramatically altered "rule" attached to it that essentially constitutes a land mine for an unknowing participant is BS and unworthy of real sports competition. Think of George Brett and the pine tar rule. I truly think less of Bills fans who are intent on dying on this hill. See my response above.

That piece is utterly awesome.

Green is saying he's boycotting OTAs and training camp if he's tagged. https://www.cincyjungle.com/2019/12/19/21028691/bengals-a-j-green-injury-news-contract-nfl-franchise-tag . That said, they could work out a long-term deal.

I want my backup to have some mobility. Barkley has none.

If he's a 4.6 guy, he'll likely be there in round 2. College guys often look faster than they actually are because the competition is worse. 4.6 at the WR position gets exposed in the NFL - i.e., Mike Williams, the USC receiver. A guy like Alshon Jeffrey ran a 4.48, and he was a second rounder. Higgins at 4.6 is probably comparable to a poor man's Jeffery, but that's not say he can't be an impactful player. By way of comparison, another big Clemson receiver - Mike Williams - ran a 4.49 and was an early first rounder.

@thebandit27, @C.Biscuit97, @BADOLBILZ, @eball -- reupping this after watching the Eagles game yesterday. That game was eminently winnable for the Eagles if they had any sort of dynamism at the backup qb position. I fully believe Foles would have won that game for them. Settling on a newly hired 40-year old high school football coach as your backup really bit the Eagles in the end. Point is, the Bills need to fully explore upgrading the position.

I would bet a fair amount of money he was healthy enough by about week 10 and made a business decision to shut it down. I'm guessing that was fine with the Bengals because they were after the #1 overall pick.

This is just a wild hunch, but I've been thinking for a while that AJ Green is their target. I think Green probably could have played at the end of the season, but made a business decision based upon how terrible the Bengals were (and frankly, it was in the Bengals interest by week 7 or so to do their damnedest to land the first overall pick; Green's presence may have screwed that up). I have to assume he's healthy, and assuming I'm right, he remains one of the best receivers in the NFL. He is a true difference maker. Not sure a bruiser is the best complement to Singletary. Gore remains a decent bruiser, but was too easily stoned after teams figured out the Bills run game.

Yeah, I would. I think the Bills have so much cap space, and they have a window next year to be a SB contender. They are just a couple of pieces away on offense - an elite receiver, a player like Kamara, and one more decent o-lineman. Sometimes you've gotta roll the dice. New Orleans had their run with Kamara, and if they're serious about rebooting, paying a RB is a terrible way to start that process. Every team's context is different. I don't think this will happen, by the way.

Look at the teams that have paid RBs. Virtually all of them probably regret it, and I include the Cowboys here.

LOL, Jauronimo. It's not a cop out because if it was, I'd be sheepish. I'm not. In fact, I'm absolutely convinced I'm right about this, which is why I'm bowing out. I'm not going to convince you, and you're certainly not going to convince me. Peace.

Well, I for one would be all over that trade. Kamara would represent a MASSIVE upgrade for the Bills.

Tell that to the refs who apply the PI rules.

Good thoughts. I agree with this thinking. Doubt it'll happen, however, for a simple reason - they are still a premier team and will have another chance next year. I can't imagine Payton is worried about the successor to Brees because he probably won't be that successor's coach by the time he's good enough to win it all (if that ever happens). Kamara is too important to that offense *next year* for them to start ditching proven talent for picks. Trent Murphy was a lot better this season than people give him credit for. He was very disruptive all season and had 4 sacks in the final two games (including the Houston game, in which he played EXTREMELY well). He is a lot better than a lot of the FA DE talent that'll be available, is a well liked process guy, and knows the system.

The league REALLY wants teams to NOT return kicks, but they can't eliminate the play entirely the way they revised the rules in 2018. If it's fielded outside the end zone and on the field of play, so be it, but the goal is to radically reduce the return rate. You seem to really want to litigate this and win on some sort of technicality, but there's a concept in law called the rule of reason, and even though it's specifically tied to antitrust law, it applies here. He had no intention of returning it, it was kicked deep in the end zone, he signaled that he wasn't going to return it, and he gave the ball to the ref. No one outside of the craziest of Buffalo fans thinks that the league screwed up here. The person who screwed up was the over-officious ref who didn't adhere to the spirit of the law. To illustrate my first point, there's this: "We're all concerned about the safety of the game,” said Green Bay Packers President Mark Murphy, a member of the competition committee. ... Murphy called the kickoff “by far the most dangerous play in the game.” The injury data shows, he said, that players are five times more likely to suffer a concussion on a kickoff than on a play from the line of scrimmage. According to McKay, there were 71 concussions suffered by players on kickoffs over the past three seasons. League leaders have said they will consider eliminating kickoffs from the sport if the play cannot be made safer. Murphy said he is “cautiously optimistic” about the proposed changes. Asked whether it’s possible to make the kickoff safe enough to avoid eliminating it, he said: “Time will tell. But I think so. You’ve got a lot of smart people here that coached a lot of football. I think they realize that this is a dangerous play.” But the changes must have an immediate effect, he said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2018/05/02/the-nfl-is-going-to-change-its-kickoff-rules-to-try-to-keep-the-play-in-the-game/ No link, of course. It's from memory. Man, you guys are laughably litigious about this.

2nd in points allowed, 5th in yards allowed, and 4th in turnovers forced in 2010; 7th in points allowed, 2nd in yards allowed, and 1st in turnovers forced in 2009.

No one did anything. That is, I saw a guy catch it, not take a knee, look at the official or some such, jog off, and then it was done.

Hughes had an absolutely phenomenal game. Any criticism of him for this game is completely unwarranted.