folz

Week 4 vs. New Orleans. Offense went dead in the 2nd quarter and then came back. Won the game. Week 5 vs. New England. Offense was bad for the entire first half. Week 6 vs. Atlanta. After opening drive TD, offense was bad the rest of the game. [Week 7 we beat Carolina 40-9; Week 8 we beat K.C. 28-21.] Week 10 vs. Miami. Offense never gets going, bad all game. It seems strange that the slump happens around two big wins. Is this a second slump, or a delayed reaction? Is it more team attitude and intensity? The slump has been spotty, with 11 bad offensive quarters of the last 24 quarters (almost half). It is so hard to know exactly what the problem is with so many factors and with us not having any inside info. But, I obviously do not think that it is one thing only. I mean, has anyone looked at how those six teams played us defensively? Did the four that had more success do anything differently? That could be another factor. I'm just guessing like everyone else here, but the two things that I keep leaning towards is: 1. Has Brady become a bit too predictable over the last 6 weeks or so (with the screens, dump offs, not taking a lot of downfield shots, etc.). Could it be less about the receivers not getting separation and more about them just not getting their numbers called or Josh being coached to take the underneath stuff? I don't watch closely enough to see if defenses have changed against us. Have they been getting more out of their shell defenses and coming up closer to the line to defend the run and short passes? If so, you need to start going over them to back them off again. There is something to be said for the "we do what we do well, and we are just going to out execute you doing it" type of offense. The 90s Bills were that type of a team. But I feel that Brady needs to get back more to game-planning (and changing things up) per each opponent specifically (and making better in-game adjustments , obviously). I'm not opposed to the McD philosophy of how he wants his offense run overall (bigger, ball control, run game, etc.), I mean, look at what having a smaller, more finesse, more open offense got us come late-season and playoffs. Nothing. But, they need to be able to open it up when called upon. Which they haven't been able to do consistently this year. As Mikie2times said, it's hard to just pull it out late in a game (when a defense can pin their ears back), if it isn't really part of your overall identity anymore. And I think they have to be careful with this philosophy that they don't make Josh feel stifled. I'm not saying we need to change the offense or completely open it up, we just need to be more multiple (to completely oversimplify with a football cliche). 2. Which leads to the second point. We know that over the years, it has been tough for Josh to reign things in, stay patient and just take what the defense gives you. He has done it very well for stretches of his career, but he always seems to fall back out of it at some point. I don't think it is ego, he just wants to play ball the way he has always played ball...gunslinger mentality. It seems that this year (even as opposed to last year), Brady has reigned the offense in even more (everything closer to the line of scrimmage, much fewer designed QB runs, way more screens, etc.). Almost as if the team was saying, if we just don't make mistakes, we'll coast thru the regular season, keep Josh safe for playoffs, etc. And between that and Cook going off, taking a lot of carries, has it just been less fun for Josh? Has he just been a little less enthused about game plans, etc. feeling more like a game manager than "the guy"? Josh is a big kid, he needs to be having fun out there. Now how much it is personal (off the field) and how much is football (Xs and Os) is anyone's guess. As I said, it's all total speculation on my part. And obviously it didn't help that Cook was on a bum ankle and Josh was missing Kincaid and Palmer for Miami too. Plus the heat, maybe a letdown after beating the Chiefs in a big one, etc. Like I said, so many factors...which makes it hard to pinpoint how to fix it. I'm not saying we couldn't have used some improvement to our WR corps. But, I'm just not convinced that they are the main problem. Nor do I think Josh or the team were depressed about the trade deadline passing with no new help. Josh and Brady have plenty of weapons to work with overall (some that they aren't even using as well as last year: Ty Johnson for one). But Josh isn't the type of guy to be down on his teammates, I think he has the mentality that he can win with anyone and always supports the guys that he does have. And if Josh is on his game, he should be elevating the receivers' play. Our WRs suck seems like too easy an answer, imo, for what is going on with the offense right now. But, I'm not discounting other factors that have been raised in this thread as possibilities as well. It is almost never just one thing. Josh and McD have pulled out of slumps before, hopefully they can figure things out and do it again. Not a lot of room left for error this year if we want a decent seed (not because of our record, but because of the records of the rest of the AFC: Pats, Denver, Colts, Chargers). As things stand at he moment, we would be the #6 seed and headed to a road wild card game in New England vs. the Pats.

My question is what does Steve Smith have against Keon Coleman? Is it personal? He trashed him before the draft. After week 8 last year (of his rookie season), he put out a similar "hit piece" video to the recent one calling Keon a bust (just 8 weeks into his career). After the Baltimore game week 1 this year, he made sure to put out a quote to tell everyone to "pump the brakes on the Keon Coleman hype train" (because Keon had a good game), and then this most recent video trashing Keon. I mean, I know this is the era of podcasts and everyone has an opinion, but, I have a hard time thinking of another former NFL receiver trashing a young receiver so much and calling him a bust after the first 8 games of his career. I remember breaking down Smith's video last year (didn't even watch the recent one, no reason to), he was trying soooo hard to point out problems that he even talked trash on positive/good plays that Keon made. It seems unusual to me how aggressive he is in his stance. I mean Keon doesn't play for his former team or anything. Their colleges weren't rivals. They grew up in different states. Why does he care so much to continually trash him? If he sucks, he'll find his way out of the league. Why give him so much attention if you think he is trash? He wasn't a high draft pick that everyone is praising. He's a second round receiver trying to find his way. Why does Smith feel the need to go out of his way to tear Keon down? All I'll say, in regards to the thread, is that I haven't given up on Keon. Exactly. Back in the day, we understood that some players took longer (2-3 years) to develop. Not every guy is ready to break out as a stud week one of his rookie year. Terrell Bernard, Spencer Brown, Connor McGovern, Khalil Shakir, Dalton Kincaid, Cole Bishop Now it's Keon Coleman, DeWayne Carter, TJ Sanders, Landon Jackson, Do they all work out? No. But have a bit of patience either way, because some of them will.

Agreed, in reality, you go for the #1 seed no matter what and let the rest of the chips fall as they may. A team would be insane for purposefully giving up the one seed for the five seed, even if it appeared to be an easier road. And you are also correct that a scenario where both KC and Balt are out of the playoffs is unlikely. But, in this hypothetical situation, I think not having to face Jackson/Henry and Pat/KC---possibly back-to-back (granted at home) would be an easier path than even three road games vs. Rodgers/Pitt, Nix/Denver, Jones/Colts. [Maybe it's based on past trauma 🙂, but we often have a real tough go against Derrick Henry and obviously vs. Pat/Reid/Kelce too, while none of those other QBs scare me.]

Great question. It is so 50/50 for me. #1 seed Pros Cons -One less game to play -Having to face either Mahomes/Chiefs or Jackson/Baltimore -home field advantage -Possibly having to face both KC and Balt back-to-back (tough to win two of those types of -To be the best you want to beat the best games in a row, and if you do, how much do you have left in the tank to beat the NFC's best team---granted 2 week layoff for SB. #5 seed Pros Cons -Not playing Mahomes, Jackson, or Henry -Have to win 3 games instead of 2 -Weaker competition (QB play, experience) -May have to play 2 or 3 of those games on the road -Refs might favor Bills in this scenario (no KC/Balt) It seems insane not to choose the #1 seed. But, gun to my head, I think the #5 seed might actually be the easier path. Yes, winning 2 or 3 games on the road is really hard, but not as hard as beating say Baltimore and KC back-to-back at home. And with the way those teams are this year (KC and Balt), sure, there is a chance that one or both of them get knocked out before they get to us (but then again, are we really going to count KC out when it comes to the playoffs?---playoff Chiefs vs. Indy, Denver, Pitt, LAC, Pats...yeah I'm not counting on them losing). Conversely, as it stands now, the playoffs would look like this: 1 Broncos, 2 Colts, 3 Pats, 4 Pitt, 5 Buf, 6 LAC, 7 Jax. If the favored teams win WC games, and we beat the Broncos (in DEN), our path would be: @Pitt, @Denver, @INDY or @PATs. But, let's say the Chargers beat the Pats in the WC round (doable), then we are: @Pitt, @Indy, and either @Denver, or Home vs LAC (Chargers could beat the Broncos) IF, big if, the Chargers beat Pats, and Jax beats Indy, then our road is @Pitt, Home vs. LAC, and either @Denver or Home vs. Jax (unlikely Jax beats Broncos, but...). If the odds are the same either way on which teams we may or may not face (#1 seed vs. #5 seed), then here is another question. Pitt should be a fairly easy win if we have to face them, so, worst case scenario for each seed---which is the harder road? Balt at home KC at home or @Denver @Indy Road games are tougher and Taylor is a monster, but Daniel Jones vs. Mahomes? or Nix/Jones vs. Jackson/Mahomes. Yeah, give me the #5 seed.

Nice post OP. My favorite line was: "On To The 2027 Draft: New York Jets" 😂 The AFC is wide open. There is no reason to not still have Super Bowl aspirations. There is no team that scares me in the AFC. Indy has looked good and Taylor is a stud, but Daniel Jones is their QB; we proved once again we can beat KC (still gotta do it in the post-season of course if we meet up with them); Baltimore may not make the playoffs; Pittsburgh is a paper tiger; Jacksonville, please. And I still think we are a better overall team (and obviously more seasoned and with the best QB) right now than the Pats, Broncos, and Chargers (although they are all good teams with good QBs). No other AFC team has more than 3 wins currently. I'm not saying we couldn't lose to any of those teams listed above, just that none of them scare me like Baltimore last year or K.C. for several years. This is a good year to make a run. And the NFL is funny. Perceptions change every week with every win or loss. The Bills were ranked 9th in the Power rankings before the KC game (did anyone really think we were only the 9th best team in the league?)---after beating KC, we jumped back up to #4 (KC fell from #3 to #6). Seattle jumped 5 places into #1 overall with a win against the 3-6 Commanders, The Rams jumped up 5 spots into 2nd place in the Power rankings after beating 1-8 New Orleans. I know Power Rankings don't mean anything, just using it as an example about how fickle people's perceptions are of teams throughout the season. And as far as having an easy easy schedule, well, that is starting to balance out a bit now. Here are the win percentages of teams that the current top four AFC leaders (by record) have beaten. Colts' (7-2) wins: Miami (2-6), Denver (7-2), Tenn (1-8), Las Vegas (2-6), Arizona (3-5), Chargers (6-3), Titans (1-8). 36% win percentage of opponents. Denver's (7-2) wins : Tenn (1-8), Cinn (3-6), Philly (6-2) Jets (1-7), Giants (2-7), Dallas (3-5), Houston (3-5). 29.82% win percentage of opponents. Patriots' (7-2)wins: Miami (2-7), Carolina (5-4), Buf (6-2), New Orleans (1-8), Tenn (1-8), Cleveland (2-6), Atlanta (3-5). 33.33% win percentage of opponents. Bills' (6-2) wins: Baltimore (3-5), Jets (1-7), Miami (2-7), New Orleans (1-8), Carolina (5-4), Kansas City (5-4). 32.69% win percentage of opponents. If the Bills had won the Patriots game (they lost by 3 points), the win percentage of teams they beat would be 40.35% and the Pats win percentage of teams they beat would be 26.92%. Obviously you could do that with any team...well, if they had won that game...I'm just trying to point out that perception is such a moving target in the NFL. If the Bills win that game, they are a 1.5 games ahead of the Pats and with a much stronger win percentage of teams they beat. The Bills are still one of the best teams in the league, regardless of other factors. It could still be our year.

Nice highlights, good player. But not sure what you mean by proven difference maker. How are you defining that? Also, the video says '25 highlights, but it is at least '24 and '25 (based on the teams shown in the video). Provided, Shaheed only played 6 games in '24 due to injury. But this season, as far as deep shots go, Shaheed has three (20+ receptions) for 26, 39, and 87 yards in 9 games. In 8 games: Shakir has four for 20, 26, 43, and 54 yards. Palmer has four for 23, 32, 32, and 45 yards. Moore has three for 28, 30, and 31 yards. Coleman has two for 20 and 25 yards. Kincaid has nine for 20, 20, 20, 22, 23, 23, 23, 28, and 47. Knox and Hawes have two combined for 29 and 30 yards. I'm just not sure what he would have added really. Are you calling him a difference maker because of the handful of deep shots in the video, or because he has proven himself consistently in crunch time of big games or when his QB is desperate, or whatever (two very different things). There were 5 deep shots in the video (bombs). And even if the video is just '24 and '25 (and not his whole career), that is 15 games played. So, an average of 1 deep shot every three games. If we make it to the Super Bowl, that would most likely be three playoff games. Is that one bomb in the playoffs something that he can provide that one of our other players can not? And would that one bomb be the difference in us making and/or winning a Super Bowl? I'm not so sure. I would have been in on adding receiver help if it was an obvious upgrade to what we have. That is what people are really clamoring for. A true #1 that can come up big in crunch time for Josh. I don't think Shaheed is that guy, so just not worth the price for a rental, imo.

Well, Beane did find Shakir in the 5th round (not saying you'd hit on every WR drafted rounds 3-5, as far as odds, but there are guys out there): Shaheed (6'0", 180 pounds---4.43 40-yard dash time) 3-1/2 years played; 28 starts; 138 receptions on 216 targets for 2,055 yards and 12 TDs. Catch % 63.9. Suc rate 48.6%. yds/rec 14.9; yds/target 9.5. Shakir (6'0", 190 pounds---4.43 40-yard dash time) 3-1/2 years played; 28 starts; 163 receptions on 214 targets for 1,992 yards and 10 TDs. Catch % 76.2%. Suc rate 56.1%. yds/rec 12.2; yds/target 9.3. Pretty similar guys. Sure, maybe Shaheed is better at deep sideline catches, but Khalil is better at screens, stuff over the middle (short and intermediate), and YAC. Plus, it's not just the 4th and 5th round picks, or 3rd round pick (if you are looking at it that way), but Shaheed was still owed $2.125 million dollars this year, and he is a free agent at the end of the season. That's a lot to give up for a 10-12 game rental, unless you are sure that he can help put you over the top. And if you do resign him, you are probably going to over pay for him. Now if you draft a rookie in the third round, you have him for at least 4 years on a rookie salary. A lot more goes into it than just how good the player is.

I get where you are coming from, but your analogy is a bit over the top. General odds of hitting on your draft picks (player becomes a multi-year starter): 1st round: 50% 2nd round: 33% 3rd round: 16% 4th round: 8% 5th round: 5% 6th round: 2% 7th round: 2% One site I saw showed that the general odds of a team drafting a 5-year starter with any of their picks (overall) is about 21.3%. Odds of winning the lottery: 0.000000333333333% (1 in 300,000,000). Plus if you draft the player, you have them for 4-5 years on a rookie salary, as opposed to FAs or trades that are generally more 1-3 years and come with a decent price tag. Swinging for the fences is ok every now and then (I would have been happy with a trade today if it improved the team), but you'd probably be in trouble (weak in other areas of your team) if you traded in too may tickets over too many years. Rashid Shaheed over his first three seasons has averaged 518 yards and 3 TDs per season. If he were an off-season FA acquisition many would say he's another WR 3 or 4 and we have a ton of them. Like was said about Palmer (career: 572 yards and 2.5 TDs/season) and Moore (career: 540 yards and 2.25 TDs/season). Yes, this year Shaheed is on pace for 942 yards and 3.7 TDs. Palmer was on pace for 663 yards before his injury (for reference). But is he really significantly better than what we already have? Would he automatically and consistently have become top 2 in targets on this team? Does he have a history of coming up big in crunch time (big games/playoffs) because that's what most are really looking for in the WR room. Plus he's just a rental for the rest of the year. He's on a one-year contract only and is still owed $2.125 million dollars for this year. A 4th, a 5th, and $2.125 mil is a lot to give up for possibly 11 games (that's if we make it all the way)---unless you restructure and give him a lot of money (which we don't have and only if he'd want to rather than test FA at the end of the year). The only other way it makes sense is if he was the key piece to finally getting us over the hump in the post-season (which I am skeptical that he would have been). And as Nihilarian pointed out, we have players with faster and similar 40-times to Shaheed. It's not like he is a 4.2 guy or something and gonna bring us speed we don't have. Shaheed: 4.43 Samuel 4.31; Moore 4.35; Shakir 4.43 The only other WR traded today was Jakobi Meyers. And despite averaging 846.6 yards and 4 TDs per season over the last 5 years, I also don't feel that he significantly moves the needle in us finally getting over the playoff hump. Is he gonna be the guy come playoff time that Josh can count on like a #1 when he's in trouble or it's crunch time? Obviously, no other receivers were actually available (Adonai Mitchell moved from Indy to NYJ, but only as an add on to the Sauce trade). I was looking for maybe a DT. But the only movement there was Qinnen Williams to the Cowboys. Doubt the Jets trade him in division; doubt Beane would give up a 1st and 2nd for Williams. No safeties moved either. So, doesn't really seem like there was much out there to help Buffalo.

That's the beauty about being a negative fan with football. You are never wrong. If we lose, there is always something you can point to as the reason...obviously. But, even if we win, you can still point out some 50/50 game decisions that "almost" let the other team win. And if not for (insert blank---usually Josh), we should have lost the game because of that decision. I've seen posters all year say that we "almost lost" to the Dolphins and Saints when the combined scores for those games were Bills 62, Phins/Saints 40 (11-point average margin of victory). And yet between 74% and 81% of NFL games are decided by one score---8 points or fewer. That means the winning team in almost 80% of NFL games "almost lost." And none of those teams (K.C. included) were even driving late in the game for a go-ahead score. Saints were down by 9 points on their last drives, Dolphins were down 7 and then 10 points on their last two drives. Chiefs were down 7 and needed to go 60-yards in 22 seconds with no timeouts, just to try and tie it (not win it). So, the Chiefs needed to convert a Hail Mary and then still try to win the game in OT (when Buffalo had pretty much dominated the game---despite the close score). No question, my heart was in my throat too...but we weren't actually that close to losing that game. I mean, what is the percentage of successful Hail Marys? But the beauty of 50/50 coaching decisions, is that whichever way the coach decides to go, you can say he should have made the opposite decision. People are questioning a FG that had plenty of leg and doinked the upright. We are talking about it being off by like inches. It's not like it was an impossible try for Prater. Yet, if we punted and KC still got to mid-fieldish, the same people that denounced the field goal would have been saying we should have gone for the win and kicked the field goal or gone for the first down (McD always plays not to lose). Either way the negative fan is right, they just have to wait for the outcome and then decide which were the blunders that made us lose or "almost" lose (with a preconceived bias about McD's decsion making, of course). It's particularly funny that people denounce the field goal try and then bring up "13 seconds" as well. Maybe McD's decision to go for it and to try and win the game was because of his past history of giving Mahomes the ball last and losing. FG goes through, it doesn't matter what Mahomes does after that. Very few NFL games are blowouts, yet some negative fans think unless it is a blowout, we suck. I really wish some of those fans would evaluate and scrutinize other head coaches like they do McDermott. They would see that plenty of other coaches' decisions can be scrutinized in the same way (and at the same volume or worse). Andy Reid was run out of Philly for bad game management and bad decisions in big games. He was the guy who could "never" win the big game (or a Super Bowl) because of his poor coaching decisions. Over the years people on this board have lauded Sean Payton as a great coach (wishing the Bills would have hired him). Yet just one Super Bowl appearance in 20 years with a Hall-of-Fame, top 5 QB of all time. And just look at some of their playoff exits, every bit as bad as 13 seconds, etc. Yet Payton is a genius and McD should be fired. Why? Too many fans look at McDermott in a vacuum, not actually in relation to his peers (or reality), and act like he is one of the worst coaches in the league in game decisions, yet I have never seen anyone evaluate his decisions in relation to other coaches, or to prove in some way that he is worse than even the good coaches, let alone vs. the average or worse coaches. All you ever hear is "13 seconds." Get over it already guys (it was almost 5 years ago already).

This is exactly why depth is so important in today's NFL. Teams with depth can mostly slog through the injuries, while teams lacking depth lose their season if they have a spate of injuries. Looking at the stats in the link provided by Colorado (which are from before the week 8 games, so guys like Hoecht would not be included) to see were Buffalo stands in relation to the rest of the league: -15 teams have the same or more overall injuries than the Bills currently (so we are probably slightly worse than the middle of the pack for the NFL right now) -20 teams have more players "Out for the Season" than Buffalo does -We do, however, have the most players with a late return date, post week 10. -But, if you combine "out for the season" and late return guys, there are 12 teams in worse shape (having lost more players for the year and late return guys combined) So, overall, we are probably a bit worse than average---like just outside the bottom third in the league---in injuries currently (somewhat surprising, thought we'd be even worse). Some of the hardest hit teams: Detroit has 19 injured players with 8 players out for the season and 4 guys with late returns (post week 10) Arizona has 16 injured players with 8 players out for the year, 2 late returns Miami has 15 injured players with 9 players out for the year, 1 late return New England and New Orleans also have lost 9 players each for the season; San Fran and K.C. have both lost 7 players for the year. For comparison: Buffalo has 10 injured players, with 2 players out for the year (now 3 including Hoecht), and 6 players with late return dates. [Caveat: I did not assess whether the players were starters, vets, rookies, etc. So, some teams who have lower overall injuries may be in worse shape than a team with more, if they have lost more of their starters (particularly their QB or stud players), rather than say rookies with minor injuries that are kind of being stashed by being placed on IR, or that kind of stuff---or just guys that are backups and who don't get that many snaps anyhow, etc.]

Currently Josh has 72 rushing TDs (in 7-1/2 seasons, 118 starts), he is averaging 10.37 rushing TDs per season (counting starts only). Currently Jalen has 60 rushing TDs (in 5-1/2 seasons, 74 starts), he is averaging 13.78 rushing TDs per season (counting starts only). If they both stay healthy and their averages maintain as they are, Hurts would pass Josh for number one in rushing TDs in the last game of the 2028 season (3-1/2 years from now). As far as health, Hurts has missed 8 games in 5.5 seasons, Josh has missed only 1 game over the same span. So, if that trend continued about the same, it might take Hurts until mid-way through the 2029 season (about 4 years from now) to pass Josh in rushing TDs (if everything else basically stayed stats quo). I thought people were saying that Josh had already passed Cam Newton, but it looks as if Cam had 75 rushing TDs, so Josh would still need 3 more for the tie and 4 more to take over first place---I expect that will happen soon (this season). As far as post-season, Hurts is in 9th place all-time with 10 playoff rushing TDs---the most of any active player. Josh has 7 post-season rushing TDs---tied with Mahomes, Henry, Hunt, and Aaron Jones (as far as active players). Josh would need 10 more post-season rushing TDs to take the franchise record (Thurman has 16 post-season rushing TDs---tied with Franco Harris for 2nd all-time, behind only Emmittt Smith))---that would also move him into 2nd place all-time, if he were to do that (and Hurts didn't pass him in the meantime). But 10 more post-season TDs is a lot, considering only 9 players in NFL history have 10 or more playoff rushing TDs in their careers.

Gotta give Mahomes some credit. He's tougher than I thought. Cus he took a beating today from the Bills defense, but kept getting up. Those were probably some of the hardest hits he's taken in his career today.

Probably the same as most: Josh Cook Kincaid Bishop D-line (The three players below combined for 2 sacks, 11 tackles, 10 QB hits, 2 TFLs, and constant pressure, while also not allowing Mahomes out of the pocket---13 QB hits today total by the D-line): Bosa Groot Hoecht (can't believe he got injured, brought so much juice to the defense---and the way Oliver and he were stunting off of each other last week before Ed's injury, just makes me sad that they are both out now, just as our defense was turning the corner). Shout-outs to Reggie Gilliam for being all over the field and helping the ground game go, and to Max for his first career INT (kid looks like he may be the real deal).

Sorry Matt...yeah, I missed the context of your post, scrolling through the thread quickly.

I'm not so sure how true that statement is anymore. The league has been moving back to the run over the last few seasons. In 2019, NFL teams threw the ball 58.81% of the time In 2020, NFL teams threw the ball 58.24% of the time In 2024, NFL teams threw the ball 54.81% of the time In 2025, NFL teams are throwing the ball 54.52% of the time. Eight of the fourteen playoff teams last year (2024) were top 10 in rushing attempts. 10 of the 14 playoff teams last year were top 15 in rushing attempts. Only one playoff team last year was in the top 10 in passing percentage (Kansas City at #10). 11 of the top 12 passing percentage teams did not make the playoffs last year. (of course some of that is that bad teams have to throw more often, but still...). Philly was #1 in rush attempts % last year, won 3 playoff games on their way to winning the Super Bowl (4-0) Baltimore was #2 in rush attempts % last year and went 1-1 in the playoffs (their loss to Buff, the #4 team in rush attempts) Green Bay was #3 in rush attempts % last year, going 0-1 in the playoffs (but losing to Philly, the #1 team in rush attempts) Buffalo was #4 in rush attempts % last year, they went 2-1 in the playoffs Pittsburgh was #5 in rush attempts % last year, they went 0-1 in the playoffs (but their loss was to Baltimore, the #2 team in rush attempts). So, top 10 rushing % teams went 7-4 in the 2024 playoffs (with 3 of the 4 losses being to another top 5 rushing team). The four playoff teams that were heavier passing % teams (K.C. 10th, Hou 12th, Min 14th, and LAR 15th in passing attempts in 2024) went 4-4 (with two of those losses to a top 5 rushing % team). Thus far, the top 11 teams in 2025 for run percentage have a combined record of 50-32-1 (and that is skewed a bit by Baltimore's record---on that list, only 3 of the 11 teams currently have a losing record---Baltimore, the Giants, and the Commanders). Not sure calling it a passing league has the same weight it did back in say 2019-2021.