folz

Totally agree. Like most other sporting events, they should only allow one reporter and camera, from the network covering the game, on the field immediately after the game. It was so bad that for the first time in my life I actually had a smidgen of sympathy for Tom Brady. Let the guys celebrate with their teammates, let the opposing team's players congratulate him (because those players want to get off that field fast). Those photographers have phenomenal zoom lenses, just look at some of the amazing photos taken in game. They do not need to be two inches in front of Brady's face. If they all stood back, they could all get some nice shots. In that scrum, how many good pictures could they actually get? Half of them probably don't even have Brady in the frame. And wouldn't your readers rather have a nice shot of the players hugging and celebrating with each other, rather than probably an annoyed looking Brady surrounded by a bunch of other photographers? It makes no sense. And if you have a mic, what are you going to get but some cliché answer to how he feels that everyone hears anyway because it is being broadcast on CBS. There is no scoop there. You'll get better quotes from him when you are actually able to ask specific questions and he is in a more reflective mood, post the locker room celebration. I cannot think of any reason or benefit for that type of media scrum.

Although I think it is a bit much to say he's better than Gonzales, because playoff opportunity and success has a lot to do with what team you're on and who is your QB, you may have swayed me into being more open to Gronk being in the first ballot conversation. You're right, what he has done in the post-season is quite impressive and that holds a lot of weight with HOF voters because it is the history of the game.

Yes, the TD numbers are impressive for Gronk, no doubt (he had 17 in one season), and championships always help...but I think championships are such a team-based thing for non-QBs. But, just to give a little more perspective: Tony Gonzales is 2nd all time in NFL history for receptions (for all receivers, not just TEs), only one spot behind Jerry Rice. Gronk is tied for 130th in receptions. Tony G is 6th all time in receiving yards (again, all receivers), while Gronk is 104th. First ballot should be for guys with all-time numbers.

Gronk should and will get into the HOF, but I don't think he should be a first ballot hall of famer. Some people questioned whether even Tony Gonzales should be a first ballot guy or not, and compare his stats to Gronk's: Tony Gronk Years 17 9 RECs 1,325 521 YDs 15, 127 7,860 TDs 111 79 They each had four seasons with more than 1,000 yards. But Tony had 13 seasons with 850+ yards, while Gronk had just those same 4. Tony had 14, what I would call, elite seasons. Gronk had 5. Now, of course, Tony did indeed get in on his first ballot, but first ballot should be reserved for sustained numbers like his. Plus Gronk didn't innovate the TE position in any way. That had already happened with guys like Gonzales and Gates. So, as great as Gronk has been when healthy, he should be a vote or two behind guys like Tony. First ballot is for the best of all time type of guys. I don't think Gronk quite reaches that status due to his overall numbers and injury issues. Definitely a HOFer, just not first ballot.

So, according to your list, the Bills currently have: 2 of their 63 current players who came over from Carolina 3 of 31 coaches/trainers with a Carolina connection (1 of the 3 who didn't even coach in Carolina when McDermott and Beane were there) and 1 of 27 FO/personnel people from Carolina So, six out of 123 people (or just under 5% of the team's players and staff). That is hardly a pipeline. And even if there are a few more that you forgot and you add in the other players you listed who are no longer with the team, it would only bring that percentage up to maybe 9-10%. So, to paint it as they only or mostly hire Carolina guys or that they hire Carolina guys to the detriment of the team seems like kind of an inaccurate picture. And Benjamin seems to be the only real mistake out of those hires. Klay, Webb, Brown, and Johnson were all just stop-gap players while the team got on its feet. They filled their role. Even Tolbert, who was not good on the field, filled his role in the locker room, setting a tone and helping to teach the process. And they let all of those guys go when they were able to upgrade their positions. We don't know yet about Farwell or Dorsey and Morgan and Worswick appear to be doing a good job. So, why complain about this Carolina connection? Is it hurting the team in some way? I don't understand the angst over it.

It's a strange dichotomy for me... Over the years, the more hype, press, pre-game, etc. that the game gets, the less important the actual game seems to be. Sometimes after the halftime show (which I never watch anymore and which is too long), you almost forget that there's still more football to be played (unless its your team in the Bowl). I think the Super Bowl is a victim of its own success/popularity. They let it get so over inflated that it isn't as interesting or entertaining as it used to be. And as to the commercials, there was a brief period in the 80s and 90s, where we weren't yet totally saturated with media and companies would spend a lot of money coming up with funny or big production commercials that were worth watching. But for at least the last 10 years, the commercials haven't been anything that interesting anyhow. So, if I did see them before the game, no big deal. I don't think people really watch the game for the commercials anymore, that just gets said because for a while it was true and the TV networks want companies (who spend a fortune for a time slot) to still believe that.

For those who say the move doesn't help Culley's chances of becoming a head coach, think about this... Josh made big improvements as the season went on this year, so Culley can take (at least partial) credit for that. And if Josh keeps getting better, well he helped lay the foundation. If Josh doesn't improve, well, it's because he left. And now he moves on to a team with another young, raw QB. Jackson may or may not become a franchise QB, but if he improves his passing under Culley (which he should at least to some extent for the simple fact that he is young and raw), then Culley has "groomed" or done well with two, young, raw QBs. And he might get that "QB whisperer" tag. That type of tag can definitely lead to a head coaching gig for a team with a young QB or one planning to draft a young QB. Plus he is basically a co-coordinator, which is less of a jump to HC than from QB coach. And the Asst Head Coaching title may seem almost honorary to us, like he just got it so its not a lateral move or to satisfy someone's stature in the league, etc. But it also says, another head coach in the league really wants this guy on his staff, enough to give him that extra title and it says, I'm going to lean on this guy. He will be in the upper level of planning. So, I would think it is not really a meaningless title in NFL or owner's circles. Plus as others said, Baltimore is a much more high profile team than Buffalo. More press, more nationally televised games, etc. After a year or two in Baltimore, especially if Jackson and the offense improves (the Ravens have traditionally not been a great offensive team), his standing in the league and possibly for a head coaching position will be much improved over deciding to stay in Buffalo as just the QB coach. Seems pretty obvious.

The kid is talented, no doubt. And when I watched the video of the incident, I too didn't think it was as bad as how it was being portrayed. But, I don't think we really need him at this stage in our team's development. The problem with our running game was the offensive line. so If we get that fixed, I have confidence that Shady can still play at a high level. And I'd rather see the Bills draft a young RB who is a better culture fit and one of our guys (DNA) to add with Shady, Murphy, and a vet (Ivory or whomever). I mean, why did KC drop him so quickly. Were there other incidents or character issues? I just feel it isn't worth the risk for our team right now. But I also think he should be given a second chance, I'd just rather it not be with the Bills.

He's smart, fast, tall over the middle, and can cover. But what I like most is his tackling ability. He's very decisive and explosive when tackling. And I love how he wraps a guy up first with those long arms of his and then kind of whips his body around or slides down the player, using his length and weight to spin or drag the guy down. He doesn't try to lay the big hit or use his helmet in any way, which players often bounce off of anyways, instead, he just puts the guy to the ground with textbook tackling. The kid is going to be really good, very soon. I mean, that sack of Tannehill over Drake in the finale was a man among boys type of play. I literally shouted "Wow" when he made that play. Give him a full off season of learning and NFL level nutrition and strength and conditioning, etc. And watch out!

No...I tend to root for Green Bay over a lot of other clubs in the NFC. I think its the similarities: small market team, loyal and rabid fan base, cold weather. Plus, we never lost a Super Bowl to the Pack. Top teams I don't like in the NFC: Dallas, NYG, Washington, Seattle. And I'd probably also add Chicago and Atlanta to that list.

Just curious. There was almost the same scenario this year for the Steelers. If Baltimore lost, the Steelers would have been in the playoffs with 9 wins (like Buffalo had last year). How many people would have been saying the Steelers got super lucky? Or, what if the Baltimore game ended before the Bills/Miami game last year. So, we already knew if we win we're in. Would that have changed the perception of if the Bills were lucky to make the playoffs last year? I think a lot of people feel it was lucky because of how it played out. But that stuff happens every year for teams, maybe not 4th and 12 on the last game of the season, but every team gets lucky at different points of the year. A win they shouldn't have had that they squeaked out, a call that goes their way to give them a game, help from other teams to get them in the playoffs, an opposing team's star player(s) were injured when they played them, etc. But, still, I'm glad the way it worked out. That was an all-time Buffalo Bills moment (and I was around for all of the Super Bowl years). I wouldn't trade it for anything, so, to me, it just feels like it is diminishing that moment of team/fan camaraderie and release to keep repeating that they just got lucky. As to the Bills not picking Mahomes, you have to remember that Doug Whaley was still the GM, so McDermott was working with Whaley's staff's information. Plus, more importantly, they (Pegulas/McDermott) knew they were going to be replacing the GM, so, you may not want to pick a QB that you aren't sure the new GM will be onboard with. That could cause friction right from the start. They smartly waited to have their GM in place and for the draft that was supposed to have better talent. Probably a good move at that time. As for Daboll, I was pretty down on him early in the year, but the offense got more creative as Josh was able to handle more and they found some speed. And players (Zay, Josh, Robert) seem to be developing well under him. Plus, it's kind of hard to fault him too much for the beginning of the season, he had lost a Pro Bowl Center and Guard (that weren't adequately replaced) and was starting Peterman and then a raw Josh Allen at QB. With Anderson and Barkley thrown in there too. Plus, he was saddled with Castillo. He didn't get to pick his own offensive staff. So, he had to get the coaches up to speed with what he wanted to do too. Those were some tough odds to overcome. And he may have not done well his first time around as OC, but a lot of guys don't make it on their first gig, but do well in their second go around. He then went back to New England and then on to Bama (where he picked up concepts from the college game). I don't know if he will ultimately work out or not, but I also don't assume he'll have a bottom 10 offense directly because of his coaching. The jury is still out, but he did enough to get a 2nd year and keep continuity for our QB. Plus his New England style offense is said to be complicated and multiple. Maybe year two, when a lot of the players are more familiar with it and have run more variations of it, we will see major improvements. (Side note: we also may not have Robert Foster and/or Levi Wallace if he didn't become a Bills coach last year, just saying.) I know the last 17-18 years have been tough, but to me it feels like we are finally heading in the right direction. We made the playoffs last year and it was going to be really hard to win this year (especially after losing Wood and Incognito) due to purging the salary cap. But that was an absolute necessity for the team's future. You can either be down about a 6-10 season and think same old Bills, or you can look at the reasons why and both the draft and financial capital they have for next season and be excited for the future. But, I guess if you just don't like McDermott, Daboll, and/or Josh Allen there will probably be no opinions changed here until they ultimately either sink or swim.

A big guy that can get downfield and adjusts to and fights for the ball? Sign me up. Welcome to Buffalo Duke, I hope your past is behind you and your future is bright.

Should be a no brainer: Don Coryell Isaac Bruce Tony Gonzales Second Tier: Ed Reed Tom Flores I'm not 100% sold on any of the other candidates as sure HOFs. How Tasker isn't in there ahead of some of those guys is mind boggling. Wish the voters would give up their bias against special teams.

Here are Crossman's Special Teams Units rankings per Football Outsiders (the only place I could find ST rankings going back to 2005 quickly): BILLS 2018 32nd 2017 10th 2016 22nd 2015 12th 2014 4th 2013 30th LIONS 2012 30th 2011 29th 2010 11th PANTHERS 2009 29th 2008 10th 2007 30th 2006 24th 2005 5th Top 10 appearances: 4 in14 years (29% of the time) Bottom 4 in the league (29th-32nd): 6 times in 14 years (43% of the time). Think about that for a moment. For 43% of his career as Special Teams coach, his units have been one of the four worst in the NFL. 8 of his 14 seasons, his unit was ranked in the bottom 3rd of the league (57% of the time). It was high time for a change. https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst

If you prorate their stats from the last seven games out to a 16-game season, they would look like this: Foster: 57 receptions, 1,168 yards, 7 TDs Jones: 62 receptions, 806 yards, 14 TDs If the team adds one more talented WR to that mix, through either the draft or FA, this could be a very scary bunch next year with Josh throwing the ball.

Exactly, one of my off season wishes was for McDermott to let Dabol change any offensive assistants he wanted to (Castillo being the major one of course), since Dabol inherited most of the staff. I was a little unsure of Dabol himself early in the year when the offense was so bad. But he won me over down the stretch, by adapting to Josh's skill set, being more creative, and obviously doing a good job developing players (Zay, Foster, Allen). So, McD needs to let him bring in any of his "own guys" that he wants to teach his offense exactly as he wants it to be done. Player development is an often overlooked aspect of coaching...but McD and his staff seem to be doing a really good job at it. Look at all of the young players that have come along this year. Guys actually moving up off the practice squad and making significant contributions, etc. Yes, you have to pick the right guys first and foremost, but if you don't teach and develop them, some or most of those guys will never live up to their potential. Culture (the expectation to work hard) and teaching are as important as Xs and Os at making players be the best they can be.

Thank you Kyle!!!!!!

Josh has been making progress and getting better each week. Maybe that would have been a natural progression on its own, maybe its the coaching, maybe its the QB room and mentorship of DA and Barkley. Most likely it is all of the above. But the key is, it is working. So why break that Up. I think DA gets another 1 year contract for next year and you keep the QB room in tact for one more season. Then when Josh is going into year three, you can bring in the prospect QB (maybe just on the practice squad) and let DA retire, keeping Matt as primary backup and sounding board. Matt played a hell of a game vs. the Jets. Yes, it was only one game, but what makes it more important than his other 6 starts in the league (2 years ago for CHI) is that it was with our coaches and players, plus two years have passed since those 6 starts. Just as Josh made a leap from having some starts and then sitting for a while before coming back, maybe Matt has gotten better in those two years as well. People usually at least get marginally better with more experience. Plus it's not like they will ask him to go out and play like Josh if he has to go in. They won't ask him to do things he can't do. Just like every other team who is starting a backup, you simplify the game plan, you rely on your defense and RBs, and don't ask them to do too much. I feel pretty good about Matt being able to manage a game and hold the fort down for a couple of games when called upon. Very happy with the signing. Congrats Matt!

On Rosenthal's QB index list, he has Josh 13th of QBs drafted in the last 4 years with at least 100 throws. The list is a future projection of who will be best going forward. I'm fine with his top 5 (Mahomes, Mayfield, Wentz, Watson, and Goff...of course 4 of those 5 are in their 2nd year as opposed to first and have better weapons, which makes a difference). But, we need to see more from Josh before we can put him in that category. But then Rosenthal has 8 more QBs ahead of Allen: Darnold, Prescott, Winston, Mariota, Rosen, Jackson, and Trubisky. Of course I'm biased as a Bills fan, but I think Josh has shown at least as much as his fellow draft mates and at worst should be on par with Darnold, Jackson, and Rosen. And I would already put him ahead of Prescott, Mariota, Winston, and Trubisky (as far as future projection). If there was a redraft of these 8 players, Darnold would be the only one that I would even debate taking over Allen. And I think I would still go with Josh, because he is a perfect fit for Buffalo and wanted to be here. As for the Power Rankings list from NFL.com, Josh is 17th. This is a list of who is playing best right now. It would be hard to move Josh up more than a couple of spots on this list. Maybe you put him in front of Prescott and Foles for 15th, but probably not much higher than that right now.

Exactly, even teams that draft well and make the playoffs every year could put a long list together of players they should have drafted but didn't. There are just too many unknowns to be perfect. Seems pointless to continually rehash who we could have had. We all know the Bills did not draft well for quite a spell. But that is obviously changing. The Mahomes one I can understand a bit just because it was actually our pick that we traded away...but there's still no guarantee that he has the same success if he came here, because the Chiefs were ready to go as a roster with an established coach who is good with QBs. Too many "ifs" and then team circumstances with any draft pick to determine what could have been if they were drafted somewhere else.

We have seen Josh throw a nice deep ball, he can throw a nice out or sideline pass, we have even seen him put some touch on the ball, like the nice lob pass to DiMarco in the Phins game. He has missed a couple of screen or swing passes, and some deep balls, but it seems like many of the drops come on those short and medium curl and dig routes. Sometimes Josh just throws those passes too hot and the WRs haven't always been able to handle them. If Josh takes a little off of those passes and/or he gets WRs with stronger hands or who have just caught enough of Josh's passes to get a feel for those fastballs and they start coming down with them, then you are probably talking about an extra 2-3 completions per game, which would significantly boost his completion percentage. It seems right now that a lot of media guys want to write positive stories about Josh because he has flashed some elite skills, but because so many of them were down on him before the draft, they still feel the need to couch their articles with the completion/accuracy issue. Other posters have pointed out how that could definitely improve and I think it will. I really think with more experience and better talent around him (OL and WRs), the narrative about Josh being inaccurate will slowly fade away. You can look at his stats and completion percentage, or you can trust your eyes. As Bills fans, we have watched every throw he's made and he is not wildly inaccurate with his passes, as has sometimes been portrayed. Honestly, I can only think of like 4-6 passes that were really ill advised or poor throws. And we've had guys that were worried about their stats or of throwing a pick before (Rob Johnson, Tyrod Taylor) and that gets you no where. On the last play in a half or a game, at mid field, do you want to see your QB throw it 15 yards and watch the guy get tackled 30 yards short of the goal line, or do you want him to heave it into the end zone, not caring if it gets intercepted, for a chance at points on the board? Or on 3rd and 10, do you want the guy that takes the safe 7 yard pass, or a guy that will throw beyond the sticks? The first guys completion percentage will look better in the long run, but will he win more games? Josh doesn't care about his stats, he cares about winning. And if he's winning, we won't care about his stats.

By my count, that was the 4th game this year where the special teams gave the game away. Crossman is not cutting it....I don't care what his reputation in the league is, he needs to go.

Well, considering that his floor seems to be the best QB we have had since at least Bledsoe's first year with us (2002) and his ceiling could be quite high with the right circumstances, I'm pretty optimistic. One thing I can definitely say (regardless of whether he becomes an elite QB or not) is that the Bills will be a hell of a lot more fun to watch with Josh at the helm than they have been in a long, long time. So, I'm good with that for now and hoping for the best. But the arrow definitely seems to be pointing up after those last two games.

The jury is still out on Daboll. Hopefully the next 5 games will give us a better picture, now that things have settled down a bit. The talent-level is a major factor, of course, but what really makes it hard to assess Daboll is the lack of continuity at the QB spot. Game 1: Peterman/Allen Games 2-5: Allen Game 6: Allen/Peterman Games 7-8: Anderson Game 9: Anderson/Peterman Game 10: Peterman Game 11: Barkley Game 12: Allen Offense is about consistency and reps, knowing what the guy next to you is going to do. That is so important on the Offensive line (the Wood and Incognito retirements really affected that, along with the ever-changing QB) and its also important in the timing between a QB and WR. It's hard to build an offense and keep improving when you have to cater to a different QBs strengths and weaknesses every other week. And those QBs have had very little time working with the WRs and O-line and in some cases, have only had the playbook for a week or two. It's hard to build a comfort level in that situation, which is what you need to have to run a good offense. Plus, Daboll runs a NE-style, match-up offense. That means a big playbook, so you can pull different things out each week to attack each opponent in their area of weakness. If they were repping the same plays over and over each week, the learning curve wouldn't be as steep. In the deeper playbook, as the season wears on (or if you have run the system for multiple years), you will have started running plays and schemes over at that point and getting better at it because it isn't stuff you haven't repped much before. You've now run these plays in games. I think it is just a system that takes longer to master or at least get competent at and the instability at the QB spot has just delayed progress that much further. So, I'm not sure yet if Daboll is the right guy for the job or not (I was pretty down on him just a few weeks ago), but it looks like things may be trending up, so... Why I would like Daboll back next year: 1. Continuity for Josh 2. He's a hometown guy and Bills fan (he wants to be here and succeed here) 3. The last couple of games he has come out of the booth and been on the sidelines and on Sunday against the Jaguars, there was one point where the camera caught him encouraging/firing up the defense. The defense, not his offense. Loved that. 4. Next year through the draft and FA money, there will be a big influx of offensive talent. He deserves a chance to show what he can do with that. 5. He'll know his players better, have an offseason to tweak things, and his players will have a better comprehension of his playbook. Then we can make a true assessment. Is Josh progressing, have the new players integrated into the team/system, are we scoring more, etc. And if I were McDermott, I would do one thing, I would give Daboll full authority to release and then hire any offensive coaches he chooses to in the offseason. Daboll inherited a lot of his offensive staff. I would let him bring in any of his own guys over the offseason. Guys that he feels would teach his system better and/or teach fundamentals the way he wants them taught (I'm looking at you Juan Castillo). Let him stand or fall on his own decisions.

I rewatched the game and looked at each Bills penalty closely. For the most part the calls were legit on both sides. But, there were a few I had a problem with or either should or should not have been called: 1. 1st quarter: Edmunds called for defensive holding. Not only was there no penalty committed by Tremaine, but on that same play, one of the Jags has Jerry Hughes in practically a sleeper hold. Should have been holding against the Jags not the Bills. 2. 3rd quarter: Should have been a personal foul on Jags during punt return. One of the Jags tackles Mckenzie, grabbing under the helmet. 3. 4th quarter: Hands to the face called against Star. This was the worst call of the game for me. He got called because the offensive lineman's head jerks backwards. But it jerks backwards because the running back got tackled into his back/legs and he got rolled up. It was not Star shoving his head back. Ref saw the motion and just assumed the penalty. 4. 4th quarter: This would have been a bit ticky tacky, but they could have called a late hit on Telvin Smith for knocking Josh down. He tries to make it look like it was an accident, like he just backed in to him, but he purposefully gave him a shove. But I was ok with them not calling this...it was pretty minor. The Taron Johnson holding call was a bit ticky tacky too and could have just as easily gone uncalled, but he did impede the receiver's progress, even if just slightly. So, call was ok. The refs did also make a bad fumble call on that return, when the player was clearly down. Though it got overturned. And could have called Ramsey for unsportsmanlike conduct for taking off his helmet and taunting the Bills sideline. But whatever. So, overall I'd say the Bills had two bad calls against them and two on the Jags that should have been called but weren't. On the other side, all I really saw wrong was the Benjamin knee down play, but I didn't watch all of the Jags calls quite as closely.