folz

With Josh, I think we have enough talent to make a Super Bowl (we have been close a few times now, but for the bounce of a football here and there). But, as far as does our talent-level match-up with the other contenders? Let's see... Yeah, I guess that I would define elite as top 5 at your position across the league (others may have a different definition). So, how many Bills are top 5 at their position? Josh, absolutely Dion, yes, been one of the best LTs for a couple of years now Taron has been a top-5 (probably top-2 or -3) slot corner for a number of years now (if he isn't slowing down) Cook (he's on the edge, but I might give him the nod). Over the last two years, he is 6th in yards from scrimmage by RBs and tied for 4th in total TDs by a RB. His stats are about equal to guys like Kyren Williams, Breece Hall, and Joe Mixon. With really, only Henry, Barkley, Gibbs, and Robinson above him (though he does have 1 more TD than Robinson). Plus, all of the other guys on the list have a significant number of touches more than Jimbo. For instance, just this year James had 239 touches. While Barkley had 378, Robinson had 365, Williams had 350, Henry had 344, Gibbs had 302, Mixon had 281, Hall had 266. I think I talked myself into saying yes for James. (Interesting stat, as I was looking up RB numbers---RB consistency award goes to Tony Pollard. 2023: 1,316 scrimmage yards and 6 TDs. 2024: 1,317 scrimmage yards and 6 TDs). Milano (if healthy, definitely top-tier. Top 5? Maybe? Probably?) Spencer Brown is a possibility (but I don't know enough about other teams' tackle play to say, but he had a great season and is a monster). Christian Benford: Not sure I have him as elite (top 5 at his position) quite yet. Maybe by next year he can get there. Shakir: If you were to break it down to just slot receivers, I might call him elite. But, don't think you can call him an elite receiver (overall) yet (as much as I love him). That's pretty much it. We may have some other guys with potential, but at the moment, no one else really can be considered elite. So, I would say the Bills have 3-5 elite guys at their positions, with a couple of guys on the fringe. But, I guess the question is (in relation to the OP's question of if that's enough for a SB), how many elite guys do other contenders have? KC: Mahomes, Humphrey, Thuney, Jones, McDuffie (Don't think Kelce is elite anymore). So, a solid five for KC? Granted, outside of QBs, it's a more solid 5 than our 5. Philly: Barkley, Brown, Carter, DeJean?, Baun?, Hurts? Mailata? Johnson? (Don't think Hurts is a top-5 QB; Baun, Mailata, and DeJean all had great seasons...but can we call them elite after just one good season? And the Philly line definitely had some inconsistencies this year (as far as Mailata and Johnson are concerned). Is Lane Johnson still what he was at 34/35 years old?). So, three definite...and maybe up to 6 elite guys. Ravens: Jackson, Henry, Roquan, Humphrey, Hamilton, Madubuike? Andrews? A solid 5 or 6? [Correct me if you think I'm wrong about the other teams.] So, I'd say it probably takes a solid 5 (with one or two guys also on the fringe). We have a solid 3 or 4, a more iffy 5 than the other teams, and a few fringe guys. So, I would say probably two more solid elite guys would have us at the level or better than the other contending teams (would love to see those elite players added this year at DE/DT or DE/WR). Even just a proven, stud FA/trade pass-rusher would go a long way in balancing things out talent-wise, imo.

Agree. I always thought the refs had it in for the Bills (especially against teams like New England, etc.). But the first time I actually questioned whether the NFL was actually steering games to get the outcome they wanted was Super Bowl XL (2005/2006 season). Jerome Bettis was playing in his last game (about to retire) in his hometown of Detroit. The NFL so wanted the storyline of The Bus riding off into the sunset in his hometown with the Lombardi trophy. Plus Pitt probably had a much bigger following than the Seahawks. The refs literally took two TDs off the board for Seattle, both on horrible calls...and those were just the most egregious bad calls of many others. No doubt in my mind that Seattle wins that Super Bowl if not for the refs interfering. I don't understand why they think they have to create storylines. It's similar to the Olympics now too. In the Olympics now, the tv coverage has all of these pre-packaged segments about certain (American-only) athletes that they want to promote or have sad storylines or whatever. They push certain storylines down our throats (and then that athlete comes in like 12th---and they barely even show us who actually won---because they're not American), rather than just letting the sports/events create the storylines naturally. And I'd bet that the stories that would come about organically would be just as compelling as any created storylines. I wish the NFL realized this. Let things play out how they are meant to and there will naturally be storylines to discuss, rather than trying to push so hard to make certain pre-planned stories to come about. I think the NFL believes that having a dynasty team (like New England and now KC) is good for business. It breeds familiarity with the international crowd and now young female markets that they are trying to expand into. I think with NE, they thought having that dynasty built their business. Which I don't actually believe is true (or the main cause of growth in the league), so they wanted a new dynasty (KC). And they also knew that people will also tune in to watch "villains" in pro-wrestling too. I remember watching the Super Bowls of NE vs. NYG just hoping to see NE lose. I mean, we were all told that when free agency came about that that would spell the end of dynastic NFL teams. Yet, post-free agency, we have had the two biggest dynasties of all time. I mean, how does that happen? Are Brady/Belichick and Reid/Mahomes really just that much better than anyone else who has ever coached or played in the league that they could have dynasties during free-agency? Take away the help they get/got from the refs and how many fewer Super Bowls do they have? How about their overall record? Not only does in call the league into question, but it makes me question if any of these guys are actually even GOATs. Really good players and coaches, but would they be considered the GOATs if not for the refs/NFL help? To me, the NFL has to go one way or the other. Either let us know that the NFL is like pro-wrestling with pre-planned storylines (entertainment only---the outcomes really don't matter) or bring integrity back to the game. But, somehow I don't think either of those things is going to happen. So, now I don't worry as much about winning a Super Bowl (if the NFL office decides, not the players on the field, then why get disappointed...it is a pre-determined outcome that we can't do anything about), so I just enjoy watching and rooting for the Bills and taking joy in the season and individual games and accomplishments rather than pinning everything on a Super Bowl win. Ironically, our best chance of winning a Super Bowl may be these next two years (as we move into our new stadium). The NFL really likes new stadiums. Sad that's how it is, but not sure I can be convinced otherwise at this point.

And how many playoff teams had to face an offense the caliber of Kansas City with Goat-candidates Reid and Mahomes in 4 of those 5 losses? Kansas City has averaged 30 points in the playoffs under Reid and Mahomes (vs. all teams). The year they scored 42 on us (in overtime)---two unstoppable offenses that year---they also scored 42 on the Steelers in the playoffs. I know we didn't face them in the playoffs in 2018, but that 2018 KC squad was the 3rd highest-scoring offense in NFL history. I know the last couple of years they haven't been quite what they were back in 2018, but we are still talking historic stuff over those 5-7 years overall (in which 4 of the Bills playoff losses fall). Not to mention a little help from the refs here and there. For what it's worth, McDermott's total playoff points against average is 28.3 points. (Still not great, but again, weigh in 4 years vs. KC) Over the last three seasons, the average score for playoff winning teams is 31 points. Over the last 5 years, it is 30 points. Playoff teams score a lot of points these days. No question that McDermott and the Bills need to find some defensive answers vs. KC (I think a stud pass rusher would go a long way) and it would be really nice to see the playoff defense improve overall---but I think the stat is a bit misleading. Not many teams have had to face a dynasty that many times in such a short span. Manning's Colts only lost to the Pats 2 times in the playoffs. Marino's Dolphins lost to the Bills 3 times over 6 years. Oakland lost to the Steelers 3 of 4 years in the 70s. But how many teams have been up against what we have?

How much do we need to change? How close are we? Here's some interesting stats for you. The Bills and Chiefs have played each other 9 times in the Allen/Mahomes era. Here are their total points in those games (combined): KC: 243 total points BUF: 242 total points If you were to say, what were their total points at the end of regulation in those 9 games: KC: 237 points BUF: 242 points If you take out the 2020 season (when the Chiefs were just a better, more experienced team than we were), then since the 2021 season (the last 4 years), we have played the Chiefs 7 times. The total combined scores for the teams in those 7 games are: KC: 179 points BUF: 201 points Hard to fathom. As to next year, my priorities would be: a proven, stud pass rusher added via trade or FA; I think Carter will develop into a really nice DT, but I wouldn't mind seeing some young, talented beef to replace/spell Daquan; Fix the safety position (however that happens); WR; Corner depth/improvement; LB depth.

Not sure if anyone did a final tally or anything for this thread, but anyone wringing their hands over "giving Worthy to KC" as the narrative goes (another Buffalo blunder), well, I think the story is far from being written still. Some people act like Worthy had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever or something. He had a very good rookie season, but let's hold off on crowning him. I couldn't find a list deeper than 25 players, but of the most receiving yards by a rookie receiver, Worthy doesn't even sniff #25. Numbers 24 and 25 are Mike Evans with 1,051 and 12 TDs and Keenan Allen with 1,046 and 8 TDs. Worthy had 638 receiving yards and 6 receiving TDs. If you include his rushing stats, he had 742 yards and 9 TDs. Six rookie receivers had more receiving yards than he did this year, 7 rookie receivers had more than Worthy's rookie totals in 2023. He had a good year, but let's keep it in perspective. {I understand that means you can say all of the same things about Coleman---since he is one spot right below Worthy in the rookie numbers, but that is ok, we weren't looking for him to come in and be a number one WR right away in an everyone eats offense---plus he missed time} Coleman had 567 scrimmage yds and 4 TDs in 13 games, with one 100-yard game. (And Coleman wasn't quite right for at least a couple of games back from injury). Worthy had 742 scrimmage yds and 9 TDs in 17 games, no 100-yard games. I know Keon didn't do much in the playoffs. But thus far, if you take away the non-catch in the Championship game, Worthy has averaged 48 yards and 0.5 TDs in K.C.'s two playoff games. It's not like he put that team over the top or gave them something they didn't have. Obviously both players will continue to grow and learn and may both turn out to be very good players. And this is not a down on Worthy post (I hope he does well, except when playing the Bills). It is just to calm the KC got us again sentiment, if it's out there. So again, I don't think we can make any determinations after just their rookie years. Game averages 2024: Worthy 43.64 yards/game, 0.53 TDs/game Coleman 42.77 yards/game, 0.31 TDs/game Yards per Target: Worthy: 6.51 Keon: 9.75 Yards per Reception: Worthy: 10.8 Keon: 19.2 I still think the Bills got the right player for Buffalo and there is no need to play into the narrative of KC one-upping us again here.

Remind us again how McCarthy's track record is way better. I don't think you can, other than to say he won one Super Bowl (which is nothing to sniff at...he won the big game---but track record tends to mean overall). Mike McCarthy Sean McDermott Wins/losses: 174-112-2 (.608) 86-45 (.656) Playoff record: 11-11 (.500) 7-7 (.500) Playoff bids: 12 of 18 yrs (.666) 7 of 8 yrs (.875) McDermott: 7 years with Josh Allen, 1 year with Tyrod Taylor [2 Conference Championship game appearances, 0-2] McCarthy: 13 years with Aaron Rodgers, 5 years with Dak Prescott [4 Conference Championship game appearances, 1-3; 1 SB appearance (win)] Yes, McCarthy has a Super Bowl. He also coached for 18 years (13 with a first ballot HOFer, and 5 with another very good QB). Are you telling me that you don't think McDermott could get a team to 2 more conference championships, and win 1, if he coached for 10 more years (with Josh as his QB for at least 6 more years)? So, how much better is McCarthy again? Payton had a first-ballot Hall of Famer as his QB for 15 years. He only made 1 Super Bowl appearance. 1 in 15 years. Yes, it was a win (he did it). But you guys would be going crazy if we only made 1 Super Bowl appearance in 15 years with Josh. Payton had 6 seasons with Drew Brees where they didn't even make the playoffs. Can you imagine missing the playoffs 6 times with Josh? The board would explode. From 2010-2017, the Saints (with Payton and Brees) missed the playoffs 4 times, lost a Wild Card game, and lost 3 divisional round playoff games. How would Bills fans have felt about those 8 seasons if it were MCD and Josh? Payton w/Brees McDermott w/Josh Wins/losses: 152-89 (.630) 77-38 (.670) Playoff record: 7-7 (.500) 7-6 (.538) Playoff bids: 9 of 15 yrs (.600) 6 of 7 yrs (.857) McDermott: 7 years with Josh Allen, 1 year with Tyrod Taylor [2 Conference Championship game appearances, 0-2] Payton: 15 years with Drew Brees, 1 year with Russell Wilson, 1 year Bo Nix [3 Conference Championship game appearances, 1-2; 1 SB appearance (win)] Now I'm sure we'll hear, yeah, but Josh is way better than Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers. Guarantee? Come on guy...you can not guarantee anything. what a joke. Interesting Topic, after Josh just did an interview like a week ago saying he basically has two goals for his career, stay in Buffalo his whole career, and bring a Super Bowl victory to the people of Buffalo. A huge part of why Josh loves Buffalo is because of the culture of the team that Sean, Brandon, and The Pegulas have created. I can GUARANTEE (😉) you that Josh does not want a new staff or to be traded and I bet that he blames himself as much as the coaching staff, front office, or other talent for the team's failures (that's just who Josh is).

Looking at the career life of other top running QBs, the age range is pretty defined, with a few outliers: Of the top 10 running QBs in NFL history (not counting Josh and Lamar), Cam retired at 32/33, and on the other spectrum, Fran Tarkenton was 39 and Aaron Rodgers is 41. The other 7 guys (Elway, Young, Cunningham, Vick, Wilson, McNabb, and McNair) were all 35-37. But, for almost all of them, their last year or two they were a bit of a shell of their former selves. So, for a running QB, is the shelf life of top play til about 34-35 years old maybe? Now, Josh is a better passer than many of the guys on that list, so he could probably last a bit longer, once the wheels start slowing down (like a Rodgers---not that Aaron ever ran quite to the extent of Josh). Josh is 28. And some of those guys played in a much harsher league for QBs as well. But, I'm going to say a solid 7 years left. Possibly up to 10 years if they keep a really good team around him at the end of his career (like they did for Elway and Manning at the end of their careers). A lot of great QBs currently are playing longer than guys back in the day, but I doubt Josh makes it in the league to 40 yo with the contact he takes.

I love fans who equate every loss to just being outcoached. Such a simplistic way to look at football, imo. Just like those (probably a lot of the same people) who appear to think that every single win is Josh doing it all by himself...the coaches and other players have no part in the wins.

Agreed fellas! Two plays: The Worthy catch at the 2 should have either been an interception or an incomplete pass. Worthy did not have equal possession of the ball with Bishop before it hit the ground. Probably should have been ruled incomplete. KC kicks a FG there rather than getting the TD. -4 points. I thought that Kincaid had the first down on the third down play. No measurement or review for that, just spotted short. Oh well. Then it appears that Josh makes the first down. The ref with the clearest view has it spotted for a first down. The ref from the other side, who did not have a clear view, marks it short. Then as he comes towards the pile, he moves his mark back further. And then as they are talking and setting the ball, they move it back further. Tony Romo noted it on the broadcast. He literally said they moved the spot back twice. And again, on the most crucial play of the game, no measurement even. They just go to video and confirm short. If it had been called a first, as the ref with the better view had it, it would have been very hard to overturn with review. Both announcers and the CBS on-air referee said that they thought it was a first down. Buffalo was already close to field goal range, instead KC takes the ball over and scores a TD on a shortish field. That is a 10-14 point swing. So, just those two plays alone altered the score of the game by 14-18 points. It is much easier to take these losses and just enjoy the fun of the games/season when you start viewing the current NFL more like Pro Wrestling. Come on, you know the NFL wants KC to get the three-peat (or at least keep that storyline alive for two more weeks). Watch Kelce announce his retirement just before the Super Bowl and KC magically wins and he gets to ride off into the sunset with Taylor and Jason (and then they break up within a year). Now, I'm not putting everything on the refs by any means though. We definitely did not play our best, and we still had our chances to go and win that game. We just didn't get it done. I don't think there is any one person to blame for it (Mcdermott, Beane, Kincaid, Josh, the defense). We just didn't make the plays (on offense or defense) in the clutch. I think that is a talent issue probably, but I don't put that on Beane either, he was so strapped this year with dead cap, he couldn't do a lot. Which is why everyone was calling this a rebuild/retooling year. I know some people will still be focused on offense and WR in the offseason (and I'm not saying ignore it---especially if we don't retain Amari), but what this team really needs is an elite pass rusher #1 (we hoped we had bought that with Von, but it just didn't work out); a big, stud DT #2 (watching the Philly, Washington, and KC D-lines today...we didn't measure up); and a revamped secondary (fix the safeties, add depth). With McD's defense, you need to get pressure with your front four and have good coverage. We have a ton of good draft picks and will be released from the dead cap money. So, we should continue to contend over the next few years, but most likely, with a much more talented team overall than this year's team. [Not that I don't love this year's team and am happy with all that they accomplished.] And as Simon and others said...no shame ultimately in losing to some GOATs (Reid, Spags, Pat, Travis) as much as it sucks to do it for the fourth time. After we lost our fourth SB back in the 90s, our team was old and falling apart. We've lost 4 heartbreakers to KC in the playoffs, but this team is still in their prime. Maybe that is a good omen for the future. We can still overcome/avenge these losses. [Just trying to take a positive spin on things---outside of the refs.] Go Bills!

Time to take down the new Death Star! Use the Force Josh...trust your feelings. Go Bills!

I'm not so sure that the OP is wrong. Though I don't think it is because Reid hates or doesn't respect McDermott, it's just who Reid is (arrogant competitiveness). [And, despite winning the playoff match-ups, I'm sure Reid isn't thrilled about going 4-4 overall against his former pupil.] I lost respect for Andy Reid and the Chiefs after the first AFC Championship between these two teams. They were arrogant and kind of rubbing the Bills' nose it as the clock wound down in that game and in its immediate aftermath. And they say that teams take on the demeanor of their head coach. And all of the trick plays, etc. Again, I'm not so sure they run them because it is their best chance to win as much as it is the Chiefs (Reid) wanting to show how smart they are and embarrass the other team a bit (same for Dan Campbell). There is no doubt in my mind that he targeted Worthy in that game to try to prove that KC once again one-upped Buffalo and got the better guy. Lest we forget, the only reason he has Mahomes is because of McDermott and the Bills. Yes, Worthy only had 5 touches that whole game, but they all came on the first and third drive. Remember the first drive was 2 plays and Mahomes intercepted, drive two for KC was a 3 and out. So, the third drive was still their scripted plays coming into the game. The fact that Worthy wasn't targeted the entire rest of the game (Worthy wasn't as big a part of their offense yet), almost proves that he did it on purpose. He can say it was just to get him involved, but I'm pretty sure it was Reid trying to one up Buffalo. Hard to say the lateral was one thing or the other. Remember, not only was it close to the anniversary of the Homerun Throwback, but Frank Wycheck had just passed away. So, the whole NFL was talking about the Homerun Throwback. Now, Kelce is known for his crazy lateral plays, so it could have just been that. A player at the end of the game trying to make a play for his team to get the win. And it is hard to tell from the game footage (would need to see the All-22), but it does looks like Toney is positioning himself before Kelce throws it. Could it have been an option?...1:25 on the clock, 2nd and 10 at midfield, down three. The play being to Kelce, who can take it, but you design a trailer (kind of like a hook-and-ladder) to follow for the lateral if it is there. When Toney's man left him to go tackle Kelce, it was there. But, even if it was planned, I don't think you can definitively say Reid did it to stick it to the Bills based on the circumstances and time in the game and because it wasn't on a kickoff. But then again, I wouldn't put it past him. I may just sound like a bitter Bills fan, but I do think that Reid and the Chiefs are arrogant (sore winners and sore losers). And I wouldn't be surprised if McDermott feels a bit differently about Reid now than when he first took the Bills job. I don't think there is any hate on either side and I'm sure there is still mutual respect...but if you don't think these two guys want to beat each other more than just about any other team at this point (which brings out their competitiveness), well, I don't know what to tell you.

Great calls Gunner. Hope you are wrong about Brady to the Saints. From what I can find regarding the Saints interview process: Darren Rizzi: Interim Head Coach. Long shot (or no shot) for the job, imo (went 3-5 down the stretch as interim HC, fans would explode). Anthony Weaver: Dolphins DC. Completed online interview. In-person interview scheduled for Friday. Mike Kafka: Giants OC. Completed online interview. In-person interview scheduled for Saturday. Joe Brady: Bills OC. Completed online interview. Can't interview again until after AFC Championship game. (2nd interview scheduled for next week) Kellen Moore: Eagles OC. Completed online interview. Can't interview again until after NFC Championship game. (2nd interview scheduled for next week) Mike McCarthy: In-person interview scheduled for next week (hoping they pounce on McCarthy, the only candidate with a lot of NFL experience---though with their other choices, it does seem like they are maybe wanting to go young and innovative). Kliff Kingsbury: Commanders OC. Saints have requested an interview, but no first interview has happened. So, Kingsbury (if he wanted to) cannot interview with the Saints until after the Super Bowl if they advance. If eliminated, he could interview next week. If Commanders go to Super Bowl, I can't see the Saints waiting until after the Super Bowl to interview him for the first time. So 5-6 guys still in the race. Unfortunately, it sounds like Brady is high on the list. Hope they go a different direction. 🤞

As far as Super Bowls, for the last 8 years, no HOFers yet, as too many players are not eligible (still playing or recently retired). So, I won't add that into the data. From SB 1 (1966/67) to SB 50 (2015/16), the average number of HOFers on the Super Bowl winning team is: 5.92 HOF players. Now that number is skewed a little down as there are still a decent number of guys from those later years still to get in (Brady, Brees, Gronk, etc.). But, it is at the same time inflated a bit by teams like Pittsburgh that had 14 HOFers on each on their 4 Super Bowl wins in the 1970s. Teams back in the day seemed to be a bit more stacked (prior to free agency). For instance, in the first 14 Super Bowls (1966-1979), the winning team averaged 10.5 HOFers. From the start of heavy free agency (late 90s) until now, when all is said and done, my guess is that SB winning teams will have averaged more like 4.5 HOFers on their squads (in this era). https://www.profootballhof.com/football-history/hall-of-famers-in-the-super-bowl/ The below linked article shows how many Pro Bowlers or AP 1st-team All-Pros each Super Bowl winning team has had. [It doesn't separate PB/AP, if a team had either a Pro-Bowler or a 1st team All-Pro, they were included---but not doubled up.] I extrapolated some data from it: -The average Super Bowl winning team (all SBs included, 1966-present) has had 6.7 Pro Bowl or First-Team All Pro players. -However, over the last 10 years (2014-2023), the Super Bowl winning team has only averaged 4.3 Pro Bowl or First-Team All Pro players (SB winners were generally a little more stacked back in the day---as I previously stated). SB Winners with just 1 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (2): The 2007 Giants and the 2020 Bucs. SB Winners with just 2 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (2): The 2011 Giants, and the 2018 Patriots. SB Winners with just 3 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (4): The 1970 Baltimore Colts, the 2006 Colts, the 2008 Steelers, and the 2016 Patriots. SB Winners with just 4 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (5): The 2001 Patriots, the 2003 Patriots, the 2014 Patriots, the 2015 Broncos, and the 2021 Rams. 13 of 58 Super Bowl winners had 4 or fewer PB/AP players (or 22.4% of the Super Bowl winners) 16 of 58 Super Bowl winners had 10 or more PB/AP players (or 27.6% of SB winners) So, the bulk of teams (50%) had between 5 and 9 PB/AP players https://athlonsports.com/nfl/ranking-every-super-bowl-champion So, if going by Pro Bowl, All-Pro, HOF (as blue chip), I would say in the current era most Super Bowl winning teams have like 5 blue chip guys. If going by draft selection as blue chip (1st or 2nd rounder), well generally 48% of starters are from rounds 1 or 2, so about 12 players per team. If taking only first round starters as blue chip, then teams average about 7 first rounders starting on their team. The Bills only have 2 PB/AP selections (Allen and Dawkins) (as only 7% of previous SB winners). The Bills do have 8 First-Round draft selections on the team (Allen, Cooper, Kincaid, Miller, Oliver, Rousseau, Elam, and Trubisky---ok, not sure the last two really count since they're rarely on the field) and 10 Second-Round draft selections on the team (Bishop, Coleman, Cook, Dawkins, Epenesa, Johnson, Phillips, Rapp, Samuel, and Torrence). So, the Bills have like 13-14 1st or 2nd rounders starting or in heavy-rotation. They have 6 first rounders starting or playing significant minutes. How many future HOFers for the Bills when the history is written? Josh, Von...then anyone else? Cooper? Dion? Maybe Cook, if he keeps scoring 18 TDs/year, but probably not. Don't really see anyone else with a possible HOF trajectory. Could Keon develop into one? I don't know. So, probably only 2, maybe 3 HOFers on the roster. Though, looking at the more recent Super Bowls (1990 to present) there will probably be at least 20 SB-winning teams with 4 or fewer HOFers on their squads. Couldn't find any relevant information on Bills players coming out of high school (without looking up each guy individually). But on all of the lists I looked at of best HS prospects over the last 10 years, 20 years, all-time---I did not see any Bills players on those lists (but each list was only like the 20 best of the last 20 years or whatever, one list was 50 best---so by no means exhaustive lists). We know Josh wasn't a 4- or 5-star college recruit. But not sure about the rest of the guys.

Which is interesting after hearing what Sean Payton had to say after the Broncos game last week: "They’ve done a really good job in the last year of focusing on their run game, and then partnering that with the skillset that Josh has. I was more surprised at the effectiveness of it.”

That is a crazy stat. On the year, Buffalo is +24 in turnover differential. Baltimore was +6 in turnover differential (and turnovers ended up being a key part in the Bills playoff win over them). Kansas City is also +6 in turnover differential on the year (hopefully we can get them to cough up a couple too, despite their recent success holding on to the ball).

One of the often over-looked aspects of the Pegula ownership has been the video teams and social media teams that they have brought in/developed. The team videos are of the highest quality and the social media team knows how to play the game. Yeah, I may be a little old to appreciate the fast editing and weird references of vids like these, but I have to say I did laugh out loud watching the third video, at the "Will Clapp Moment of Appreciation." 😁

The holding call on Dion took us from a 1st and 10 at the Baltimore 39, to a 2nd and 22 on our own 43 (very difficult to convert---far from field goal range). That's huge. It killed the drive and kept Baltimore in the game. The score at that time was 7-7. With that first down, the Bills were like 4-5 yards away from a field goal. We had the momentum because the drive started off of Lamar's INT. If we score a TD there, momentum is on our side, and the crowd is going crazy (rather than silenced with a punt). And with the way the rest of the first half played out, we would have taken a 28-10 lead into the half, getting the ball out of the intermission. That would have been tough for Baltimore to overcome in that weather. That call totally kept the Ravens in the game. At best (if it was a bad call), the PI on Tre gave us 4 points. If they don't make the call, we're kicking the field goal to go up 17-10 at that point (as opposed to 21-10). On the holding call, we were going to at least get a field goal there, which would have given us a 24-10 halftime lead, a TD there gives us a 28-10 halftime lead. If the refs don't make either call, we have either a 20-10 halftime lead if we got a field goal on the holding drive (only 1 point less than what it was, 21-10), but if we got a TD there, we would have had a 24-10 halftime lead. Again could have been 28-10 if the refs still called the PI, but not the holding. And don't discount momentum or keeping the crowd in the game, etc. The two calls did kind of balance each other out a bit on the scoreboard, but I think the holding call on Dion definitely changed the course of the game much more than the PI call did.

[I posted the following in the Gameday thread, but thought it might get lost in there, so figured I would repost in this thread.] So, we keep hearing the better team lost. Baltimore was/is a better team than the Bills, but: -Head-to-Head: 1-1 -Record: Buffalo 13-4, Balt 12-5 (plus we purposefully pooched the last game of the year vs. the Pats---could have had two wins on Balt) -AFC seeding: Buffalo #2; Baltimore #3 -We scored more points than Baltimore this year (only by 7, but still) -Conversely, their defense only allowed 7 points fewer than the Bills defense on the year -So, the teams are tied in point differential on the year -The two teams scored the same number of TDs on the year That's about as evenly matched as two teams could get (with a slight edge to the Bills based on record and seeding), but then there is this too : -We had a +24 turnover ratio, the Ravens had a +6 turnover ratio (not surprising this was the difference in the game as it's one of the only stats with a major advantage to either team). -Josh Allen > Lamar Jackson Buffalo: Two best wins: KC (15-2), Detroit (15-2) Two worst losses (not counting week 17): Hoston (10-7, div winner, lost div round playoffs); Rams (10-7, div winner, lost division round of playoffs) Baltimore: Two best wins: Buffalo (13-4), Washington (12-5) Two worst losses: Las Vegas (4-13), Cleveland (3-14) The only place the Ravens had it over the Bills this year was total yards. They had 1,119 yards more than us on the year (or 65.8 yards per game). But all of those extra yards did not equate to more points or more wins than the Bills (again, the Bills turnover prowess is probably the reason for that---giving our offense more short fields). And more yards than the Bills in the playoff game didn't help them advance either, did it?. So, how is Baltimore the better team again? What metric are people using? Just total yards without looking at any other stat? Or is it just the popularity contest known as Pro Bowl voting?

So, we keep hearing the better team lost. Baltimore was/is a better team than the Bills, but: -Head-to-Head: 1-1 -Record: Buffalo 13-4, Balt 12-5 (plus we purposefully pooched the last game of the year vs. the Pats---could have had two wins on Balt) -AFC seeding: Buffalo #2; Baltimore #3 -We scored more points than Baltimore this year (only by 7, but still) -Conversely, their defense only allowed 7 points fewer than the Bills defense on the year -So, the teams are tied in point differential on the year -The two teams scored the same number of TDs on the year That's about as evenly matched as two teams could get (with a slight edge to the Bills based on record and seeding), but then there is this too : -We had a +24 turnover ratio, the Ravens had a +6 turnover ratio (not surprising this was the difference in the game as it's the only stat with a major advantage to either team). -Josh Allen > Lamar Jackson Buffalo: Two best wins: KC (15-2), Detroit (15-2) Two worst losses (not counting week 17): Hoston (10-7, div winner, lost div round playoffs); Rams (10-7, div winner, lost division round of playoffs) Baltimore: Two best wins: Buffalo (13-4), Washington (12-5) Two worst losses: Las Vegas (4-13), Cleveland (3-14) The only place the Ravens had it over the Bills this year was total yards. They had 1,119 yards more than us on the year (or 65.8 yards per game). But all of those extra yards did not equate to more points or more wins than the Bills (again, the Bills turnover prowess is probably the reason for that---giving our offense more short fields). And more yards than the Bills in the playoff game didn't help them advance either. So, how is Baltimore the better team again? What metric are people using? Just total yards without looking at any other stat? Or is it just the popularity contest known as Pro Bowl voting?

I think Brady is around Buffalo one more year. The 2nd half of our playoff game didn't help his cause. Nor did the fact that we won. Because he is off limits for at least another week, as the teams who already made the decision on their coaches are getting a jump start on hiring staffs, etc. The Bears were one of four teams that showed interest. So, they're out. The Jets have interviewed or are interviewing 17 different guys (plus I don't know Brady would accept that job---in the division, terrible ownership, big QB question/future). Joe already interviewed for Chicago, New Orleans, and Jax. He has not yet interviewed with the Jets, though he is on their list. There are also rumors that Aaron Glenn (DET DC) is the frontrunner for the Jets job. So the Jets don't really seem like a real possibility. That leaves the Jags and the Saints. The Jags are also interviewing: Steve Spagnuola (KC DC), Aaron Glen (DET DC), Patrick Graham (LV DC), Liam Coen (TB OC), Robert Saleh, Brian Flores (MIN DC), Todd Monken (BAL OC)---they had also interviewed Ben Johnson (CHI) and Kellen Moore (who looks to be getting the Cowboys head post). So, Brady is currently 1 of 8 remaining candidates. Jags are moving into second round of interviews (in-person). Apparently Johnson, Coen, Glen, and Saleh were the front-runners. Sounds like the Jags do want to go with an offensive guy. So, with Johnson gone, is Liam Coen the answer? Monken and Brady are the only other candidates on the offensive side of the ball. The Saints are also interviewing: Aaron Glen (DET DC), Mike Kafka (NYG OC), Anthony Weaver (MIA DC), David Shaw (former Stanford HC), Kliff Kingsbury (WAS OC), Mike McCarthy (former DAL/GB HC), and Darren Rizzi (NO interim HC). Again, they also interviewed Kellen Moore, but it looks like he's going to Dallas. So, Brady is again, 1 of 8 remaining candidates. Saints are also into second interviews and have them scheduled for Kafka, Weaver, and McCarthy. I think it will be one more year (if Buffalo continues to play well again next year and especially if we make/win a SB this year) before he gets the call. As for the Bears, great hire. It will be interesting to see if Johnson can get Caleb Williams and the Bears offense up and running...and conversely, it will be interesting to see what happens to the Detroit offense without him. Who will they hire to replace him? Can they keep it going? Was it more Johnson than Campbell with Detroit's success, or will Detroit just keep rolling (they still have some great players on offense).

Already over .500. The win against Baltimore was his seventh. So, a 7-6 playoff record currently for McD. A 7-5 playoff record for Josh.

Great initial post Chandler! One of your best. Thanks for getting us started each week. We are ONE BILLS NATION tonight. Let's F'n Go Buffalo! Mafia Mount Up! GO BILLS!

Good...everyone get it all out before tomorrow...exorcise those demons.

Man I loved Joe Cribbs and Jerry Butler! And I enjoyed watching Fergy play (he was the QB of my childhood). He was never a top guy, but he was a very good QB---despite a lot of down years for the Bills during his career. He ranks 57th all-time in passing yards and 55th all-time in passing TDs. Funny enough, Josh Allen currently has just 1 passing TD less than Fergy. So, just two more passing TDs for Josh will move him ahead of Fergy in the Bills' record books. I remember being so upset when Chuck Knox left. But, I guess if he didn't, we might not have had Bill, Marv, Jim and the boys do what they did. The post-game interview with Reggie McKenzie @ 10:55 in the video is priceless. [Reminiscent of the feelings of the Bills breaking the drought in 2017.] And we often talk about the players/league being tougher back in the day. Well, apparently the refs were too. Check out the ref @ 43:19 in the video. We're Talkin' Proud!

So, according to the CBS Head Coah/GM hiring tracker: Joe Brady is being interviewed by 4 of the 6 remaining teams that still need a HC: the Bears, the Jets, the Jaguars, and the Saints. Dallas and Las Vegas have not requested an interview with Joe. The Bears are interviewing 18 candidates (14 done, 4 to go). Is it me or does that sound like an unusually high number? But then the Jets are interviewing 17 candidates (12 completed) The Jaguars are interviewing 10 candidates (6 completed) The Saints are interviewing 9 candidates (only 2 complete) So, a lot of interest for Joe...but he's up against a lot of other candidates too. As far as the NFL's interviewing process. I understand that if you were able to hire your coach now, instead of after the Super Bowl (Feb 10th), that is almost an extra month for the new coach to get started. That's a lot of time---in regards to the draft and him hiring his staff ahead of other head coaches, etc.. So, it wouldn't be fair to have teams wait until say after the Super Bowl to start interviewing. It would kind of put those teams in a bit of a hole. But, interviewing a playoff coordinator now, almost seems like just an elimination round. I mean, if you want one of those coordinators, you are going to have to wait for their team to be eliminated anyhow. Sure that could be today or tomorrow, but it could also be Feb. 10th. If you want one of those guys that bad, you know it and are ok to wait. If he's just one among many candidates, then you are probably not going to wait...unless he blows your socks off and is clearly the #1 interview. So, it almost seems silly for teams to interview playoff coordinators (while their team is still in it) unless they are pretty sure that they are the guy they want (or at least one of their top 2-3 candidates). When you are interviewing 18 guys, why bother with a playoff coordinator, unless you are pretty sure you want him? And why interview guys right before their game? Half the teams will be eliminated this weekend and you can interview them on Monday...the other guys you still have to wait for anyhow. It definitely hurts the coaching candidates to still have their team in the playoffs---and unless you are already a team's top 1 to 2 choices, you probably have very little shot of winning them over in an interview anyhow. Sounds like Brady is focused on the Bills and not all that interested in the available opportunities (or isn't really expecting to be hired by any of them). But, that is also a process in the NFL...interviewing for multiple teams over multiple years drives up your stock. So, you kind of have to take the interviews. And yes, some coaches spend a ton of time preparing for these interviews. But again, it sounds like Joe has the right perspective about it this year. Get my foot in the door and be seen, but not put too much into the interviews that it takes away from the team.