The Big Cat

Way to misrepresent the game to make your point. Yes, the score was 6-6 at half. And that's an indictment on the defense...because? Mostly, however, the score was 6-6 at half because the offense only had four first-half possessions, with the final one ending on a pick at the goal line. It's also not convenient to your point (I'm not sure why we're disqualifying a good performance from the defense, anyways) to note their was another redzone turnover in the second half as well. This game was close...BECAUSE THE OFFENSE STUNK.

I'm baffled anyone wouldn't.

Heath Evans sweats his days with Bellicheat. All you hear about from Pats* players (Evans included) is that everyone is bought into the system. In his world (one in which Lombardis were won), the rebuke from Rex's players must have been tremendously unsettling and foreign.

I also argued in favor of Marrone, and expressed trepidation that--while he was a micromanaging hardass--Marrone would have the team more consistently focussed and prepared than Rex would.

Can't argue that. Would be curious to see what Bellicheat's non-Brady record would have been. Fair enough.

No, actually. The evidence you cite is a perfectly reasonable answer as to why he's struggled to win.

When an opinion doesn't match yours, those points are "excuses."

The Jets before and after. You mean the Jets before and after Rex? Or the Jets before and after they signed a QB/WR duo that broke numerous franchise records? Or were you talking about the Jets before and after they brought back any semblance of talent in their defensive secondary? Or is the Jets before and after Geno Smith got his jaw broke?

I'm glad you feel secure in your virtual posse. But I wouldn't confuse three or four outspoken compadres with any sort of majority. May be you should run a poll. Prove me wrong.

What do you think the outcome of this conversation will be? You seem to believe that every point made that aligns with your opinion is a salient counterweight and that anything to the contrary is an "excuse." So if your desired outcome is for everyone to share your opinion, otherwise you'll continue throwing these mini-tantrums, well, then I don't know what to tell you other than advise against the outbursts.

Von Miller and DeMarcus Ware knowing the silent snap count were better than anything Bills fans could dream of in 2015. To use their performance in the AFCC game as a standard is beyond absurd.

salad was not perfect. crotouns: yes. but terribly salty. but they deliver through grub hub.

No amount of any kind of gap pressure would have slowed down the quick passing attack that immediately neutralized the front four in the first six weeks of the season. And there's nothing to 'admit.' Rex took the players out of a scheme that was perfect for their skill set (so long as nobody got injured). Who is disputing this? What IS at issue is whether his scheme will be more successful long term, and won't live or die by four healthy pro bowlers up front.

Yes. It shows how opponents stats against the bills compare to their season averages. It's obviously not perfect. I whipped it together over ceasar salad.

Lunch meetings get cancelled, I think of you guys first: This is very interesting analysis. What it tells me is that Rex failed for reasons he hasn't been scrutinized: because the run D was WAY OFF. It also provides evidence enough to suggest, as I have been, that the defense wasn't TERRIBLE. It was a disappointment, because it was mediocre. Also, Rex said very plainly at the combine that there were two games that employed his scheme and his scheme alone: the final two. Do we believe him? *percentages represent how their results against the bills compare to their season average green = 0-85 (arbitrary benchmark made up earlier today to define "success) yellow = 86-100 red = 100+

No, I'm curious to look, but I'm a too busy right now. I'll crunch those numbers eventually.

Imagine a world where multiple explanations exist...wait for it..at the same time!! GOSH! I have continually offered EACH of these explanations...concurrently...to the people who just want to wail about the coach.

It does seem as if Rex detractors are immovably bias, yes. And that I've been painted as somebody with zero qualms about the man and his coaching style shows how far one has to go to prove his hatred of the man. To me, those people come off as a tad illogical. Yes. I have no problem saying this. Here's what I was thinking, but I have no data to support whether is reasonable or not: if by the end of the year, our opponents are held to 85% or less of what their season averages are for points and yards, then the defense will be a success. How's that? He didn't play through six games. He was injured during the Bengals game. He did not finish that game. We all have to be on the same page here about the way things actually happened. Your point was that they fell in sack rankings with the same personnel. That's what you said. If you meant for your point to be that there was a lack of pass rush, okay. I'm happy to discus why we think that is. I won't, however, profess to have THE answer. And your insistence that you do--that it's about Rex and nothing else, I think is silly.

I understand the question perfectly. And I answered it. I think it's foolhardy to latch onto a stat and create a pass fail standard based on an arbitrary guess on what they should do. Doing so only gets you the result that you want. And since Rex's defenses have been ranked in the top 10, but since posters don't want that to be true, they'll unearth other stats to disprove those stats and holler and scream about why that ranking doesn't tell the whole story, but theirs does. So, for the sake of constructive dialogue, it's a losing proposition to "put a stake in the ground" when I don't know what changes they'll make to personnel in the offseason, but I do know that any measurement of success I propose will be roundly rejected by the same 3-5 people who seem to have the utmost difficulty with the concept that many factors contributed to a disappointing 2015.

I haven't changed my argument once.

Well, I never said the defense was bad because of Tyrod, so you'll have to please excuse my ongoing skepticism of your reality.

I honestly don't know. Rex's defenses have rarely put up gaudy stats. So where they rank statistically seems secondary to whether or not they were effective. And I would argue they were effective more often than not last year, and I'll point you again to the analysis I did that showed how long stretches of offensive inactivity MUST be considered when looking at what impacted wins and losses most last year. Rex's defense will be good enough to win games in 2016, I believe this to be true and I believe it was the case last year. Whether or not we have a winning season and/or make the playoffs will be MAINLY the result of TT improving. So, your question to me about what the defense has to do to make us a winner is a losing proposition. Because if TT plays like he did last year, they'll HAVE to be top-8 to even sniff the playoffs. Dude go back and look at the game logs. Jesus: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WillKy20/gamelog/2015/

Hahaha, and again reality rears its ugly head. Williams got injured halfway through week 6. Otherwise, if you're not changing your argument from PERSONNEL WAS THE SAME! to FOUR OF THE 11 PLAYERS WERE THE SAME! Okay, sure. Got me there. But that's not what we were discussing.

You keep characterizing my argument as binary. I imagine since yours is, you assume everyone else see things as either or. I don't. And none of my positions here would suggest I do. I can't help you understand that. But here, I'll give it a whirl. Reasons why I think the Bills underperformed in 2015 in order: Lack of talent/experience at QB Injuries Lack of talent at LB/S Difficulty adapting to scheme/adapting scheme to players Reasons you think Bills underperformed in 2015 in order: Rex sux