Jump to content

Sam Darnold Dazzles in Debut


Gugny

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Gugny said:

I'll preface with this .... I still consider the Mets to be a team with zero no hitters in its history.  Why?  Because in 2012, when Santana was vying for the 1st no-no in franchise history, Carlos Beltran got a base hit that was a) obvious and b) erroneously ruled foul.  On paper, it's a no-hitter.  In reality, it is not.  And I'm a Mets fan.

 

This brings me to the Bills' playoff drought.

 

Did the Bills really "make" the playoffs? 

 

The Bills' regular season was over after the Dolphins game.  The Bills didn't do enough to make the playoffs.

 

The Bengals did enough for the Bills to make the playoffs.  That is the reality.

 

And yes ... I feel the same way about the (7-9) Seattle team (even though they actually won a playoff game).

 

I'm torn.  Part of me says, "Yes, the drought is over."  But part of me says, "It's not over until the Bills make the playoffs without having to back in."

It is like banging the fat girl, after a 17year dry spell. Yeah, it is over, but I'd keep that to myself. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I'll preface with this .... I still consider the Mets to be a team with zero no hitters in its history.  Why?  Because in 2012, when Santana was vying for the 1st no-no in franchise history, Carlos Beltran got a base hit that was a) obvious and b) erroneously ruled foul.  On paper, it's a no-hitter.  In reality, it is not.  And I'm a Mets fan.

 

This brings me to the Bills' playoff drought.

 

Did the Bills really "make" the playoffs? 

 

The Bills' regular season was over after the Dolphins game.  The Bills didn't do enough to make the playoffs.

 

The Bengals did enough for the Bills to make the playoffs.  That is the reality.

 

And yes ... I feel the same way about the (7-9) Seattle team (even though they actually won a playoff game).

 

I'm torn.  Part of me says, "Yes, the drought is over."  But part of me says, "It's not over until the Bills make the playoffs without having to back in."

Yes, they played the Jaguars and lost 10-3. They didn't back in. They finished 9-7 and qualified as a wild card based on NFL rules

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nucci said:

Yes, they played the Jaguars and lost 10-3. They didn't back in. They finished 9-7 and qualified as a wild card based on NFL rules

 

Watching the end of another game after your season is over, hoping a team loses so you can "get into" the playoffs is the textbook definition of backing in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gugny said:

 

Watching the end of another game after your season is over, hoping a team loses so you can "get into" the playoffs is the textbook definition of backing in.

Look at it how you want. The Bills played in the playoffs last year. That's all that matters.....

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nucci said:

Look at it how you want. The Bills played in the playoffs last year. That's all that matters.....

 

Sometimes I agree with this.  Like I said ... I'm torn!

1 minute ago, Mark80 said:

So, with your logic, I guess Armando Galarraga really did throw a perfect game then, huh?

 

Dude ... that was heartbreaking.  But no, it doesn't go both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gugny said:

 

Sometimes I agree with this.  Like I said ... I'm torn!

Don't be...it'll drive you nuts...just enjoy it...I think they make the playoffs again. They are not as bad as most seem to think

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't the first time a team got help and "backed in" to the playoffs...step one is to put yourself in the position to even be able to get in with some help. The Bills did that much last year. Didn't the Giants "back in" when they beat the **Pats in the Super Bowl???

 

Sure, the Bills had some luck (for once). That shouldn't take away from what they did do, what they could control. Sometimes its better to be lucky, than good.

 

The drought is over. Regardless of how it happened, embrace it.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I'll preface with this .... I still consider the Mets to be a team with zero no hitters in its history.  Why?  Because in 2012, when Santana was vying for the 1st no-no in franchise history, Carlos Beltran got a base hit that was a) obvious and b) erroneously ruled foul.  On paper, it's a no-hitter.  In reality, it is not.  And I'm a Mets fan.

 

This brings me to the Bills' playoff drought.

 

Did the Bills really "make" the playoffs? 

 

The Bills' regular season was over after the Dolphins game.  The Bills didn't do enough to make the playoffs.

 

The Bengals did enough for the Bills to make the playoffs.  That is the reality.

 

And yes ... I feel the same way about the (7-9) Seattle team (even though they actually won a playoff game).

 

I'm torn.  Part of me says, "Yes, the drought is over."  But part of me says, "It's not over until the Bills make the playoffs without having to back in."

We'll, nothing says it can't start over.. but yes by definition.

 

To your point though,  I think so.  Even if we miss this year, I think McBeane can sail this ship.   (I loved embedded!)

 

That backed in stuff is kind of a cop out to me.

Edited by JaxBills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the argument the OP is making.  On one hand, officially, the drought is over.  On the other hand, it would be nice to see them decisively get into the playoffs without help.  As to the former, that was probably the best case scenario for last years team, so they out performed IMO.  As to the later, I don't expect to see that until next season.  If the Bills get into the playoffs this year, I suspect it will be similar to what we saw seven months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

It wasn't the first time a team got help and "backed in" to the playoffs...step one is to put yourself in the position to even be able to get in with some help. The Bills did that much last year. Didn't the Giants "back in" when they beat the **Pats in the Super Bowl???

 

Sure, the Bills had some luck (for once). That shouldn't take away from what they did do, what they could control. Sometimes its better to be lucky, than good.

 

The drought is over. Regardless of how it happened, embrace it.

in sports you always need some luck to win a championship...

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that there is universal agreement on this topic. The Bills were pulled into the playoffs by Cincy.  When have you ever seen such an outpouring of $$$ from one fan base to a player on an opposing team.  That was our way of saying “thank you” to Cincy for getting us in the playoffs.

 

I’m extremely happy with the progress that the team made last season, please don’t misread me, but, we needed more than a little help to get to that playoff game.

 

The drought will officially be over when the Bills warm their way into the playoffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is an acceptable and oft used way to make the playoffs. We’ve had a number of 9-7 & 8-8 years since the Music City Debacle that could have turned out better for us from a League perspective. If it did, would you be questioning that we ‘by rights’ shouldnt have been in those playoffs as well? What if we won the SB from a last minute of the last game invite due to another teams misfortune? Would you taint that as well?

End story: we did our part and waited on other Game results to see if it was enough. Happens nearly every year.

This time it was.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cripple Creek said:

I think that there is universal agreement on this topic. The Bills were pulled into the playoffs by Cincy.  When have you ever seen such an outpouring of $$$ from one fan base to a player on an opposing team.  That was our way of saying “thank you” to Cincy for getting us in the playoffs.

 

I’m extremely happy with the progress that the team made last season, please don’t misread me, but, we needed more than a little help to get to that playoff game.

 

The drought will officially be over when the Bills warm their way into the playoffs.

Every year someone gets in because someone else loses.  That's why they play the games.  It's such an odd concept to me.  We had to win our share too.  It's almost self loathing,lol?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JaxBills said:

Every year someone gets in because someone else loses.  That's why they play the games.  It's such an odd concept to me.  We had to win our share too.  It's almost self loathing,lol?

It's Buffalo

  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Going back to when Seattle backed in with a losing record: the win against New Orleans should have never happened, which was proven in their next game.

 

That said ... I'm almost glad the Bills didn't beat the Jaguars.  It would have been a hollow win.

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

Going back to when Seattle backed in with a losing record: the win against New Orleans should have never happened, which was proven in their next game.

 

That said ... I'm almost glad the Bills didn't beat the Jaguars.  It would have been a hollow win.

You know, we're not going to come to an agreement on this. 

Edited by JaxBills
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO …..

 

I don't consider the drought as over. We haven't played our way into the playoffs, we needed help. HOWEVER, the clock has been reset, we Bills fans no longer have to suffer the "experts" pointing out that it's been 17 years since we've appeared in a playoff game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

Going back to when Seattle backed in with a losing record: the win against New Orleans should have never happened, which was proven in their next game.

 

That said ... I'm almost glad the Bills didn't beat the Jaguars.  It would have been a hollow win.

Oh come on....Surely you can't be serious...so if we won the Superbowl last year , it wouldn't have mattered because you thought we backed in?  A win is a win

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gugny said:

Going back to when Seattle backed in with a losing record: the win against New Orleans should have never happened, which was proven in their next game.

 

That said ... I'm almost glad the Bills didn't beat the Jaguars.  It would have been a hollow win.

 

Why?  It just means the Bills would have gone back to NE, and lost there.  We're used to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overthinking it. Yes, the drought is over, but I agree nobody should be satisfied. I certainly don’t see McBeane as people happy with a single playoff appearance, so I’m confident they’ll continue to strive for a championship.

 

 

Edited by Rockpile233
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I'll preface with this .... I still consider the Mets to be a team with zero no hitters in its history.  Why?  Because in 2012, when Santana was vying for the 1st no-no in franchise history, Carlos Beltran got a base hit that was a) obvious and b) erroneously ruled foul.  On paper, it's a no-hitter.  In reality, it is not.  And I'm a Mets fan.

 

This brings me to the Bills' playoff drought.

 

Did the Bills really "make" the playoffs? 

 

The Bills' regular season was over after the Dolphins game.  The Bills didn't do enough to make the playoffs.

 

The Bengals did enough for the Bills to make the playoffs.  That is the reality.

 

And yes ... I feel the same way about the (7-9) Seattle team (even though they actually won a playoff game).

 

I'm torn.  Part of me says, "Yes, the drought is over."  But part of me says, "It's not over until the Bills make the playoffs without having to back in."

 

 

The Bills finally played a game in January

 

The drought is over

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Gugny said:

I'll preface with this .... I still consider the Mets to be a team with zero no hitters in its history.  Why?  Because in 2012, when Santana was vying for the 1st no-no in franchise history, Carlos Beltran got a base hit that was a) obvious and b) erroneously ruled foul.  On paper, it's a no-hitter.  In reality, it is not.  And I'm a Mets fan.

 

This brings me to the Bills' playoff drought.

 

Did the Bills really "make" the playoffs? 

 

The Bills' regular season was over after the Dolphins game.  The Bills didn't do enough to make the playoffs.

 

The Bengals did enough for the Bills to make the playoffs.  That is the reality.

 

And yes ... I feel the same way about the (7-9) Seattle team (even though they actually won a playoff game).

 

I'm torn.  Part of me says, "Yes, the drought is over."  But part of me says, "It's not over until the Bills make the playoffs without having to back in."

 

The Bills played a game in the Wild Card round of the playoffs, that counts wither or not they "backed in" is completely irrelevant. If you personally don't want to count it then whatever but that is irrelevant to wither or not it actually counts in the records of the NFL. I also would counter your Mets point by saying that RA Dickey should have had a no-hitter because the one hit he allowed in 9 innings should have been ruled an error. 

Edited by billsfan89
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What if the games were played in reverse order, or if our game took a little longer and we won AFTER the Bengals game? Then would the drought be over?

 

Do you just want a win and youre in scenario? Because you seem to be placing a lot of weight on the fact that the Bengals went longer than ours did, which seems dumb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...