Does anyone else get the feeling McDermott coaches scared against Reid like he is a son coaching against his Dad??

[billsfan89]

I don't think McD coaches scared (if you can call it that) against KC because of Andy Reid or a little brother mentality. I think he coaches conservative because Hill, Mahomes and Kelce are a deadly combination and the offense is dynamic enough to win a shootout. Those are three dynamic players and the Bills offense should be able to put up points. Hoping to not let up big plays and stiffen in the redzone is the strategy of someone who knows their opponent and has faith in their offense. It didn't work obviously and they should have adjusted at the half at the very least. Hopefully after two cracks at KC this year they find a strategy that works and KC maybe starts to lose some pieces. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

I actually thought it was fine to call it. Look: you need to convert 2 two-pt conversions no matter what, and why not try it when it still looks a little like garbage time to the Chiefs? The Bills clicked on that drive, and it seemed like the right time to do it, with the D possibly a little more lackadaisical. Regardless, the Chiefs could score at will and the Bills were not going to win that game. 
 

This is a pretty good take, by the way: https://www.si.com/nfl/2021/01/25/buffalo-bills-not-aggressive-in-loss-to-kansas-city-chiefs

 

 

I just don't see the sense in locking down a 2 score game instead of inviting a significant chance (50%) that you doom your team to need 3 scores in 4 minutes agaisnt the Chiefs (the Ravens were last week...).

 

The point is that they did NOT need a 2 point conversion on that score.  Therefore there was absolutely no reason to put that score at risk of putting them out of 2 score range.  If they miss on a 2 pointer on the next possession when now 16 instead of 17, well.....hey, they had no choice then.  But instead they went for 2, didn't get it , recovered the onsides.....and kicked a FG that wasted another minute..............and left them still 2 TDs down!  Gifted another possession, and they come out with the same result. 

 

If they kicked the extra point and then recovered the onside kick, I have to think there's no way McD settles for a FG with only 3 min left.  It's 4 down territory the rest of the way.

 

It was a bad call.

[Success]

No more than Reid was w/ BB when KC lost to the Pats in the AFCCG 2 years ago.

 

Experience means something.  I think the lights were a little too bright for McD and all of the Bills yesterday. But last year, they were a little too bright in the WC game - this year, it was the AFCCG.

 

It's a progression (I won't say a process).  Not that it's always linear in football, and it might be hard to get back to this game - but when we do, we'll be better for the experience of it.  McD and Josh both seem to feed off of bad experiences, and use them as fuel.

 

[LABILLBACKER]

1 minute ago, billsfan89 said:

I don't think McD coaches scared (if you can call it that) against KC because of Andy Reid or a little brother mentality. I think he coaches conservative because Hill, Mahomes and Kelce are a deadly combination and the offense is dynamic enough to win a shootout. Those are three dynamic players and the Bills offense should be able to put up points. Hoping to not let up big plays and stiffen in the redzone is the strategy of someone who knows their opponent and has faith in their offense. It didn't work obviously and they should have adjusted at the half at the very least. Hopefully after two cracks at KC this year they find a strategy that works and KC maybe starts to lose some pieces. 

Kelce turns 32 in Oct.  Hill turns 27 in March. We just have to be patient and start drafting young speed. 

[BullBuchanan]

This KC franchise is an all-time great dynasty, and we aren't - at least not yet. Look at the matchup on paper, and it's not even close. Combine that with the fact that they all played up to their level and we did not. It's really that simple. The Bills are a very good team, but KC is the new NE, so if you want to beat them you have to come prepared for that.

We beat teams this year by largely being a one-trick pony. If you want to compete with elite dynasties, you have to be a lot more multiple. To do that, we need some combination of elite RB, Elite TE, a second Diggs, an all-pro caliber player or two in your front seven, and better play from your QB when it matters most. There wasn't a single player or coach on the field for Buffalo yesterday that did a good enough job to win. Some of that is talent, and some of it is just execution. 

[dave mcbride]

15 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I just don't see the sense in locking down a 2 score game instead of inviting a significant chance (50%) that you doom your team to need 3 scores in 4 minutes agaisnt the Chiefs (the Ravens were last week...).

 

The point is that they did NOT need a 2 point conversion on that score.  Therefore there was absolutely no reason to put that score at risk of putting them out of 2 score range.  If they miss on a 2 pointer on the next possession when now 16 instead of 17, well.....hey, they had no choice then.  But instead they went for 2, didn't get it , recovered the onsides.....and kicked a FG that wasted another minute..............and left them still 2 TDs down!  Gifted another possession, and they come out with the same result. 

 

If they kicked the extra point and then recovered the onside kick, I have to think there's no way McD settles for a FG with only 3 min left.  It's 4 down territory the rest of the way.

 

It was a bad call.

I just felt in retrospect that they were more likely to convert in that situation than if the game had somehow gotten closer and the outcome was in doubt. 

[BullBuchanan]

15 minutes ago, Success said:

No more than Reid was w/ BB when KC lost to the Pats in the AFCCG 2 years ago.

 

Experience means something.  I think the lights were a little too bright for McD and all of the Bills yesterday. But last year, they were a little too bright in the WC game - this year, it was the AFCCG.

 

It's a progression (I won't say a process).  Not that it's always linear in football, and it might be hard to get back to this game - but when we do, we'll be better for the experience of it.  McD and Josh both seem to feed off of bad experiences, and use them as fuel.

 

It's like the '89 Broncos running into Montana's 49ers and the embarrassment of riches they had. Even Elway needed 4 cracks at it before he was able to get it done.

[Like A Mofo]

I created a meme just for last night

 

[BullBuchanan]

18 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

I just don't see the sense in locking down a 2 score game instead of inviting a significant chance (50%) that you doom your team to need 3 scores in 4 minutes agaisnt the Chiefs (the Ravens were last week...).

 

The point is that they did NOT need a 2 point conversion on that score.  Therefore there was absolutely no reason to put that score at risk of putting them out of 2 score range.  If they miss on a 2 pointer on the next possession when now 16 instead of 17, well.....hey, they had no choice then.  But instead they went for 2, didn't get it , recovered the onsides.....and kicked a FG that wasted another minute..............and left them still 2 TDs down!  Gifted another possession, and they come out with the same result. 

 

If they kicked the extra point and then recovered the onside kick, I have to think there's no way McD settles for a FG with only 3 min left.  It's 4 down territory the rest of the way.

 

It was a bad call.

You still need the two points to win, regardless of when it comes. The whole "delay it until later" point is just pushing it down the road.

There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others.

[Mr. WEO]

1 minute ago, dave mcbride said:

I just felt in retrospect that they were more likely to convert in that situation than if the game had somehow gotten closer and the outcome was in doubt. 

 

 

When you have the chance to lockup a 2 score game you lock it up and go balls to the wall there on out.  A miss (50% chance) dooms them to needing 3 possessions in 4 minutes.  Crazy.  Take the 50% chance when there are no options.

 

They took an unnecessary risk and compounded the error with the FG.   A disaster in late game decision making.  Maybe he didn't realize how much time was left? Or that the Chiefs O was having its way with his Defense?

 

 

[dave mcbride]

Just now, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

When you have the chance to lockup a 2 score game you lock it up and go balls to the wall there on out.  A miss (50% chance) dooms them to needing 3 possessions in 4 minutes.  Crazy.  Take the 50% chance when there are no options.

 

They took an unnecessary risk and compounded the error with the FG.   A disaster in late game decision making.  Maybe he didn't realize how much time was left? Or that the Chiefs O was having its way with his Defense?

 

 

By that point in the game, the Bills were clearly going to lose, 2 pt conversion or now. The Bills couldn't stop them at all, and the Chiefs could simply have kept dialing up easy first downs. The point is, don't make too much of that call. The better team won and could have scored 45 if they didn't take their foot off the gas.

[Fan in San Diego]

I thought we should have went for the TD's instead of kicking FG's, play to win

[TheFunPolice]

Keep the game alive, so you kick the XP and make it a 16 point game. All of a sudden you recover the onside kick and have a shot to go get 6 THEN go for the 2 to make it an 8 point game, 1 score. 

 

By missing the 2 pointer you took most of the excitement out of the onside recovery. Didn't get the decision at the time. 

 

Always stay alive in games, so that when you get a big play (like the onside recovery) you have the chance to capitalize!

7 minutes ago, Fan in San Diego said:

I thought we should have went for the TD's instead of kicking FG's, play to win

 

Agreed, especially in the 2nd half. 

 

Kick the FG you probably lose. Miss the TD you probably lose. Score the TD you have a shot.

 

Only 1 of those situations is positive, so you try for that one. 

[Bob Chandler's Hands]

Some folks on here could really benefit from a lesson in Bayesian statistics. But we're not going to do that in this thread. 

 

[Madbillsfan]

Reminded me of Coach Klein from Waterboy. 

[BullBuchanan]

2 minutes ago, TheFunPolice said:

Keep the game alive, so you kick the XP and make it a 16 point game. All of a sudden you recover the onside kick and have a shot to go get 6 THEN go for the 2 to make it an 8 point game, 1 score. 

 

By missing the 2 pointer you took most of the excitement out of the onside recovery. Didn't get the decision at the time. 

 

Always stay alive in games, so that when you get a big play (like the onside recovery) you have the chance to capitalize!

 

Agreed, especially in the 2nd half. 

 

Kick the FG you probably lose. Miss the TD you probably lose. Score the TD you have a shot.

 

Only 1 of those situations is positive, so you try for that one. 

That may make the game more exciting for Joe Fan, but it doesn't change the math. In fact, it probably works against you.

[TheFunPolice]

9 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

That may make the game more exciting for Joe Fan, but it doesn't change the math. In fact, it probably works against you.

 

Yeah, I get both sides of it. I didn't love the decision to go for 2 there, but it's defensible. 

 

Not going for the TD and settling for FGs inside the 10 makes no sense. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

You still need the two points to win, regardless of when it comes. The whole "delay it until later" point is just pushing it down the road.

There is no avoiding war; it can only be postponed to the advantage of others.

 

Not really.  See everything above.  it's as simple as would you have a better chance tying/winning with 3 possessions or 2 with 4 min left.  This isn't even hard.

 

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

By that point in the game, the Bills were clearly going to lose, 2 pt conversion or now. The Bills couldn't stop them at all, and the Chiefs could simply have kept dialing up easy first downs. The point is, don't make too much of that call. The better team won and could have scored 45 if they didn't take their foot off the gas.

 

 

There 4 min left and the went on to recover an onside kick!  The game was over??

 

I think a lot of us didn't realize that the Bills had thrown in the towel after they missed the 2 points.

 

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Not really.  See everything above.  it's as simple as would you have a better chance tying/winning with 3 possessions or 2 with 4 min left.  This isn't even hard.

 

 

 

There 4 min left and the went on to recover an onside kick!  The game was over??

 

I think a lot of us didn't realize that the Bills had thrown in the towel after they missed the 2 points.

 

No offense, but apparently it is. It gives you no advanatge to go for 2 points later if the result is the same - it just gives you a longer sweat. By going for it earlier, it may have even been to our advantage, because it lets you know what you now need to win. By kicking the Field Goal, down 14 points with 3 minutes we gave ourselves a chance to get a second onside kick score a TD before the 2 minute warning and then either onside again or kickoff with 3 Time Outs and the 2 minute warning needing only a TD to tie.

Regardless, the whole point is moot. The decisions in the final 5 minutes had no bearing on the outcome of the game. We lost in the 2nd quarter, and the nail was in the coffin with 13 minutes left on Allen's interception.

[Mr. WEO]

Just now, BullBuchanan said:

No offense, but apparently it is. It gives you no advanatge to go for 2 points later if the result is the same - it just gives you a longer sweat. By going for it earlier, it may have even been to our advantage, because it lets you know what you now need to win. By kicking the Field Goal, down 14 points with 3 minutes we gave ourselves a chance to get a second onside kick score a TD before the 2 minute warning and then either onside again or kickoff with 3 Time Outs and the 2 minute warning needing only a TD to tie.

Regardless, the whole point is moot. The decisions in the final 5 minutes had no bearing on the outcome of the game. We lost in the 2nd quarter, and the nail was in the coffin with 13 minutes left on Allen's interception.

 

It's not at all.  The goal after that TD was to make it a 2 score game, that's it.  Very simple.

 

One method of achieving  this goal has a 94% chance of success, the other has 50%.  If either fails, it's a 3 score game and they are essentially doomed.

 

You would pick the method to be within 2 scores of tying/winning that has only a 50% chance of succeeding?  That makes no sense.  

 

Scoring 2 TDs was more likely with 4 min left than 3 min left.  The FG was useless.  If they were 16 points down, McD would not have kicked it.