So how are we feeling about Coach McDermott?

[ColoradoBills]

1 minute ago, Bermuda Triangle said:

how much of the bolded is Beane, and how much is McDermott?

 

They are a team.

[GunnerBill]

25 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

What are you, his mom?  

 

He hasn't answered them directly.  He's hedging, as he often does.  I'm just not letting him off the hook.  

 

 

 

No I answered your question. Very directly. When someone gives an answer you don't like you accuse them of not answering.

[Bermuda Triangle]

5 minutes ago, ColoradoBills said:

 

They are a team.

So we can blame McDermott for the Cody Ford, Zack Moss and Elam draft picks?

[ToGoGo]

People don’t like to be wrong. 
 

They’ll always be too hard on McDermott no matter what. 

[NeverOutNick]

Hate to say it because McDermott is who he is and we’ve topped out with how dynamic we can be with him leading us but if we get the 2 seed and win at least one playoff game, he will be our HC next year.

 

If we miss the playoffs or lose first round of the playoffs we NEED to move on. Go hard after Jim Harbaugh, who I believe would pick us as his #1 place to coach because of Josh. 
 

Do I believe the bills will do this? No. Brandon Beane is a great GM but also most likely feels like he “owes” his job to McD and also probably feels like he is tied to McD and if McD goes then he goes too. I don’t feel the same way but internally I bet that’s the thought process and the reason nothing will change

[GunnerBill]

25 minutes ago, Einstein said:

I like McD and want him to be the one who brings us home a Super Bowl.

 

He is a good man.

 

But there are still some gameday issues that bother me. For example, yesterday, when we did the whole “fake like you’re going to go for 4th and 1” game… why did he call a timeout? Just take the delay of game if you’re going to punt regardless. Save that timeout.

 

The other flaw that bothers me is his persistence in keeping bad players on the field for too long. Von should have been sat weeks ago. I understand he is coming back from an industry but he is not helping us as a team yet. So sit him. Same with Murray.

 

Stuff like that bugs me, but I guess no-one is perfect.

 

On that timeout on Sunday I mean given where the clock was (we weren't going to use it, punting with 1:16 left in the half) the 5 yards for the punt mattered more. My first reaction was also "take the delay" but actually Martin pinned them with the punt and they knelt. Had the punt resulted in a touchback or a return maybe the Pats try a screen or something safe at least. I think on reflection it was a pretty good decision because the punter executed.

[Einstein]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

On that timeout on Sunday I mean given where the clock was (we weren't going to use it, punting with 1:16 left in the half) the 5 yards for the punt mattered more. My first reaction was also "take the delay" but actually Martin pinned them with the punt and they knelt. Had the punt resulted in a touchback or a return maybe the Pats try a screen or something safe at least. I think on reflection it was a pretty good decision because the punter executed.

 

You feel the 5 yards would have made a difference on the punt? I’m not so sure.

[Buffalo03]

42 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Yes. But do you really look at this roster and think that is where they should be? If they'd won every game they'd be overachieving. If they end up 10-7 they will have underachieved. Vegas had the over/under at 10.5 and the formula Pro Football Reference uses had us at 11.3 wins. 

I think you're underestimating the roster. I think we are talented enough to win 13 or 14 games but haven't because of stupid decisions made. Not because of talent

[PBF81]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

No I answered your question. Very directly. When someone gives an answer you don't like you accuse them of not answering.

 

Right, just like you gave me all of those games and plays where Gilliam was instrumental on big plays last season.  

 

... which I'm still waiting on BTW.  Just like that.  Yeah, I get it.   

 

At least we should be able to agree that Gilliam's been just a JAG this season.  A $2M+ JAG.  

 

 

[pennstate10]

This thread amazes me. 
 

You guy would rather have Hank Bullough?

Or Jim Ringo?

Or Kay Stephenson?

 

4 out of every 5 Bills coaches have been losers. Chumps. Under .500. 
 

Yet you want to take one of most winning Bills ever and toss him aside after a winning season?

 

SM H

[GunnerBill]

Just now, PBF81 said:

 

Right, just like you gave me all of those games and plays where Gilliam was instrumental on big plays last season.  

 

... which I'm still waiting on BTW.  Just like that.  Yeah, I get it.   

 

At least we should be able to agree that Gilliam's been just a JAG this season.  A $2M+ JAG.  

 

 

 

I gave you examples there too. You didn't like them.

 

You only consider someone has answered the question if you agree with their response. 

 

You are incapable of meaningful discussion.

7 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

I think you're underestimating the roster. I think we are talented enough to win 13 or 14 games but haven't because of stupid decisions made. Not because of talent

 

And I think you are overestimating it.

[FilthyBeast]

I'm sure all of this has probably been covered ad nauseam, but I'm also back to square one with 'McDummy' after these last few weeks.

 

It just seems like every time they play one of these 'regular season superbowl' games they simply can't sustain that level of play on a weekly basis like a true elite contender does (see Baltimore Ravens) and if that's not a direct reflection of coaching not sure what is. You simply can't crush a team like Dallas then proceed to play back to back clunkers that go down to the wire against backup QB's and teams jockeying for top 5 draft picks.

 

And while many optimists will say things like 'This team has won 4 straight', 'not every game is going to be a blowout', etc. etc....I just can't feel confident in a team that barely beat the likes of the Chargers and Patriots, especially the latter considering it was a home game and the defense managed 4 turnovers...yet the game still essentially came down to the final drive and final minutes of the game.

 

Right now I'm 50/50 on whether or not they even beat the Dolphins/make playoffs, but even if they do it's going to be another quick exit with this coach especially with Josh Allen continuing to be a headcase and not play up to the standards of even an average NFL starting QB for the most part.

 

At the end of the day this team just thinks they ' just need to show up' most weeks and that's because of the locker room and culture that McDummy has created.

 

 

[GunnerBill]

8 minutes ago, Einstein said:

 

You feel the 5 yards would have made a difference on the punt? I’m not so sure.

 

Maybe it would. Maybe it wouldn't. But when it executed like it did I think the result absolutely justified the call. The 5 yards in that scenario (very unlikely to get the ball back) mattered more than the timeout.

[PBF81]

4 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I gave you examples there too. You didn't like them.

 

You only consider someone has answered the question if you agree with their response. 

 

You are incapable of meaningful discussion.

 

No you didn't, and you cannot find the post where you did.  You gave me like two from two games but claimed that he did it all season.  When I pressed you, you said that. you were at some pub and then wasn't the time.  

 

Haven't heard a peep since.  

 

Feel free to find the posts if you think you did.  Or better yet, produce all those "impact plays" at you called them I believe.  And are you now claiming that he's made impact plays for the offense this season too now?  

 

Either way, who cares.  But you do seem to be the only one that doesn't think we should have won the first games with the Jets and Pats, Denver, and Jags, or at least two or three of them.  

 

 

3 minutes ago, FilthyBeast said:

I'm sure all of this has probably been covered ad nauseam, but I'm also back to square one with 'McDummy' after these last few weeks.

 

It just seems like every time they play one of these 'regular season superbowl' games they simply can't sustain that level of play on a weekly basis like a true elite contender does (see Baltimore Ravens) and if that's not a direct reflection of coaching not sure what is. You simply can't crush a team like Dallas then proceed to play back to back clunkers that go down to the wire against backup QB's and teams jockeying for top 5 draft picks.

 

And while many optimists will say things like 'This team has won 4 straight', 'not every game is going to be a blowout', etc. etc....I just can't feel confident in a team that barely beat the likes of the Chargers and Patriots, especially the latter considering it was a home game and the defense managed 4 turnovers...yet the game still essentially came down to the final drive and final minutes of the game.

 

Right now I'm 50/50 on whether or not they even beat the Dolphins/make playoffs, but even if they do it's going to be another quick exit with this coach especially with Josh Allen continuing to be a headcase and not play up to the standards of even an average NFL starting QB for the most part.

 

At the end of the day this team just thinks they ' just need to show up' most weeks and that's because of the locker room and culture that McDummy has created.

 

 

 

He'll sink or swim on his own.  

 

It's not like it's coming down to a forum vote as to whether or not he stays.  LOL 

 

 

Edited January 2 by PBF81

[Niagara Dude]

3 hours ago, Buffalo_Stampede said:

Has anyone changed their opinion of him over the last month?

 

This will be an emotional weekend. I’m prepared for a lot of McDermott threads Sunday night if things go poorly. I want to see how we’re feeling entering the biggest regular season game of his head coaching career.

No because the team has nor been ready to play the past two games and both against garbage teams. If they come out conversation against the Dolphins they will lose

[Buffalo03]

5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I gave you examples there too. You didn't like them.

 

You only consider someone has answered the question if you agree with their response. 

 

You are incapable of meaningful discussion.

 

And I think you are overestimating it.

In what ways? The guy that originally posted this said that 13 or 14 would be overachieving but that 10 would be under achieving. Are we really gonna argue about a difference of 2 or 3 games? This team can win 11 and it can certainly win 14. It just doesn't because of bad coaching and game management earlier in the season. All 6 losses are by one score and could have gone either way. We have a top 3 QB, a good RB, a good up and coming TE, a solid Oline and pretty much a solid defense with missing core players I may add. Keep that in mind. We are missing Milano and Tre and have still won 10 games. The only thing we really need help at is WR. Tell me how I'm wrong

Edited January 2 by Buffalo03

[VaMilBill]

3 hours ago, Malazan said:

Short of a Superbowl, I think they need a change. There's something wrong with the way this team conducts itself. They are flat and unprepared and seem to have volatile emotional swings throughout the season and within individual games. I mean, that happens, but it's too much. The lack of consistency is their biggest problem.

Well we never got blown out this season which used to be a McD special. So there’s that

[GunnerBill]

Just now, PBF81 said:

 

No you didn't, and you cannot find the post where you did.  You gave me like two from two games but claimed that he did it all season.  When I pressed you, you said that. you were at some pub and then wasn't the time.  

 

Haven't heard a peep since.  

 

Feel free to find the posts if you think you did.  Or better yet, produce all those "impact plays" at you called them I believe.  

 

Either way, who cares.  But you do seem to be the only one that doesn't think we should have won the first games with the Jets and Pats, Denver, and Jags, or at least two or three of them.  

 

 

 

Nope. I never said he did it all last season. That is an outright lie which is the other thing you do. 

 

I said he had a specific role on the offense that in certain games they use and has an impact on the defense. I broke down a KC game in great detail gave you the numbers and the succes rates with him on the field bs without him. Explained why that was. 

 

You just didn't like the answer. You don't like answers that unpick the narratives you make up in your head.

[PBF81]

5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

You are incapable of meaningful discussion.

 

When sufficient info and facts aren't provided to produce a meaningful discussion, I'd place the reason for a lack of one onto the person making claims but not avowing them firmly.  

 

 

[Big Blitz]

23 minutes ago, BritishBill said:

 

I don’t have a strong opinion either way. I’d be interested to know from those who followed the Bills in the superbowls era - was everyone united around Marv Levy or did he come in for criticism for not getting the Bills over the line?

Perhaps back then the fans didn’t have the same voice as they do now with social media and internet forums! 
 

 

 

 

The consensus among fans was that Marv was the right coach for the collection of egos that made up that team.  
 

No one called for his firing after even the 3rd SB loss.  Very faint if any.  I recall there were times more people at times called for Reich to start over Kelly if he had a bad game which of course was ridiculous.  
 

Marv had a great OC in Marchibroda from 1989 to 1992 and that was as elite as the offense would be under Kelly.  Still good after he left but those were the peak seasons.  
 

 

As time passed most will now tell you if the team had a better collection of defensive coaches (or head coach in general) maybe we win one.  
 

I’m of the belief we were out coached badly in SB 25 and the other 3 we faced teams with superior talent that would have required significantly better coaching to win.  
 

Marchibroda was gone by then and the defense was just average despite having the greatest defensive player ever in Bruce.  

 

This has contributed to my attitude toward McD now.  I don’t want to waste Allen and look back saying “man, he really just needed a better OC after Daboll left.”  

[Buffalo03]

8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I gave you examples there too. You didn't like them.

 

You only consider someone has answered the question if you agree with their response. 

 

You are incapable of meaningful discussion.

 

And I think you are overestimating it.

And please state reasons why. How do you think I'm overestimating the talent. Do you even know? Or do you disagree just to disagree?

Edited January 2 by Buffalo03

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, Buffalo03 said:

In what ways? The guy that originally posted this said that 13 or 14 would be overachieving but that 10 would be under achieving. Are we really gonna argue about a difference of 2 or 3 games? This team can win 11 and it can certainly win 14. It just doesn't because of bad coaching and game management earlier in the season. All 6 losses are by one score and could have gone either way. We have a top 3 QB, a good RB, a good up and coming TR, a solid Oline and pretty much a solid defense with missing core players I may add. Keep that in mind. We are missing Milano and Tre and have still won 10 games. The only thing we really need help at is WR. Tell me how I'm wrong

 

It can win 14. It can win 17. It can win 7. 11 or 12 is par for this roster agains this schedule. 13 or 14 wasn't impossible but I do think would have been an overachivement. 9 or 10 would be an underachievement.

 

 

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

When sufficient info and facts aren't provided to produce a meaningful discussion, I'd place the reason for a lack of one onto the person making claims but not avowing them firmly.  

 

 

 

They were provided. You just didn't like what it proved so disregarded them. 

 

Stick with your narratives. They are safer for you.

1 minute ago, Buffalo03 said:

And please state reasons why. How do you think I'm overestimating the talent. Do you even know? Or do you disagree just to disagree?

 

I have given my reasons earlier in this thread. 

[Buffalo03]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

It can win 14. It can win 17. It can win 7. 11 or 12 is par for this roster agains this schedule. 13 or 14 wasn't impossible but I do think would have been an overachivement. 9 or 10 would be an underachievement.

 

 

This team is talented to have won every game we have played in. Again, tell me where I am wrong in my assessment. Do we not have a top 3 or 4 QB in the whole league? Do we not have a good/decent RB, do we not have the best oline we have had in years? Do we not have an up and coming TE? Do we not have a top 10 defense without our best players? Tell me where I am wrong

[Trogdor]

1 minute ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

The consensus among fans was that Marv was the right coach for the collection of egos that made up that team.  
 

No one called for his firing after even the 3rd SB loss.  Very faint if any.  I recall there were times more people at times called for Reich to start over Kelly if he had a bad game which of course was ridiculous.  
 

Marv had a great OC in Marchibroda from 1989 to 1992 and that was as elite as the offense would be under Kelly.  Still good after he left but those were the peak seasons.  
 

 

As time passed most will now tell you if the team had a better collection of defensive coaches (or head coach in general) maybe we win one.  
 

I’m of the belief we were out coached badly in SB 25 and the other 3 we faced teams with superior talent that would have required significantly better coaching to win.  
 

Marchibroda was gone by then and the defense was just average despite having the greatest defensive player ever in Bruce.  

 

This has contributed to my attitude toward McD now.  I don’t want to waste Allen and look back saying “man, he really just needed a better OC after Daboll left.”  

Yeah, a better coach probably would've made the guys stay in and prepare. There are a lot of looking through rose colored glasses when people talk about those teams. I mean, look at the saint people have made Jim Kelly into. 

[PBF81]

1 minute ago, Buffalo03 said:

This team is talented to have won every game we have played in. Again, tell me where I am wrong in my assessment. Do we not have a top 3 or 4 QB in the whole league? Do we not have a good/decent RB, do we not have the best oline we have had in years? Do we not have an up and coming TE? Do we not have a top 10 defense without our best players? Tell me where I am wrong

 

Good luck getting a direct answer.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

Just now, Buffalo03 said:

This team is talented to have won every game we have played in. Again, tell me where I am wrong in my assessment. Do we not have a top 3 or 4 QB in the whole league? Do we not have a good/decent RB, do we not have the best oline we have had in years? Do we not have an up and coming TE? Do we not have a top 10 defense without our best players? Tell me where I am wrong

 

We have lots of good players. But on a schedule with 5 games against double digit win teams (likely 6 by the end of the season cos the Jags will beat the Titans) and playing Cincy while Burrow was healthy and generally having one of the tougher schedules in the league this year you need those good players to be pretty consistently at their best to get to the bigger win totals. And the difference between good players (which we have lots of) and elite players (which we have fewer of) is the ability to repeat it week in week out, game in game out. 

 

We have lost two games this year that I put squarely on coaching. Patriots and Broncos. To argue all 6 of our losses are on coaching is ridiculous. 

[K-9]

1 hour ago, Buffalo03 said:

I feel he has been better with this in the last month. Have you seen something where you wouldn't agree?

End of the first half yesterday was the latest example. We could have gotten the ball back with over two minutes left if he had taken his timeouts when he should have. 

[Buffalo03]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

We have lots of good players. But on a schedule with 5 games against double digit win teams (likely 6 by the end of the season cos the Jags will beat the Titans) and playing Cincy while Burrow was healthy and generally having one of the tougher schedules in the league this year you need those good players to be pretty consistently at their best to get to the bigger win totals. And the difference between good players (which we have lots of) and elite players (which we have fewer of) is the ability to repeat it week in week out, game in game out. 

 

We have lost two games this year that I put squarely on coaching. Patriots and Broncos. To argue all 6 of our losses are on coaching is ridiculous. 

So, we lost the first Jets game because we aren't talented enough, even though we killed them the second time? I think the London trip playing a Jags team that had already been in London for 2 weeks played a big part in that loss, we lost the first Patriots game because of coaching, we lost the Eagles game because of coaching. We didn't Los because lack of talent. This team is capable of blowing anyone out on any given week if we played the way we should and I think you know that. But because of scheme and injuries, we haven't. 

[PBF81]

12 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

They were provided. You just didn't like what it proved so disregarded them. 

 

Stick with your narratives. They are safer for you.

 

So are you now saying that Gilliam didn't make quite a few impact plays on offense last season then? 

 

Which is it?  

 

 

[Buffalo03]

5 minutes ago, K-9 said:

End of the first half yesterday was the latest example. We could have gotten the ball back with over two minutes left if he had taken his timeouts when he should have. 

I don't even remember that to be honest with you. I just know there hasn't been as much the last month that I have been frustrated with about him as I had earlier in the season

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo03 said:

So, we lost the first Jets game because we aren't talented enough, even though we killed them the second time? I think the London trip playing a Jags team that had already been in London for 2 weeks played a big part in that loss, we lost the first Patriots game because of coaching, we lost the Eagles game because of coaching. We didn't Los because lack of talent. This team is capable of blowing anyone out on any given week if we played the way we should and I think you know that. But because of scheme and injuries, we haven't. 

 

We lost the Jets game because of Josh Allen. Anyone who still refuses to accept that needs to come into the real world.

 

We lost the Eagles game to a better team on the day who just made one or two more plays than we did.

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

 

So are you now saying that Gilliam didn't make quite a few impact plays on offense last season then? 

 

Which is it?  

 

 

 

I am saying the same now as I said then. He did make an impact but not week in week out. His role was very gameplan specific. But in those games the result of his usage was very clear and backed up by the numbers.

[Warriorspikes51]

I’m not a huge fan of his. 
 

I will say what he has done since that stupid article came out has been impressive.

 

he’s had immense pressure on him 

[Buffalo03]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

We lost the Jets game because of Josh Allen. Anyone who still refuses to accept that needs to come into the real world.

 

We lost the Eagles game to a better team on the day who just made one or two more plays than we did.

Yes, I agree, Josh Allen was probably the main reason for that first Jet loss but does that mean he isn't talented enough? We lost the Eagles game because just like so many times this season, McDermott's defense (because of McDermott) buckled in the final 2 minutes of a game. It was also McDermott's decision to kneel with 20 seconds left in regulation to go to OT instead of being aggressive. It was coaching that lost that game

[FilthyBeast]

Here's another thought to ponder, regardless your stance on McD....this team may never have a better chance to get to/win a superbowl in the coming years when you consider how wide open things are right now especially in the AFC as a whole.

 

Yes the Ravens look like a prohibitive favorite right now, but we've seen how different Lamar looks in the playoffs...after all even McD and a lot of this current roster already beat him there, albeit at home.

 

Chiefs defense is elite and more than good enough to carry them right now but you'll never see Mahomes and that offense look like this again. Veach will fix that in a major way in the offseason. And at least the Bills get them in Buffalo finally should that materialize later this month.

 

Other than those 2 teams I don't see anyone else that could possibly be in the way especially since I'm not a believer in the Browns/Flacco either despite beating up on some bad teams as of late.

 

The anxiety and tension among the Bills fanbase is going to be at an all time high leading up to Sunday Night, and will only grow exponentially should this team get into the playoffs again....to say it's now or never is an understatement.

[PBF81]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We lost the Jets game because of Josh Allen. Anyone who still refuses to accept that needs to come into the real world.

 

We lost the Eagles game to a better team on the day who just made one or two more plays than we did.

 

And naturally the coaches, particularly McD, had little control over us throwing the ball 70% of the time, over 2/3 of the plays, when the weakness of the Jets' D is their rushing D. 

 

OK 

 

Out of curiosity, what makes the Eagles better?  

 

What?  Better OL?  Better QB?  RB?  D?  

 

We've scored 430 and allowed 297. 

They've scored 423 and allowed 401.  

 

So out of curiosity, what in your mind makes them a better team?  

 

We can go over the offensive and defensive rankings in numerous categories if you'd like, but I don't think that they top us in any of them.  

 

 

[Rubes]

7 minutes ago, FilthyBeast said:

Here's another thought to ponder, regardless your stance on McD....this team may never have a better chance to get to/win a superbowl in the coming years when you consider how wide open things are right now especially in the AFC as a whole.

 

Yes the Ravens look like a prohibitive favorite right now, but we've seen how different Lamar looks in the playoffs...after all even McD and a lot of this current roster already beat him there, albeit at home.

 

Chiefs defense is elite and more than good enough to carry them right now but you'll never see Mahomes and that offense look like this again. Veach will fix that in a major way in the offseason. And at least the Bills get them in Buffalo finally should that materialize later this month.

 

Other than those 2 teams I don't see anyone else that could possibly be in the way especially since I'm not a believer in the Browns/Flacco either despite beating up on some bad teams as of late.

 

The anxiety and tension among the Bills fanbase is going to be at an all time high leading up to Sunday Night, and will only grow exponentially should this team get into the playoffs again....to say it's now or never is an understatement.

 

There is still a possible scenario where the Bills get in as #6 and the Chiefs are #3...

 

[PBF81]

8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We lost the Jets game because of Josh Allen. Anyone who still refuses to accept that needs to come into the real world.

 

We lost the Eagles game to a better team on the day who just made one or two more plays than we did.

 

I am saying the same now as I said then. He did make an impact but not week in week out. His role was very gameplan specific. But in those games the result of his usage was very clear and backed up by the numbers.

 

Well, you provided me two games, one was the KC game, which I went through play by play and disproved that.  

I then asked you for more games.  You said you were in some pub and were in the middle of lunch and drinking or something and you'd get back to me.  You never did.  I've ignored it until now.  As they say, best to let sleeping dogs lie. 

 

Either way, since you obviously had them documented, either mentally or somewhere, throw them out, I'll look at 'em and we can discuss further.  

 

Again, do you now claim that he's made any kind of significant impact this season besides that one TO?  I know he had a big penalty on Sunday.  I suppose that's impact, just not for us.  

 

Anyway, I'm all eyes and ears and have been waiting.  

 

 

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, PBF81 said:

 

And naturally the coaches, particularly McD, had little control over us throwing the ball 70% of the time, over 2/3 of the plays, when the weakness of the Jets' D is their rushing D. 

 

OK 

 

Out of curiosity, what makes the Eagles better?  

 

What?  Better OL?  Better QB?  RB?  D?  

 

We've scored 430 and allowed 297. 

They've scored 423 and allowed 401.  

 

So out of curiosity, what in your mind makes them a better team?  

 

We can go over the offensive and defensive rankings in numerous categories if you'd like, but I don't think that they top us in any of them.  

 

 

 

I think the Bills and Eagles are pretty closely matched teams. On the day their talent just made one or two more plays. If we want to really break it down simply.... Tyler Bass missed two FGs from 34 and 48 and their kicker nailed a 59 yarder in a squal. It probably came down to that as much as anything else.

[MJS]

3 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

My opinion has changed ZERO.  Nothing that has occurred since the firing of Dorsey has changed McDermott in any way.

Back when we were losing, MANY posters here said "At this point, we have to win the AFC Championship game for me to reconsider my position with McDermott" or similar.  

 

I really hope McDermott remains on the hot seat regardless of how this season plays out.

 

The goal here is not to heroically make the playoffs...the goal should be winning MULTIPLE SUPER BOWLS while Josh Allen can still play football.

 

McDermott remains an "0 for" in that regard, and this season is likely to be the same.

He was never on the hot seat.

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, PBF81 said:

 

Well, you provided me two games, one was the KC game, which I went through play by play and disproved that.  

I then asked you for more games.  You said you were in some pub and were in the middle of lunch and drinking or something and you'd get back to me.  You never did.  I've ignored it until now.  As they say, best to let sleeping dogs lie. 

 

Either way, since you obviously had them documented, either mentally or somewhere, throw them out, I'll look at 'em and we can discuss further.  

 

Again, do you now claim that he's made any kind of significant impact this season besides that one TO?  I know he had a big penalty on Sunday.  I suppose that's impact, just not for us.  

 

Anyway, I'm all eyes and ears and have been waiting.  

 

 

You didn't disprove it. The numbers proved me right. You just didn't accept it. I did say I'd do the same detail breakdown of the other KC game (I can't recall if I did 2021 or 2022 now) but I didn't ever get around to it. 

 

Still. I proved you wrong. As I do time and time again when you try and hammer your false narratives.