McDermott decision making

[GunnerBill]

25 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

but the bottom line is Miami got the TD with 8 seconds remaining.

 

And a time out still in their pocket.

[GunnerBill]

18 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Yes and therefore - you cede all control on the drive to the Dolphins.

 

In your situation- you basically give up any chance for the Bills to get the ball back and you allow the Dolphins to dictate what they want to run. 

 

You also free them up to take endzone shots and let the half end exactly as it did.  By using the timeouts - the Bills gave themselves a shot at control and if Bosa keeps contain on the pressure on 3rd down - you get both scenarios.  The Dolphins have to kick the FG and the Bills get the ball back with 20 seconds.

 

Both scenarios have played out numerous times in history - one - you are ceding the points and allowing your opponent to dictate and one you are trying to dictate plays, but both require your defense to make a stop.

 

In this case - the Bills didn’t and that drove the narrative, but I would still prefer McD to be aggressive and try to dictate even on defense - rather than be passive and allow your opponent to dictate down, distance, and time.

 

 

On the pretence that this somehow guarantees they end up with 3 not 7.... but that gets you to the same problem.... you need your defense to make a stop. 

[Billsatlastin2018]

Until McD wins the Lombardi, all of these little pick at (not picky) points are going to be introduced when he makes/doesn’t make questionable decisions. 
 

It’s all about 13 seconds- at the All time pinnacle of poor performance coaching decisions in Pro Sports!

 

To be fair, he seems to be getting lots of things right. And it doesn’t hurt that his GOAT is doing the same as he matures. 
 

e.g. McD has perfectly timed TWO wins now against the Ravens, by running the clock down to zero before trying a winning FG. Would that he/Josh did that against the Chiefs 2 years ago in Orchard Park. Always be intelligent! And if you yourself cannot, in the instant, know every nuance to victory, then FFS, hire somebody smarter to be able to do that for you instantaneously.  

[Augie]

Money isn’t everything, but it’s certainly something. Maybe we should limit responses here to those from people making $5 Mil per year and up. Nobody is perfect,  but he’s smarter than most of the rest regarding football matters. He is elite and is at the pinnacle of his profession. How many of you can say that? 

 

 

.

Edited September 22 by Augie

[GerstAusGosheim]

On 9/20/2025 at 10:59 PM, SoTier said:

This is a McDermott crucifiction thread.   You are wasting your time trying to reason with zealots.

 

Zealots, lol. 4 years of having an MVP level QB with nothing to show for it is enough for any objective, reasonable fan to question whether Sean has what it takes to get us over the hump. The only thing we are wasting at this point is Josh's prime.

[Buffalo716]

10 hours ago, GerstAusGosheim said:

 

Zealots, lol. 4 years of having an MVP level QB with nothing to show for it is enough for any objective, reasonable fan to question whether Sean has what it takes to get us over the hump. The only thing we are wasting at this point is Josh's prime.

John elway didn't win a super bowl till his penultimate season 

 

Warren Moon never went to a super bowl 

 

Between Aaron Rodgers and Drew Brees 36 seasons two super bowls 

 

It's harder to win than you're making it out to be

[GaryPinC]

14 hours ago, Rochesterfan said:

 

Yes and therefore - you cede all control on the drive to the Dolphins.

 

In your situation- you basically give up any chance for the Bills to get the ball back and you allow the Dolphins to dictate what they want to run. 

 

You also free them up to take endzone shots and let the half end exactly as it did.  By using the timeouts - the Bills gave themselves a shot at control and if Bosa keeps contain on the pressure on 3rd down - you get both scenarios.  The Dolphins have to kick the FG and the Bills get the ball back with 20 seconds.

 

Both scenarios have played out numerous times in history - one - you are ceding the points and allowing your opponent to dictate and one you are trying to dictate plays, but both require your defense to make a stop.

 

In this case - the Bills didn’t and that drove the narrative, but I would still prefer McD to be aggressive and try to dictate even on defense - rather than be passive and allow your opponent to dictate down, distance, and time.

 

 

I believe control is relative and based on perspective and I feel we ceded any chance of a waning clock forcing a field goal.  I understand what you and GunnerBill are saying, but for me in this scenario of a one score game, an inconsistent defense and being just outside the red zone with 55 seconds, my priority is to let a waning clock squeeze Miami. 

 

I prefer our defense and the clock pressuring Miami into the field goal instead of just our defense.

 

Getting Josh the ball before halftime wouldn't be my priority because preserving the lead will give the opportunity after halftime to extend to a two possession game, and that is of added magnitude in a tight game like this.

 

Don't get me wrong, I certainly favor using our timeouts to get Josh the ball back if the situation were more favorable.  I respect your perspective on it except for the part where yours was the only correct solution.

 

15 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And a time out still in their pocket.

Sure, but I'm not understanding your point?  We gifted them two timeouts and a significant amount of game time, making it easy to hold back that last time out until they exhausted all the extra opportunities at the touchdown.

[GunnerBill]

5 hours ago, GaryPinC said:

I believe control is relative and based on perspective and I feel we ceded any chance of a waning clock forcing a field goal.  I understand what you and GunnerBill are saying, but for me in this scenario of a one score game, an inconsistent defense and being just outside the red zone with 55 seconds, my priority is to let a waning clock squeeze Miami. 

 

I prefer our defense and the clock pressuring Miami into the field goal instead of just our defense.

 

Getting Josh the ball before halftime wouldn't be my priority because preserving the lead will give the opportunity after halftime to extend to a two possession game, and that is of added magnitude in a tight game like this.

 

Don't get me wrong, I certainly favor using our timeouts to get Josh the ball back if the situation were more favorable.  I respect your perspective on it except for the part where yours was the only correct solution.

 

Sure, but I'm not understanding your point?  We gifted them two timeouts and a significant amount of game time, making it easy to hold back that last time out until they exhausted all the extra opportunities at the touchdown.

 

What leads you to believe the defense would have been any more likely to make a stop?

[BananaB]

5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

What leads you to believe the defense would have been any more likely to make a stop?

Well for starters, they forced 3 3rd and longs on one drive. Despite playing poorly on that down they were doing their jobs on the first two downs. So it’s not out of this world, mind blown crazy for the Bills to hold them to a FG. You seem to think it would be though. 

[GunnerBill]

5 minutes ago, BananaB said:

Well for starters, they forced 3 3rd and longs on one drive. Despite playing poorly on that down they were doing their jobs on the first two downs. So it’s not out of this world, mind blown crazy for the Bills to hold them to a FG. You seem to think it would be though. 

 

No. I don't think it is crazy. I just don't know that I think it was any more likely than it was the way the Bills played it. Was it possible for them to get a stop, sure. It was either way. But they didn't do it. I'm not sure why they were more likely to do it with a running clock. Would that have stopped Tua escaping on 3rd down? 

[GaryPinC]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

What leads you to believe the defense would have been any more likely to make a stop?

Because Mike McDaniel has issues at times with his clock management and anticipating ahead when to use timeouts.  Additionally, if we have our timeouts still in pocket we can use them to reset the D if needed on those last plays.

 

If the ball had been back at the 35-45 or inside the 15 with 55 seconds left, sure, try and preserve time for Josh.

 

Instead, if we let Miami play it out, it's not unreasonable to assume that Miami converts the third and 7 but has 15- 20 seconds on the clock and burned at least one timeout.

 

Now we have better control of that situation than what occurred.   McDaniel is under more pressure to take the FG and we didn't give him two timeouts up front to help settle him and make plans.

[GunnerBill]

24 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

Because Mike McDaniel has issues at times with his clock management and anticipating ahead when to use timeouts.  Additionally, if we have our timeouts still in pocket we can use them to reset the D if needed on those last plays.

 

If the ball had been back at the 35-45 or inside the 15 with 55 seconds left, sure, try and preserve time for Josh.

 

Instead, if we let Miami play it out, it's not unreasonable to assume that Miami converts the third and 7 but has 15- 20 seconds on the clock and burned at least one timeout.

 

Now we have better control of that situation than what occurred.   McDaniel is under more pressure to take the FG and we didn't give him two timeouts up front to help settle him and make plans.

 

See I don't see that we do have better control. The one play I think it might change is the run they called on 2nd down with Achane. Maybe they feel they have to pass there. And so of course there is a chance that play goes differently. But there is a chance they throw it into the endzone, which they did two passes later. Whichever way around the Bills defense had to make a play to stop them. 

[GaryPinC]

55 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

See I don't see that we do have better control. The one play I think it might change is the run they called on 2nd down with Achane. Maybe they feel they have to pass there. And so of course there is a chance that play goes differently. But there is a chance they throw it into the endzone, which they did two passes later. Whichever way around the Bills defense had to make a play to stop them. 

Ok, that's cool, we can agree to disagree.  

 

For sure the defense needed to make a stop in any scenario, but what was the optimum scenario for them to maximize their chances?

 

When our timeout strategy actually unfolded on that 2nd and 5, I felt it was a little too much hubris and extra time opportunity that a touchdown became significantly more likely. 

 

My greater point is that McDermott's choices aren't necessarily the only "correct" way to handle that situation and IMO given everything, not the best way.

 

It's been a good, respectful discussion and I thank you and Rochester 4 that!

👍