Alphadawg7

Always was. Not one time ever has the vaccine been touted to keep you from getting it 100%. Just like the flu shot doesn’t guarantee you won’t get it. If people want to listen to fake biased media or social media to get a different impression, well that’s on them. But at no point has it ever been the case that the vaccine makes you immune to COVID.

I’m vaccinated and boosted. I have COVID right now and got it from my friend who is also vaccinated and boosted. People need to stop thinking the vaccination keeps you from getting it or spreading it, that’s not at all what it does. Yea it can reduce the odds of getting it and spreading it, but new variants lessen that. The vaccination purpose is to significantly reduce the chances of getting severe reactions that require hospitalization or death. It improves recovery time as well and shortens the window in which you are contagious to others. So the breakout going on in the NFL has nothing to do with unvaccinated players. Anyone and everyone can, and is, spreading it. However, if you are vaccinated the time to return to the field can be shortened versus unvaccinated because your timeline of how long you can be contagious to others is shorter.

Gonna be hilarious when Allen wins MVP but wasn’t a pro bowl selection lmao

Not the same. Davis should ALSO get 6 catches with Beasley there. And no one is better than Beasley at getting those critical short 3rd down passes for a first. So yes, we will miss him, especially if the weather is bad.

That was the point though. People have constantly referenced our weather is being part of our home field advantage. I am countering that its not actually an advantage for us, and its actually this year been a disadvantage at home with bad weather. Bad weather adds a wild card...untimely fumbles that wouldn't normally happen...drops that wouldn't normally happen...slips that wouldn't normally happen...etc. It can happen to either team, so why force that unknown into most of our home games? It can work against us just as easily as it could work for us. I would rather put ourselves in the best position to win each game. So, if the bad weather is not helping give us an edge, why even do it. Especially when the best fan base in the world would make a dome deafening for opposing teams and would TRULY be a home field advantage. Let the Mafia show out and drown them in the noisiest environment they will step into all year. For me its about finding ways to maximize our home field, and IMHO bad weather is not helping our cause in every case. Sure, there are going to be some opponents it gives us an edge on, but there will be others it actually works against us and helps them. Like this year, when we have faced prolific rushing teams in bad weather...that helps them while hurting us. A dome makes sure we always have some sort of advantage at home by maximizing the noise the Mafia brings to the table.

Fair points and reasonable reply...my counter points: Winds and weather issues in our home stadium are worse more often than those other cities. If you polled the entire NFL, I have no doubt that Buffalo weather would be the most chosen as worst place to play weather wise. Those teams you mentioned were all great running teams, not just prolific pass attacks. Elway's championship teams were dominant rushing teams. Brady's game was most often quick strike and timing pass attack versus big aerial attack most his career in NE. I never said it was impossible to do, I am saying if we are all out aerial attack, we neutralize some of that advantage when facing teams who are better rushing teams when we are at home in bad weather. The counter of course, is to also be very good at rushing the ball, which those teams you mentioned were also very good at. So to be clear, I did not say we couldn't be a good passing team (we obviously already are) in a Buffalo outdoor stadium, I am saying if we are a big aerial attack offense, then when lesser opponents come to town (see Colts, Pats, Steelers this year for example) who can run the ball better than us in bad weather, then the weather is not a "home field advantage" for us, it actually helps our opponents in those cases. And with a lot of the better AFC teams typically being used to bad weather like KC, Pitt, NE, etc...how is the bad weather actually an advantage for us anyway? Bad weather for me just actually balances out the playing field more, doesn't seem to give us an advantage. But the biggest case I always see being made for keeping it an outdoor stadium is that its part of our home field advantage. That is really the main area I disagree at. We play Pitt, Colts, or Pats in a dome right now, I would bet we beat each of those teams 8 or 9 times out of 10. In a bad weather game where running the ball is paramount, we might not even have a .500 win % against them.

Whats our home record this year? 4-3 Who did we beat: Washington, Texans, Miami, Carolina (all weaker opponents and none of these games were really poor weather and all but the Panthers game were early in the season when weather is typically better than later in the season and playoff time) Who did we lose to: Pitt, Colts, Pats (all good running teams, and all in poor to terrible weather conditions dealing with high winds and rain). All games we struggled to throw the ball in the poor conditions. So yeah...stand by my original point. And considering home playoff games would also have a high probability to be played in bad weather, being a prolific passing attack gets negated at home.

A strong case can be made that we are actually WORSE than our opponents playing at home in bad weather. With Josh Allen here, this team and offense will be a big aerial attack for more than a decade. That will be wasted on an outdoor stadium. I think being an outdoor stadium in such severe weather really mitigates any prolific aerial attack we build and takes away any advantage that might give us.

You cited the records of two teams at home as to counter his point that we would have better home field advantage with a dome. Those teams were Packers (outdoor) and Colts (indoor). So what did I miss? If I misunderstood then apologies, but I don't know how else to take your post. Packers are a much better team than the Colts, so their respective home records seem to have nothing to do with the stadiums they play in. For me, its clear this team needs a dome. We have not been any better at playing in bad weather than our opponents are, in fact a strong case can be made that we are in fact worse at it right now than many of our opponents. And with Josh Allen here long term, we will have a big air attack for more than a decade. That is wasted in our bad weather. Bills Mafia is the most engaged and loudest fan base in the NFL. The noise they could create in a dome would make it the toughest place to play in the NFL IMO.

Disagree still. There was enough time where if we don't move the chains, the game was not over. And I disagree that any of our backs could have done that because Moss hasn't been good at hitting holes of finding creases and Brieda has been ineffective all together unless he happens to get the ball in space, which our OL rarely provides. Point is...Devin saw the field the bulk of the snaps. He not only hit a momentum shifting TD run we needed, he also picked up multiple key first downs when the game mattered and on plays where the gain wasn't there and he either shifted his way through or flat our bulldozed the pile forward. Several times one of our other backs would have lost yards and he instead turned the play into a positive as well. These things matter in sustaining drives, and when we don't run the ball at a high volume, keeping one guy in rhythm is better for the offense overall.

Specner Brown has definitely been one of our best OL overall this year while he has been at RT. He is a rookie, he will have ups and downs like any other rookie, but overall, I think he is very much trending to be a long term fixture at RT for the Bills. At LT, its really hard to grade him here fairly. He had to play LT for the first time in the NFL against some wicked pass rushers and do it on short notice. It was a really bad game for him, no doubt. But, I think it would be premature to say he is capable of playing LT in the NFL in a pinch. He clearly isn't ready now though. But good thing for us, we already have a LT and his future looks bright at RT and my expectation is he will be a full time starter there for a long time for us.

LMAO...you think that is a direct correlation of the stadium rather than the quality of the team...or Rodgers over Wentz? LOL it has nothing to do with what kind of stadium they plan in. Packers are a MUCH better team than the Colts.

100% they should switch roles. I said it after the Bucs game...we are a better offense without Sanders. That is NOT a knock on Sanders who is a great dude, great teammate and still can play. Its about the rest of our offense. Our OL struggles to hold up on pass pro this year, and getting guys like Cole and Knox more touches on shorter quicker routes because they can often win their matchup is key. Davis fits in better on the outside because he brings something different to the table. He is more physical of a receiver than Sanders, can still go deep, and plays bigger. So he compliments Diggs more than Sanders does. So now you have a more layered offense on the field that is harder to defend. What I love about Davis is that he is deceptively fast too, he is a guy who can beat you deep when you are not expecting it, just like he is a guy who can use his body to create space on a quick slant. Sanders at this stage is more of a finesse receiver and can be taken out of the game too easily by physical corners. Absolutely should still get some snaps, but I think the snap count should flip flop between what Sanders was seeing and what Davis was seeing. Davis should be the starter, he has earned it the last game and a half where he was finally getting the touches. Him and Josh seem to have a great connection too.

Here we go again...lets take out a bunch of his production that was IMPORTANT to the outcome of the game as he effectively ran the ball to chew down clock when the game was still not decided yet. Just so someone can make a false counter point? Come on, thats ridiculous. The game is 4 quarters...the plays, yards and points matter the same throughout the game. Not to mention, he hit a great TD run that finally gave some life to the offense that had been sputtering. PS: You are also missing the point here overall...its about giving one back the lions share of the touches instead of a committee. Not about when and where they were productive. Its about making the offense more cohesive with more consistency in the lineup. And like someone else said, that should include Gabriel Davis continuing to be more involved in the offense as well.

There is a reason our players LOVE LOVE LOVE playing for McD and this team. The locker room culture is a massive part of that. McD holds them accountable, but he also treats them with respect. He won't tolerate that stuff, which is why he pulled him and coached the kid up and talked to him to get his head straight versus just screaming at him and embarrassing him in front of the team and home town fans. I don't care what others on this board say, McD is a great HC and leader. He has some things he can be better at in game, but overall, he is the right guy for this job IMHO.

Agree, Devin moves piles more than Moss. There is this myth that Moss does around here for some, but its just factually not true. I mean just this past game, numerous times Devin is being gang tackled but still managed several more yards after the fact just moving the pile. Devin is short, but he has powerful legs and a low center of gravity, so he doesn't get the credit he deserves for how hard of a runner he is.

The point was, we stuck with ONE back. And those carries were important, he was chewing clock down. I acknowledged the late game carries in the OP. And Devin could have easily been a 1000 yard back this year if not for Daboll's stubbornness. Surprisingly though, Devin still could get to 1000 yards this year over the next 4 games if we commit to running the ball these last 4 games. He needs 377 yards to get there, and he is averaging 4.7 ypc. He needs to average 95 yards per game (admittedly, not likely given our OL and our OC allergy to running). Based on his ypc, he needs 20 carries a game. And while he got 22 this game, I do seriously doubt he will average 20 the next 4 weeks. That being said, all it would really take is one breakout game where he got say 125+ yards rushing. if he did that in one game, then suddenly he just needs to average about 75-80 yards on the ground the other 3 games which is doable. So, we will see...I have not given up on the fact he could be a 1000 yard back. But clearly, if they had just committed to giving him the bulk of the carries, he would have EASILY been a 1000 yard back this year. And my preseason post predicted he would be the guy getting the bulk of the carries. Sadly, it seems to have taken Daboll until week 15 to realize that is what he needed to do all along. Yet Devin still has a shot at 1000 yards.

Question: Why? I ask because Moss lacks the vision Devin has. I have seen have wide open lanes and then cut back into traffic away from them to a 2 yard gain instead of what would have been a big gain had he taken the lane right in front of him. Moss is slower to the hole, doesn't find the creases, and often misses huge lane opportunities too. And with an OL that doesn't provide a lot of lanes, you must be able to take advantage of those when they come.

Moss has no vision, that is his biggest issue. Slow to the hole and misses creases that Devin sees. Our line isn't good enough to make Moss a good runner. He might do well on a well blocking team, but we aren't that.

Our OL needs help for sure, but we were also missing 3 starters this week weren't we?

Well no one is coming in to replace this year...so I am referencing featuring him rest of the season, stop this committee nonsense they did all year.

I made a case earlier this week that if we are going to be able to run the ball we must commit to one feature RB, and that back clearly should be Devin Singletary. Our OL and RB's cant find a rhythm if they aren't seeing enough carries. Use Brieda as a third down receiving back more and few runs to spell Devin, but without question Devin is our best runner. Daboll finally pulled his head out of his back side this week and ran the ball 22 times with Devin...a handful of that came about because we were chewing clock the second part of the 4th quarter protecting the lead. But its what we needed to do, and it benefited Devin and our run blocking today allowing us to run the ball more effectively when it mattered. I realize Devin had a 3.9 ypc, but that was more due to late game obvious runs. And this was behind a patchwork offensive line with several guys hurt and playing out of position. I hope they stick to this featuring of Devin as the primary runner and keep getting him 15+ carries per game min.

I personally think we are in good shape at CB2 as Wallace has had a very good season and Dane has thus far played well too. Of course, that’s assuming a full recovery from Tre too though

To be fair to McD though (in terms of Defense), we still do need to figure something out at DT given Star is struggling to stay on the field and is vital to our run D with the lack of size outside of him. And there is still the Edmunds wild card...is he in our future plans or do we need to draft one too? So I am all on board the OL early strategy, but I also won't be upset if they are on the clock and take a DT or LB that is higher graded on their board either. I have a feeling our first 3 picks will be some combination of a two offensive lineman and a defensive player, likely a run stuffing beef cake at DT. Then again, Beane stays pretty true to his board, so all depends who is on the board still while we are picking. Also won't be shocked to see him move around the draft this year either.

The only one that matters is also the most egregious one...the 3rd and 2 fade at end of regulation, he was being mauled and it was close to as bad as when the Rams screwed the Saints in the playoffs that caused a rule change. It was that blatant. I am not a blame the refs guy, but this is without question a inexcusable missed PI call as they were one and one with no one around them to obscure the view of the CB pulling Diggs jersey neck collar to near his belt line on that route. He was also interfered with on the first drive of OT, but that was less egregious than the one in the end zone.