Alphadawg7

People forget that Russel Wilson and other great QB's throw picks too, miss seeing guys open, etc. Sometimes it feels like (not this thread or this article, but this board I am referencing) people have this expectation that Allen is only good if he is perfect. Its maddening at times. But it is fair to critique what he did right and what he didn't do right like it is with all players. But some other posters around here just seem to think Allen should be perfect and isn't allowed to make a mistake without again questioning his potential. Some here are even saying he has already peaked. Its not about will he make a mistake, because he will as all of the greats do...its how does he bounce back and respond. Can he have the memory of a goldfish and forget it 10 seconds later. And Josh has that in spades. I mean lets be real here, Josh led us on yet another 4th quarter comeback for what should have been a perfect pass for game sealing win, on the very next drive after a critical INT mistake. A fluke insane play by an elite WR took that focus away, but its those ice in the veins moments that tell you that no matter what we always have a chance in those situations. Brady has that, Montana had that, Brees has that, Wilson has that, Mahomes has that...etc. Its a trait you can never teach, a trait that is either there or not and its rare. Guys like Matt Ryan, Stafford, Rivers, Cousins, Goff, etc are not guys that you ever feel are clutch and will get the job done with one final play or drive.

Didn't Diggs score and embarrass Ramsey on multiple plays as well as our other receivers in a game we won? This post is a bit silly to me.

Pin this comment. Nice work.

Come on people. This is such an absurd whiny narrative to call an ELITE player making an incredible play embarrassing. And honestly, Poyer and Tre collided just enough to shift Tre out just enough for Hopkins to be the only one to reach the ball. They could throw this play 200 times and it may only complete once. It happens. The over reaction on this board after a loss is still mind blowing. Did it suck sure...but the guys on the other team are paid a lot of money to also make plays. No one is perfect every game, the opponents are going to make plays too. But if you read this board you would assume that posters here think Tre can never give up a single pass or Josh can never make an errant throw. Russel Wilson, widely seen as the best or 2nd best QB in the league right now by just about everyone, threw picks against us and again this week in defeats. Brady had an awful game against the Saints...cant even imagine if Josh ever has a game like that what this board would do. Probably say its time to draft another QB. After Tenn and KC games and this board was ready to fire Beane and McD earlier this year. After Seattle game they are great again. After a fluke play people are back to they are the problem again. The amount of bipolar disorder around here is just crazy Our whole defense has been struggling. We had a lot of new players come in with no preseason, no time to get them to gel. We lost Star to COVID opt out greatly hurting the interior DL. We have a plethora of injuries or covid issues in our secondary. Our top 2 LB's have been hurt, playing hurt or out several games. Its not that Tre "got paid", its that the unit has to deal with a lot of turnover and isn't as efficient as they were last year. Also, people forget one MAJOR thing. We can not run the ball anymore...what that means, is we are not chewing clock like we should which equates to less time on the bench for the D too and far too often are back on the field too fast. I mean do people even realize we just played the top offense in the league where our starting CB opposite Tre was a 7th round rookie? And he too got knocked out for a while making a PS activated guy suddenly the starter over there. Yet this defense held its own. It bent, but often didn't break in key moments of the game against the top offense in the league. It did fairly well against Murray and Hopkins all game considering and just unfortunately had one miraculous play to steal the game back. Sorry for the rant, but geezus this board loses its mind after a loss. So many people here saying we wont win the division now, crowning the fins )with a rookie QB who has been just ok so far), we will be back at .500 soon and all kinds of stuff. Its just crazy

It was a play of a lifetime. It happens. Let’s not over react over it. They can try that 100 times probably only works once. More encouraged to see the offense again drive down clutch for the go ahead than worried about a fluke amazing play by two extremely talented players.

I wouldn’t trade Allen for Mahommes, and here is why. Mahommes has the biggest contract in history. And while he DESERVES it, it’s one that may be problematic as the years go by in terms of balancing out the roster. If Allen continues to ascend into top 3 status, he will be in line for his own mega deal. But my gut tells me that winning and playing in Buffalo are priorities one and two on his list and that he will be more likely to get paid but in a more team friendly contract to help insure Beane has more opportunities to keep the best roster possible around him. So as we sit here today, I wouldn’t entertain any trade offers for Josh. There isn’t anyone who is a better fit IMO for this team than Josh right based on how he is playing and what he means to this team.

hahaha yeah, all my same thoughts

Well while its easy, for me it truly is Diggs. Can't think of another trade I was that excited about, specifically because of my excitement around Josh Allen already and just how I knew Diggs was going to immediately elevate Allen's game even more and this offense. I mean this team now is the most excited I have ever been for a team. I lost my s**t when Diggs trade was announced, and I am still on cloud 9 now and have him in all 3 fantasy leagues. I get the mentioning of guys like Bennett and stuff, and there is nothing wrong obviously with those choices, not like I would ever disagree with that. But I am 44 years old, so when those other things happened, I was too young to appreciate them or even know who Bennett was before coming here. So he was more a guy I just always knew as a Bill, not so much an acquisition. But right now, this team we have, this staff we have, is the best and my most favorite since the SB years. So Diggs trade carries so much more excitement for me when it happened and even now. Runner ups would would be Mario Williams signing and Hughes trade. Williams was so unexpected given he never even left Buffalo during his first visit and was one of the biggest prizes of FA that year, if not the biggest. And he really helped change the narrative here (even though Rex set that narrative back a bit when he took over), which was big. Hughes is arguably the most successful in terms of lop sided, trades in team history and such an important part of this team since he arrived for a sack of rocks.

Yeah agreed. And I too back then was like WTF, they are gonna let Brees walk for an unproven rookie? I thought they were crazy and I was pissed off when I thought he was going to Miami and thrilled when they stupidly passed on him. I don't remember the exact timing, but if memory serves I feel like they passed on Brees because of the shoulder injury but then instead brought in Culpepper. Maybe Culpepper was not the same year, but I just remember going how stupid that was to pass on Brees for an injury that he was recovered from and expected to have no on going issues with it. Glad Miami was stupid...Brees and Brady in our division would have been even worse than the nightmare we already had to endure with just Brady.

Yeah, its always surprised me too that the Brees vs Rivers decision in SD doesn't get more discussion. Honestly, I think it is more to do with the fact that Rivers still had a stellar individual career, so its not as sexy when there is still success to some degree as opposed to if Rivers had never developed into a legit starter and they had let Brees go. Its no secret the media loves stories where someone won big vs someone who lost big. And in the end, Brees didn't exactly have a ton more team success for the Saints outside the one SB given how for so many years the Saints were just not ever a complete team and always carried by Brees, especially defensively challenged most his time there. So again, the discrepancy I think was never widespread enough for the media to talk about it more, but its honestly a very interesting subject and I think has a shot at one day being a 30 for 30 special or something. But I really like this topic, and I will argue that Brees did more with less than Rivers. And had Brees not hurt his shoulder at the end of his last season there, I am not so sure the decision would have been as easy for SD. More importantly, I think if Brees stays in SD, I really do feel like he would have accomplished even more than he did for the Saints. I don't think he quite equals the same stats, I mean he has been in a high octane offense the whole time there under Payton, but he still would have put up gaudy stats I am sure and I think he may have one a couple of SB's at least with some of those rosters SD had over the years that choked in the playoffs. And yeah, I wanted Marvin Lewis back then too...badly actually. So I was with you on that.

While there is a half season and playoffs to still be played, I would argue he is already a top 8 QB right now. That being said, I don't know when Josh gets his extension, it may not even be next year, he is only on year 3 of his deal, but I think the amount of the extension will be a 2 part equation. First part, what did he do in the playoffs. A subpar playoff game and early exit isn't going to help his case on the contract size. Two, what kind of home town discount is he willing to include, if at all. This is what we know about Josh. He is one of the single most competitive players in the league and wants to win more than anything else. He truly loves Buffalo, its fan base, and playing with this team. He loves his brothers in that locker room. He is a small town guy and doesn't seem to prioritize money over all other things. Its always foolish to just assume a player will give a home town discount. Mahomes has a lot of the same traits above and seems to love playing in KC, yet he didn't afford them a home town discount by any means. However, Mahomes had also already won a SB, and that changes the mentality a bit too. If Josh and the Bills come up short of a SB trophy this year, that hunger is going to still be there, especially if they get even closer to it this year. I can see Josh wanting the team to have a little extra fire power in keeping as many guys as they can and some flexibility in adding some more quality pieces around him for them to all have an even greater shot at the trophy. Then there are just guys that when you really look at them you just feel like he is the kind of guy that prioritizes winning and staying where he loves to play over money regardless of what they have already accomplished. And Josh is the rare guy I think fits that description, so while no home town discount is assured by any means, I do feel its going to be a strong possibility that Beane and Allen will structure a deal that allows Allen to really cash in but still not be a cap killing contract that would make it harder for Beane to truly keep a championship TEAM on the field.

Good example to of this was the Chargers with Rivers or Brees, and they chose poorly. Brees has it. River's didnt. Imagine if Brees had stayed in SD instead of Rivers, I think he wins more than one SB. He had Tomlinson in his prime, there were some great defenses there, Antonio Gates, etc. I really do think Brees wins more than 1 had he remained in SD with some of those rosters. With the Saints, he has frequently been saddled with terrible defenses. There were some Chargers teams that really should have made the SB, but that team didn't have anyone who could close games. Brees closes games.

This makes me want to pull up all the posts and comments I made last year when I said this very thing would happen and people wanted to argue it. Makes me want to dig the posts up where I said Allen will have the better career as a QB than Lamar and would rather have him still even after he won MVP and people mocked that. Makes me want to bring up all the posts where I pointed out gimmick offenses like this never last and people argued he was the MVP. This is where I just causally insert: I told you so. Im no Lamar hater, I loved watching him play in college and enjoy watching him in the NFL. And he will still be a dangerous QB, but he is literally what Vick was before him. Took the league by fire quickly, and defenses just didn't have the answers initially. But once they found a way to limit the damage on the ground, the limitations as a passer began to hold the offense back. I still think Lamar will have a long and successful career, and he could even still win a SB, maybe even this year with how good the defense is. But anytime you have to run a gimmicky offense to mask the deficiencies of the offense, then you leave the door wide open for Defenses to understand how to exploit that. Not every defense they face will have the talent to do so, but once you get to the playoffs, defenses become a bigger factor in games and so far, they have been able to stall Lamar and the Ravens.

Surprised this is news to anyone. This was easily the most talked about story line during the AB to Bills saga. Its still never truly been confirmed by anyone credible that it was specifically AB she slept with. But its widely presumed to be him off of rumors. But again, this is old news...like the moment the story broke about AB close to being traded to the Bills broke, this was widely being discussed all over the board.

I didn’t say they would be easy though. I literally said it won’t be easy. I disputed they are heads and shoulders above the rest. That lost to Raiders and had several other narrow wins against lesser teams. Like I said, they are favorites still for the SB, but they aren’t unbeatable.

Yeah, I get that. As far as the $4 a month, I think its less about the $4 for ESPN+ and more about not enough content on their networks. I guess my only point is that I don't know if they will gain enough revenue off the pay wall to justify reducing and restricting that better content on their actual networks. Its substantially more expensive to run those live networks than a VOD service. So for me, I think their bigger issues is that not enough people are watching their networks anymore. So for that model to work, they would need to make up that revenue with ESPN+ subscriptions increases. That is really what I am more saying in terms of the model I think may be a mistake for them. I am like you, I don't really care about the $4 so much so I still have it even though I barely watch the ESPN+ stuff. But, I think where they are really losing money is on viewership on their cable/satellite networks, and by hiding some of their better content behind a pay wall, they are seeing a sharp decline in ratings on their more expensive cable/satellite channels.

I disagree with the Chiefs. They have looked quite vulnerable all year. Even with the Bills playing at their worst essentially, we were within one score late in the 4th. And keep in mind, we had injuries and Allen was playing hurt too. Still deserve to be the favorite of course, but just saying not seeing this "head and shoulders" above the rest status. I think we can beat the Chiefs. Not saying its easy, but I really think we can beat the Chiefs in the playoffs as long as our team is healthy. I think there are other teams that can upset the Chiefs in the playoffs too. Dont get me wrong, I would peg the Chiefs as certainly the leading favorite to represent the AFC in the Super Bowl, and honestly to win the SB. But, just saying they don't appear head and shoulders better and look beatable to me. Raiders beat them, Chargers in a rookies first start almost beat them, Panthers almost beat them, we were playing our worst football and hung in there until the very end still. I think us, Pitt, Balt, and Tenn will all play them tough, and they will obviously see some collection of those teams in the playoffs.

My bad, and yes bball should have triggered BASKETBALL in my mind as me and my friends love playing and watching basketball and always refer to it as bball. But for some reason I thought I saw the word "baseball" and I dont know why hahaha. I do get the demand for college basketball, just not sure its still enough to grow its subscriber base enough, especially given how much college basketball is still readily available outside of the paywall. Anyway, sorry for misreading that

Definitely disagree. Its completely clear he was in as far as I am concerned.

ESPN+ was a mistake IMO. Why every network is trying to build out their own paywall is beyond me. Its a turnoff to viewers, and sports content just isn't in demand enough due to wide spread availability to warrant a pay wall. Yes, they have 30 for 30, and excellent series. But that series already has so many episodes now, its not enough to really command a pay wall. The bulk of their exclusive stuff just isn't good enough to consume a lot of of it all the time and warrant the paywall. I pay for it in a bundle package with HULU, Disney+, and ESPN+. But honestly, the ONLY reason I do is because I was already paying for HULU and the upgrade was not that much and I wanted to get the Disney+ for the Mandalorian. Outside of Mandalorian and 30 for 30, I literally don't watch any other of the content behind the paywall. There is just WAY too much content on all the other platforms I have like Netflix, HULU, Prime, HBOMAX to feel compelled to search ESPN+ or Disney content (I have no kids) for something else to engage in. If I was ESPN, I wold focus on going back to just being the sports network, scale down the endless amounts of additional ESPN's, and take away the pay wall. Also, they need to get better sports shows, the Stephen A's and Skip Bayless type shows are mind numbingly stupid. Its literally the same show every day. First Take spend 2 hours on the air with an hour of it discussing the Cowboys almost every day of the year. These shows barely discuss real sports news, its just loud noise every morning. 30 for 30 should be a series on ESPN, not a VOD paywall for example. I mean once they tucked it and other original behind the paywall, all that was left on ESPN were Sportscenter replays and garbage shows like First Take with some less watched sports peppered in through the day.

Agreed as well

I definitely agree when you pay a tier 2 or tier 3 QB as if he is tier 1, you immediately diminish your chances of building a powerhouse. So many examples of teams overpaying guys early because they had to. Doesn't mean those teams cant get there or win a SB that fall into those situations, just means its going to be harder on those teams if they are not supported by a strong front office and coaching staff who can find talent in the draft and get the most of it on the field. Its also not always avoidable or even wrong to do that either, especially if that tier 2 or tier 3 QB is young and trending toward that tier 1 level. Some teams have no choice but to roll the dice. Take Goff for example, I personally felt it was too early to give him that size of a deal, there were a lot of question marks still about his toughness and ability under pressure (and quite frankly still are today). But they were kind of in a spot where they had to roll the dice based on his trend line and production. No team is going to let Goff walk that early in his career, so I get it. Just one of those spots you hope the progress continues. Sometimes this works out, other times this turns into Kap in SF, Tannehill in Miami, Carr in Oakland, etc where it doesn't and they underperform to that deal moving forward. That can really set a franchise back a while.

No disrespect, but this is wrong. The $20M mark is irrelevant in the first place, but I mean just going back 2 years to Tom Brady, he had a cap hit over $20M that SB victory, so its not accurate either to say no one over $20M has won it. The case you are really trying to make is a cap chocking contract by a top paid QB. But that is not accurate either. Steve Young has the record as his contract ate up 13.1% of his teams cap in 1994 when he led the Niners to the SB. Guys like Manning, Farve, etc all also won the SB while being among the highest, if not the highest, paid at their position too. I don't disagree with the point that winning a SB once you have already paid a QB as one of the top 3 paid players in the league makes winning a SB much harder moving forward due to the cap restrictions of that contract. Means your team needs to be excellent at drafting and replenishing talent through the draft on cheaper rookie deals because you wont be able to afford both buying them in FA and resigning your own. Chiefs for example are a team that will be a major contender, and likely favorite, this year and next couple. But at some point, if Chiefs dont consistently hit on their draft picks the next few years, Mahommes could become Aaron Rodgers where he always plays excellent himself but his team roster is always just missing just enough to keep them from getting more SB births and titles. Brady was making $22M in his last year they won the SB.

Ok I will do it

At this point, bring him in for a workout. What’s there to lose.