Alphadawg7

Im pretty sure it was Crazyonz

Hahaha yup, it was Crayonz Booger. (I fixed after @Jauronimo clarified it was Booger)

Yes, I am special, entitled, and the Alpha and I worked really really hard on that comment, studied and everything. Of you can just keep ignoring valid points with these type of responses you are doing and making it more about being a martyr or victim. What ever floats your boat.

Is that really your response? So you’re just gonna ignore the point all together? Lol

But what kind of cars do you drive?

No offense, this is a really ridiculous comment for one reason and one reason only. Every single QB in the NFL gets lots of yards and even TDs off of flip passes like that and short simple screens. You want to remove it off only Josh to paint your own narrative. Not to mention, Allen’s threat as a passer and a runner makes executing this type of play more effective too as it’s hard for the defense to cheat a play like that without getting burned bad somewhere else.

Daboll was saddled with bad situations for most of his OC career prior to Buffalo. It took him a long time to work his way back to NFL OC as a result. I seriously doubt he will look at the Redskins job as desirable. Even with a young QB to work with in Haskins, that organization is horribly run from the top down. Daboll knows very well that if Bills keep winning he will be a hot candidate and will have better choices available to him soon enough. I think there is little chance Daboll will take the Redskins job given the trajectory of the Bills right now likely creating much better openings soon enough.

Jordan and Bills beat the marginal Mariota and Titans. Houston and the Colts had the upset of the year on the road in prime-time to beat sensational Mahomes and the Chiefs. Dumb, but thats really just is what it is.

I don’t disagree with this, and yeah was just a quick note as on several bad INTs Josh had no where to go with the ball prior to making what was ultimately a poor decision to force something. He has to learn to let plays go for sure, he does that and we would be undefeated right now.

Im not excusing him for making the poor decision, but at the same time better play around him will negate the temptation and frequency of Josh trying to do too much.

To be fair...if WR's got open earlier and/or the OL help the pass pro better on some of those bad INT throws, maybe he doesn't have to try and make a hero throw?

Ha typo. That was my board, I will fix

That’s not what I or others think at all though. The bottom line is that players momentum into the QB was not at all caused by the minor contact on his thigh and was primarily from Milano’s own momentum. In other words the contact did not forcibly propel Milano into the QB.

Yeah, this is my exact stance too. So not sure if you were agreeing with me or thought I meant something else, but I fully agree with your post and its my exact opinion as well.

He was hit in one leg, and it was his thigh, not below both knees.

All good, we clearly see the contact different. I watched video multiple times and I can’t see how you get the conclusion Milano was blocked into him when the offensive player didn’t even block Milano. Milano went over and defender hit one thigh, all forward motion was created by Milano. No big deal, we won and the refs called this a roughing the passer. I don’t have an issue with that.

Yup, good counter point and very true for all teams.

Here is the thing though, show me where Milano was blocked into him or fouled. He was not blocked into him, Milano hit Mariotta because of his own momentum. The defender bumped his thigh, but the defender did not forcibly block Milano into the QB nor did he foul Milano. The "and has no opportunity to avoid him" is directly in reference to the defender being blocked or fouled into the QB and only comes into play in that situation. So lets look at the 3 components of the rule: Was Milano blocked into the passer? NO - Milano was not tossed or blocked by the defender into the QB, Milano's own momentum carried him there. Was Milano fouled? NO Did Milano have the oppportunity to avoid the QB? Irrelevant given that neither 1 or 2 above occurred first. So sorry, I am not trying to be difficult here or anything, but I cant agree with you on this. Rule is clear as day, and unfortunately Milano unintentional hit on the QB was a penalty according to the rule as written IMO.

I guess Zerovoltz is no Alphadamus ???

We were also a terribly run franchise with mediocre or worse talent for 17 years. There were plenty of bad players that bad regimes kept starting over the years for people to hate on.

Yeah for sure, that holding penalty was BS

Funny, there are certain posters who will insist I personally hate Zay all because I defend my criticisms of him when they attacked me for it...but I don't hate him and think he seems like a good overall person and teammate. I just hated what he did on the field. Just like I don't hate Fitzpatrick, but hated the contract we gave him and didn't like him as a starter for the Bills. So I do hope this change of scenery helps him rebound his career. I do think the Raiders offense is a better fit for him than what Daboll was trying to do, and maybe he can regain confidence and build some better chemistry with Carr. I was a fan of drafting him (even though I preferred JuJu as I live in LA and was high on him, but wasn't upset they took Zay after he set records in college either) and was rooting for him early. He fell out of favor with me as a player when I kept seeing him fail to make plays. No WR makes every tough catch, but also no solid or better WR fails to make just about every tough catch. He never seemed to have the mental toughness to get through the ups and downs. But like I said in my original Zay thread, I would rather be wrong about him than right as it would have been good for the Bills. I doubted his ability to prove the criticisms wrong, but would have rather seen him excel than struggle. But he failed to establish a role for himself here this year and now he will get a chance to go to a team with a big need at WR and get a legit shot to reboot himself there. Best of luck to Zay, this was the best move for both the Bills and Zay.

I watched the video, and it was after watching it I changed my mind from BS call to refs got it right. It was again Milano's own momentum, the blocker did not create force to throw Milano into the QB, Milano's leg was bumped but it was Milano's own momentum that carried him into the QB. For me, it's one of those plays where I do not fault the player (Milano), but at the same time it was a penalty according to the rule as written. I am not trying to defend the rule and have no issue if people don't like the rule or think it needs to be adjusted or changed. I am just stating, as the rule is written, the refs made the right call IMO.

But I think you misread my post as I didn't say though he dove at the QB, I said he hit the QB off of his own momentum. The only way that is not a roughing the passer is if an offensive player intentionally throws him into the QB. Milano dove over the offensive player off his own momentum that resulted (unintentionally of course) in running into the QB late after the pass was thrown. That 100% correlates with the existing rule in place. There is no part of the rule where the prerequisite of it being a penalty is malicious intent. The rule is you can not run into the QB, just like you can not run into a kicker, regardless of intent. The only exception is if the defensive player is thrown/tossed directly into the kicker or QB by one of the offensive players. And in this case, I admit I thought that was what happened in live play, but seeing the replay, Milano dove over the blocker and was not tossed into the QB. So while I do not fault Milano, the unfortunate reality is that it was a roughing the passer penalty in 100% full accordance with the rule as written. You are free to not like the rule, and I also think tweaks to it need to happen, but at the end of the day, the refs got this play right according to the existing rule in place at the time it happened. Like I said in other post, I do think they need to 2 levels of the penalty though for unintentional situations like this just like they do with the kicker...5 yard and 15 yard penalty.

Thats roughing the passer because he hit the QB all on his own accord. In live play, I too thought he was "flipped" into the QB, but he actually wasn't and dove with his own momentum into the QB. It wasn't "intentional" but it doesn't have to be to violate a rule. Just like running into a kicker does not have to be intentional, but if the defender hits the kicker even while trying their best avoid doing so, its still a penalty. Roughing the passer is not required to be intentional, the rule is the QB can not be hit after he has thrown the ball regardless of the intent of the defender. It is however NOT roughing the passer though if the defender is thrown into the QB by one of the offensive players. For example, had someone physically tossed Milano into him, it would not be called. This is to prevent OL from tying to get free yardage by intentionally making the guys they are blocking hit the QB for a penalty. One thing I would argue is that there should be two levels to the penalty like roughing the kicker with a lighter penalty of 5 yards on plays like this one and then the 15 yard play for the bigger offenses. Especially given some of the real tricky tack roughing the QB calls that have happened across the league the last 2 years.