Hapless Bills Fan

Well, the Bills had indeed scored an average of >40 points per game the previous 3 games (43,40,38); 35 points the week before that. So.... And no, teams don't score TDs on every drive. But the best teams have red-zone TD % of 70% or up. The Bills are currently tied for 11th at 62%. The worst team in the league is currently 43%. So when the Bills came away with 2 TDs on 5 red-zone trips, they were below the league worst and below their own average performance (40% vs 60%). I'd call that being slowed, You do You though. LOL 1) when Belichick praises a player, it typically means he feels he's spotted a flaw 2) I read this and it reminds me of the joke about how it's impossible it is to praise someone in Yiddish. It comes across as implying that he started at a very low level and Belichick didn't think much of his chances to get better.

Not a surprise to see DTs and DBs protected

It's possible. According to NFL's Chief Medical Officer Allen Stills, 20% of vaccinated players who have tested positive return in less than 10 days. Maths say that means 80% of them don't return in less than 10 days, although overall he says they still return more quickly after less severe illness. (Note that I'm specifically talking about what the NFL's CMO says about NFL players here, and don't shoot off general comments, 'K?) They need -no symptoms in 48 hrs -two negative tests 24 hrs apart It's the latter that's apparently the problem After 10 days (and no symptoms for 48 hrs) elapse, they are no longer required to test negative.

Depends. If -they had 5 Red zone trips but only came away with TDs on 2 of those trips (penalties no factor on 4) -we stuffed them on "and short" twice -we finished with more points, including a TD directly following a turnover ....then I would think that's fair to say. Certainly would be correct that our defense impacted their game. Would you not agree?

So according to this, we needed to make a move to open up a roster spot. Anyone know what we did? Edit: OK I see it...Tommy Doyle to the Reserve-Covid list I think Feliciano can practice all week and be activated (or not) on Monday, so no reason to make another move now...unless we want to

The drum that the Talking Heads have been beating, pretty much since the Tennessee game but intensified since the loss to the Jaguars and then the Colts, is that "too much of Buffalo's offense runs through Josh Allen". Now, there's some truth to this. It's true for other teams as well, but no one seems to bring up the same qualifier: no one is saying "the Ravens aren't a balanced team because too much of their offense runs through Lamar Jackson" even though if you take out his 707 yds the Ravens rushing offense would drop to 29th on the NFL, just as the Bills would drop to 31st. Instead we have announcers mercilessly washing them about how no one can tackle Lamar Jackson (because the Browns couldn't), when I could go on Youtube and find film of some teams sacking Jackson Over. and Over. and Over. in the same game. The fact is, so much of the Ravens offense running through LJ is a flaw, as much as so much of the Bills offense running through Allen. It creates a vulnerability - any time there's a gap in a team's game, it's a lever opposing DCs can exploit. The bottom line is, we lost to the Jaguars in an embarrassing fashion, and we're going to be wearing the Dunce cap in the media corner and living it down (if we can) for a while. And I'm OK with that. "Buffalo vs Everybody", Baby.

Boo ***** Hoo for the Pats when we just lost Tre' White for the rest of the season Also no one gave a rat's ass that we were without Star and Edmunds when the Colts were running us over.

I was wondering that myself. Don't they have school and stuff?

I thought you had moved along?

Errrrrr.....the Dolphins have won their last 4 games, including the Ravens. Tua was "out" from early in Game 2, to Game 6. The Dolphins lost a close game to the Jags (3 points), a close game to the Falcons (2 points), ran into a buzz saw at Orchard Park, then haven't lost since. Fun Fact: that win over the Ravens would be the reason I currently have a Flying Pig as my avatar. I said that the Dolphins could beat the Ravens, when Pigs Fly. So....

Welcome. On the waivers part, I should have written "just like any other player released from the 53 man roster after the trade deadline" Before the trade deadline of course veterans are not subject to waivers. Supposedly Jones has a sore neck and is questionable

I'd like to hope so, but in general rookies -vs- Judon has not gone in favor of the rookies. See the strip sack Dawson Knox let by him near our goal in the 2019 Ravens loss. Especially a rookie coming back from Covid in who-knows-what shape.

Dude, he wrapped Allen up and lifted him (after the ball was gone), then threw him down. There was no "clear as day trying to hold up" about it. You can see his hand wrap under Allen's legs and lift them up, then he lands on him. He doesn't keep his weight on his arms, because he can't, because one of his arms is wrapped under Allen's legs lifting. At the very best, and despite what Collinsworth belched out, there is legitimate evidence to support that being a penalty by rule.

Eh. You can make an argument that "the Bills stopped the Bills" on other drives as well, but here's what went down on the Bills 5 RZ trips: 1st and 10 from the Ten 12: neither a first down nor a TD. No penalties:4 yd pass to Motor; 3 yd run by Moss; incomplete pass. FG. 1st and 5 from the Ten 5: Holding on Sanders nullifies TD to Knox, 1st and 15: 3 yd pass to McK; 2 yd run by Moss; incomplete pass to Diggs. FG. 1st and 10 from the Ten 15: pass to Diggs, TD 1st and 5 from the Ten 5: pass to Sweeney, 2 pt conversion Knox to Allen, TD Included a 2nd and 1 run by Allen stuffed for no gain. 1st and 10 from the Ten 12: 4 yd run by Moss; incomplete pass to Sanders; 5 yd run by Allen; 4th and 1 run by Allen stuffed for no gain I think we got to give the Tenn D some credit on 2 of those 5 drives with no penalties etc. Then there's 1st and 10 from the Buff 25, short pass to Zack Moss intercepted at the 27 yd line resulting in a Ten TD 2 plays later There was a Zach Moss fumble on another drive after a short pass, followed by a tackle for loss on a run. These could also be considered as the Bills stopping the Bills, in addition to the Manny Sands hold and the McKenzie TD called back. Bottom line, points to both sides.

While the Titans didn't slow our offense down overall, they did stop it at critical points, in the red zone leading to INTs and not TDs. Pretty much.

To be honest, no great running back with a choice is going to choose to play for the Buffalo Bills until/unless we prove that 1) we can run block for him competently 2) we have a consistent commitment to a run game

Yes, practice squad players are considered free agents. They can accept or reject. Now not many players reject - the money on the regular roster, even at NFL "minimum", is hugely better as outlined above. But it has happened! The only time that is not true is when a practice squad player is elevated more than 2x to the regular roster for just a single game. The first two times he automatically reverts to the PS. The third (or greater) time, he will be subject to waivers and can be claimed by any team in reverse order of their record - just like any other player released from a 53 man roster.

Looks that way so far. Of course part of it may be the luck of one landing among the Marine Mammals in Miami and one getting drafted by one of the greatest if not the greatest coaches of all time.

I understand that you're being sarcastic here, but it may well be appropriate to do this, from a statistical standpoint. At best, you can't say a priori it's more appropriate to compare a full and a partial data set. And by the way, if I'm remembering correctly, @billsfan1959 has some good statistical background and actually knows more about this than the Average Bear, maybe more than I do since for much of my professional life I had the support of professional statisticians. There are a number of factors that go into sound statistical practice. One of them is comparable size data sets. One of them is comparable data collection conditions You can compare data sets of unequal sizes, but then you have to use special statistical tools and tests to ask "are these truly different, or are the differences I'm seeing the result of a smaller sample size in one set?" If you have reason to believe that conditions varied during the course of the data collection (as occurs during a football season) it may be statistically appropriate to limit the size of the larger set to correspond to the smaller set. Is there reason to believe that conditions vary during the season? Yes, on the one hand weather may worsen, injuries may mount up. On the other hand, the team may "click" and bond more as the season goes on, or find what they're best at and focus there, or just "practice makes perfect". McDermott has openly said on many occasions that it's his goal for the team to play their best football in Nov and Dec, indicating he is trying to skew the full-season data set towards improvement at the end. So it may well be the best "apples to apples" strategy to compare first 11 games last season to first 11 games this season. It would probably be inappropriate or cherry picking to perform other comparisons, such as picking the best or worst 11 games from last season to to compare to this season. It might be less cherry-picking to make a random selection of 11 games, but only if you believe there are no systematic factors that enter into the course of the season (which is probably true - see above).

Talk to Brian Daboll. Brian Daboll: "Good Fundamental Execution" (buffalobills.com) About 7:40 in Kim Jones asking question "if my information is correct, 7 interceptions and a fumble in the last 4. Are there common denominators in that, can someone get into a bit of a slump where the same thing happens again and again?" Daboll: "I think every turnover is different. Trust me, all those 7 turnovers weren't on Josh, either. QB get credited with interceptions, I understand that and they all understand that, but there's a lot that goes into ball security. Whether it be the offensive line, protecting inside out, keeping the depth and the width of the pocket, running backs knowing who to block, blocking them properly, receivers running the right adjustment, QB making the right decisions. Ball security is a team thing." So, per coach Brian Daboll, he would apparently disagree with @Billsfan1972 that the Ints are caused by "frustration with this year's offensive schemes and play calling" and with you that "Allen forces the ball too often, just take what the defense gives". He apparently assigns some of them on protection breakdowns, either of the OL or by the RBs. He would put some of them on route-running mistakes by the WR. And he would put some of them on Allen making poor decisions. He doesn't think they are all one cause such as "frustration" or "forcing the ball".

No need to give me the "benefit of the doubt" https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/column-matt-hasselbeck-thinks-key-to-bills-rebound-is-josh-allens-healing-left-shoulder/article_3f8e57d0-2386-11eb-9a92-b3a82e42fa1f.html

I don't think we're saying anything that different when you look under the hood. "Daboll has shown he is willing to run it in games where the running is having some effect" is only a sidestep away from "Daboll honestly doesn't believe we need a run game. He may pay lip service when forced, but he really believes that there is no offensive downside to coming out of the tunnel with a game plan to sling the ball 50 times and run 5, when the opponent knows that's what you're going to do and has schemed up exotic pressures to take advantage of that tendency." Daboll has repeatedly said that he game plans week to week to take advantage of an opponent. Everything we see suggests that part of that game plan is to look at (say) the Colts or the Ravens in the playoffs last year, decide that we won't be able to run effectively, and work on a game plan that doesn't involve the run. Or look at the Jags, decide that we can exploit their secondary, and ditto. Now sure, he can and will design game plans that are very run heavy as with last year against NE or against San Diego. But that's different from saying "we have to at least show a credible threat to run, Every Single Game". The difference may be that I buy into Greg Cosell's point (and Tony Dungy's etc etc) that even if you aren't running very effectively, the threat of running keeps the defense in need to defend the run and keeps them from going nutsoid with the pressure looks that overload one side of the line and have no one home on the other (what Pittsburgh and the Jags and to a lesser extent to Colts seem to have done). I also buy into Steve Tasker's point that if you create a pass-heavy game plan, the runs just don't get practiced as much, so the timing and execution on run plays will suffer. Now sure, what he perceives as likely to be effective DOES depend upon the player personnel we've got, and the "buck" for that stops with McBeane. But I don't believe for a minute that Daboll doesn't have strong input into the team's prioritization. I don't think Beane went off to sign Sanders without input from Daboll. Therefore if the big bucks in FA got spent on Sanders, it's because Daboll said his #1 priority was another receiver to pair with Beasley who could also run deep routes and get open when Diggs was doubled. If Daboll said his #1 priority was improving the IOL, do you really think McDermott and Beane would have ignored that and run out to sign Sanders? I don't. I think Daboll signed off on the idea that the IOL was "good enough", that Ford would likely develop given an injury-free off season, and that some combination of Feliciano, Boettger, Lamp and Douglas would be servicable.

It was not great weather. You state that but the links you show don't demonstrate. IMO the shoulder injury was probably the more relevant The point is, the data show a different game plan, but it's your (probably faulty) inference as to the reason for the game plan.

Did you show this part of the box score when you concluded the Bills played scared? During the first game, there were strong gusty winds. Second game, light winds. Allen was also 3 games out from a shoulder injury and had just moved up from a linebacker brace to a slightly less restrictive brace during the first game. Allen was fully healed and had been throwing with precision the 2nd game "Playing scared" had nothing to do with the playcalling choice of 38 runs 18 passes first game and 31 runs 40 passes 2nd game. Gusty winds, rain vs mist and the state of Allen's shoulder were factors. First game: Second game:

LOL McD Tuesday interview. Sean McDermott: "Continue to Work Every Week to Improve" (buffalobills.com) Boston Globe guy Jim McBride asks McDermott about Mac Jones and McDermott says good things about Jones, he's a talented young QB, Josh McDaniels is back to his old ways developing a young QB to play at an elite level, Jones is off to a phenomenal start, he's as advertised, he does a great job executing their offense. Then he goes for the trick question: "Do you see any similarities to the Patriots teams of the early 2000s when they had a young QB...." (damned if you do damned if you don't question) McDermott neatly dodges it. Says "well, I wasn't in the division then" and goes on to say a bunch of praiseful things about the Patriots now "they're playing high level football..they're well coached, they execute well, they're not beating themselves, they play good complimentary football" Not for nothing people have said that Sean McDermott can really dance.