All_Pro_Bills

Your preparation assessment is an excellent insight. Maybe I'm drilling down to far here but it made me think of another disadvantage the Bills might have when it comes to playing the Chiefs. I'm not suggesting any Jedi mind tricks or stuff like that but I wonder if another problem is that through their past association that Andy Reid knows how Sean McDermott thinks better than anyone else. For another example, look no further than how some former Patriot assistants like fired Dolphins HC Brian Flores seem to have good success against Belichik. Is it because they know very well how the NE HC thinks? So rather than suggesting Sean become more aggressive maybe he needs to become more unpredictable? Because I'll bet that Andy knew in crunch time at the end of the game just exactly what Sean was going to do.

Jerry's just repeating what most of us here already concluded. The kick-off through the end zone and the defensive alignment in the last 13 seconds were completely incorrect decisions and pretty much the exact opposite of what you should do in that situation. If they would have somehow survived these bad decisions we wouldn't be talking about it here. But results matter and failure requires an examination. The fact that every loss for this team with the exception of one game during the season was a one-score affair might lead us to conclude we need to carefully examine the decision process of the coaching staff that might have reversed the outcome if they would have done one or two little things a bit different. Its wild speculation on my part but outside of the Colts game with a little tweak here and there or a little different play call or coaching decision this team might have been 16-1. Of course that requires that everything went right all the time which doesn't happen that often. And I'm not suggesting we need perfection when it comes to our coaches. Everybody makes mistakes. The issue is how big they are. I wouldn't call it choke more than I'd say it was simply the incorrect strategy and decisions given the situation. What I believe McDermott and Frazier failed to account for most in their decision was the fact the Chiefs had their 3 time outs. If they would have had zero or one time out left then it might have made more sense. That to me is the failure. Failure to factor in the time outs into the decision, failure to account for the fact the sidelines meant nothing to the Chiefs in how they'd play the final 13 seconds of the game. Just bad judgment and thinking based on the situation they faced. And they had plenty of time to run through the thought process between the Bills score and the kick off over a long commercial break in the game. So not enough time to think it through can't be an excuse. As what's done is done I'm over it but I can't forget it. The critical question that everybody needs to ask is are you concerned they'll do it again in a different situation under different circumstances in the future when the game or the playoffs or perhaps even the Super Bowl is on the line? And if you think they will and you want to avoid that critical error then what do you do about it now to prevent it from screwing the team and the fans?

I love the Hitler/Trump analogies because Trump killed how many millions of people and took away exactly what freedoms and rights? And sent thousands to concentration camps like the COVID camps polls suggest Dems are okay with sending people to "voluntarily" quarantine. Oh yeah, none of that happened right? But he tried to take over the government and turn it into a dictatorship. And there's like billions of pieces of evidence to support this. Or at least that's what you believe. But let the drama continue. Lots of cute pictures and misrepresentations of facts and events. I understand that communists/socialists like Stalin and Mao are upset that Hitler gets all kinds of recognition. They are upset because they want everyone to know they killed many more people than he did. And want some recognition for their nefarious acts too. On a side note, I saw a great quote about socialism. "You can vote your way into socialism but you'll have to shoot your way out". That sums it up quite nicely.

For me a better comparison is crossing over to a different sport but staying in the same city and that's the Sabres of the Hasek era vs. the Bills of the Allen era.

HCQ is not banned and it is not deadly. A little over 20% of monthly prescriptions written and filled for the U.S. inflammation market are for HCQ. So are doctors writing 10's of thousands of scripts per month that are killing lots of people? The science and stats say no.

Good point. The problem the Chiefs face is they need to get into FG range to extend the game. There are 13 seconds left in regulation and they have all three time outs. To do this they need about 45 yards. So they need to execute 2 plays of 20+ yards and still leave time for the FG attempt. They might have 3 plays to do this if they are short quick passes. An unsuccessful first play will likely end their chances or at best require the offense to take even greater risks. They will be using their timeouts to stop the clock if the pass is complete. So how can you determine that playing 20 yards off the LOS and protecting the side lines, which they have absolutely no need to use to stop the clock, that presents an almost perfect defensive set up that will allow them the best chance of successfully pulling off their only hope to tie the game is most effective way to stop them?

If you're starting a team from scratch which QB do you want? Both are great. Both are in the superstar class. But I wouldn't trade Allen for Mahomes straight up. Let's not overlook the fact that Reid and the Chiefs had a very good team before Mahomes arrived with Alex Smith at QB. 11-5 in 2015, 12-4 in 2016 and 10-6 in 2017. The improvement Mahomes provided was marginal but the margin they needed to get them over the hump and into the Super Bowl and a win there. What did the Bills do before Allen? No playoff since 1999 that's what. What would they have done without him this year? Something like 7-10. If he's not the MVP, the one player most important to his teams success then nobody is. Josh elevates the performance of the players around him at a very high level. Mahomes also does this but with the Chiefs its a little different because, like the Patriots used to be with Brady, their offense presents match up problems and confusion for defenses that Mahomes exploits. What the Bills need to get over the hump here is a bruiser at RB and an offensive line upgrade on the interior and game plans that put less wear and tear on Allen going forward, and a defense that can make the big stop in the playoffs against a great team when the games on the line.

This is an excellent post. And if McDermott and his defensive coaches played out the scenarios and how the Chiefs would play it out in response to it here they obviously missed their approach to moving the ball into field goal range. This calls for a lot of thinking on your feet along anticipating the need for certain adjustments in-game and maybe this isn't in the wheelhouse of our current staff. My game theory for prepping the defense for the Chiefs started after last weeks win against NE. When Belichik went to the Bills locker room to offer congratulations they shouldn't have let him leave until he devised a defensive strategy the Bills could use against the Chiefs the following week. Or maybe McDermott went to his mentor, Andy Reid, and asked him "Andy, do you think this defensive game plan will work against your team"? And Andy said, "absolutely Sean, it will work great".

The general consensus here is nobody would be sad to see Frazier go and he gets the majority of the blame for last nights 13 second brain freeze but I also believe this defense is still McDermott's basic philosophy and Leslie is just calling the game within the parameters of that system and not running "his" system. I'd welcome an outside view coming in with a different and more aggressive approach, when the situation calls for it, but unless the head coach is willing to entertain the idea that his defense isn't going to get the team over the hump against teams like the Chiefs that execute extremely well and can't be depended on to make the big mistake at some critical point in the game, and the HC is on boards with some fresh thinking we're dead in the water right out of the gate with a new DC. Otherwise this defense is just lacking star power. Look at their number one rating but a snub when it comes to pro bowl selections. Maybe the voters are right about that assessment? If you're putting together a defense outside of Tre White and Matt Milano who are you going to want? All that cap space committed to the defensive line rotation to keep players fresh through the game. How'd that work out for us last night? What they need is a couple impact players that eat up some cap space and not 8 or 9 guys that are about average NFL defensive lineman. The older veterans here need to go and somebody the offense has to worry about needs to be signed. The younger guys I'd give some time. Also some bulk against the run in the middle has got to be a priority. I've got mixed feelings about Edmunds. He just doesn't have the instincts and hasn't developed the ability to read and anticipate the play but I also fear he'd go elsewhere and the light would come on under different scheme and coaching. In the 13 second disaster I would think they'd line him up at the LOS against Kelce with explicit instructions to not allow him a free release and put Mahomes in a position to not even consider throwing him the ball. Either the coaches don't trust him or he's just not up to it but that's got to be why he's here. To make a play in just this kind of situation. I'm not seeing how they can commit big money to him at this point. The secondary just needs another good corner opposite Tre but the safeties are getting older and some draft capital needs to be spent there to plan for the future. So for me its a re-load with some fresh thinking.

We'll likely never know exactly what Frazier and McDermott were really thinking here. 13 second left starting at the 25 with 3 timeouts. They strategized it for a situation where the offense had 1 or 0 time outs left where getting to the boundaries to stop the clock was something the offense needed to do. Just modifying the defensive alignment to play off 10 yards and not focus on the sidelines and instead focus on doubling specifically Kelce and Hill would have almost certainly resulted in a stop. They had time for 2 plays of 25 yards but not enough time for 4 plays of 10 yards regardless of the timeout situation. What's most disturbing after digesting the outcome for about an hour is not the loss but how completely obvious and clear this should have been to the coaches. But the defense they called just set up the 11 players out there for failure. And added another heartbreaking loss to the list when we all should be getting psyched up for next weeks AFC championship at the stadium instead of not even caring about it.

You should be able to stop Joe Montana and Jerry Rice with Walter Payton and Randy Moss with a hall of fame offensive line with only 13 seconds left in the game with a drive start at the 25 with just an average NFL defense and a part-time high school coach.

That theory that the defensive line rotation scheme is supposed to keep the line fresh went down the crapper tonight and it might be a good idea to invest in 1 or 2 dominant players rather than 8 or 9 okay to good players.

Let's not forget letting Hill run free to take it to the house before that. Two times the offense with Allen/Davis came back to take the lead and two times the defense gave it right back. Its almost impossible to imagine that's possible if I didn't see it happen. Total chock by the defense in the last 2 minutes and OT. Just terrible. I'll be up all night agonizing over this awful end of game performance by the defense. I hope we see somebody sign Frazier to a HC spot tomorrow. At least I'll know he's not going to be back to do this again next season.

Not squibing the kick to burn 3 or 4 seconds off the clock was dumb. And rushing 4 on the play to set up the FG? Its got to be a quick pass so you're not getting to Mahomes. Hell, you rush 3 and maybe even 2 and drop 9 into coverage. But letting them into FG range in just 2 plays with 13 seconds? The offense deserved better.

But only 3 of them are brave enough to admit it publicly.

Just think of it this way. One of the primary purposes of NATO is to provide a buffer between the US and Russia so when the hostilities start and all those vacationers in France get blown off the face of the Earth you won't feel so bad anymore.

Where have we seen this before? Prior to the pro-western government currently in power the pro-Russian and democratically elected Yanukovych government was overthrown in a coup engineering by then under-secretary of State Victoria Nuland under the Obama administration. Recall the Maidan protests which were pretext for the event. His sin? Declaring no interest in forming closer ties with NATO and Western alliances. Soon thereafter, was the Russian invasion and takeover of Crimea. Of historical note is that Crimea, originally a territory of Russia, was transferred by Soviet Premier Kruschev to Ukraine in the 1950's. Of note is that Krushev was a Ukrainian and the move was generally unpopular with the impacted populations at the time. But what choice did they have, right? So now with Biden in the White House Vicky and the war-hawks are back to finish the job after the pause button on new wars and conflicts was hit for 4 years. The problem is the circumstances have changed dramatically. Biden has already taken the most serious U.S. options off the table. Now the U.S. has very little leverage, the UK is irrelevant, and Europe is split on backing or resisting taking any kind of military actions and some states such as Germany see economic integration and trade with Russia as a fundamental objective. And so goes Germany, so goes Europe. My assessment is this is no-win scenario. I see no vested interest here, regardless of your insistence that Americans should fight and die for democracy in obscure and irrelevant places around the world. I hope we steer clear of getting bogged down in another useless conflict. But our government tends to spend a lot of time and resources on useless adventures which makes a lot of defense contractors and their shareholders rich at the expense of a lot of death and destruction. Maybe we should discuss more about Yemen and U.S. support of non-democratic Saudi Arabia which is recklessly targeting, bombing, and killing civilian populations to its south? Why aren't we supporting or insisting on a transition to democracy there if that's the number one driver of policy?

The world's most reliable contrarian indicator.

Russian intelligence concluded that Trump was unpredictable and therefore dangerous. It wasn't so much what he would or wouldn't do but rather they couldn't play out the U.S. reaction to their actions with him in charge. So they hesitated to take any action. The Biden administration is very predictable and officials like Blinken are well known. Under Biden the U.S. will provide assistance but has already shown their hand by stating they will take no direct action or commit combat forces if hostilities break out. Biden has also taken expulsion from SWIFT off the table. With the two things Russia fears removed from the equation he's more or less signaled the U.S. will take no actions that Russia has any fear or concern over. Given this all of the European countries will take no direct action because they assess the U.S. will abandon them and hang them out to dry if there is an escalation. Also, most countries see economic integration with Russia as beneficial to their long-term interests and a European centric strategy that benefits their interests instead of benefiting the U.S. Putin knows all of this. While the U.S. might welcome a proxy war against Russia that would tie up their forces and distract them from other interests in places like the Middle East I don't understand why anyone thinks Russia has any interest in Ukraine other than protecting their access to the Black Sea and keeping NATO and US forces out of Ukraine and off their border. Occupying the country is not a goal as it's a financial drain and financial disaster and in need of constant aid from external benefactors. I see the idea of an invasion as a media talking point and negotiating tactic more than a likely outcome. The most likely outcome is the situation slowly de-escalates and disappears from the headlines.

Living by the economic principle of comparative advantage. Sounds good.

The comical thing here is the left fancies themselves as crusaders in the fight against the evils of the system and the establishment. But how can you be a rebel or a revolutionary fighting the system when you control every social and political institution of the system and everything you believe is consistent with the beliefs of the system you insist you are fighting? Lets look at the belief in systemic racism. Its an inconsistent narrative. Liberals control the system. How can you claim to fight a system of racism if you control the system and make all the rules? That means liberals, that control the system, are racist. Either the system is not racist or the liberal left running the system are racist. The entire belief system is based on self-delusion.

Just touch base with former members of Bill's Arkansas State Police detail and get some insights. Or more likely their surviving family members.

People that have dirt on or go after the Clinton's are found to have a 560% higher risk of suicide than the baseline population.

Somebody forgot to lock the basement door when they put the crazy old guy to bed and he wandered up the stairs to the press podium and starting speaking some incoherent gibberish before they could put him back down there. Maybe Peppermint Patty should just level with us that grandpa has been slowing down a lot lately and the family is going to have to get together and decide what to do with him when the time comes.

Don't worry. Only the intellectually lazy and mentally compromised would believe such an excuse. He called the FBI on Jan. 8 and “explained his position”. Sure here's a guy that's a member of a government targeted political organization caught on video admonishing and encouraging other protesters to storm and enter the Capitol because "that's where our problem is". And all he has to do to avoid being arrested and sent to prison like hundreds of other protesters is to call the FBI and explain what he was doing. Why didn't they all think of that? Just call the FBI and give them some excuse and all is forgiven. And throw the incriminating video evidence of you in the garbage. Why its absolutely brilliant. I'm sure its going to catch on fast. Just call the cops and tell them you didn't mean to shoot those 5 people and the cops will tell you not to worry. Now that you've explained your position we'll just take your name off our wanted list now. Thanks for letting us know. Amazing! But I'm sure every national news show will lead with the story of Ray Epps providing transcripted and close session testimony to "the committee". Circle the clown cars. Just unbelievable, simply unbelievable. LMAO. I mean, come on man! You've got to be fooking kidding me here! How many ways can I say it? The absurdity of this "investigation" has reached new levels only somebody with a sense of comic genius could have envisioned. Just call the FBI and explain your position and they'll let you go. I'm laughing so hard my stomach hurts. I got to meet the person who made up this story/excuse. And shake their hand. And tell them you made my day as I haven't laughed at anything so ridiculous in a long, long time. So explain yourself Mr. Epps. "I was just trying to get protesters to enter the Capitol to disrupt the certification of the election results". Oh, well thank you Mr. Epps. Now that you've explained yourself the FBI will remove you from our list of most wanted people. Oh my God. Who can possibly believe any of that? Ray might as well wear his "Official FBI Informant' Tee shirt to the hearing.