Bleeding Bills Blue

Thats all well and good. I don't think it was a terrible call to throw. It's Benjamins fault that he got OPI. Not Dennison or Tyrod.

Just get YOUR guy. If they like darnold, get him. I don't want to trade up for like our 4th best QB on the board. Figure we moved from 10 to 27 for an extra pick (we expected to be in the 20 range). So we have 2 picks in 2018 in the 20 range. That may be enough for 10ish. Now if we throw in a 2019 1st we have the ability to move to maybe #4 in front of a denver or NYJ - assuming the #1 overall pick isn't for sale (i think it is).

Unders only 39 too... so i think we're expected to score what like 3 points here?

I mean - 20 of 55 sacks were in 2 10-sack games against HOU week 1 and IND in week 7. Considering they played them both two more times... they got 28 of 55 sacks in 4 games against HOU and IND. They're a good... even a great defense. But they are not as good as numbers indicate.

They def beat up on the cupcakes. However they did beat pitt and should have beaten the Rams. When they're bottled up on O and the turnovers don't come is when they struggle.

yeah - i was just giving my own first hand take.

I dunno, I've been to Miami for a game and that place was like half-full. MAYBE. And they put attendance at 64800 (https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201509270mia.htm). I think its literally BS fluffed up numbers that they show to corporate sponsors. There is no real data lol.

He's a captain on a playoff team... he helped lead this team to the playoffs. He also had a few pretty good games this year. Also we would need to finish with 13 wins and a tiebreaker over NE to host a playoff game. True. The other guy threw 5 picks in a half.... he's the best we got. I don't know what the argument is about here anymore - i thought we were supposed to praise a signature moment. that's the topic.

So did anyone answer how you can be over 100% attendance?

I think coaching might be one of the few areas that we are relative equals in. Neither has ever been coached a team in the playoffs before. Both have been assistants for teams that were in the playoffs though. Both coaches are conservative, both prefer a bend but don't break approach on defense, limiting turnovers, and running the ball to get in makeable 3rd downs. Very similar philosophies - but their team has a lot more talent. Always will come down to QB though. I don't think Tyrod is much better than Bortles, but if he has a good game we'll probably win.

Do you have the play afterwards where he scrambled for the first down?

To me - comes down to takeaways.

We need to run the ball well and with likely tolbert as the lead back, i want to see more traps/powers. Rely on his ability to move it a bit more north/south, and less on his cutbacks. He's alright on one cut runs but he's not making a guy miss in the backfield and that seems to be the trend on our zone running scheme. Get him going with a full head of steam. This would help put us in manageable third downs. I've liked how they've gone empty on some of the 3rd and mediums as it helps open up the middle of the field, and prevent blitzes.

Bortles has been better about taking care of the football over the course of the season, but Tyrods main turnovers come from fumbles and blindside sacks. This team has a really good pass rush so it's a crapshoot. I think the 9 point spread is a bit generous, but who knows, we can't score 2nd half points lately.

It's never a good thing to miss a playmaker I agree. Especially when the backup is essentially a fullback.

Gotta get big men to the 2nd level to hammer those backers.

And it's pretty much teh same strategy that the jag's have used all year. They beat pittsburgh with 2 pick sixes. Other than that they played boring football and bullied lesser opposition.

We had a better record a year ago - and McVay has turned them around quick. But people forget that they have added 2 new starting WRs, a starting LT, starting C, and drafted a new slot receiver. Between that and better playcalling the offense improved a ton. Their defense was already talented, and have benefited from a simpler coaching approach.

I honestly think we have a shot with or without. They are not as good as the stats indicate IMO. Colts twice with no QB, Texans twice without watson starting either, cleveland, and cincy. They held all those teams under 300 yards, recorded 12 takeaways, and 35 of their 55 sacks in those 6 games.

5 100 yard games since we traded them dareus. The stat's got a bit skewed when they held the browns and bengals running attacks... Considering they were 2 of the worst rushing teams in the league it shouldn't be a surprise though.

Why can't we run against the Jags d? They have the 21st ranked rush d - and are 3-6 in games where they gave up over 100 yards. Figuring out how to run it on this team will be the key. They also had a takeaway in 14 out of 16 games. Kept opponents under 300 total yards 9 times.

Right - all of those guys have played and won games for the Chiefs since Todd Blackledge - none were drafted by them. Jackie Treehorn.... treats objects like women... man....

Also mean's hes probably struggled with his route running.

He's had drops - don't blame everything on the QB. He's had uncatchable targets too.

I dunno - some people are superstitious.. Other's literally just don't care. I'm not on the team, whatever i say feel or do literally has no effect on the outcome of this game or other games.