BarleyNY

Yup. It’s not a quality of opponent issue, it’s a matchup issue. Also those are physical teams. The Iggles seemed to be scraping a player off the field every other play last Sunday. Even a win could be costly. The Steelers and Ravens defenses are physical too obviously. The AFC crown is going to be a physically demanding journey.

Faneca deserves it IMO. Many more years and games at such a high level.

It really wasn’t luck with Burrow. The Bengals put him behind a putrid OL. Some of us saw this coming. The Bungles are probably going to waste a tremendous QB prospect in the same way Luck was wasted by Indy.

I’m surprised that so many teams have black or white as their “color rush” uniform.

So much depends on coaches and GMs being on the same page. A stable, well run organization helps enormously. The difference between organizations that: - know what they need in players - can take the time to develop young players properly - allow the hard work of the scouting department to dictate player acquisition and - can play a long game with the draft, trades and contracts versus those that: - constantly have turnover because new players have to be brought in every few seasons to fit a new system - rush rookies into important starting roles - allow the whims of owners and coaches to dictate player acquisitions and - are pressed into draft reaches, bad trades and bad contracts because jobs are on the line cannot be overstated. I think some teams draft a lot better than others, but I also think that there is a ceiling for it. Beyond that it’s luck. The big differences we see are between well run and poorly run organizations.

They are closer to 2019 than 2018 Bills to be sure and I agree that they’d be a tough out for the Bills. That’s more match up related than thinking they’re as good as the Bills right now though. They are probably on the right track, but this is year 1 for Stefanski and his crew. That’s one issue. The other big ones are a lack of talent for their defensive scheme (though they have some very big talents like Garrett and Ward) and Mayfield’s regression. Note that I am from Cleveland and root for both teams so maybe I’m being a little more critical of the Browns than I need to be.

The Iggles completely sold out to stop the run against the Browns. I expect that to be the defensive game plan against them from here on out. It’ll be interesting to see how the perform against that. In general I think the Browns are some where between where the 2018 and 2019 Bills teams were in development. I’d have them close to the 2019 Bills if not for Mayfield’s regression. And coincidentally if the playoffs started today the Bills would be hosting the Browns.

You are right about that as his fifth year option was declined. I know they’ve put claims in on him both times. I guess they just want to do their own medical evaluation on him.

Broadcast map CBS only has one game this week. It is showing Tennessee at Baltimore according to this map, not Steelers v Jags. It’s the only game between two likely playoff teams. I get why the Miami game at 4 would be better for us since Miami is our only threat for the division, but it’s not like they are playing a playoff contender. We are getting what is likely to be a more competitive game. I would prefer the Miami game, but I get why they chose what they did.

Yeah, I was wondering where all these people saying they are doing yard work live. I’ll be watching games by a fire as the snow/ freezing rain falls outside

There has to be an agreement from the player and usually there is a financial settlement. Incidentally, he has a bad groin injury. Still, expect the Browns to make another claim for him when he goes through waivers again. They did so the first two times and they are still very interested in him. Plus they are in long term team building mode. They’ll take him even if they have to IR him for the remainder of the season. Edit: Raiders are also interested in Tak.

That’s back when the Steelers were pioneering steroid use in the NFL. (There were no rules against them yet.). It is no coincidence that the Steelers had some “phenomenal” draft classes in the 70s though.

This is the most plausible reasoning I’ve seen.

Hey! Thirty is a kid when you’re my age! But, yeah, you’d think Saints coaches would be well aware of his ability to play QB by this time. I’m not a big Winston fan, but I’ve seen nothing from Hill that makes me think he will be close to as good as even Winston is.

Yup. Plus their DL is probably the best in the league this year. Our OL needs to be in top form for that game.

High school aged kids don’t have contract clauses (which include guarantees for injury) and a players’ union to deal with so I doubt it would be necessary.

I think it still makes sense. A coach should never publicly contradict the team or independent doctors, especially with something like this. Clearance to play - or lack thereof - from doctors can mean a lot of money (and cap space) in the event a player’s contract is terminated. I think Morse is a candidate for that in the offseason due to the size of his contract and his past concussions. Also how would it look if McD contradicted the doctors and then Morse got another concussion after the bye? No coach wants to open up that can of worms.

That’s a very good point. I was thinking along the lines of others that it’d make more sense to have Morse at center and Feliciano at OG. But getting Morse completely healthy makes more sense. My daughter got a concussion playing soccer 12 days ago and still is having headaches and light sensitivity. The longer you can give concussion to heal, the better. Glad they’re taking extra time with Morse.

I thought you were going to say that the only way the Bills don’t win the division is if Miami wins more games than us. But on a more serious note Frazier is running McD’s defense, isn’t he? If the play calling isn’t good or something else is wrong, then McD should be stepping in to fix it.

If you could argue against my points, you would have. But you’re not........

Good thing you have that “reason” to stop arguing rather than admitting you were obviously wrong.

Or you misunderstand it. And here’s why that’s the case: - That the phrase “in which he is moving toward or parallel to” is included. If the intent of the rule is that a stationary player can’t block toward his own LOS, then why include that phrase at all? The rule would be more simply stated. It would just read that blocking in the direction of the LOS outside the designated area is illegal. They added the requirement of movement toward the LOS for a reason. - If blocking toward the LOS is considered moving in that direction then every downfield block that starts directed away from the LOS but the defender gets turned parallel to the LOS would be a penalty. That’s not the case obviously. And that happens a lot as defenders try to get past blockers. - Any offensive player outside the tackle box who facing parallel to the LOS or back toward it would be defenseless under your interpretation. Again, that’s obviously not the intent of the rule. Sorry.

As in if an offensive player is facing the LOS they can block a defender coming at or by them (rather than get trucked) as long as it’s above the waist. But they can’t run toward the defender and do that. That’s how I understand the rule. Yes. 3 yards on either side of the LOS.

The Cardinal blocked in the direction of the LOS, but he wasn’t moving in that direction. I believe that is a necessary condition for it to be an illegal blindside block.

You can’t put a hand on the back of a player while blocking them. That’s said, I watched the play several times on the broadcast from 3 angles. It looks like he hits him from the side as he dives for Murray and that’s where contact is made. His left hand may have touched his back on the way down, but that’s not a block in the back IMO.