msw2112

And then did it in 3 straight seasons, and capped it off with a National Championship.

Class act and comes across as a very bright guy. Based on that well-written letter, his wife comes across as bright too. Wishing them the best and it would be great if there was some type of future association with the Bills' organization (coaching or otherwise).

I didn't hear the presser and I'm not a McD apologist (I think he has a lot of strengths, but also several weaknesses), but even without hearing it, I have no doubt that McD did NOT kick off the presser by congratulating himself.

Well, technically, the Bills' season is over, so past tense would be appropriate.

I'm not typically a fan of passes behind the LOS, but I thought they worked pretty well yesterday. In particular, the pass to Shakir on 4th down was a huge play. I thought the play calling was pretty good. The Bills move the ball and scored a lot of points against a strong KC defense. The only playcalls I disliked were a few runs later in the game when KC stacked the box and an easy pass play over the top was available and the long shot into the end zone to Shakir when Diggs was open underneath (for clock management purposes and the higher-percentage play). Overall, Brady has done a great job and the Bills offense has come to life, despite a middling WR corps.

I don't see the harm in bringing him into camp and seeing where he is next season. I'd also bring in some competition. Many excellent kickers have bad games or bad seasons. If he doesn't look right in camp, move on.

I'm OK with snowballs being thrown around in a playful manner, but I agree that specifically targeting opposing players and/or officials with snowballs is bad form, particularly after losing a game.

Reid also won a lot of regular season games with Alex Smith, but didn't have playoff success. You guys are missing the point. I'm not saying that McDermott is a better coach than Reid. He's not. I'm simply comparing the fact that both coaches had a lot of regular season success and won some playoff games, but never took a team all the way. Reid, with Mahomes, eventually got over the hump. Will McDermott, given that he has Josh Allen? Maybe, maybe not. But to say that McDermott is a terrible coach with zero redeemable qualities is silly.

I don't think that McDermott is perfect, and I realize this is a subjective discussion and mostly opinion, but McDermott lead a team with Tyrod Taylor and Nathan Peterman at QB, with a 17-year playoff drought, to a playoff berth. After drafting a great QB, he's elevated the team to one that has double-digit wins every year and has 4 straight division championships. This season, they've beaten playoff teams Dallas, Tampa, Kansas City, Miami (twice), and Pittsburgh. They won 6 games in a row with the season on the line, winning the division, securing the #2 seed and 2 home playoff games. They did that with McDermott serving as defensive coordinator with a defense that's been decimated by injuries. They played Super Bowl Champion Kansas City very close in a one-possession game. Free agents are willing to sign with Buffalo, a bad-weather rust belt city, often for less money than they could get elsewhere. Are there better coaches? Sure. Is Andy Reid one of them. Yes. Might Jim Harbaugh or Bill Belichick be better? Maybe. The statements that McDermott lacks a single strength as a coach and has zero redeemable qualities are extreme and ridiculous.

McDermott is a good coach and he deserves to continue based on the results he's gotten the last few years. That said, I do agree with the above post that things may be getting stale and a new regime might bring some good energy to the team. Maybe he's Tony Dungy with the Bucs (or the Marty Schottenheimer) of his era and they need another voice to get over the playoff hump. On the other hand, maybe he's Andy Reid who suffered through years and years of playoff failures before finally getting over the hump and subsequently having amazing success. I don't think that keeping him shows that Pegula doesn't care about winning the Super Bowl. It means that Pegula likes having stability and continuity, annual division championships, playoff appearances, and a chance to contend every year. Maybe one of those years, things will break the Bills' way (injury wise, or a critical bounce or call during a close playoff game) to get them over the hump. For those who say he's a bad coach, the record speaks for itself. They Bills win double-digit games every year and he was even able to squeak into the playoffs with Tyrod Taylor and Nathan Peterman at QB. They've bounced back from adversity and won a lot of big games. He held a defense together with scissors and duct tape this season, given all of the injuries. So yes, he's a good coach. Is he good enough to win a Super Bowl with this Bills team? I don't know. Back to the original post, I am a Michigan grad and a huge fan of the team. I love what Harbaugh has done there and he was extremely successful in San Francisco. If I knew the Bills would be able to hire him, I'd consider him an upgrade over McDermott. Harbaugh just has a better track record. He's done more at multiple levels than McDermott has, so if the Bills were to guarantee replacing McDermott with Harbaugh, I'd do it. That said, I just don't see him coming to Buffalo, so I think the question is moot. I don't think that there are too many coaches out there better than McDermott (although Harbaugh is one of them), so sticking with a proven winner is not sexy or exciting, but not a terrible choice either.

I'm OK with him coming back at a reasonable rate, as long as the team also drafts a couple of WRs, at least one of them in the early rounds. He was missed yesterday. That said, if he gets paid somewhere else, and I think he will be, I wish him well. While Gabe was clearly inconsistent, he was a good teammate and he contributed in a lot of important games over the years, particularly in the playoffs. The big game in KC a few years ago was not his only big-time playoff performance. I believe that he made several key grabs in a close playoff win a few years ago (against Indy, I think, but it could have been Baltimore).

Those 4 or 5 yards make it 3rd and manageable, as you correctly stated, which keeps the Chiefs' defense guessing and opens up the playbook more for the Bills. Plus, a 41 yard FG becomes a 36 yarder. I absolutely agree with the OP about the strategy there. Not that you don't want a TD, but given the game situation, with time on the clock, the Chiefs having timeouts left, and Mahomes, Kelce, Reid, etc. on the other side, there's a damn good chance they score on the next drive. Thus, yes, the objective should have been a) getting the first down; b) running the clock down; c) taking a few shots at the end zone from closer in; and d) settling for a shorter FG, with no time left, if that's what the situation called for. Attempting a long throw into the end zone with a minute and half left and HOFers on the other team's offense, was not a winning strategy.

I have no doubt that Milano in the lineup would have made a big difference. I give Klein a lot of kudos for coming in cold like he did and playing well against Pittsburgh, but he was so obviously slow last night. So many of the Chiefs' big plays showed Klein hopelessly chasing the receiver or ball carrier from behind. The Chiefs knew they had a mismatch and took full advantage of it. Kelce is a first ballot Hall of Fame player and he's good against all opponents, but a healthy Matt Milano is about as good a counter-weapon as you can have. Milano would have limited some of Kelce's effectiveness (as well as other Chiefs offensive players). That said, he's been out for most of the season, so the Bills needed to adjust and compensate and weren't able to do quite enough.

Diggs is tough to figure out. He played really well in the first half of the season. When Brady took over, his production dropped, but I don't think it's because he lost a step mid-season, it was simply because Brady was (wisely) spreading the ball around to other weapons such as Shakir, Kincaid, Cook, and even Ty Johnson. If teams were going to double-team Diggs, that means someone else has single coverage and/or is open. That said, he's made some key drops. That dropped bomb from Allen yesterday could have changed the complexion of the game if he had caught it. An NFL WR of his level HAS to make that catch. The Chiefs' WRs, ridiculed for drops all season long, made all of the tough catches yesterday. Shakir and Kincaid also made a bunch. So is his decline because he lost a step, or is it because the offense is not running through him anymore? And if it's because the offense isn't running through him anymore, is he dropping the ball because he's just out of rhythm or is it because he feels "disrespected" and his head/heart are no longer in it? I hate to question the guy, because he's always been a competitor who plays hard and wants to win, but he's also shown to be a bit of a head case. I'm curious to know what others on the board think. And I'm really just looking for insight into his play and not taking the contractual situation into account.

Young guys like Bernard, Benford, Cook, Shakir, Torrence, and Kincaid (listed in no particular order) definitely make it look like they can continue to be one of the better teams while they move on from some of the more expensive veterans. Dorian Williams also looks like he has some potential to improve as he adjusts to the NFL level of play. It doesn't take the sting out of the loss, but at least provides some hope that there will be talent on the roster other than Josh Allen.

I'm bothered and disappointed, but not devastated. It's not like 13 seconds, which ripped my heart out and I was depressed for about 2 weeks. I think it's because I (we?) objectively knew that the Bills were not the best team this season. I didn't see this team beating Baltimore or San Francisco. I do think they could have beaten the Chiefs, but it was a 50-50 game going in and whoever won the game was going to do so by a slim margin. The 13 seconds year, we literally snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, and I think that Bills team was the best team at the time and would have gone on to win the Super Bowl. This team wasn't going to do that. I should add that the injuries on defense were the biggest part of my feeling that the Bills were not the best team. If Milano was healthy, I don't think Kelce has the game he had. Then you take out Bernard, and others, and it was obvious that the Chiefs were going to be difficult to stop. I said before the game that the offense needed to be near-perfect and put up 35 points to win. I still think that holds true. If the Chiefs were not in kneel-down mode on the last series, I think they would have scored a TD, which would have given them 34 points, so 35 would have been needed to win. (Even if the Bills had scored a TD on their last drive, getting them to 31, I think the Chiefs would have scored to take a 34-31 lead, and 35 would have been needed). But hey, if the Queen had balls, she'd be the King. There are lots of ifs, ands, or buts, but the Bills lost and it's time to move on.

That's the same feeling that I had. Rather than throwing for the end zone, Allen had Diggs underneath on the 2nd down which would have gotten the first down and allowed them to milk the clock, take a few shots at the TD, and if unsuccessful, then attempt a chip shot FG. On 3rd down, I thought I saw Shakir open underneath, but in fairness to Josh on that play, he was on the run and it would have been difficult to get the ball to Shakir. Although the defense had a couple of stops in the final 10-12 minutes, I didn't think they'd stop the Chiefs if they had scored and given them the ball back with more than a minute on the clock.

This is about where I'm at....

Agree. With the injuries on defense and WR, and the RB room now healthy, the spots are needed elsewhere. Should one of the RBs go down again, it would be great to bring Fournette back (if he was interested in coming back).

I agree with this. I fully understand why McD calls those timeouts and I have also noticed other teams doing the same thing recently, but I believe that forcing the other team to scramble and rush to get the play off benefits the defense more than calling timeout to settle everyone down. It gives the offense a chance to catch their breath, get their best play called, get their guys aligned, etc. Obviously, if you have 12 men on the field or otherwise see a significant flaw in the defense, you call the timeout, but I think McD does it in those situations as a matter of course and I don't agree with it. I say all of this in the context that I'm not a McD hater. He's done a hell of a good job over multiple seasons. He's not perfect - no coach is - but hopefully the Bills will earn/get some breaks this year and get to the promised land. I'd be curious as to how many people on this board wished we had a coach "like Nick Siriani" over the last couple of years ago, and how they feel about that now. I admit that I had some thoughts that it might be great to have a young, brash, aggressive coach versus the more traditional/conservative style of coach in McDermott, but after the last 7 weeks, I'm good with what we have. Ask me again in a month.

When I saw it in real time, I thought it was a penalty for sure. When I saw it on replay, it did not look like a foul. I used to be of the mindset that I didn't want my team to benefit from any bad calls - I wanted to win without any questions or doubts. As I get older, I realize how many bad calls have gone against the Bills, and that people may or may not remember a bad call, but they will always remember who came out on top. So, if this was a bad call, I'll definitely take it! Also, as to officiating yesterday, I think the first fumble that was reversed in the Bills' favor was an incomplete pass, so a bad call in the the Bills' favor, but the second one that was not reversed was a terrible call. The player fumbled in bounds, it was not touched by anyone who was out of bounds before touching it, and it was recovered in bounds. I don't see any rationale for that not being ruled a fumble. I think it was a makeup call for the questionable one earlier. I hosted a bunch of people for the game including some noisy children (mine), so I couldn't hear the explanation given by the referee or the follow-up commentary.

When Dodson went down, I expected this move to happen. It makes all the sense in the world. Klein knows the system and has played OK in spots. And he was available. I'd rather have Klein than a guy with more athletic ability who doesn't know the system. He was not signed to be a developmental project. He's insurance and might just suit up this week, given the fact the the opponent is likely to run the ball this week and the Bills are down 2 LBs (if you include Milano along with Dodson).

I'm thinking days....

I am not in favor of adding an 18th game. I was against 17. That said, if the did go to 18, I agree with your suggestions.

No doubt. This is exactly what I was thinking should have been called on the 4th and long 1 (which I stated in a different thread).