MPT

So why is it that you say Tyrod is 1-6 against teams over .500 and not the Bills that are 1-6 against teams over .500? It's a cold hard fact that both sides of the ball contribute to wins and losses, but your bias doesn't even consider half of the equation.

I'd have to agree with this sentiment, although I also want to see results before I can be convinced he's the guy. I was never on board the Rex hype train because I believe that unproven bravado is basically a symptom of an inferiority complex. McDermott is definitely a refreshing personality after the last two years. Whether that results in positive change remains to be seen, but I'm back to being cautiously optimistic instead of just cautious. Hope springs eternal for Bills fans.

Can someone who is anti-Tyrod please say something that isn't completely childish? I'd love for there to be a thread where it isn't analysis vs sarcasm. Although, I have to say, between my own research and others' posts here, I am much more content with Tyrod as our QB than I was at the end of the season. There have been a lot of articles, posts, etc. that have shown our offense to be in capable hands. Whereas the arguments, or lack thereof, from the other side have shown how little substance there is behind blaming our QB for the last two seasons' disappointments. He won't light it up in the passing game, but we have an approach that is well-suited to take advantage of the weaknesses of defenses that are focused on the pass (i.e. all of them), and he's the best guy to run it. Other teams have to cater their game plan for two of our offensive weapons (three if Sammy is healthy), and that's no small achievement. It takes a lot of talent and skill to average more yards per scramble than most QB's yards per pass attempt, and it takes a lot of preparation and knowledge (and balls) to pull the football out of a HOF running back's hands and take it yourself when the defense shows an opportunity. Yes, they had stretches of ineptitude. But (surprise!) that generally came when we were missing our #1 and/or #2 WR, our #1 and/or #2 RB, or our #1 TE. Yes, I want to see an improvement in reads and progression. Yes, I want to see a quicker release. Yes, I want to see fewer sacks. But you know what? Even with those weaknesses, and a whole lot of injuries to passing targets, we did pretty well on offense. So, I'm hoping the new coaching staff can make some improvements in the passing game and a whole lot of improvements on defense. And I'm going to go out on a limb and say that's probably exactly what they're working on, and in those proportions. Hey, it can't be any worse than the Ryan bros, right? ... Right?

Would you apply that logic to the Colts or Saints? Disclaimer: not saying Tyrod is better than either of those QB's. Just suggesting that maybe the other guys on the team are a little important too.

Don't have time to look at more numbers vs playoff / non-playoff teams right now, but our defense in 2014 gave up an average of 18.1 pts/g and only gave up 24+ pts 3 times (37 to the Pats, 24, and 26). With that defense and this past year's offense, a 12+ win season is very plausible. So, while I realize that the 2014 defense is beyond what we can hope to achieve this year, this offense does have what it takes to be a contender. Hopefully they only get better with the reintroduction of Sammy and the addition of Jones.

"Far from terrible"? "Good enough"? And using actual facts too? What a fanboy!

Offense vs playoff teams: 23.7 ppg Offense vs non-playoff teams: 27.9 ppg Defense vs playoff teams: 28.4 ppg Defense vs non-playoff teams: 18.6 ppg Sorry, I couldn't hear you. Which part of the team only did well against terrible teams? I didn't include the last game for obvious reasons. I did include the first Patriots game, even though no statistician or rational football fan would, just because I knew you'd cry if I didn't. By the way, without that game, the numbers look like this: Offense vs playoff teams: 25.0 ppg Defense vs playoff teams: 33.1 ppg Yikes! Well, that certainly doesn't look good for you. I'll be awaiting your concession.

I'm a lot more polite before enduring an onslaught of mis-quotes, misinformation, and general douchebaggery. It quickly became apparent that you weren't willing to debate the topic in an adult manner, so I didn't have any qualms mocking your inane obstinance.

In that scenario, they didn't get any points and they didn't get very many yards. That kind of undermines your argument that "yards are not yards" and "points are not points." What you really mean is "not yards are not yards" and "not points are not points." Which is obvious, but still somehow beyond your comprehension. You see, you can't completely fabricate a hypothetical situation in which the Bills don't score any points and then use it as evidence that they don't score points. It's a fallacy, and it's nonsense.

Can you even read, or do you just kinda guess what people say and then mash your keyboard until you're tired? If you're going to quote me, make sure it doesn't say the exact words I claimed it did. Maybe you should call Beane and tell him to sign Matt Ryan. Then you wouldn't have to B word and moan about our QB incessantly. There must be some reason we haven't signed him, though. Can't fathom what it would be. Still blaming the offense for the defense's ineptitude.

You don't win arguments by being snarky and obtuse, sir. When you lead the league in rushing and you're almost last in rushing defense, the clock is always running. This results in lower scores for each team. So, the fact that the Bills still had a top ten offense in points scored and still had an "average" defense in points scored should put to bed any misconceptions about each side's efficacy. I mean, just think about the fact that we led the league in rushing (better than the #2 by a ridiculous margin of .5 yds/carry and 15 yds/game) and we were STILL 25th in time of possession. Think about the fact that there were 4 games total in which a single running back rushed for 200 yards last season, and the Bills were the victim of 3 of them. These are indicators of a defensive failure of historic proportions. You want to ignore these facts and the fact that the Bills were top ten in scoring? Fine, go right ahead. But don't expect anyone to take you seriously.

16th in points against. Average. 29th in rushing yards against. Atrocious.

Actually, I said the other teams "put up more." That's the part we have to fix. Because we are already putting up enough on offense. Curious: how bad does the defense have to be before you lay any responsibility at their feet? Do we even need to field a defense, or should our offense be able to put up more points no matter what? Let me put it another way... If you're running a business, and that business is generating more revenue than most of your competitors but bleeding expenses faster than most, which area do you focus on to improve your bottom line? Seems pretty f'in obvious, eh?

Well one of us has to tell it like it is. Still blaming the offense for the defense's ineptitude. A question mark would be an improvement. At least then, instead of certain defeat, there would be some games against good teams we'd actually have a chance of winning.

And yet, despite countless posts with endless stats and evidence showing the Bills put up points against good teams, you still think the defense wasn't the problem. Exactly. Other teams had to fight back. We put up points, but the good teams always put up more. That's a reflection of the defense, not the offense. The first bolded is simply not true. The rushing stats were generally spectacular against good teams as well as bad teams. You don't end up with the #1 rushing attack by only doing it against bad teams. As for the second bolded, I whole heartedly agree. I was really hoping we'd use the last game of the season in 2016 by putting Tyrod to the test in the passing game instead of wasting it on EJ. If we can be a little more consistent with the passing game and improve our defense to even average levels, we'll be a very good team.

It's average. What's your point?

No love for Eric Wood? I would probably go with either Kyle or Eric. McCoy might get consideration. He has been an enthusiastic representative for Buffalo and is a stud besides. My last jersey was Freddie, and that still feels like a solid purchase. Kyle and Eric are probably the only guys on the current team who have Freddie status.

Tyrod had the 7th highest QBR in the league inside the red zone. He was also tied for 4th in QB rushing TDs inside the red zone. Not too shabby. Actually, I don't think anyone has ever made that claim. You just interpret "Tyrod is an integral part of a top-ten offense and doesn't turn the ball over" as "TYROD IS THE BEST QB IN THE LEAGUE." It's understandable why you'd be arguing against that point, but nobody is making it, so...

First of all, 16th is exactly average. Second of all, field position is a special teams statistic. We had a kicker who couldn't kick the ball through the end zone on kickoffs and a punter who finished dead last in yards per punt in the league (he also tied for first in punts out of bounds and 32nd in longest punt). I am eagerly awaiting the day you blame Tyrod for Carpenter's missed field goals and extra points. Really should have lined up for a 2 point conversion, drawn the defense offside, and then Carpenter would only have to kick a 20 yard extra point instead of a 25 yard extra point. Stupid Tyrod! Actually, I have no idea what would happen in that scenario involving offside during a 2 point conversion and then switching to an extra point. Would be an interesting factoid. Anyway, you get the point. Well, probably not. But, point made.

The best ways to help out a defense are running the football and scoring points. The offense did both of those things very well.

Doesn't the fact that you have to embellish facts to support your position make you wonder about the veracity of said position? BTW, I wouldn't advise using that that particular embellishment with the ladies. It can only end in disappointment.

Ha

Not sure why you guys have so much trouble grasping this, but there is no QB on the planet that could have gotten Sammy 1500 yards. Why? Because he wasn't on the field. And if Flacco, with Steve Smith Sr. and Mike Wallace (neither of whom even sniffed 1500 yards), couldn't get to the playoffs with a top ten defense, what in the world makes you think he could do it with a bottom ten defense and a bunch of practice squad receivers?

The fact that you referenced that article when you thought it supported your argument and then called it "flawed" when you realized your mistake really says everything about your ability to have a rational conversation about the matter. Never said they were. Deflecting is a pathetic tactic. Funny. You don't seem to have learned a thing.

Speculation based on facts is valuable. Speculation based on bias is not.