Drunken Pygmy Goat

As it should be.

You have no clue how much Marcel "wants it". He did talk about Waufle recently though. You should check it out. Lame

This is madness! I never expressed any kind of undying love for Peterman. None of what you said has any relevance to the question I asked. I'll rephrase what I said; I hope the coaches keep players based off of performance and potential, instead of worrying about fallout from fans.

This is where I'm at as well. However, the back and forth bickering between people on opposite sides will continue until a Bills QB hoists the Lombardi trophy. I would guess that most Bills fans would rather have Andy Dalton at QB rather than Taylor. But even though he's made the playoffs several times, the Bengals haven't won any of those games, and he's usually scrutinized for it. I'm sure there are back and forth conversations on Bengals message boards from homers and critics. It's been like this a few times in the last 17 years. We've had QB that, over the course of a couple of seasons, have shown us reason for optimism, and reason to be skeptical at the same time. That's where we're at with Taylor. Each individual situation may be different, but letting things play out is really the only thing left to do when every last topic and detail has been beaten to death by fans. There have been plenty of facts presented to support the case for both side with Taylor, and even though beauty is in the eye of the beholder sometimes, we now just need more evidence to make a better conclusion.

Nice work transplant and Scott. You think the coaches are going to cut a guy because of the fans, and not because of what they see?

Haha, I thought I was the only one that noticed. I'm also trying to figure out what a loose game is.

Thanks, Hokie!

We've seen him do it, so I wouldn't rule out converting 3rd and long completely, but "confident" is probably a bit generous. Some of those were with his legs, and Woods was a nice blocking WR. But I agree with you. Bills were 13th last season in 3rd down conversion percentage, so they weren't terrible. I'd like to see the 3rd and short rankings. You would think the better rushing teams in the league are at the top of that list.

People are getting way too hung up on the 3 and out stuff. First of all, football is a team sport. 3 and out percentages shouldn't reflect on the QB ONLY. When the **Pats go 3 and out, do we automatically place the blame on Tom Brady? No. The QB is responsible, as is the WR(s), RB/FB, TEs, linemen, and coaches. And I'm not one to take away certain things that happened in order to paint a different picture, statistically, but I get where transplant is coming from. 25th to 14th is a nice improvement. Perhaps that was due in large to a change in approach by Lynn. But the improved number also shouldn't reflect on the QB only. Team sport.

True, but that interest grew rapidly over the last 6 or 7 years. I'm sure Kroenke wasn't totally opposed to staying in St. Louis, and on the surface, it at least appears like he did "all he could" to keep the team there, but no one needs to move. They do it for the money, and the majority of league owners agreed with the relocation. It really is screwed up how the league and the owners have the kind of leverage that they do. Even Ralph threatened to move the Bills to Seattle, which resulted in the construction of Rich Stadium. I don't think the Bills will ever leave Buffalo, at this point. I know that sounds a bit foolish, when you consider the fact that cities like Baltimore, Houston, Cleveland, and L.A., have all lost teams in the past, and soon to be Oakland once again, but where would the Bills move to at this point? Oklahoma City? That doesn't really seem like a "NFL football" town to me, but who knows, I guess. San Antonio? Austi may be close by, but is more of a college town, and Texas already has 2 teams. Where else is left? Portland? Vegas is off the table now. Toronto?...nah

Twilight Zone Solid article, BTW. Do the other two fazes of the team play any role, or just Taylor and the offense?

IMO, Kroenke was enamoured with the idea of moving to L.A. Fan interest had been rapidly growing in L.A. for several years. And money is different out there compared to St. Louis.

It was hard to watch. That's why Dawkins was drafted, and the staff certainly hopes he can start sooner than later. Maybe that gives him a bit of an edge.

You would think the people in charge would have the length of the new stadium's lease coincide with the length of the loan. I think it's usually around 30 years. That way, if a team wants to move after 30 years, all debts will be paid in full.

Same here. Taxing hotel and rental car transactions tends to have more financial impact on out-of-towners than it does locals. The league has the G4 program (for now, at least). The Pegulas may pay for it, or a major portion. It would be nice to hear some news on the subject, even if the plan is to retrofit New Era Field, but I don't think we're going to hear anything for another couple of years.

Only difference is I think Dawkins/Mills is closer to 50/50. Dawkins will need to be at least on the same level as Mills, otherwise the coaches may go with the more experienced Mills until Dawkins shows the improvement. Also, I think the #2 TE position will be a close, important competition, and I think O'Leary will win the battle.

Exactly. Now, it's just a matter of who they plan to hire, what exactly the focus will be, and will we see or notice an difference in strategy as a result.

It sounds like everyone in this thread is saying the same thing, differently. There's much more to analytics than just "situational football" data. The Bills started tracking players in camp a few years ago to see how much running they had done over a period of time, and would make decisions on rest based off of the data. Things like that would fall in the analytics category, I believe. I have no idea if they still do that, but if hey are adding to the department, I assume they will focus on things like that,as well as in game data. As far as in game stuff goes, I think it make a lot of sense to utilize analytics, or any advantageous method that you can. But I think most people realize that it's definitely not so "cut and dry", and I don't think an NFL head coach will get to that level by simply using analytics to get ahead. As someone else said, sometimes you go off of gut feeling when you're offensive line is dominating a game and go for that 4th and short. Analytics takes a back seat to logic, and NFL coaches feel out a game, in several aspects. When your top wide out is playing on another level than the opponent all game, logic tells you to incorporate him into the game plan more as the game progresses (we all saw what happened when the Bills stopped targeting Sammy against KC a couple years ago, and how that turned out :/ ). Or if the opponent is showing weakness in certain areas as the game progresses, logic tells you to focus your attack on those areas more so than maybe the game plan had suggested going into the game. There's no spreadsheet for those kinds of things. But it wouldn't hurt to have some data at hand to at least help you make a more educated decision in certain areas. I spoke with a college coach (Pioneer League) a couple of years ago about different things, and analytics was one of them. He started off by saying that a coach has about 5 seconds from the time the whistle blows to make a play call decision for the next play (in most scenarios). In a game where communication and organization play such an important role (and again, we all saw the negative side of that with the previous regime, although I don't think that was analytics driven as much as Rex being a bafoon and over thinking things), he didn't sound too fond of making decisions based more off of analytics, as opposed to gut feeling. His position was that successful coaches get to the level they are by making calculated decisions based on the way a game is "playing out", while also making calculated decisions based on the variables in play in a given situation. He told me that, aside from the "element of surprise" moments, a good coach knows when to take risks and when not to, and that too often coaches tend to overthink things when they feel like they need to win a "chess match", if that makes sense. They either gamble too much at the wrong moment, or are too conservative in the wrong moment, and that making a mistake in those moments often is the difference in a tight game. I never really got a defined answer from him, as it was a short snippet of our conversation and I wasn't too concerned about it at the time), but what I think he was telling me is that analytics can be helpful in some cases, but they cannot replace experience, and that a good coach makes decisions based off of "what he knows". A seasoned coach will have been through many of those crucial moments in games where you have to make a tough decision, and will remember the outcomes of those decisions and incorporate that into future decisions. Yeah, it's a fine mixture. Good coaches know how to balance. Billichik was mentioned earlier. One thing that I think coaches like him and Carroll do is "feel out" the officiating crew. This may be a bit different of an example, as opposed to situational football stuff, but they tend to push the limits of the crew earlier in games to see what knd if game they'll be calling. Once they get an idea of what is being tolerated, they adjust their aggression is some aspects in order to ride the thin line of what's a penalty and what's not on that day. That's good observation on their part, but I also assume that part of it is analytic driven. The coaches and analytics department can see how frequently an officiating crew throws flags on average, as well as games where they've officiated your team specifically in the past, and use that as a guideline going into each particular game. "Analytics" is much more than meets the eye, than what the typical detractors seem to realize. It's certainly not as definitive as it is in baseball or hockey, but useful nonetheless.

This doesn't work anymore, I guess... sorry. Good thing I switched to DirecTV in April.

That's my guess as well, but more from a statistical standpoint. I think they'll be about as efficient as they have been. Hopefully part of the dip in stats is partially the result of an improved passing attack, not just attributed to "regression".

It's pretty sad, the lengths some people will go to, to try and convince others that their hate driven theories are correct. I love football, and love the Bills. With that being said, I'll never let my personal obsessions cloud my vision or perception of reality. For many fans, if a player isn't a future Hall of Famer or All-Pro, he sucks. Some people nit pick way too much. For example, Jerry Hughes has been known to jump offsides more often than we'd like. It can get frustrating, but some people tend to blow that way out of proportion, and judge him more off of that as opposed to the total body of work. Part of what makes him a good player is his jump off the snap, and sometimes as a result, he jumps early. Bruce Smith used to get flagged for jumping early all the time, because he was trying to time his jump off the snap. Now obviously I'm not going to compare Hughes to Smith, because Bruce certainly made up for those penalties by becoming the all time sack leader, but that was part of his game, just like Hughes. A third of a second is a long time when trying to get to the QB before he throws, and that early jump could be the difference between a sack, a hurry, or not coming close to the QB. I guess what I'm trying to say is that some fans take things way too seriously sometimes, and hold some weird grudges against certain players. Tyrod Taylor may not be a QB that can carry his team to a championship, but he's definitely not as bad as some people make him out to be. His play is far more positive than negative, and with a competent defense, he can play well enough and smart enough to make the playoffs, IMO. Too often, people look at stats when judging, rather than efficiency. My apologies for getting off topic here.

I think you're right. One thing for sure is that Rogers' was "off" that day...for his standards. That was a great stretch of 3 games for our pass D.

Regardless of their reasoning, anyone that defends the defense if the last 2 years should not be taken seriously. Taylor may have some issues, but if the defense had performed close to a top 10 unit these last 2 years, the Bills would have been in the playoff discussion in the end. Taylor and the offense would have been "good enough". Every (non-dilusional) fan knows this. The only thing that will hold this defense back from improvement over last year will be injuries, IMO.

I think you're right. He is a monster on ST coverage, and keeping his legs fresh at his age will be important. Our other LBs are much younger, and if a player goes down, Alexander would be a nice replacement.

Defense played well, but there were several dropped passes IIRC, including a would be touchdown to Nelson. The Bills did just enough that day on offense. They were aided by a punt return TD. To say that they deserved to win that day is probably a bit generous, but they did enough in the end to seal the deal.