Rochesterfan

Sorry, but the rules changed with the new kickoff rules. If the ball on a kickoff touches the ground in the end zone without being touched - it is now a touchback regardless of where it hit the ground first. It can hit at the 10 and bounce into the end zone and it is a touchback - like a punt. The Bills/Jets kickoff would be a touchback today. They updated the rule. The ball is ruled dead the moment it hits the ground in the end zone. In the original Bills/Jets game because no Bill touched it outside of the end zone - if Gillislee had recovered it in the end zone - it would have been a touchback not a safety. It would only have been a safety if aBills player muffed the kickoff in the field of play and the ensuing momentum put the ball in the end zone where a Bills player would have recovered it. I would love to see a collection of every touchback this season - because I swear I have seen the exact same thing several times - guy catches the ball and just tosses it to the ref. It is nearly impossible to look for touchbacks though because it is such a boring play. I assumed because they do not show much of the kickoffs - on these deep kicks if they signal the refs and catch it - the play was over, but what I do not know is if they talked about that. The referee on the field obviously thought it was a live ball - so he did not believe it was giving up, but as with all rule changes - maybe he was living in the past for a second.

The players should feel bad and angry and quite frankly ticked, but not the fans. The fans should be their to show their support to get through and that we care (that is why the fans that travel is so important). Based upon the comments of the players - they get it - they understand and need to grow and get better. To a man it sounded like they were angry and taking this to heart. It will make them better and stronger. The fans going or not going does nothing to condone or detract from the feelings - it is a chance to say thank you one last time and hopefully show support to guys in red, white, and blue.

So in other words - don’t do what worked. Change your game plan to something you have not done. Sounds like a plan to lose - do what you do and only get aggressive when you have to.

I said this in another thread - I just do not understand why Buffalo got to be the butt of every joke, but Cleveland that has now matched the streak and compiled a significantly worse record during that time - skated by. I always hate to wish ill will on another fan base, but I hope for our sake this goes at least one more year - so Cleveland can own it.

This is an excellent point. I guess my question is at what point do you know that and how is it determined. My guess is that the Bills will not cut him during the off-season unless they are sure they have upgraded (see Clowney, etc.) and they need the money. I believe he goes into training camp as part of a rotation with Hughes, Johnson, a new draft pick, and maybe whatever DE they sign or re-sign (ex Lawson). I expect that one of the higher priced veterans (Murphy or Hughes) will be released at cut down depending on the talent and play, but I suspect they will let them battle it out in preseason- in case of injury. I do not think they want to create a hole until they are sure it is filled. The other thought is if they feel Eddie got better on the PS - and think he is capable of filling Lawson’s rotation - then maybe you cut Murphy and shoot for a top end FA, but I feel they would rather play it safe with the known than risk getting someone top end that doesn’t fit the 1 of 11 and creates attitude. I think they would prefer to find that high end - elite talent in the draft and mold him into their system.

This is a terrible take - it is hugely different than game 4 of the preseason. Game 4 of the preseason- you still have 90 players on the roster - you have more than enough players to sit both your starters and back-ups. This game you had your regular roster. You do not have enough players to sit more than a small handful of starters. They do not have enough players to sit both Tre and Wallace. Now why have JA play a series or two - no idea, but Wallace was playing no matter what - with Tre sitting they only had 3 CBs left at that point and ended up needing McKenzie to play CB for a series.

I’ll bite - if we were a higher offense and a worse defense - like in the Rex years - I suspect that we would be missing the playoffs or have little shot at winning anything - much like the Chiefs that keep getting it handed to them in the playoffs - hence their push for defensive players this off-season. 300 yard games mean nothing that has been shown in each of your other poor threads. It is a stupid stat, but for some reason it is the only one you keep coming back too. Also I think we need to get you a better thesaurus to understand “supporter” - not sure it is being used correctly. Frankly if the team was a top offense and a bottom defense - I would not be happy with the team. I do not find teams like KC with a better than average offense and a poor defense to be fun to watch. I would much prefer a top end defense and a mid level offense. I think defense travels better and works better in all weather and most importantly wins when it comes to the playoffs. So I guess in the end - if things were switched - I think we are a worse team in general and I think our chances of success would be worse. I will take JA completing 60-65% of his passes for 220 yards and let the defense lead this team because I think that gives them the best chance at both short term and long term success. Think Baltimore here rather than KC. More running and defense and less shoot outs.

I totally disagree that it is not in question- it appears that it is not in question for you, but as many other are pointing out - in your very thread and you seem to be happy to ignore - they do not feel he is very conservative and he has been changing with the team. Many of us see a guy that has been constantly changing and his tendencies have changed with the team as it grows. Year 1 he was conservative - with a very bad offense and a questionable defense. Year 2 as JA became more accomplished as a rookie - he became more aggressive- going for it more and punting less - especially as he got past mid field. This year the offense is marginally better and he has been more aggressive yet. He is middle of the pact for 4th down attempts - which most definitely is a sign of aggression - especially for defensive HCs. He runs both hurry up and regular offenses - so he is not overly conservative with his style. I agree he does not step on the throat of the other team, but the offense still has a ways to go (it is the weakness of the team). He has tried a few times and things have not gone well. I think he is working the long game on this and would rather hoist the burden on the more experienced and consistent defense than put JA and the offense in a bad position. I think you have made up your mind and although many others have presented various facts of how he has changed- you are choosing to believe he is a finished product. I am not convinced that is the case. I think he will continue to grow along with this team and they are becoming better together. He is working hard to do what he feels is in the best interest of the team and sometimes that is different than what the fans think.

Totally agree - He calls McDermott conservative with no real definition, but then argues with no good reason why others are not. It is a poorly thought out premise with no basis in reality. McDermott is not overly conservative or aggressive by any measure. He goes for it on 4th down as much or more than others. He tries for TDs rather than FGs as shown by their Redzone TD percents and going for it on the goal line. His run to pass ratio does not lean overly conservative and we have had games where the team starts out with 10-15 passes right from the get go. Definitely not conservative. His defense is a zone based defense meaning he wants to flood zones, but he mixes up the defenses and attacks and blitzes in a normal way. It is not overly conservative - nor is it super aggressive. The biggest thing to me is how we completely miss the changes in his coaching and people are still basis things off his first year. McDermott started off with a weak team and was much more conservative. He had a bad QB in Taylor that he did not trust and did not instill confidence in the passing game. He kicked lots of FGs and punted on almost all 4th downs. It lead to blowouts, but he understood the team was weak and even when getting blown out he stayed conservative. Now he is a totally different coach. He trusts JA more and has been rewarded more - so he goes for more 4th downs and punts less. He passes more and has one of the better Red Zone scoring teams. He has 2 WRs that are putting up career years. Do not make up your mind on whether McDermott is conservative or not - he is evolving as his players grow and change. My guess is if the offense gets 1-2 more players this off-season and are a bit more explosive- he becomes more aggressive. Now do I believe he is going to be Doug Pederson level aggressive - Nope, but everything points to him continuing to move above the middle of the pack as the team becomes better. Now the final thing on this thread - many types of coaches win Super Bowls and sometimes they are conservative and sometimes aggressive, but the problem is that successful coaches that are conservative- do not get labeled that way. Lombardi was ultra conservative at the end of the conservative era, but it worked for his team. Marv - even with the no huddle- was super conservative. The offensive philosophy does not change his coaching style. Doug Pederson is super aggressive, but it backfires on him on several occasions, but was enough to win at the biggest time. BB - like McDermott - falls squarely in the middle and was more aggressive at times and has been more conservative at other times. There is no one right way - you need to have the proper feel of your team and push the right buttons at the right time.

I guess my real question is about your expectations in performing for him versus let’s say Zay Jones or McKenzie. All 3 guys averaged about 2 Catches or less per game. They averaged between 7 and 10 yards per catch. The biggest difference is McKenzie can play special teams and is used for running plays and Duke is not. Duke played in 3 games and after an initial good game - he had 1 catch in each of his next 2 games. It is not like they benched a guy getting 5 - 10 catches a game. He also gives them nothing else except receiver play - so you lose something from both Foster and McKenzie going to the bench. I am fine if they want to use him, but please do not act like he was some kind of playmaker they benched. His stats are not better than the guys currently playing and he gives them less flexibility when playing.

I absolutely hear what you are saying, but I will wait to pass judgement. The biggest difference between this game and the 4th preseason game is roster size. The Bills May be able to rest some starters, but remember there are very limited replacements at the moment and you figure some guys with injuries are already probably going to be out - Morse, Nsekhe. You also have guys like Hughes and Liuget with some minor injuries that you may or may not sit. That leaves very few people you can just sit. I would rather see them get some of the starters ready and then take them out - rather than be forced to play them with little prep time. I would also prefer to see the majority of starters together to best protect individual players and then get them all out. I would hope that back-ups see 1/2 to 3/4 of the game, but remember they are not regularly playing more than a few snaps - so conditioning and timing come into play.

It would be a good idea, but the refs still have to determine the exact moment the runner is down. You also have issues depending upon which way the ball is being held and where the sensors are located. It could help a small bit, but unless you have sensors all over the players and the ball - you are still going to get bad spots.

Even if he is talking about that (which he is not) - let’s be fair. 3 runs for 5 yards is partially accurate as one run was for 4 yards - a perfectly fine drive start. The other two were bad. You also need to consider that during one of these drives on first down after a conversion - we had an 11 yard run. So after taking the lead on first down we ran the ball 4 times for 16 yards is that fair to say? You can also consider the fact that on the other first down plays we threw 2 incompletions and got a 5 yard penalty. So it is not like passing on 1st and ten got you into 2nd and short.

This is total bull and completely irrelevant. This Bills and Pats team are both nearly equal, but the Pats had a better record against common opponents - so it is no surprise both games were close. This “so called” worst Pats team is the AFC #2 seed and has only lost 3 games to division champs - it is not like they are the Bengals. They boast a top defense and special teams unit. They are far from the worst Pats team during this run, but go ahead.

Actually look at the first down plays and you will see that you are totally and completely wrong, but why should that matter. For the games on first down the Bills ran 10 times and dropped back to pass 11 times (one was a sack). So they actually passed more on first down than ran. Whoops. In addition - the run mix yielded 4 runs on first down of 5 yards or more and 5 runs of 1 yard or less. I am not sure what you expect, but considering they had good balance on 1st down plays between run and pass and considering half of the 1st down runs were for over 3 yards - why should he go away. Yes it would be great if the 5 carries of 1 yard or less went away, but before the play you do not know which plays are going to work and which are not and the facts remain Daboll called a very balanced and did not fall into an unimaginative place - you are just clouded by a faulty memory of the game.

So true. The Browns I think would have been 100 x better if they had retained Williams as HC and Kitchens as OC. Now the Jets are in the same boat. Let it sink!

It is multi fold for reasons it works, but first yes the offense and defense can sub. The first thing is usually teams try to set up their best play for that situation- so you gain info about what formation and players they want in that situation- plus whether they call motion or not. The second thing is you can see how the offense reacts when you show pressure or drop off - so you know a little better what they are going to do to allow you later on to scheme a package. It has a chance to be a win/win for McDermott - if they switch personnel- they are going away from their top play for that situation- plus you get info to use for a later package when you see that set-up again. It is just a totally different perspective on coaching because of his defensive background. He has much more varied attacks coming from his defensive plans and as long as they are ahead - he likes the knowledge it provides to the staff to use timeouts in that situation.

What I do not get - with the Browns missing the playoffs this year they have now matched where we were in the number of straight years without a playoff appearance. 2002 - 2020 for Cleveland, but that is still all they ever talk about for the Bills - even now that we are going to the playoffs 2 out of 3 years - the power rankings make a dig at this being the 2nd trip in the last 2 decades. Why is that a Bills only narrative- it should move to the Browns - especially as they have the worst win percentage of the last decade and since they returned to the league and now have missed the playoffs for just as long as the Bills did. Somehow the Browns got all the hype and the media is pushing an old narrative and it really stinks. They could even focus on the Bucs or Jets as those are pushing a decade plus since their last appearance.

Looks like a pretty good tackle. He did similar things against Landry in the Cleveland game on a WR screen. For a smallish DB - he is a fine tackler. IMO - If you ask me which is better - this thread or Wallace at tackling - I give the nod to Wallace 100 times out of 100 - even with the miss on Conners.

Disagree. He may be a weak link on one of top defenses in the NFL, but tackling is not his major issue. At his size - he is a much better tackler than Johnson - his 1st round drafted partner. Where Levi has issues is with his overall athletic ability. The play is question was not a whiffed tackle because he can’t tackle - it was his lack of acceleration and a poor angle that got him to a point where Conners had already beat him and he couldn’t make a play. He has failed to wrap up running backs a few times, but Johnson also has whiffed on several tackles. In coverage - he has to back off a bit more because he does not have the top end speed or the size and therefore can not make the plays of a Tre White, but he works well in this defense working to keep guys in front and making the tackle - preventing big plays. He rarely misses his tackles on his WR and generally wraps up and gets them to the ground. Where his issue really show up is in space especially against RBs because he is a step slow to the meeting point and RBs in general are hard for DBs to bring down 1 on 1. We have seen it with White also - missing and not being in the right spot. We see it against it also with Singletary making LBs and DBs miss in the open field.

That’s 3 for Brees - hoping for 1 more and we can hold Brady down.

Just amazing - totally fearless!

Hate this (bold) - then you get even more phantom calls at the worst time. For example - the last Int - if you watch Edmunds gets his hands to the face of the Pittsburgh OL. If the NFL could review - we all would be sitting there celebrating when - whoops he comes a call to overturn the play. Mistakes happen - let it go and move on. Give me much less replay and I am happier. Especially give me less of NFL heads having any say at all - give it to a sanctioned official if you must - at the game, but keep NY and the NFL out of it. I have no issue with McDermott this game. The Bills near halftime had 3 time outs, but were at their 10 and had just gotten the ball back on a Turn-over after their turn over. Take the lead and go into the half - don’t make another mistake like the Philly game that costs you. I do not understand how the fans that do not get this. The Philly game, the NYG game, the Bills drive just before this that in Pittsburgh- etc. The Bills have had a high percentage of turn overs in that situation and it has cost them at least 1 game and without amazing defense the same could have happened in Pittsburgh or against the Giants. The end of the game was the right call - the phantom hold ruined everything. The Steelers should have gotten the ball with about 30 seconds needing 75-80 yards. Running was the right call - they just cannot hold.

That is what they were doing - they showed a run to set-up what could have been a TD. The Steelers played great defense and did not bite on our tendencies. Why was that not going for the jugular? They played to a known tendency and tried a play off from that - that against a lesser coached defense is a TD. Why is it brilliant when teams like Houston and NE try these plays, but for Buffalo - they are not going for the Jugular? I get wanting to drive it down their throat, but based upon what the Bills were running - go ahead and try it. Gore being the veteran- saw the coverage and ate it. At that point the FG was the key - so they ran a draw and made sure to tie the game. It is not like they just downed the ball in victory formation. It was a series that did not work, but at least they did not go all “duck” and have Allen try to force it for an Int. They had a plan and it didn’t work, but also did not cost them.

It was definitely a pass and the Steelers played it well with the coverage in the end zone. I have no issue with the calls because they used the first run to set up the halfback pass attempt. It was a cute play and I prefer that they just man up and make some plays, but sometimes you get an easy score because of tendencies and I think they were taking a shot to mess with their tendencies and it did not work.