Capco

At least 3 huh? Stupid *****.

Pats at least get 3 this drive. Gotta keep the offense balanced with Gore while we still have the time.

Damn it...

If he didn’t blow a challenge earlier in the game, I think he would have challenged.

No PI!?!?!?

Gore!!!!

Yessssssss!!!

Unreal.

Lol Murphy didn’t even see that sweep.

We are trying so hard but they just keep barely converting. Defense is gonna be gassed by halftime.

That was bad officiating imo, but there’s no way that gets overturned.

That was a convertable 3rd down.

Excellent man coverage is forcing Allen to hold on to the ball. Josh tends to move when that happens, and the defensive line is playing containment. It’s not really anything more complicated than that.

??????

Excellent 3 and out. Some Jauron ball by McDaniels.

The pats coverage is fantastic. Josh doesn’t have many options. Their defense is just too complete.

It’s gonna be a long game.

Missed PAT is a good thing I guess.

Just breathe Josh.

100% spot on afaik. When I was in my teens, the most I knew about offenses and formations and whatnot was pretty much predicated on Madden for a while lol. Once I began really digging into the X's and O's of football, and specifically EP, I remember thinking "Wait, so some teams motion a receiver and depending on where that receiver motions to, it can alter the OTHER receiver's routes, all at the same time?! That was the "think outside the box" moment for me and was when I really started to gain an appreciation for how creative plays in football can be. One final thought: when people say Brady is a "system" QB, this is exactly what they are referring to. People say the system makes it "easy" on Brady, and while that's true to a point, it still takes a smart, capable QB to run this highly complex offense. All the EP does is help maximize the production of those who can handle it, assuming you have the smarts on the rest of your offense to implement it. We're lucky Josh has a big arm AND a big brain.

I have a feeling this thread would be about 20 pages shorter and infinitely more readable without all the ego protecting. No one cares what anyone on the internet does for a living as long as you are anonymous. Shut the ***** up. Please. And stop responding to the people that do. It looks silly. There's a point where it's entertaining and there's a point where anyone with any semblance of self awareness would facepalm themselves to death for it. Now, my next post would probably be me declaring my omnipotence, but unfortunately I already played that card some time ago ?

I feel like BB knows this team better than some of the Bills fans and posters. Guy does his homework... damn. John Warrow's questions can get a little bit "out there". Not only that, his delivery is awful. It takes him 50 seconds stumbling over his own words to ask a yes or no question. His articles are okay, but his interviewing leaves a lot to be desired.

First and foremost, I'm saying then as now, we simply still don't know enough yet to make a determination either way, yet here we have people calling it a game at halftime when the score is tied. I honestly can't tell right now but I think there's more investigation warranted after reading the complaint. I'm also saying that I'm fairly certain most people would take the exact opposite stances regardless of their inherent hypocrisy in order to protect their egos, but that's politics. Because remember what political beliefs are: they are beliefs, which means that they are choices based on faith to some degree. When most people are confronted with a stark reality that goes against their political beliefs, they have two choices: change/modify your political beliefs and admit that you were wrong about views you deeply held, or adapt your view of reality to fit your politics. Most people don't have the ability or willpower to overcome their egos; we are human after all. This is politics. Any human being who looks at you with a straight face and tells you they're completely unbiased is one of the most self-deluding and potentially dangerous people you could meet (if they were in a position of power namely). We all have our biases because we all have a unique set of life experiences. I know most of this is obvious when spelled out, but when we get caught up in the moment we let our guard's down. For me personally, I think I would probably be leaning more on the President's side in 2011 simply because of the track records of the two up until their 3rd years in office, but in both cases I would want to see more. I think the vote in the Senate to release the transcripts would have been unanimous in 2011 as it was in 2019. I'm not ready to swallow the pill that everything in Washington is political and that the rare person who can transcend politics is no longer rare, but extinct. If that's true then we ought to scrap our whistleblower laws altogether. Also for the record, that Schiff parody was really ***** stupid. If you have good evidence you let the evidence speak for itself. That was too much of a lawyer's courtroom maneuver in front of a jury than it was a Congressperson performing oversight. We haven't transcended beyond the politics of this situation into actual justice yet. A parody like that only flies if it's BLATANTLY obvious at this point, and it's just not.

Some of you are trying to say that if this EXACT situation happened to Obama in 2011 that you (the same people rushing to Trump's defense) would also be rushing to Obama's defense as Republicans in Congress tried to use a whistleblower complaint and a transcripted phone call to impeach a duly elected president, right? Hahaha. Some of you would be jumping on this and get caught up just as hard if not harder as some of the Never-Trumpers are now. The history of Obama's presidency post 2010 midterms makes that very clear. Imagine #WalkAway referring to Republicans telling other Republicans to change party because Obama was being unfairly besmirched by the opposition at every level.

All correct as well.