Avisan

Okay, but we don't need to beat the Pats or Eagles to make the playoffs.

Shocked at the number of people who think the Bills have at least a 5% chance to lose out, including dropping games to both the Browns and the Jets.

I would add Saints and first Dolphins game as games that probably could have been won with Mitch under center. 5-8 with no Allen and our defensive injuries (functionally missing like 40% of our contract investments) seems pretty reasonable tbh, we'd be a lot like the Bengals have been this year but slightly better imo.

No, this seems pretty accurate. I think barring an injury to Josh, missing the playoffs would be a red flag. And the argument is less "it could always be worse", and more "no seriously guys, it's statistically likely to be worse and we're likely to waste multiple years of Allen's career confirming that it's worse".

I don't think he's shown he isn't capable. We got absolutely hosed on ball spotting last year in the AFCCG, and there are some pretty interesting statistical analyses demonstrating that the Chiefs get favorable penalty calls specifically in the postseason. I think last year would have been the Bills getting seal clubbed by the Eagles were it not for the ball spotting shenanigans. If we get bounced out of the wild card round due to coaching blunders I'll sing a different tune.

Yeah, he had a pretty rock-solid defense at the time and Sanchez played to his max potential for a hot minute. Then his defense got figured out and he's a blowhard that couldn't adjust. So now he's out of the league. Better team performance despite functionally a tank year where they instead made the playoffs and worse quarterbacking than his predecessors is a pretty reasonable indication of higher quality, yes. I'm not sure which is worse, constantly making provably wrong statements or (allegedly) going to all of the effort to know the correct information and then posting deliberately wrong things so that you can... gotcha somebody that points out that you're saying things that aren't true? "I was only pretending to not know what I'm talking about" isn't the gotcha you think it is, chief

Rex Ryan was coach of the Bills for two years and managed a 8-8 and 7-8 season (fired before wek 17) following a 9-7 Doug Marrone season. McDermott was 9-7, 6-10 (5-6 with Allen playing and winning literally every game that Allen managed a passer rating above 80), and 10-6 in his first three years. He was already above .500 before Allen became a consistently good QB. Tyrod Taylor provided the Bills significantly better QB play than Allen by both passer rating and QBR prior to Allen's 2020 season, and the 2017 season with Tyrod was when he had become pretty figured out and started to decline both statistically and by the eyeball test. TL;DR-- Your statement is factually incorrect.

It's not a particularly subtle parallel. I address it explicitly in my response. Most coaches aren't anything special. McVay is special. Belichick was special until the game passed him by. McDermott is very good, though, and plenty capable of winning a Superbowl if the cards line up right. Welcome to football; that's how it is for the 30 to 31 out of 32 teams that aren't a dynasty at any given point in time. Peterman did win, though. And very clearly so. Unfortunately, live bullets in the NFL are way faster than the preseason version and Peterman doesn't have the ability to make that jump. There's a reason he's had a long and (relatively) lucrative career as a #3 QB, though. The man has made like 8 million dollars to hold a clipboard and be excellent in the QB room despite not having the physical talent to see meaningful play at the pro level.

I mean Mike McCarthy was a very good head coach for a solid stretch in there, he fell off hard after the 2016 season with 4 out of 7 seasons below .500 and poor postseason showings as head coach of the Cowboys. I think McDermott is more adaptable than McCarthy and more likely to make changes when not getting desired results. McCarthy failed to adjust as the game evolved and does not come across as a particularly strong leader of men. The Bills under McDermott are resilient and players vocally like playing for the team, even after having left the Bills. If McDermott's Bills start posting sub-.500 regular season records and/or start getting regularly bounced out of the Wild Card round with prime Allen playing, I'll be fully on board with him getting fired and a new regime getting brought in.

We're a consistent contender with Allen, but we're still a perennial playoff team with a top 10 QB and a #1 WR, and frankly it's ridiculous how much some of you insist on pretending otherwise

Yes? That's literally every media personality's job, if you don't make hyperbolic, attention-grabbing statements then you don't get views, and if you don't get views you lose your job I think it's fair to say that Allen is the main reason why we make the playoffs every single year, but not the main reason we make the playoffs generally. He has the second-highest contract AAV, so he's going to get "less help" than ~30 other QBs by default. Them's the breaks. The fact that he's better than his peers in that price range helps the team, significantly. Players like Burrow are better pure passers. Players like Lamar are more dangerous dual-threats. Allen being the complete package is extraordinarily helpful to the team. This is still a playoff roster with Sam Darnold and a 30 million dollar receiver instead of Allen and Josh Palmer, though. The defense, OL, and RBs are good enough to regularly make the playoffs with merely "good" QB play and a true #1 wideout.

Talking heads that are paid to stir the pot stir the pot, news at 11

Coaches of 9-4 teams are of course notorious for requiring fall guys

If we win out, just Jets or Dolphins over the Pats is needed. We would win on Conference record tiebreaker.

No.