ngbills

Funny you start by saying "Cleveland is not going to make the playoffs...Miami is not an easy win...and Cincinnati will probably beat them once...they have to win a game somewhere." Then go on to be critical of others saying "I mean people already are figuring out who is going to win and lose before the games are even played....doesnt work like that." That is the point of this all. Playing with who wins that game or this game and how it impacts who gets in the playoffs. That is why ESPN has the playoff machine in the first place. Obviously no one knows what will happen.

Interestingly - If you pick the better D to win each game the rest of the season by ESPN default option. Guess who makes it? Chargers...finishing 9-7 with wins over KC, JAC, MIN, OAK and KC again. Loss is to DEN. Dont see that happening but interesting nonetheless.

Browns are lowest on the list of concerns. PIT and OAK are right there though with easy schedules. Bottom line - Bills win games they should vs DEN and NYJ. Then take 2 of 4 vs PIT, BAL, NE, DAL.

CLE plays CIN x2, MIA, AZ. Those are 4 easy wins. The PIT game will be big. Then they play BAL late. They are between 10-6 and 8-8 pretty easily. PIT plays CIN, NYJ, AZ. Those should be 3 easy ones. They play BAL week 17 so BAL could have nothing to play for. Key games will be CLE and Bills games. They are between 11-5 and 9-7 quite easily. OAK plays NYJ, DEN and that gets them 8 very easily. They win 3 of these to get to 11 - JAC, TEN, LAC, KC.

Nothing changed after this Sunday. Key games are still DAL, BAL, PIT. We lose two of those and we are potentially in trouble. Raiders are likely 11-5 or 10-6. PIT could wind up 11-5 or 10-6. CLE could be 10-6 and own win over Bills. IND could wind up 11-5 or 10-6.

Here is my question: He plays a few bad games and the thought is that he is young, needs more time, was known to be a project. He plays one good game and it is how can you say he is not clearly getting better. It can be both. He can have a bad game and still have the potential to be a good QB. He can have a good game and still be an awful QB. Point is that until he plays consistently at a certain level there are going to be questions. Until he starts consistently makes good decisions, has proper footwork, shows improved accuracy. One good game against an awful team does not prove either way nor does bad game against a good team.

Having good players never hurts. Add M Thomas, Hopkins, J Jones, etc to this team and they are clearly better. Do you have to have one to win? No. But you could say the same for any position. It is a team sport. You need some form of balance and/or really good players that enable you to win.

Short term memory loss and creating a narrative. Fitz had a few as well. And those old enough to remember saw all the Flutie magic. I

Leave no stone unturned

Really? What are these clutch wins we are talking about that separates Allen from the pack? The win vs a NYJ team that is 2-7? Or the one vs CIN that is 0-9? I must have missed Tyrod's game winning drives vs. HOU and TEN in 2015 or the TB and ATL games in 2017.

Then why are they all gone? I thought this team had no talent and McD had to do a complete overhaul? For the record - This OL is a huge upgrade over any of Tyrod OL. And the 2017 Bills dominating WR's of Zay Jones, Deonte Thompson, Andre Holmes with partial years of Jordan Matthews and KB? Come on . Just wrong. Bad QB play is wrong at any price. Not about the money. No on supporting cast. And if so that is scary to think our GM/Coach have downgraded the talent in year 3 of the process...

This is a huge myth. I refuse to give Josh credit for almost losing to awful teams and then fighting tooth and nail, with the help of a dominant defense to beat an awful team. Bad teams are bad mainly because they dont know how to close out games and win. Make some 4th quarter wins vs good teams and then we can talk.

Because he has been choosing or scared to do this in the past? No. Hit on a deep pass and he is over 300.

Does not matter for a number of reasons. 1. We are talking about level/quality of play. If Tyrod and that offense was not up to par then Allen and this offense are not up to par. Who cares about age, cost or any other parameter. 2. If you want to talk about experience then you have to also talk about things like Tyrod being a 6th round pick and Allen a top 10. Allen being picked as a franchise QB vs Tyrod as possible back up and not even making the roster. 3. You cannot compare Allen only to Tyrod and nothing else. You have to compare what other QB's drafting in the same time frame as Allen have been able to do. Lastly, you can say Allen has not played well and still be a Bills fan. You can be unhappy with his play and still want him to succeed. You dont have to be a blind cheerleader and make up an excuse for any negative comment about Allen.

Worst case and realistic scenario: Bills - Finish 10-6 with losses to NE, DAL and BAL and winning other 4 games. Raiders and Indy go 11-5. Raiders - Wins vs CIN, NYJ, TEN, JAC, LAC, DEN and a loss to KC Indy - Wins vs JAC, TEN, TB, JAC and two of 3 vs CAR, NO, HOU or CLE wins out or 5 of 6 vs MIA, PIT, CIN, AZ, BAL, PIT (and Bills lose PIT game too) or PIT beats Bills and wins 4 of 5 vs. CIN, CLE, AZ, NYJ, BAL

Exactly. Tyrod was not good enough and Allen is not get enough (yet). Clearly Allen is greener and there is a chance, but not a guarantee, that he gets better. Mostly everyone here wants to see that happen. I think frustration comes from what we are seeing on the field being reminiscent of failed QB's of the past and hearing the familiar excuses about more time, changing systems, supporting cast, etc.

Tyrod in the right system isnt a horrible option. Problem is you put yourself in a box that most teams would not want to be in.

2016 Tyrod

Lets pick Tyrod in a playoff game that he didnt play well with Allen against a 2-6 team. Yeah that makes sense. Pointless. I am not care about any Tyrod vs Allen or want Tyrod back. Point in my mind is simply this offense is not good enough. The Bills chose to move on from Tyrod or whoever and it has not equaled that level of production yet after 2.5+ years. That is a concern.

No way no how. We won games despite Allen not because of him this year. We would at least be 6-3 with almost anyone at QB.

This clarifies everything. Allen got the green light to play Justin Bieber in the locker room.

Who is everyone? I can agree people did not expect instant Brees/Rodgers/Brady. But he still makes some horrible decisions that I would be mad my college QB makes. He misses horribly on some passes that an NFL QB just has to make. Those are the concerns. I am fine with the he needs time angle, but there are basic high school/college level concerns.

Seriously? Neither of those are close to showing the ability to hit the deep pass. A broken play where a guy gets open and you huck it down there. Guy is standing and waits for it. The crossing play is better at least.

Allen Clutch Factor 2018 Ten - He threw for 82 yds total this game. Gets credit for clutch but this was a win despite him. He had 2 short passes on game winning drive, they ran the ball most of the drive. 2018 Det - Battle of bad teams out of the race. Bills took lead with 10 min left nand counts as comeback win... 2019 - NYJ, CIN, MIA = Three of the worst teams in years. Only reason needed comeback wins was because Allen played bad. Again, this clutch factor is so over hyped. For one they have been against bad teams that our less likely to hold up and win a game. For another it should never require a comeback in the first place if he played better. These are not 38-35 comeback wins in a shootout vs Brady. These are 17-16 wins vs awful teams.

Clutch factor - Tyrod did win some games. One difference I think people miss is those clutch games were Tyrod did not win were against good teams. Tyrod could be clutch like Allen against bad teams. Lets see Allen clutch against the good teams.