The Red King

Such a well thought out an nuanced reply. While I can agree with some of your points, I have to disagree on others. Still, I must commend you on breaking down each point and possible scenario to provide a truly verbose opinion on the matter!

I see the occasional talk about adding more teams to the NFL. In some ways it could help. Diluting talent evens the playing field, and more teams mean that more players are drafted ahead of the top teams. But there is one roadblock to this, the QB position. A high-caliber QB is at this point in the NFL a make it or break it position. You have one, or you don't. Adding more teams will not add more star QBs to the pool, and with the rest of the positional talent being thinned down across additional teams league-wide it could serve to simply increase the gap between the top and mid-tier teams. As a result, as things currently stand I don't think the NFL can expand in any capacity without harming the product. A franchise QB is all but required, and there are not enough of them out there for the 32 teams we currently have. Thoughts?

I tried to check. And again not saying the 3rd down D is troubling, just 3rd and long. Buffalo is actually quite good at 3rd and short, so it evens out. That being said, credit where it's due. The Bills did quite well against 3rd and long today.

So, from what I'm hearing from some, it doesn't matter how good or bad our 3rd and long play is, there is nothing to be concerned about because we're 11-3. All 3 or less loss teams have no flaws whatsoever to be worried about? There should be no concerns whatsoever for the Bills, Chiefs, Eagles or Vikings. Not for any facet of their gameplay at all, because hey, less then four losses. Four flawless teams, should make for amazing Championship Games and Super Bowl then.

All this is about is 3rd and long. And don't give me 11-3. This team isn't flawless. 11-3 doesn't mean nothing could be wrong. Look at Pitt two years ago. Had even a better record, then got curb-stomped in the Wild Card game. I think I raised a valid concern. The longer the D is out there, the less our O is. 3rd and long should be when we get off the field, but we're blowing a disproportionate number of them. Honestly, I'm more comfortable with 3rd and 5 then I am 3rd and 10.

I'm trying, but I just can't find the stats. 3rd down overall, but not 3rd and long. Not defensively at least.

We're 17th in 3rd and long, or 3rd overall?

It may be perspective, I didn't check the numbers, but I worry about 3rd and long because our D seems bad at it. I'm actually more confident with 3rd and short. We just seem to keep getting torched on 3rd and 10, 3rd and 12, etc. 3rd and long and you can usually pressure the offense, but it seems we do the opposite, giving the QB time to kill us. Again, maybe I'm wrong, but for all our strengths we just don't look good on third and long plays.

What tickles me are the complaints about the 2pt conversion. First, it would not have mattered, we won by three. Second, there is a clear shot of the ball breaking the plane before coming free. It was literally conclusive.

It's hard to make split-second judgement calls. Face-guarding is an unofficial tie-breaker if the ref isn't sure whether or not to throw the flag.

Go back and re-read my initial reply. I think you missed the point entirely. By black and white you mean what's good for the goose is not good for the gander? If the only thing that matters for the Bills is their record, then the same holds true for the Chiefs. If it doesn't hold true for the Chiefs, then you can't use it as an argument against criticism of the Bills.

Who are the Chefs?

Mahomes has yet to play a road playoff game. I'd love for us to be his first.

Considering every post on here critiquing the Bills or coaching is met with "Hey, we're 12-3", no, the Chiefs are 12-3 so they are not overhyped. Now if you want to claim the Chiefs aren't that good despite their record, you have to open the door to the possibility Buff isn't either. You can't have it both ways. Either only the record matters, or it doesn't.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Maybe, but this one was far, far more important. Therefore, more stressful.

Oh, I'm waiting to hear phish fans b!@#$ about the snow at the end. 😁

Let me guess. There was a game of Chicken between OBJ, the Bills and the 'Boys. Beane played it cool, Dallas tried to, and both had OBJ sweating. Dallas just blinked.

I know the rule says if you succeed with both challenges you get a third. I was just curious if any team actually got one yet.

So, do we have any indication as to when he'll be ready to play?

Likely pointless, unless the NFL or someone not the refs are the ones to review it. Remember when PI was challengable? They refused to overturn even the most obvious calls. I don't see this being any different.

I think the whole "not willing to work out" thing kinda deflated all of this hype, for us, for the Bills, 'boys and Giants. That one act completely changed the tone and now it almost seems like everyone is rapidly losing interest. He did it to himself, really.

We use him on screens. We cannot block for screens. Doesn't matter who runs it, the RB is devoured immediately as "blockers" run right past opposing players like they were slalom poles.

Von is better in the playoffs then he is in the regular season. That's why we got him. This is like being kicked out of the theater after the trailers, not what you paid for. Next season I say we wrap him in bubble wrap and throw him in the freezer until the playoffs.

The numbers make it real tough to divvy up. The divisions are too diluted atm. I think go back to three divisions (Come back Central!). That should solve having a crappy division champ. But as for the playoffs, it's tough needing factors of two, giving some teams a bye, but not more then one. Still wracking my head on a viable solution there.