No_Matter_What

I don't get why this is so hard to understand for so many people. DL is doing great, they had 2 drive stopping sack and tons of pressure. But that is Mahomes playing QB. He is too good.

McKenzie, Sweeney, Gilliam. At this rate Taiwan Johnson will score a TD.

Well this was unexpected

He does but also protection looked better, that certainly helps.

So easy.

Don't know what happened to him but he's gone from being interesting to JAG trying to be funny sometimes with almost no relevant insight.

Edmunds plays amazing game to my untrained eye. Again.

I am the opposite of hot head but you really need to bench him now.

Good decision, no matter the outcome. McKenzie blew it big time. Still lot of football in front of us.

Are we playing Benford instead of Elam this drive?

This. But even if it is not, let's not get crazy on 4&9 when the game is scoreless in early 2nd Q.

If only we had Breece Hall!

Yeah as usual. Let's judge everything after half drive.

No elevations, 4 heatlhy scratches. What a weird feeling.

Jets at Packers is really brutal. Well worth of TNF.

I don't know how to cross quote between threads but this is what you wrote recently: "Today will be the day we remember as the day the Bills began their march to 4 straight Super Bowls victories." And now you are telling me you care about Jets game because they could become a threat for 2022 Bills?

I am probably a weirdo but I am rooting for Jets tonight. I find Rodgers completely insufferable, and I don't mind Jets winning some games. I want Patriots to end up dead last in the division and I see no harm in Jets having some success. They are no competition to Bills at this point anyway.

Were there any elevations announced today? I missed it and I thought it's always day before game, isn't it? I am actually hoping they were none, which would mean that roster guys are mostly ready to go.

FYP

Lol I am watching the game right now and this is exactly what I had in mind couple of minutes ago. It should be something like 21 or so.

I "hate" them because they have something what we don't. SB. If we win one, it will allow me to see things differently. That's why I already don't "hate" Patriots. We killed them last year in WC so they became irrelevant to me. Win SB and I won't care about the Chiefs too.

Von Miller - vet rest - limited?

Not sure if we understand each other but I don't think you're right. The rotation isn't necessarily the same. I'll use your example. In both cases, you need to split it into two scenarios for the sake of this argument - depending on where do you actually play those "Division" games (you play 2 games at home and 2 on road). So it goes like this: AFC East: H, H, H (div), A, A, A (div) or H, H, A (div), A, A, H (div) So no matter what, the rotation is still 3 home games and 3 road games. But in AFC North / AFC South scenario it works differently: AFC North: H, A, A (div), A, H, H (div) or H, A, H (div), A, H, A (div). So in this case, depending on specific opponents, there can be real H/A rotation on yearly basis. To give an example - if Chiefs and Steelers end up winning their divisions each year, they WILL rotate home and away games each year in HAHAHA fashion. Same with Chiefs and Browns. But if Chiefs end up playing Ravens or Bengals, it will go HHHAAA. And just to be clear, since there are apparently some posters here who feel the need to ridicule anyone who cares about this topic - I don't think this is an attempt to screw Bills or anything. I just find this part of scheduling very interesting and would love to know why it is working this way.

Bolded is not true. It is only true for AFC East games vs other divisions. All other divisions actually do rotate home/away games within those two years when teams play opponents with the same ranking. However, they do not rotate the way I would expect it, i.e. H/A/H/A, but rather H/A/A/H, which means that it in fact might not be an actual rotation based on specific teams played at home and on the road in those years when teams play complete opposite division. The way it works: East vs South, East vs West, East vs North: Home, Home, Whole Division, Away, Away, Whole Division, rinse repeat South vs North, South vs West, North vs West: Home, Away, Whole Division, Away, Home, Whole Division, rinse repeat As follows from the above, even teams from other divisions can play same opponent 3 times in a row at the same place, but it is not guaranteed - it depends on specific opponent. In case of AFC East, it doesn't matter - as long as end up being at the same place in division as any other team, you'll play them 3x at home and 3x on road. I didn't check NFC, but I guess it works the same there. Well, this is an interesting theory. I appreciate that you did some research and tried to understand how things work. I have 3 comments: 1. Like I said above, rotation is different between various divisions. East is the only division in the AFC which does not rotate games at all. 2. I think you are wrong in the blue statement. They couldn't rotate. I played with it, and I don't think you can make all divisions rotate. Try it and let me know That is why I think it is actually not working this way - it is impossible to do it. 3. Certainly an interesting theory. But I think you ask good question in red and there is an obvious anwser - you'd want to rotate home and away games. It really seems a stretch to me that such thing as you describe would be relevant. How does it matter that you can't host any AFC West team in the same year you play AFC North? It seems really minor to me. Actually, if this was the case, then they should also change how they schedule years when you play complete divisions. We always play Chiefs and Chargers either at home or at road, so we never have a chance to play Chargers on road when we play Chiefs at home. To sum it up, it still remains mystery to me why they use this formula. If you find something out, let me know

@Beck Water Thanks for effort. I keep my own records and I think you have W4 wrong. Prince Emili was elevated, not C.J.Brewer. Easy proof is that it was his head which caused first of Poyer's INTs Also, one technical note, I think you could ommit PS signings. They are just making it little more complicated and are not that relevant. Just mo.