CincyBillsFan

Watson was barely up to the challenge. He was ineffective through two and a half quarters yesterday but in the end he came through for the Texans like a star. But let's not forget how Watson did in his first playoff game last year. Allen did much better in his first game.

I think it worked out just fine with Allen. Had Arizona beat us in the bidding war to draft Allen we would have been forced to draft Josh Rosen. Think about that for a second! I agree and as I've said about other picks EVERY team is going to miss on guys in EVERY draft. It comes with the territory. But with that being said, bean & McD are going to have to be willing to spend a 1st or 2nd round pick on an offensive skill player - something they seem reluctant to do.

I don't know about that. Allen seems to like big receivers. Look at all the targets Duke gets when he plays. And if this is a swipe at Allen, Brown went over 1,000 yards with Allen throwing to him. So I suspect that Metcalf would have exploded, especially in the 2nd half of the season, had we taken him in the 2nd round last draft.

This is one of the things that Bean & McD have to take a long hard look at. They keep chasing "value" in the draft when it comes to offensive skill players and that can be hit or miss - Singleterry was a hit but the book is still out on Knox. But at WR, a position the Bill's desperately needed to upgrade, they whiffed by passing on Metcalf and I would argue they whiffed on Hunter Renfro who could have been taken in the 4th round. Instead we signed FA walk ons who contributed nothing. This off season the Bill's need to take a long hard look at their offensive philosophy including everything from their off season talent acquisition to their in game tactics. The way they chose to play offense this year did not work. Sure it's hind site but that's why you learn from your mistakes. Next season the Bills must go after & acquire big time play makers on offense. And they need to use BOTH the draft & free agency to do this. They must also rethink their in game tactics and this includes unleashing Allen & Singleterry and anyone else they bring in.

Try telling that to Lamar Jackson. We ignore what the Ravens have done at our peril. Like the rest of the Allen supporters on this board I agree that he needs to keep improving his passing game. But to not acknowledge the significant improvements he's made in just one year in that part of his game is to be deliberately blind. But for Allen to continue to grow & improve as a passer he MUST get more help at the play maker position. As I watched the rest of the wildcard playoff games I couldn't help but notice that only NE had fewer offensive threats then the Bills. Even the banged up Eagles had better play making/more productive TE's and a better one-two punch at RB.

It was a funny take and had moments of truth. But it made me think of something else - are the Bills, Deboll & McD screwing Josh Allen up? While the writer of this article was being a smart a## he was also noting something that we Bills fans are already aware of - Allen makes jaw dropping plays and plays QB with a creativity seldom seen in the NFL. Last year Lamar Jackson was booed at home as he had a terrible game in the playoff against San Diego. The "new" offense the ravens were trying to run seemed to implode in the playoffs. Who watching that game, including most of the 65,000 people in the stadium, weren't calling for Joe Flaco? But the Ravens in the off season doubled down on their crazy offense and put even more pieces around Jackson to make it happen. The result was there for all to see. Maybe what the Bills need to do is treat Allen like the Ravens treat Jackson - as an unconventional talent that could redefine how the QB position is played. Change the offense to FOCUS on and FEATURE the wild stuff that Allen does. Surround Allen with equally creative and wacky PLAY MAKERS. On this current offense ONLY Singleterry would fit the kind of skill player Allen should have around him. Guys like SF's Kittle or Carolina's McCaffrey would thrive in such an environment. Just some food for thought and I hope Daboll, Bean & McD do a little out of the box thinking this off season. Or we can stick with splitting Gore & DeMarco out wide in an empty backfield. You know a play design that deprives Allen of extra protection while simultaneously removing 40% of the threat the spread out "play makers" are supposed to represent?

I agree with you 100%. Of all the mistakes made and plays NOT made it really did come down to executing that sweep. For all the bashing Daboll is taking and I'm dealing it out like everyone else, it was a great play call that caught Houston flat footed. Allen would have gained 20 yards had just one of those guys got in the way of #41. They didn't even need to make a block.

That's not how I remember it. He looked right at Knox. The problem and I guess the situational awareness issue was that Knox was moving towards him and he lateralled the ball where Knox had just been.

I think you might be on to something here. And for the record over the many years I've watched college & pro football I've seen that play made a number of times. In fact it used to be standard procedure for the trailing guy like Knox to hang back in the expectation that the runner might lateral the ball. I think other old timers would agree that this is how it used to be done. My guess is Allen had two thoughts that triggered the lateral: 1) the first was to get the ball out of bounds 2) the 2nd was that Allen probably noticed that there was nothing between Knox and the end zone. Sure they would have probably run him down but who knows. And gaining 20 more yards and getting out of bounds isn't such a bad thing. Bottom line is that the play did no damage and might have been huge if Allen/Knox had pulled it off.

I don't know about that. Getting the Bills into position to kick the tying FG was a big moment and while it wasn't pretty Allen got it done. And OT was a big moment in which Allen was coolly moving us into position to kick the winning FG and then we had a QB sweep that should have gone for 20 yards except that the blockers inexplicably forgot to block the only defender on the edge. Then of course the bad penalty on Ford. And I haven't even got started on how the defense played in the 4th quarter & OT. Seems to me the moment was to big for the whole team including the coaches. Let's hope this is 1989 and not 1999. I happen to think we're closer to a 1989 scenario where a bad playoff loss to Cleveland launched us into the Bills most glorious period.

Overall Duke was much more productive then Foster. He made several tough 3rd down catches. The end zone throw by Allen was perfectly placed and the DB made a great play on the ball. But with that being said Duke should have caught that pass. A lot of NFL WR's make that catch. But to be fair NO ONE on the Bills makes that catch. Our receiving core simply doesn't make what would be called great catches. They make solid, tough catches but almost never make the spectacular ones. And in the NFL this is a problem because spectacular catches are being made by other receivers all over the place. Bottom line is the "pro Duke" posters were right that he should have been active the entire season. When in a game he produced and he provided the O with something they desperately needed in the WR group - a big body. But the fact is that McD values the offense less then the other two units or he would have sat Foster and played Duke. Ditto for Yeldon. This also explains the reluctance to give Singleterry the ball more. The risk of a fumble outweighs the gain of a big play. IMO this type of thinking has to end and should be a point of introspection on the part of McD in the off season.

But why is he more frustrated with Allen then he was with his defense? He has proactively constructed a Bills team that relies on it's defense to win games. IMO the D experienced more of a collapse in the 4th quarter/OT then Allen and the offense did. Like I've said this was a total team loss but Allen was more a positive then a negative in the game. And bringing up a lateral that while ill advised had NO NEGATIVE IMPACT on the game was curious. There are more good things to take away from Allen's first playoff game and OT experience then bad things. That's what MD should have focused on. In fact one of the lessons from this game isn't that Allen was a wild man it's that McD's entire concept may be flawed. Maybe this off season we should focus exclusively on improving the Offense even at the cost of the defense. McD might benefit from a bit more introspection here. Or maybe McD should lobby to trade Allen. I bet we would get a high 1st round draft pick for him. I'm being serious here. Allen would command a 1st round draft pick and maybe a decent veteran LB or CB to go long with the deal. Then McD can get a true game manager with a 3rd round pick (or maybe Gruden will send us Peterman back for his 5th round pick) while using the extra 1st round pick to select a CB or DE. Allen is a thoroughbred race horse and McD may think that he needs a plow horse type QB to pair with his elite Defense and conservative game plans. Okay I'm hitting the sack now but I am being half serious here.

Reading this actually concerns me. You can't just arbitrarily target "21 points" and build an offense that can reach that score. Football isn't that precise. The best you can do is create an offense that scores within a targeted RANGE. If you look at the play calling and collection of talent on the field the Bill's O is designed to score between 16 - 24 points per game. That's a reasonable target in a sport with the variability of football. This is especially true when you pair that offense up with a defense that generated NO defensive TD's and had by my count only ONE forced TO in the opponents red zone. For comparison, a potent offense would be expected to score between 25 - 35 points per game. Score less and you need a stronger then expected defensive effort to win. So we have a weak to moderate offense paired with a supposedly "elite" Defense and I would argue that in games where the Offense was at the lower end of their scoring potential the D almost never played elite. Within TARGET RANGE (16 - 24 points) scoring games - wins: Beat the Jets 17 - 16; Beat the Bengals 21 - 17; Beat Washington 24 - 9; Beat the Broncos 20 - 3; Beat the Steelers 17 - 10; Within TARGET RANGE scoring games - losses: Lost to Cleveland 16 - 19; Lost to Ravens 17 - 24; Lost to Pats 17 - 24; Lost to Texans 19 - 22 Lower then TARGET RANGE scoring games - wins: Beat TN 14 - 7 Lower then TARGET RANGE scoring games - losses: Lost to NE 10 - 16; Lost to Eagles 13 - 31 Higher then TARGET RANGE scoring games - wins: Beat the Giants 28 - 14; Beat Miami 31 - 21; Beat Miami 37 - 20; Beat Dallas 25 - 16 I didn't include the Jets game because most of the starters didn't play. But from this list only ONE TIME did our D play elite in a game that the O didn't reach it's TARGET RANGE and that was against TN. Given the talent on the Offense and including a wholesale change out of players from 2018 and the fact that we were starting 3 rookies on that unit a target range of 16 - 24 is reasonable. Insisting on a minimum target of 21 is not reasonable IMO. And if you truly have an elite D you have to win a couple of games when your offense reaches 16 or more points. We didn't.

That's a question with an agenda because that is NOT what Allen was doing. On the Bill's only possession in OT Allen had a couple of great throws to convert 3rd downs. I guess the questioner was referring to the 2 throws to the end zone at the end of regulation? They weren't up for grab throws as they were safe throws over Dukes head. We didn't have any TO's left and you don't want to throw an int. Or is the "up for grab throws" referring to the deep pass to DeMarco? There are a lot of NFL WR's & TE's that catch that ball. It looked like it was up for grabs becasue we had a FB running 40 yards downfield on a pass play. Bottom line is that McD needed to recognize an agenda driven question and answer it appropriately.

McD can steer the answer to the question in any direction he wants. Have you heard how he answers injury questions? And let's face it when it comes to the sports media and Allen McD's been around the block. He should know that some of these "reporters" are out to trash Allen and magnify every mistake while minimizing every success. He should suspect an agenda when he's asked this kind of question and answer it accordingly.

He was sloppy in his comments at the very least. And it's not like McD to be sloppy in his comments.

I am more convinced then ever after this game that Allen is the guy. Would anyone in their right mind argue that Watson & Jackson aren't the franchise QB's for their respective teams? Well take a look at how they played in their first playoff games which were played at home. Allen accounted for 372 of the Bills 425 yards today - enough said.

That's even worse IMO. The ONLY place McD needed to address this was with Allen privately. And given the FACTS of how this game went and all the places you could legitimately point the finger of blame, it was deeply unfair to throw Allen under the bus which is exactly what McD did here. I'm not sure it matters much whether he meant to or not. Once the game was over and if we're to believe in this "process" of McD's then we need to see it in action after a disappointing loss. The ONLY thing to say publicly is that it was a disappointing loss and we have to learn from it and grow. And in fact this is the correct thing to say because going forward the Bills can build off this. McD screwed up here and hopefully it will just go away.

Great point. You punt the ball. And he has the nerve to call Allen out?

Well that didn't seem to bother the Titans as they won their playoff game scoring 14 points. And if NE had gotten within FG range they would have won the game with 16 points. When you have the money invested in and the talent spread across an offense like Kansas City do you expect them to score over 20 points every game? I do. But the Bills have taken the opposite approach and put most of their eggs in the defenses basket. So when the offense scores a TD on the opening possession and then pushes that lead to 16 - 0 late in the 3rd quarter the expectation is that the defense will hold and the Bills win the game. Just like if the KC defense holds an opponent to 24 points the expectation is that the Chiefs O will score more then that.

The lateral was NOT blind. Watch a replay. He made a correct backward pass to Knox who was all alone at the sideline. Had Knox not moved towards Allen and caught that lateral he would have gained another 20 yards and gone out of bounds at the end. Was it a risky play? Yes, but it wasn't blind. Put a couple of real play-makers on the field with Allen and we'll see more magic then mayhem. And as another poster noted on another thread there's a fine line between a mayhem & miracle play in the NFL. Sure the sacks were partially on Allen but the speed in which the Texans pass rush was reaching Allen was disturbing. The Texans were all over Allen at the snap of the ball. Frankly I don't see how he avoids those sacks. His only option was to throw the ball away which would have drawn a grounding penalty. The Bill's O-line picked a bad time in the game to play poorly.

This is what I was thinking when I watched a replay of the lateral. It was really close to being a huge play.

I hope you're right but his choice of words in response to that question was piss poor. Frankly it's shaken my faith in McD. You get to know the quality of a man when he faces tough times. How he responds is critical. The whole point of the "process" as I understood it was that after a loss like this, the team & coaches would circle the wagons. And if ever there was a team loss this was it. Maybe I'm reading to much into what McD said. But it just doesn't seem right. You let the dust settle and watch the film before making any kind of comment like this. I think upon reflection most Bill's fans are going to see that there was a lot of positives out there today. This has the feel of 1989 and that's a good thing. And since the early years of Jim Kelly's career, when was the last time we felt as good about our QB going from year 2 to 3? I would answer this is the FIRST time since the early Kelly years. Think about all the QB's we've had since Kelly retired. There isn't one who I felt good about going from their 2nd to their 3rd season here. NOT ONE until Allen. That's a huge step forward and McD needs to be careful about fouling this moment.

Yes it was. Had we stopped them our offense gets a 2nd possession in OT probably starting at about the 40. Also later on that same drive with an opportunity to put the Texans into another 3rd & 18 at midfield the D messed up a sack and Watson made the game winning play as a result. Yet McD as the nerve to call out Allen for trying to do to much? The more I read that McD quote the more disturbing it looks. It's not only poor timing but it shows a dangerous lack of insight into how his team just lost a game they should have won. I would hope that Bean will have a talk with McD.

The defense is the strength of this team. It's where we spend the cap money and it's the unit that drives the strategic direction of the offense. That is McD plays conservative offense because he expects the defense to win the game. McD stresses that the Offense NOT commit turnovers. This comes at a cost. The cost being conservative offensive play calling and execution once we get a 2 score lead. We've seen it in almost EVERY game this year. The bottom line is that we had a 16 - 0 lead late in the 3rd quarter. All the offensive play calling that frustrates so many of us is by design to avoid a TO that allows a team to score cheap points and get back into the game. I blame the D because in a little over one quarter they allowed TD drives of 75 & 80 yards. They also allowed the Texans to convert BOTH 2 point conversion tries. Then in OT after forcing a 3 & out the D allowed the Texans to drive from their 17 yard line to our 10 yard line to kick the game winning FG. That was a 73 yard drive. McD put this game on the shoulders of the D and they let him down. Yet in his post game press conference he calls out Allen for "trying to do to much". Gee IMO the problem was that the D didn't do enough. But that's just me I guess.