Mikie2times

That is how I see it, it just couldn't have been missed in this obvious of a way. I see him growing into being even more athletic in the Pro's and then combining that with his competitive nature and a need to survive. I think he just was forced to try it more when he was a rookie and then built a ton of confidence in his ability likely starting with the leap in Minnesota.

Josh has turned out to be an elite running QB. It's a huge part of his game and has given us some incredible moments over the years with his hurdles and running over defenders. I guess the question is, did the Bills know what he was capable of outside of some mobility? This isn't mobility, this is the 2nd best running QB in the NFL. Josh ran an unofficial, 4.76 and in college had 767 yards on 237 carries, a 3.2 average Lamar had an unofficial 4.34 and in college had 4,132 yards on 655 carries, a 6.3 average Would anybody considered passing on Allen if they knew his ability to run was this strong? As far as arm talent, he was a consensus #1 in the draft. We haven't seen a prospect with top arm talent and elite running come out of the draft since Michael Vick. Running ability as a QB seems to be an area that teams don't really miss on in evaluation. It's shocking we have a guy who didn't flash it to this extent until his pro career. Did anybody really know? Thoughts?

Glad I scrolled up

It's more the team than just Josh, but really, for me, it boils down to winning a SB at this point. That is the standard the rest of his career as well as for this team. That's the accomplishment that says we were able to take all this unity, pride, and talent and be consistent with it against the best competition for 4 weeks. To me that's all he has left to prove.

Classy as usual. It was nuts, looked like 6, came out of the frame so late.

Bill has no idea how to deal with Allen's hybrid ability.

If I'm an opposing fan, Allen has to be so demoralizing. Almost like what it felt when Jones scrambled for the two first downs on the opening drive but just all the time.

Despite our rejuvenated running game, I see Bill going more in the mold of the 1990's Giants. Control the ball. Force Buffalo to win with the RB run game.

I live under a rock, turning my TV on only for games and Netflix. Radio only for music. This year I watched more YouTube and ran into his takes with Tasker and Chris Brown. Then I saw Angry runs etc. He's one of the few people I will spend time watching. I never understood his connection to Buffalo but he seems to have one? I see some negative posts. Has our brand gotten so strong that we get to pick who talks about us now and not just be happy we get some national pub?

It's good work OP. I'm very familiar with AV, it's not an exact science but the guys at pro football reference do great with data collection and simple summary. All they attempted to build with AV is a way to compare different positions or the same positions across different eras. AV is far from perfect but anybody that slights it, I would happily challenge to create a better ranking system for what they're attempting to capture. They will even admit it's flawed in the summary but still fun and informative.

Slick ball, very difficult on the kicking game. Many of us remember the #1 coldest game and the very memorable play from Tasker. I will never know if The Raiders meant to squib it, but Tasker plucked a kickoff line drive and returned it inside the 3 yards line shifting momentum. We score, then missed the extra point. That didn't happen with Christie. It's going to be hard on kickoffs, extra points, and any field goals with length. I used to do some kicking in addition to more masculine roles, but it's incredible how different it is to kick a ball that's slightly deflated vs very inflated. You get way more distance on a partially deflated ball. When it's cold like this you just don't get any recoil with the football. It doesn't travel. It's also very hard to hold onto and catch. Concerned about our punting unit after last week. You also know damn well Bill knows the science I'm describing with football pressure and temps better than anybody. They will probably be blow torching balls on the sidelines prior to FG's.

Edmunds and Hughes need to join the Rodney Dangerfield club of Buffalo. Over the years our fan base at times has been in strong contrast with our coaches. I'm not talking about positions that are easy to see like QB. More with positions that have assignments that benefit the team and not always the individual. Out of all my gripes I do think McDermott is a good defensive coach. So when it comes to these two it's hard for me to knock them when I don't always know what is being asked of them. It's very hard for me to say just because Jerry doesn't have X amount of sacks or Edmunds doesn't have X amount of big plays they suck. I really don't know. To me it has enough "careful what you wish for" to stay neutral and positive on both.

I never suggested you go by feel and that alone. I said it's somewhere in the middle of math and common sense. Hence my example of risking your life savings at 60 years old with a 30% EV. It's statistically the correct decision, but very few would ever consider such a thing. I disagree with your comments over variance in the course of one game or even one season or even many seasons for one team. Just not enough trials for the data to stabilize. A really easy way for a great team to get beat by a horrible one is do things like go for it on the 18 yard line. It generated a potential 17% swing in win probability on a singular play. If your team is better, you don't want to introduce those type of events voluntarily. As you stated yourself, you use the data as an outline and part of the decision making process. Even the correct decision statistically can equate to pure gambling depending on the context.

In the example I stated, under a singular trial, I don't have enough trials to risk my life savings even with a 30+EV at the age of 60. That would be mathematically the correct decision, but in real life, I'm pretty certain even most statisticians would not take that proposal. In the situation Staley faced, I would rather extend the trials/plays I have with the Raiders because I feel I have the better team. Last thing I would want to do is introduce a huge amount of variance into the equation by doing things like going for it on my own 18 yard line even if it does come with a 3% EV.

If I said you have a 65% chance of doubling your money and a 35% of losing it all, one outcome, like a coin flip, would you say yes? Maybe when your 20, probably not when your 60. That's the root of the problem with some of these guys. Staley looked at the decision as a +3% win probability in a binary way. Where another way to look at it, still from a statistical perspective, is you're electing to create a 17% swing in win% based on one play by going for it. Is that something worth doing midway through the 3rd quarter in a 3 point game? Further, is that worth doing vs a team that really wasn't doing much offensively without the refs help? Last part bringing more of the old school football mind into it. I really would like to think right answer exists in the middle of it all.

I think this is correct

Cool. Look, the Bills have played 3 meaningful games with the Patriots the last two years. I do not consider the 2nd game last year as meaningful. By that time we basically had the division locked and New England was down to 2nd string players. We could be 3-0 in those games or 0-3. All of them were close and decided in final minutes. Even in the last game which for some reason people seem to feel we completely exercised the demon, we converted a 4th and 1 on an incredible play by Josh late in the 4th. Fail to convert on that play and New England has the ball and is driving for the W. This is after outgaining them by 140 yards and being +2 in the turnover column. It would be completely out of the context of how these games have gone for anybody to assume it won't come down to a couple plays late in the game on Saturday. Further, for anybody to assume we have established some sort of supremacy, our biggest edge just got fired in Miami. For some reason Bill could never figure Flores while Buffalo handled them with ease. It feels as if we have the edge, yes, but people consistently overestimate by how much.

At the end of the day I'm fine with it. So much of our offense comes from Josh doing what Josh does with broken plays. We have a ton of weapons and didn't exactly set the world on fire. If he leaves it's next man up.

With the wind, Buffalo 24 and the Jets 10 Against the wind, Buffalo 3 and the Jets 0 I honestly think the wind will eventually become a massive advantage for this team as it was for the 90's Bills. Allen just plays worse, his competition can't even function. Think Baltimore last year, New England, Jets game......

I don't think any of us live long enough to see the 2007 Patriot's +315 broken. Beat the Giants and they go down as the best team of all time in any sport.

I wouldn't be so sure. We released him after he had a rather solid season for us, jut not worth the cost. We weren't going to pay a premium for a guy whose primary skill was run defense. Miami decided to really pay a premium for that and I feel it's likely because they thought he could be more than a one dimensional player. Jets inherited that premium. Most teams are not looking for rotational DE's for run defense. They want them for pass rushing. That said Shaq was always impossible to move off his spot, he just had very little speed and edge rush to his game. Very one trick pony, think 3-4 DE in the early 2000's, something Rex Ryan might covet.

Allen is a very unique player and difficult to evaluate through conventional methods. I think his closest comps are Russell Wilson, Deshaun Watson, Randall Cunningham, Cam Newton/Daunte Culpepper (in the best years they had), some Steve Young. If they all had DNA mixed and you sprinkled in some Brett Favre that's what we are dealing with. Allen is likely the most gifted of these guys just based on his physical stature and capability which is saying something. What is unique about all of these guys is they're mostly passing scramblers, not a scrambling passers. When it comes to QB's who are a true threat on the ground they generally have to develop more in the passing game. They aren't as dangerous in the passing game as a whole nor are they in scramble drills. Think guys like Michael Vick or Lamar Jackson or Vince Young. Allen is trying to pass. If you flush him he is still trying to pass. If you clearly give him the option to run he will gash you. He's not a guy that just dinks and dunks down the field or will generally have the ball out at the top of his drop. He's one of the all time freak athletes to play the QB position and a lot of what he generates is not by design. He is responsible for so much as it relates to how we generate points. Probably more so on an individual basis than any player in the NFL provides for his team.

He was actually a beast at setting the edge in the run game. I would be fine with him coming back. They're all apples, Shaq is an orange. He's a hell of a run defender. You can't move the guy. That's why I would like to see him back.

The best slot, we can booze, get fat, and still not suck at work Monday.

Nobody wants Monday, horrible decision by the NFL to slot playoff games for Monday.