Einstein's Dog

Running that play in the first place had some risk. L Joseph coming down on that calf could have set back Burrow/Cincy in a big way.

I didn't realize they thought about it and had a delayed flag. That is just wrong. IMO, this could have been a after further review, pick up the flag situation. And from a game situation, it would have made the game more interesting to see if the Bills could have hit the long FG.

I think the rules dork messed up and didn't even bring up the "imminent loss of yardage because of pressure". To me, It seemed like a convenient overlook of the rule so they didn't go back and look at the lack of pressure on Josh on that call.

Tyreek was using the peace sign and then it was being used by the defense and the league didn't like it. So the peace sign, much like "the finger" would be understood to be flagged. However, a finger point is not the rule. You routinely see linemen point at the line of scrimmage blocking assignments and no flags. The ref determined intent, and it was a rinky-dink, unnecessary call (very easily could have given a discreet warning). For me, there was the larger point of cumulative BS. The unnecessary finger point call, the uncalled tripping, and then the out of ordinary Intentional grounding call. But a finger point can mean more than a taunt - as it is with the O linemen. The action he did was not by rule a flag, the ref had to interpret intent and think Josh was taunting instead of identifying a player that needs to be blocked.

That's right, that added to it. They were lining up for the FG attempt and then in kind of a delayed fashion came back. I wish the other refs could have talked the one out of it. As a Bills fan watching the broadcast of that sequence of events was extremely frustrating.

Didn't see a thread on this. How could they call that? The ref purposefully called a terrible non-challengeable penalty. It's one thing to miss/not throw a flag on something. Like the tripping -even though it was on the person with the ball. You can somewhat think they didn't see it or think from their vantage point it wasn't a penalty. But Intentional Grounding - that really annoyed me. Where did they see "imminent loss of yardage because of pressure". The ref should never have made that call. Josh wasn't throwing that ball because of pressure. It was a terrible subjective call. And with the broadcast you see the replay of the non-called tripping, followed up with the inexplicable bogus intentional grounding call was a double whammy. The broadcasters saw the tripping and said a little something and kind of movedon/went silent. Then the Intentional grounding and at least Collinsworth was like "what?". Then the rules dork tried to make like it was definitely by the rules correct. But the rule dork clearly left out the whole under duress element of call, dork. It was very frustrating.

Seems a little short sighted to me to think we should have gone all out to beat Tampa. While running a sneak would have a greater chance of scoring, running a sneak would also have a much greater chance of having Josh's shoulder get hit and hurt. I wonder how many of the same people here complaining about not running a sneak would be looking to fire Dorsey if he ran the sneak and Josh is out for the next 3 weeks because his shoulder is too sore to continue.

First, you started the snark with your "Do you know how to look it up" bit. And yes, I find the idea that a QB sneak is safer than the QB handing the ball off not only to be counter-intuitive, but also not to be true.

If your objective is to not have your QB hit, running a sneak is not a good play. I don't know how to dumb this down any more for you. Everyone in the FO wants to extend Josh's career. Having him get hit less was thought to be a good way to do that. They have been executing that strategy.

A shot to Josh's shoulder could limit his effectiveness for multiple games. Another aspect of that is hard to track is the effect of cumulative hits. We see this in RBs all the time, the talk of the wear and tear. Our Carolina connections are all to familiar with the short time span of Cam. They are trying not to have that happen with Josh.

A safe play? If your objective is to limit the number of shots your QB takes, having him run a sneak is not something you do. Extending the career of Josh by intentionally limiting his hits was a stated goal this year. They are doing that. Playoffs you may see an expanded playbook.

I think Josh got hurt in college running the ball. Anyway the concept is pretty straightforward, the more Josh runs the ball the higher the odds he can get hurt. Especially in short yardage/goal line where there is no sliding or avoiding contact. I do believe the reduction in Josh's designed runs has been part of a deliberate effort to extend his career. I commend Dorsey/McD for sticking with their overall objectives. I think you will see Josh run more in the playoffs.

Actually the worst case would be Allen out for the year with an injury. People seem to have a hard time realizing one item of emphasis has been to run Allen less to minimize his chances of getting hurt.

Royale is not telling him how to react, he is saying many of us don't want to hear it over, and over, and over again....and I agree with him.

But you said earlier "a lot of teams don't do it". Now when shown statistics to the contrary we get the "it doesn't matter". Secondly, after being shown a study concluded there was an advantage you say "One thing that's clear is that there is no evidence to support...." Huh? You may not like the study or its conclusions but there is some evidence. To me, this pre-criticism comes across as planting reasons to dislike or blame McDermott. The overwhelming majority of coaches would defer. But you have McDermott set up with statements like "Show some f**cking balls and confidence" and "that's the only way we are going to beat them"

Absolutely Not. You win the toss you defer. Much more ability to control the game.

For me, I'd like the WR upgrade the most - I know Gabe had a good game but give Josh/Dorsey 2 excellent WRs and let Josh cook. Choices: Mike Evans - c'mon Beane. Tampa is starting to look pathetic like we thought they would, deep down they know it. They need draft capital for a real QB. DHop - Tenn can claim they want to test what they have, but most know they got nothin', and need draft capital. Our third for a FA they picked up. J Williams - Elam and a third might get it done. A Thielen - I'm luke warm on this guy, but he seems dependable. RBs- seems like we need a guy who can get a yard over 90% of the time. Short yardage and good pass protector. Plus I don't know if Harris can come back. D Henry - kind of out of character for the Bills to pay RB but for $5M for the remainder of the year, he would be interesting AJ Dillon - kind of King Henry lite. a cheap version, get him for one of our extra 6ths.

They threw the flag! And the replays showed the guy was, in fact, down the field. You don't then get to pick it up because you feel it didn't impact the play after the fact, that's not how this is supposed to work. If they never threw the flag I wouldn't be bothered. But picking it up when the replay showed the guy was down the field, didn't make sense.

I'm with you, hope for a move for DHop. We will never really know how much the recency bias affects the moves (unless we get him) but Gabe had a good game and it doesn't feel on the board as a crisis anymore. Conversely, the poor short yardage problems were more present. We don't have a practically guaranteed yard from any of our RBs (and not even Josh). It does make D Henry more attractive but his salary and just one year are not what the Bills usually do. Maybe AJ Dillon for the budget version.

I agree, helmet swinging is a different level of wrong. And saying the refs couldn't determine what happened is weak. They should have stopped play and figured it out. There was a commercial break anyway I believe.

I didn't see that. But even so, it doesn't explain swinging it - which is the real crux of the problem. Because to me it was a totally inexplicable non-call by the refs for something that should have helped the Bills. It drove me nuts and the broadcast dropped it.

Certainly seemed like the Broadcast just covered up for the inept non-officiating there. They weren't even able to highlight the original supposed offset - they didn't show what Settle did to get the violent reaction from the center. Even with Settle/center offsetting, swinging a helmet is a different level of Personal Foul.

Also the little guy wasn't even part of the original scrum -which was according to the announcers something T Settle was involved with. But I couldn't see anything out of the ordinary from Setttle, but did see the Tampa guy have a personal foul type reaction. They didn't even cover that well.

I agree, I thought he would get kicked out. Didn't something happen like this with Cleveland.

I wonder if he will get fined. He should. As for the official ruling, I guess they must have swept it under "offsetting". But it is a whole different level of offense to me.