PBF81

Yes, my bad. Even more to the point then. But yes, the '21 divisional game. The point remains the same. Thanks for catching that!!

You don't really believe that there's a chance that Pegula would fire McD, do you? I can't imagine that Beane would, ever. Pegs just extended both of 'em. If he even remotely thought that there's a chance he'd fire one or the other after the season, why would he have extended them when they were signed through '24? I don't even see that as a possibility. I do thnk that the wheels come off defensively speaking, and we could be in trouble on offense if our OL isn't good or we get significant injuries there. BTW, keep an eye on Press Taylor. IMO he's going to be a hot commodity for a head coach following this season. More so than Ben Johnson.

LOL I'm sure it is. Especially when they disprove your agenda.

LOL Man, this place is a great case-study for human behavior. OK, to start, let's back up and put this back into the context from whence it came. You originally said this in response to one of my posts; To start, you are the one suggesting that it was a "no-brainer," I did not say that. If I had wanted to say it, I would have. I did not. Next, your entire argument, witness your above statement, was limited to our playoff seeding. All I was doing was adding the context of our playoff performances, AND, the fact that winning the AFCE in '20-'22 for us, and from '01-'19 for the Pats, has been a relatively simple task as other than for those two teams, them from '01-'19, and us from '20-'22, our division has [verifiably] been the easiest in the league during that time frame. That should change this season, but that's a sidenote. I then explained that of our 7 playoff games over the past three seasons, few of them were impressive from a coaching perspective and explained why, and I deliberately left the Ravens game out of that analysis. So why you're on my leg about this is a mystery. "Say it was a good defensive performance?" I never said anything about purely defense in my discussion. But what's going on here, is that you've ignored the points about 6 other playoff games, have stripped off the offense from this game, and are attempting to use a defensive performance, next to a putrid offensive peformance, as a singular reason as to why McD, implicitly, is a good coach. I would be remiss if I let you get away with that polemically speaking. BUT, for the sake of argument, sure, it was the best defensive performance in the history of the franchise. (Editorial note: I don't really believe that, but I'll acquiesce to it to keep you happy) Offensively it was clearly bad, one of our worst on that season. Defensively, I'm not sure, how amidst that acquiescence, allowing 150 rushing yards on nearly 5 ypc and 35 minutes in ToP aren't problematic. That was also in a game where Jackson, not the most noted passer in the game, had to come out and Huntley replaced him. Yes, it was a good but hardly perfect defensive performance. But the O sucked. At last check, offense is also part of coaching, and you want to ignore that completely. So sure, best defensive performance in the history of the franchise. Given. But the offensive performance was on the other end of the scale. If that equals a game to look at from a great coaching perspective, yes, we'll have to agree to disagree. I think we're finished here. I cannot contribute to your agenda.

Where did I say that it wasn't a good defensive performance? I think you're reading into things there. I'd kindly ask you not to put words in my mouth. Thanks I also think you missed a whole lot of context. To start, you are using that game as an example of a well-coached game, which is the context of our conversation. I don't recall the discussion being only about D, and since McD's the head coach, I'll include him in on the entire discussion, including the offense if you don't mind. He has a phenominal QB like Allen, and the best we can do is 220 total yards? By implication that's good in your view. For a little perspective, that was our 2nd-worst offensive performance all season and our least amount of 1st-Downs, by 3, which is a lot in that context. 17, which is piss poor. We were 3 of 14 on 3rds, which again, by implication you appear to think is good. We averaged 2.0 yards-per-carry on the ground, which is also piss poor. Again, the implication must be that you think it's good. Looking at it from Baltimore's side, only the Titans and Bengals (twice) played worse than us offensively. The Bengals absolutely sucked that season. Baltimore had a 35:33 to 24:27 Time-of-Possession advantage. Some of that revolves around the D, which allowed 150 rushing yards. You seem to think that's decent. Not sure what to say, but at least please keep my comments in context.

I would have more faith in Beane and picking Allen, if a lot of his other day 1 & 2 (rounds 1-3) picks were even remotely as good, but they're not. So suggesting that Beane's some kind of astute genius for picking Allen, when most of his other picks don't match the same level of scrutiny, seems to fall short in the grand analysis. Let's face it, there was definitely some good fortune (call it luck if you will) re: Allen. And insofar as McD goes in the equation, let's not forget that he saw a lot of positives in Peterman, positives that absolutely no one else saw. So yeah, it's quite possible that Allen's carrying McD and Beane's water. Again, this season will reveal much. If we end up touting the #1 offense, and once again get ousted in the divisonal round or lose, particularly as the #1 or #2 seed, in the CC round, well, IMO that would say quite a bit. Again, let's let the season play out. No need to discuss hypotheticals like that until they unfold, or conversely, do not unfold.

This season is going to be a referendum on McBeane vs. McBeane. LOL It will define itself after 7 seasons by season's end. No amount of chatter here is going to alter any of it.

The Niners in the AFC East over the past three years? Well, they'd have had an easier schedule in '20 and '21, when they had the fourth toughest schedule in the league in '20. It stands to reason that in those two seasons they'd have posted a better record. Last season they beat almost no good teams during the regular season, but come playoff time they played better than we typically do in them by most measures in the first two games. Tough to fault them for getting shellacked by the Eagles as Purdy got hurt early and an absolutely atrocious nothing QB came in to replace him, leading to a 15 minute time-of-possession (and other) advantages for the Eagles. The Bills over there in the West, I don't envision our record having been much different over there, but come playoff time, and given our playoff history, we likely would have gotten by Seattle, even if not by as much as they did, but Dallas, whose offense was better than either Cincy's or Miami's, we may have lost that game. I don't see how that's germane to my point however. As I said, this season will reveal much. I expect that by season's end, peoples' viewpoing of McD and the D is going to be somewhat different. I'm sure that more excuses will be levied in his favor, but nonetheless. Let's see how it shakes out as that is simply MO. I'm also not defending Shanahan BTW, I don't care for the guy myself. My point is that having Allen allows for McD to be over-rated. Culture and being a players coach are one thing, routinely getting your a$$ handed to you in the playoffs once you hit the divisional round is altogether another while your defense entirely underachieves its regular season performance. Simply because you say it doesn't make it true. If you want to talk about playing both sides, how about ignoring 6 games in favor of a single game. I'll let readers decide after that. LOL Honestly, ... seriously? .. and honestly, what's with the big focus on "being right?" You wanna be right? OK, I agree with you, entirely. LOL I'll enjoy the season, things are going to play out as they play out. Don't like my takes and opinions, fine. I'll acquiesce to yours for your sake. LOL

So you're using a single playoff game to contrast with several unimpressive wins and critical losses then. OK, I'll agree. BTW, here's some more info on that game that you're using to attempt to argue contrary. The Ravens had ... More passing yards More total yards 340 v. 220 More 1st-Downs Better 3rd-down-conversions, we were poor Over 10 minutes in time-of-possession advantage They also had 150 yards rushing to our 32 (2.0 YPC) It was their penalties and poor kicking that was primarily responsible for our win. Did we play a great defensive game in allowing 150 rushing yards? That sounds like pure opinion. Either way, and again, if that's the only bright spot in an argument supporting McD overachieving come playoff time, it's problematic. Just sayin'.

Less with more: Last three seasons ... 3-0 in the Wild Card Round (2 of those wins against QBs Thompson and Jones) 1-2 in the Divisional Round 0-1 in the Conference Championship Game with the person we're talking about walking the Loss over to Reid on a silver platter at the end of the game. A supposed defensive expert allowing an average of 28 PPG, over 31 if we don't count the offensively bereft Pats, in our last four playoff games. Beating the Colts w/ Rivers despite being outplayed in that game. 4-3 overall with two of those wins against marginal playoff teams and both with low-end QBs, and another win while being outplayed by a team with the 9th ranked scoring offense and 10th ranked scoring defense and a 39-year old washed up QB in his last-hurrah season. Winning a division with QBs like Jones, Fitzpatrick, Tagovailoa whose in and out with injuries like most people go out for wings, Skylar Thompson, Mike White, Zach Wilson, and Sam Darnold is hardly impressive. It would have been along the lines of tragic had we not been able to do that, which fed directly into those seedings. Let's see how he does this season, over/under achieves, now that there's finally some competition in the division for the first time in over 20 years. Brady & Belichick had it easy in that regard too.

Yeah, no kidding. They should be fine with Purdy, who seems to be more in the Burrow mold, but if he maintains his level of play and improves after his rookie season, they'll have their franchise QB too. It's nice to have that piece, because then you can focus on building the rest of the team. That's what many Bills fans and a lot of media have problems with, what we've done apart from Allen. ... and Diggs. Hopefully this year is a turning point with Kincaid & Torrence. You lay that out as if it's trivial to acquire one. We tried for what, over 20 years, with varying people in charge, and got nothing after Kelly. It's not that easy and also requires quite a bit of good fortune.

For the pick. In a lot of peoples' opinions McD is doing less with more in that regard. Also, Possibly, I'm hardly a Shanahan apologist. I wouldn't want him coaching my team. Why not put all their good guys on our team and "see." LOL I'll tell ya what, switch Allen for Bosa and we're a .500 team regardless. D doesn't win in the modern NFL.

Indeed, kinda like how we could have had Mahomes, which almost everyone claims is better? Either way, in essence then, you're saying that McD's success is entirely due to Beane's having selected Allen. I'll buy that.

Now, put Allen on the Niners and their QBs on the Bills, and then what do you see?

Andysplaylist's thought is interesting, but here's the issue that I have with it. If that's true, it's suggesting that distractions will bring out competence, which is a stretch. LOL The other part of it is that McD has never come out and taken credit for it. Quite the opposite in fact, it's been implied, at least as I see it, based on veiled statements and press comments, that it was not his fault. Either way, we don't really know who made those decisions. The other thing I have an issue with is comparing McD to Reid, and more specifically when you said "relatively competent defensive mind." I'd ask for a definition of that before I comment further, but there's been a very inaccurate narrative since McD was hired, that somehow he was ever anything but a very average DC, which the data strongly suggests is the case. I recently made a post detailing that, I forget which thread I posted it in, but I'm happy to post it again. It paints the opposite picture, which I've maintained all along. There was never anything special about Carolina's D, and the talent he had there is comparable to what he's got to work with here, perhaps even a little better there. I mean when you have Kuechly anchoring your D ... IMO we're headed for a similar very average D ranked season here. I am expecting the offense to be the best Bills offense ever however, and IMO that's far more important in today's NFL. If this were the '80s or '90s I'd disagree, but in today's pass-happy offensively skewed league, much better to have a top-ranked O and an average D than the other way around.

Well, I wouldn't say "obviously" in every instance. It's amazing how quite often a majority opinion overlooks quite a few things. I guess I should have clarified a little better, but IMO it's going to be glaringly obvious. LOL Without assuming what you're viewing as the 'positives', I'll ask directly, what do you see as "positives" in our MLB situation? Asking for a friend. Frankly I'm not sure I see any. I've been told by some here that the MLB position is going away in the NFL, and not knowing the depth charts of the 31 other teams, I went and looked, and on paper at least, all have either a MLB or ILBs in a 3-4. So it does not appear to be the case that the position is disappearing. I also think that that proposition is ridiculous since teams still run the ball, and if the position were to be "going away" in favor of smaller LBs that can cover better than they can play the run, then I'd fully expect teams to run the ball UTM more, which only makes sense at that point. I've been bringing this up since last season assuming that would not keep Edmunds, which we haven't, and how we'd better get on the stick in terms of planning a replacement after his departure. That obviously hasn't happened.

This season will reveal much, including whether or not this unfolds positively.

All I know is that almost immediately after the Draft they said he wouldn't be playing MLB, that he'd be playing WLB. That's out there online. No need to argue about it. It is what it is. Don't look at me to defend what they say. I don't agree with their approach to building our roster. This is one glaring example of why not.

We'll know what the deal is if the next time we see him on TV, he's got a pair of those McD glasses on too.

Indeed, exactly. Therefore, as it stands, we are two deep at WLB, but have no MLB/ILB.

Thanks Yeah, I realize that's the narrative, but I specifically looked last season and there were numerous times/game where he drops back, there's a player, sometimes even two, wide open short on the outsides, occasionally over the middle, he either doesn't see it (difficult to imagine) or ignores them, and either goes deeper or scrambles trying to find a deeper guy. I'm also referring to routine 1st and 2nd down plays, not 3rd-and-long plays, which is understandable. I'm actually going to make a running video reel this season of those plays to illustrate it. But we can go to pretty much any game and find them. The only question is why does that happen. But that's where Brady made his living, going through his progressions rapidly, and regularly hitting those guys in the flats/out for say an 8-yard gain and moving the chains and consuming precious time, keeping the D off the field. It's fine to score a TD in 2:30, but if you can score one in 6:50, as long as the clock isn't an issue, why not do that. Brady buttered his bread so to speak by doing that. Sure, he could throw deep and take advantage of Moss, but he knew the importance of consistency in moving the ball. I'm not sure that Allen's got that down yet and there are tremendous questions as to whether Dorsey does or not. One of the things that bothers me about Dorsey, and this is pure speculation, but IMO he's trying to live vicariously through Allen, even if only subconsciously, trying to relive his collegiate glory years from the coaching perspective, which if true would explain a lot, but is also obviously problematic. This isn't FFL, it's real games. From a play-calling angle, sometimes it's problematic when every receiver is 10+ yards downfield.

Our two worst Total Yards games and worst and third worst games for Passing and 1st-Downs. We averaged 18.5 points, 16.5 1st-Downs, 275 Total Yards, and 156 Passing Yards. They averaged 16 points, 20 1st-Downs, 310 Total Yards, and 185 Passing Yards. That sounds like a coaching issue to me. Now they have Rodgers and Cook. We haven't changed significantly and are likely worse on D. I like Torrence, but that's probably not an encouraging first game for him to play in. I'm concerned.

LOL, there is that conundrum element to it for some.

I will say, I actually like having a tough division, like it was in the late '90s. Makes you tougher for the playoffs. It's better than a one-team race every season like it's been for 22 years where the divisional games are merely formalities. Agree The big thing for me is that KC has no significant WRs on their roster. Maybe they'll add one after cuts or via trade, but I'm far from convinced that they have even a top-5 offense again. Kelce's 34 as well, he'll be doubled constantly. For a team that's fielded an average to slightly above-average D I don't think that this is their year again. I also think that Jax is gonna be one of the stronger teams. They're well coached, great QB. I wouldn't be surprised if Press Taylor's in the head-coach discussions during the season.

I'll let the shortstop speak for me.