PBF81

No, just advising that I've seen in print that it's now 2027. Sorry, I don't, I didn't save them, the articles that is. It was one of the county people that was quoted as having said it. I don't live in Erie County anymore and haven't for years, so I don't even follow the names of the politicians. I wish I could be more helpful. Frankly I don't care, not to be an ass, but it is what it is and what it will be. Debating it isn't going to alter the date by an hour one way or another. All I'm saying is that I wouldn't bet money on that it's available for games three years from now. Again, they were claiming open in 2026 when the construction was clearly to have begun. But back to my original point, and let's assume 2026, Allen will be 30. That fixes that. LOL Parking's going to be a PITA for at least three seasons, and when the new stadium opens there's still going to be "destruction" on the old site which won't be available for parking for at least one season then. I don't know if ECC allows parking, but if so, I think what'd I'd do is park on the opposite side of ECC and walk over from there. It's going to be a nightmare, particularly this season. I may look into going to road games instead until this nightmare is finished. We travel so well anyway, it'll probably be worse (for our opponents) for a few years now. LOL

Yeah, that's the party-line, but the reality is that they were saying that when construction was supposed to begin nearly a year ago by the time it does. As augie says, or at least implies, expect delays. I was merely saying what's been reported otherwise. It's in their interest to keep people as interested as possible for PSL income.

BTW, here's a timeline piece in the BN. https://buffalonews.com/news/local/a-timeline-of-the-new-buffalo-bills-stadium-deal/article_d1252c88-eaa2-11ed-a114-8beedb569797.html Sounds as if the stadium will be open to the public, perhaps to help sell PSLs and STs, but not ready for play until 2027. That's not the piece that I saw it in, but that's one.

The most recent piece said it was opening now in 2027, that was after the County signed off. Also, the clauses allowing for lease extensions, as a series of 1-year extensions, have provisions through 2028. We have to remember, the estimate for 2026 was made when they said that the digging and construction was supposed to have begun during last season. That obviously didn't happen, and has been pushed 8 or 9 months, so 2027 sounds quite reasonable. If you're interested, look for the recent articles about the County signing off, I saw it in at least two places.

And on that note, it's a good thing that elbow's healed. They wanted to make sure that Brown got something, even if only a participation ribbon. Gotta encourage the youngster.

Barry Sanders would be incredible in any days game. Instead of a RB, I'd love to see Ballard, Wolford, Hull, and Ritcher on our OL. Allen would be so much more relaxed and better at passing.

Boy, that's a very interesting proposition. I wouldn't have thought of that. I'll search it for attendance when I have a little time. I hadn't thought of that, but that makes sense, particularly since the stadium opens and Allen's first season will be when he's 31.

Presumably you mean the violence of the game on the field? ... and yes, I would agree with you on that aspect. That even continued into the '90s and I hated nothing more than players that deliberately tried to injure or hurt other players. Siragusa was like that for the Ravens, couldn't stand the guy.

Smart move! I'm quite content with secondaries, particularly since I live out of town. It should be interesting, and the comments here as well.

I am happy as well, but obviously disappointed when our seasons end as they have. I'm of the mind that I don't mind losing, as long as we play our best, and we haven't done that. I realize that I'm hardly alone there. I'm better at losing to a great team, which is why the Super Bowl loss to the Skins didn't bother me as much as the other three did. And in case it wasn't obvious, I've very analytical, by nature, education, and occupation. LOL I'm always looking at what's preventing things, anything really, businesses etc., from being much more efficient and optimally run. Then looking at the reasons why and causes, then making any corrections that align with that. There are always ways to improve. So I have those two aspects of me that are conflicting. I've toned down insofar as the Bills go over the years though. My criticisms come from my analytical nature wanting to improve and optimize the team's play. LOL I miss the days of my youth where I merely watched football and got excited to see the games. Then again, the game seemed to be much simpler back then. I still stand by the notion that the best era of football was the '70s and '80s

Definitely bigger and I agree that he's more explosive, but he doesn't strike me as being faster. Singletary's shiftier too. His best games were against us, which is why I'm guessing that they liked him, a little blindered vision there IMO. Also a disproportionate number of his rushing TDs were against us. In about 10% of his games he posted 25% of his TDs. Against all other teams besides us he's averaged only 4.4 ypc which is very average. Singletary's yards-from-scrimmage are nearly twice what Harris' are. IMO we're going to miss Singletary. I don't see Harris being anymore than a low-end starting caliber RB. If I had to compare him to one of our past RBs, the one that comes to mind is Antowain Smith. I suspect that they're planning on using Cook as the 3-down starter, how he fares in that role remains to be seen. The most carries he's ever gotten in a season is 113 at Georgia. The most carries he's ever seen in a game is 14, last season vs. the Pats.

As CA OC said, there's been mention of them, typically in interviews, by team people, I don't recall, but probably Raccuia, stating that those were in the ballpark. We should know definitively soon. The whole process will be quite interesting as will the fan feedback. Yeah, it'll be quite interesting for sure. Someone in this thread already mentioned lowers moving up to maintain their game budgets, which will put the sqeeze on those in those seats currently. The whole thing sounds kinda messy, but it is what it is. Agree with you tho, particularly on the improved crowd. Hope so anyway. And hopefully walking from the tailgate location to the gates won't be like walking thru skid-row. In other news, Allen will be 31 when the new stadium opens.

No, I think that's right, but remember, they don't pull those numbers out of thin air. They seem to have supported them since then. We should find out soon. It's in the interests of both the team and fans to release them, open up sales, and give fans as much time as possible to pay for those PSLs over the few years it will take the stadium to be built. I'm with you, I only do secondary market anymore. Between the whacky weekend weather and flex games now, it's too risky to plan that far ahead, I even buy mine after the game gets locked in schedule wise. I'd rather pay a little more and be certain. We travel so well that road games are good options too. Anyway, Jets that survey, was in an article by Tim Graham in The Atlantic exactly a year ago. ---- Location: Upper level between 15-yard line and the end zone Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $990 One-time PSL: $2,100 Location: Lower level between 15-yard line and end zone Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,730 One-time PSL: $3,950 Location: Mezzanine level end zone Coverage: Significant Heating: None Annual price per seat: $900 One-time PSL: $1,150 Location: Lower level between 40- and 20-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,900 One-time PSL: $4,850 Location: Mezzanine level between 25-yard line and end zone Coverage: Significant Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,580 One-time PSL: $3,200 Location: Upper level between 40-yard lines Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $990 One-time PSL: $2,600 Location: Upper level end zone Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $750 One-time PSL: $750 Location: Field level enhanced end zone Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,580 One-time PSL: $3,950 Location: Mezzanine level between 40-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Annual price per seat: $2,080 One-time PSL: $5,950 Location: Mezzanine level end zone Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Annual price per seat: $820 One-time PSL: $2,100 Location: Lower level enhanced end zone Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,090 One-time PSL: $2,600 Location: Upper level between 40- and 15-yard lines Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $990 One-time PSL: $1,400 Location: Mezzanine level corner Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Annual price per seat: $1,090 One-time PSL: $1,750 Location: Upper level between 15-yard line and end zone Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $990 One-time PSL: $2,100 Location: Lower level corner Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,440 One-time PSL: $3,950 Location: Mezzanine level between 40- and 25-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,440 One-time PSL: $4,850 Location: Upper level between 40- and 15-yard lines Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $990 One-time PSL: $2,100 Location: Lower level between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $2,280 One-time PSL: $9,000 Location: Mezzanine level between the 40-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: None Annual price per seat: $2,280 One-time PSL: $4,850 Location: Upper level end zone Coverage: Moderate, canopy overhead Heating: None Annual price per seat: $750 One-time PSL: $600 Location: Lower level between 25- and 15-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $2,080 One-time PSL: $5,950 Location: Upper level between 40-yard lines Coverage: Minimal, roof canopy-adjacent Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,190 One-time PSL: $2,100 Location: Mezzanine level between 25-yard line and end zone Coverage: Significant Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,310 One-time PSL: $4,850 Location: Lower level end zone Coverage: None Heating: None Annual price per seat: $1,190 One-time PSL: $1,750 Individual premium seating options Location: Mezzanine-level club seat between 40- and 25-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $2,800 One-time PSL: $11,200 Location: Mezzanine-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $4,000 One-time PSL: $20,000 Location: Lower-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $4,350 One-time PSL: $13,600 Location: Lower field-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $5,050 One-time PSL: $13,600 Location: Lower-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $5,350 One-time PSL: $9,200 Location: Mezzanine-level club seat between 40- and 25-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $2,800 One-time PSL: $11,200 Location: Mezzanine-level club seat between 10-yard line and end zone Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $2,400 One-time PSL: $5,150 Location: Lower field-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $6,050 One-time PSL: $24,250 Location: Lower-level club suite between 40- and 25-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $4,500 One-time PSL: $13,600 Location: Mezzanine-level club suite between 25- and 10-yard lines Coverage: Significant Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $3,000 One-time PSL: $6,250 Location: Lower-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $4,350 One-time PSL: $11,200 Location: Mezzanine-level club seat between 40-yard lines Coverage: None Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price per seat: $4,500 One-time PSL: $20,000 Suite seating options Location: Sideline executive suite Number of seats: 16 Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $198,150 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level living-room box in corner Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: None Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $75,150 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level loge box on sideline Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $54,000 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level loge box on sideline Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $60,250 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level mini suite on sideline Number of seats: Eight Coverage: Enclosed Heating: Climate-controlled Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $103,450 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level owner’s suite on center sideline Number of seats: 16 Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price: $347,700 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level owner’s suite on center sideline Number of seats: 16 Coverage: Enclosed Heating: Climate-controlled Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $214,150 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level loge box on corner Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price: $63,250 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level living-room box on corner Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: None Food and beverage: A la carte Annual price: $63,250 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level executive suite on sideline Number of seats: 16 Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $267,700 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level mini suite on sideline Number of seats: Eight Coverage: Enclosed Heating: Climate-controlled Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $77,100 One-time PSL: Not required Location: Suite-level living-room box on sideline Number of seats: Four Coverage: Significant Heating: Above seats Food and beverage: All-inclusive Annual price: $60,250 One-time PSL: Not required

They released them in that survey that they sent out, what now, maybe 18 months ago or so. They seem to have stuck to those in subsequent releases of info.

Our general level of player talent isn't above-average. Cincy's is. I'd say 8-10 for Cincy. Chiefs I'd say 7-9. It's all guesswork, as you imply, but how would we move the ball w/o Allen? It's rhetorical.

LB is the most interesting position battle from now 'til the season starts.

Mahomes wouldn't have the degree of success here that he's had in KC. JMHO

I guess, but I think you're reaching three. LOL IMO tho 13-seconds was far worse because it essentially handed the game to KC on known premises throughout the game, whereas that lateral, as stupid as it was, obviously wasn't the called play. I'm not sure that it was supposed to have happened under those circumstances as they evolved. Did Belichick ever state that it was the actual called play? Point being at least they tried, it was poorly executed and more on the players, particularly the one that made that idiotic lateral. "13 Seconds" was a complete vacating of any chance for hope whatsoever didn't even put the players in a position to have it work. It was doomed other than for poor passing by Mahomes and it was fully planned. I think I'd rather wager on getting hit by lightning. That lateral wasn't planned. Besides, if McD leads us to two or three SBs and then does that in his 20-something-th season, I won't say a word. LOL Also, Jones was in the midst of a horrible game, on the road in LV, and Belichick was probably thinking that he had no chance in OT, and frankly, he probably didn't, whereas we had outplayed KC in that game otherwise. It was also the very last play in the game and I doubt he envisioned a perfect lateral by his own player to an oppponent that was in the absolutely perfect position to score a TD for the Raiders. I'm sure he figured, "WTF, this is headed for OT, so let's give it a shot" kinda thing. I can't compare that to "13 Seconds." Jones didn't even appear to be ready for a lateral. Point noted however. I will say, that that wasn't under Brady tho, and as I'd mentioned, Belichick sucks and isn't even a winning coach w/o Brady. As to McD, I see an average 6-win team the last three seasons without Allen. I said that they wouldn't win more than 8 as a ceiling, I said 6-8, and that's with the relatively easy schedules we've had that I took into consideration. Belichick is still on the bubble for playoffs, which is maddening, but he still sucks w/o Brady. I'm forcing myself to reserve judgment for another season or two. He at least has seen to it to put a decent OL on the field, and anytime you have that you have a shot at a 10-win season if your D is average. It's not difficult, for any team, to win 5/6 games. Very few teams win less. Last season only four teams won fewer than 5 games. In '21 only 5 teams. It's difficult to do, but either way, our average during our "drought" was 6.6 IIRC.

Yeah, I remember that lateral, that was post-Brady tho, right? That was also a desperation move, wasn't it? All players and coaches make mistakes, the question is how many rise to the level of "13 Seconds." And our defensive alignments as in the Cincy game are mindboggling. Belichick has sucked as a coach when he hasn't had Brady lending credence to my points similarly about McD and indirectly about Beane. Only two playoff appearances in what, 10 other seasons, only one playoff win, ironically against the Bledsoe led Pats. LOL Also, likewise, thanks!!

True, and I don't think that if Mahomes had the Patriots' wide receivers, as an example, that he'd be nearly as good. Also, as we know, QBs always take more heat and get more credit than they're responsible for, generally speaking. But I'm not sure that too many other fans are jealous of our OL. Brady also had coaches noted for their competence and top-notch OLs. Can you think of anything akin to "13 Seconds" or those ridiculous defensive alignments etc. that Belichick or his other coaches were responsible for? I can't think of a single major SNAFU that readily comes to mind throughout his entire career. We have numerous ones in six short seasons. Brady exceled in realizing that it was the high-percentage passes that were key and focused on them, realizing that most average WRs could be utilized in that way. Same there, he rarely had receivers exceed much over 1,000 yards, and if they did, typically not by much. Edelman and Welker, both short-yardage slot guys that averaged 11.0 ypr career were two of his better WRs. Gronk was Gronk and would have exceled anywhere. He spread the ball out and was a great on-field tactician in that way and knew how to read Ds, perhaps better than any QB ever. He got more out of all the pieces as a whole, but he also had far better OLs than Allen's best OL ever, who knows when that was. Allen's never had an Edelman or Welker, Beasley's the closest he's had and that was his most successful season, 2020, when he was actually hitting the high-percentage stuff more often. This season will be interesting but Kincaid's still a rookie. Point being, perhaps Allen could do the same with coaches that didn't make "13 Seconds" type of errors or hand huge chunks of yardage to opponents and a top-10 OL. I mean don't you think that would improve Allen's "lifting of everyone else"? Otherwise, right now I see most of the players on our team that would run through a brick wall for Allen. That's a valid concern. My MO is to get the people when their available, not wait until your hand is forced by the media and/or fans that have had enough, force you as the owner to fire them, and then have lesser options than had you planned it out according to when the best would be available. One thing that has plagued us in that way is wanting coaches (and GMs to a lesser extent) for cheap, which I've never understood. I don't know exactly what the cap is these days, but teams spend around $300M on players annually, but hesitate to dish out $10/season for a coach who's the one responsible for putting it all together. That makes no sense to me. I would think that now we would have no trouble attracting the best candidates, it's simply a matter of paying out for the best ones. Moreover, how were the better ones in the league now hired. Obviously someone of influence saw something in them. That wasn't the case when we hired Beane, who was obviously coming from Carolina after the way that they hired McD. What did they see in McD? His track record as DC wasn't particularly stellar, in fact it was incredibly average and inconsistent. And as of today, can you or anyone define what this mythical "Process" actually is? Sounds to me like a ton of BS designed to keep the questioning at bay. Just sayin'. I think that lost in this as we're discussing, again, is where they would be without Allen, that singular draft pick. Honestly, I don't see more than a 6-8 win team annually, which is what we had before they got here. If that's true, then what's the defense of them? (rhetorical) Thanks!! And likewise! I always enjoy a respectable and well thought out back-n-forth! It's the noise, the tangents, and the unnecessary ad hominem that make interactions unenjoyable. LOL

Entirely understandable, after all, we're all fans and want the same thing at the end of the day. I don't begrudge anyone "drinking the koolaid" per se, but for purposes of discussion it's more fun and makes more sense if there's a basis for that discussion. I asked some questions in that post, if you go back and answer them, even if only to yourself, I think you'll open things up a little bit more. Thanks for the rest!!

OK, so on that note, and in the vein of our discussion, how is he supposed to get more out of the RBs? Or the D? How about the OL-men who seem to be playing their hearts out for him already? I can see him forcing more out of Diggs who seems to think that none of this is his fault despite near invisibility in three of the last five playoff games and one underperforming effort. Isn't is entirely possible that we simply don't have the level of talent for Allen to be able to "get that out of them?" ... other than for say Diggs? Also, was Allen responsible for ditching his safety valve Beasley? That's on Beane. There needs to be a degree of realism in any expectation for anyone that has a task set before them. It strikes me that we're asking Allen to turn mud into an award-winning chili as such. But the question remains, at the end of the day, isn't it entirely possible that the level of talent that we have generally speaking, simply isn't good enough to perform to those levels? I mean there are obvious talent differences between say Diggs and Brown, which is widely stated by our fan base every offseason, that we need better receivers. When fans say that, even they know that the talent is not there. Right? So why couldn't the issue be that some of us as fans, overrate the talent that we have?

Thanks! Yeah, I don't think that Frasier's coming back either. I digress however in thinking that McD's defense is going to be better. IMO we have too many shortcomings on defense to be a top-10 D this season, particularly against the slate of QBs and correlating offenses that we play. I do think, fairly or not, that that may lead to Frasier's getting a HC job somewhere as the perception will be that it was him that was responsible for our #1 & #2 ranked Ds. Maybe not, we'll see. The rub is that our playoff D has been on the opposite end of the spectrum, and as I pointed out in another post somewhere, focusing on 1st-Down stats as a singular indicator, they type of D that we have typically fielded in the playoffs, no team has won a recent Super Bowl with a defense like that, so it's incredibly unlikely that we will. In another thread I pointed out how statistically our D was well below average in pass-rushing after Miller went down, and we hardly played Mahomes, Burrow, and Lawrence after that. Mac Jones (twice), Justin Fields, and Mike White. Tua had a much better game w/o Miller than his game with Miller in. Defensively we have no impact pass-rusher, only one LB that's known to be a capable starter at something other than a replacement level, not one CB that was even average last season, aging Safeties and no help from the draft. There's a whole lot hinging on White's knee health this season. Von Miller's finished as an impact player at his age although we'll see him post-surgery at 34, I wouldn't hang my hat that his performance will even approach being reminiscent of last season much less in his prime. There are a whole lot of variables in a season where we face quite a few offenses in the top-half of the league and many top-10s, more than last season easily. We'll see how the season shakes out. I have to think that so much of his "lack of focus" are the stressors of having to overcome so many other shortcomings of the play of the team, and coaching.

Please, I enjoy a good and respectful back-n-forth, I wish there were more of it, not at all taken personally like so many others. Allow me to respond to some of your comments in that same vein. And please, feel free to respond back again. There's nothing for me to "get over," I have no dog in the fight. It is what it is. I do analyze it though, objectively. From an analytical perspective I do find it a little discouraging to see that the things most negatively impacting this team generally continue to remain unaddressed. But in deflecting heat from oneself while allowing it to settle on another under your charge, and someone that's essentially made you what you are, I do have a difficult time disrespecting, anyone and at any level, even employees. This was about Allen however, not me. I was defending him. I don't care if I'm 100% wrong on everything that flows from my pen if we go 17-0 or 8-9, slip into the playoffs as a wild-card, and win the Super Bowl. I'll be the happiest person on the planet at that time. If we continue to "make the playoffs" with Allen at QB, and continue to underachieve and get ousted in the WC or D rounds, then I will be incredibly disappointed like most other fans. But there's nothing personal on my end. At the end of the day absolutely nothing that you or I do or say changes anything. I didn't say that Allen would be winning Super Bowls, I said we'd be seeing a different Allen, for sure a more efficient Allen. I firmly believe that we would be, and no, I didn't elaborate because I didn't want to deal with the backlash and tangents, but I will briefly here. IMO he'd be more of a pocket-passer while using his athleticism only to escape trouble when absolutely necessry, which he wouldn't be facing with nearly the frequency on any of those three teams because their OLs are better, ... because their GMs have done a notably better job at doing that among other things. I was not all that high on the Rams and have even took heat here for stating that their success was largely hinged upon a soft schedule that year and some good fortune and peaking in the playoffs. Not that that matters, your thoughts on McVay aside, IMO Allen would be different anywhere that has a significantly better OL than we've had, and that's a good number of teams. Beane's had 6 drafts now, so I'm not sure "how much time" he needs. Others have done it in far less. As to the Pegulas, who cares, Kim's entirely out of the picture now and Terry has implied if not all but admitted that he's not a football guy like that and he takes no active role in overseeing the team. The Pegulas are not germane to the discussion. How many owners have supported underachieving GMs and HCs in the past, and even now, today. My biggest issue, since apparently it wasn't clear, was that Allen's taking more heat than he should be, and much of that has to do with McD. Your supportive statements re: McD above aside, what does it say for a coach that preaches character and integrity, that refuses to address the biggest reasons why his team loses games, and coaching related, not QB related, and leaves his QB out there to address the media on the topic? In my book it doesn't say very much and is hypocritical. You validated that McD has done that, so do you support it? Do you think that it's good form for someone that preaches (almost literally) integrity and character? Because I don't, I think it sends a poor message to be frank. Allen's trying to be the consummate "team player" in the proverbial sense in this regard, but taking far more heat and responsibility than he should be, and taking it for both Beane's and McD's errors, shortcomings, and mistakes. I mean seriously, allowing an average of 393 yards and over 24 1st-downs in 7 playoff games over the past three seasons is hardly Allen's fault. It is unarguably horrific defensive performance however. We can disagree on all that, but I will say this, if that continues, I'm worried about Allen exercising his out in a couple of seasons. It's nice to think that he'd never leave Buffalo, but if he continues to take a beating because Beane's neglect and/or judgment about building enough protection for him, thereby threatening the longevity of his career not to mention his ability to take his team to the promised land, and if McD keeps fudging up our defensive performances in the playoffs, like with those ridiculous alignments in the Cincy game, and do we need to even discuss "13 Seconds," something that McD has never come clean on, then Allen may opt to leave. In finishing this post, you said the following ... Beane has now had 6 drafts and McD's heading into his 7th season. Defensively we've been tops in the NFL in the regular season, but in the playoffs we have regularly performed to the opposite end of the rankings. The offense has essentially been all Allen, even for running the ball. Now it's commonly held that we're trending downward, and that both the Fins and Jets are trending upward. What if one of them wins the division, or heaven forbid NE? We have better talent on paper than all three teams. And as to McD, to this date we still don't know why "13 Seconds" happened, or whom was specifically to blame for some of our ridiculous defensive alignments in the playoffs. Why? Because he, McD, hasn't come clean on it. That's all fine and dandy, but then it leaves people to speculate and leaves the likely assumption that he was responsible. Right? But if refuses to clear things up, then he should expect people to put things on him, question him, and expect that if it continues, as it has, that it may end up costing him his job. I don't think that's unreasonable in the least. So the question is, how much longer do you give both Beane and McD to "build success"? 8 years? 10? 15? I ask in all earnestness btw. The issues we have continue. So either we're hoping for a leopard to change its spots, or for enough time to pass for McD to learn in OJT fashion, how not to make mistakes that even the average football fan understands the basis for. At some point, whether it's after this season, two more, five more, or 20 more, the plug needs to be pulled. But here's the rub, if we wait too long, we forfeit the advantage of having Allen here, which is 100% of the current basis for hope on this team. Right now there's a stigma held by many, a good chunk of Bills fans as well as a majority of the national media and fans now from what I'm reading, that McD's merely another Marty Schottenheimer or Marvin Lewis, and neither of those coaches had a Josh Allen. And speaking of Lewis, what if Cincy hadn't ditched Lewis and gotten Taylor, who's obviously a better coach? Are you content to ride Allen's career out like that if that's the case? I and many others view it as a tragedy if it shakes out like that. That's essentially what we're talking about here. At the end of the day we have obvious flaws that are preventing us from winning it all. The question must be which of those flaws are more responsible than others, and then let's address those first. What much of the talk of Allen is about these days is his (personal) failure to take us to the promised land, when the reality is that he's that absolute last one that should be taking heat while parties more responsible take less than he does. No? Parting thought ... pick ANY of our QBs during our playoff drought years, put them on this team over the past 6 seasons. What kind of record do you think that McD would have had with those QBs of your choosing?

Well, again, it could be because all eyes are on him, and he takes the collective heat for all of our failures despite being the reason for whatever limited success that we've had. I mean how much help has he gotten offensively from Beane? (this draft and season waiting to see that is) Has coaching helped him out, to win games and advance to the SB? Has the D exceled in the playoffs? Has the coaching staff done everything that it can to utilize our RBs effectively to take as much heat as possible off of him? Meanwhile, McD never says anything in pressers and speaks in riddles, while Beane speaks in typical generalities. If Allen could focus on not having to put up 35+ points to guarantee wins, not have to overcome coaching blunders, on defense too, and could focus on purely his pocket passing, maybe he wouldn't feel the need to take 90% of the heat. It's difficult to respect McD while he hides behind lame statements made following bad or inexplicable losses without rendering any explanations whatsoever much less genuinely accepting responsibility, while Allen's hung out to dry and take the predominance of the heat for why this team has issues. Put Allen on the Eagles, Bengals, Chiefs, and even several other teams and IMO we see a different Allen. Meanwhile, he says what he has to in order to try to keep the attitudes re: the team positive. JMHO