PBF81

Right, and let's ignore the fact that we're now forcing him into a game that thrives on that kind of throwing. What was that about prowess?

I hear ya, but look at Lofton and TO's aggregate stats, then look at the QBs and systems that were throwing to TO. Lofton would have easily been #2 to Rice all-time had he had Allen throwing to him. Agree on Moulds, he'd be my third, but distant third after those two.

Gotta go with Lofton here. He led the league in YPR twice, posted 6 seasons of 1,000+, and finished his career with 764 catches for 14,004 yards and an 18.3 YPR avg. His second season was close to 1,000 and he had another wedged in there where he got injured but would have had over 1,000. His QB in his five biggest seasons was Lynn Dickey. His other 1,000 yard season was here with Kelly, at the age of 35, when he posted 57 catches for 1,072 yards, 8 TDs, and 18.8 YPR. At 35. Dude was Gabe Davis with route running skills.

But why argue off in some arbitrary tangent then? Why waste our time?

You missed the point, entirely. Out of curiosity though, how many targets do you think that Samuel will get this season?

If you don't care, why comment? Your "analysis" is trivial. And yes, when all else fails, like our offense sputtering to end the season unable to average more than 20 PPG in our last three RS games, that's what out staff does, throws its hands into the air and "lets Allen be Allen." That's not coaching or leadership, is throwing one's hands up into the air. It's reasonable to suspect that they don't mind doing that for a few playoff games, just not all season.

What do you think that the whole complimentary football thing is, which is driven entirely by McD, as opposed to Allen doing what Allen does best, which isn't that. Hence the drop-off. That's false. Under Dorsey Allen posted 1.1 INTs/game, under Brady, 1.0, no significant difference. We also have to ask ourselves whether that trade-off did us good or not. If the offense didn't look good, was notably less efficient, with Allen's performance metrics dropping into the abyss, what's the point. If that's the point, just run the ball by Cook for infinite 3 and outs and have zero picks. Besides, as others have accurately pointed out, some of Allen's picks were deep in opponent territory resulting in "as good as punts." Significantly lower. I've posted how much many times. That's exactly the case and can easily be seen. Is there another logical conclusion? We have been underachieving the entire time that Allen's been here. Our offense under Allen is capable of so much more than we're getting, and our perennially diminishing overall team offensive production validates that. I'm not optimistic at all. Hoping it works, but to me this is a hope against hope situation. There's absolutely nothing suggestive that Brady's going to be better than average as an OC if even that. What we do will, as usual, hinge upon Allen's individual performances, very little having to do with Brady's scheming. As to Brady, I'm pretty sure that by season's end more people will realize the extent to which McD has his thumb on Brady. We shall see. There are going to be more questions than solutions by season's end.

OK, so factor the TEs in then. Carolina had nothing even approaching Kincaid. Anderson who? We were talking about Samuel's "big season" at Carolina. (2021) I see Robbie Chosen, undrafted prospect out of Temple. OK, but far from great. If you can find another notable WR/TE receiving talent on that team besides Moore, let me know.

He also had 97 targets, no receiving talent on that team that was worth a turd besides Moore, and a 79.4% Catch%. How many targets do you see him getting here? Do you see him repeating that Catch%?

What's interesting about all of this Brady love is that on one hand it's all his doing that we finished 6-1. On the other hand, despite the lack and diminishment in offensive performance metrics and general scoring apart from two games, he was still running Dorsey's offense for the most part. As to McD, come on now, if you don't see that then you're not looking, or rather, turning the other way. As to your last statement, agreed, that's precisely what I was referring to. If it doesn't change, then we're in trouble. But even with the change, we've heard McD & Co. say that they want to run more. Part of stripping away the BS is tearing down false narratives. Such as ... - Cook finished strong. No he didn't, he finished incredibly weak, bottom-dwelling in fact apart from a single game of his against a worn out team from their week prior and with us coming into the game as if it was our Super Bowl. - The offense was better under Brady. Simply false, particularly considering the trend over the last few games where we averaged 19.3 PPG and against defenses that were far from good, all below-average, two well below average. - Diggs lost a step. Also nonsense. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. But he was used to run ridiculous patterns often, like bubble screen type stuff and crossing patterns at the LoS, of course his YPR is going to suffer. But any thinking person would clearly see that that was clearly related to the issues between him and McD/Brady. Otherwise, no player loses a step from one game to the next. That narrative is built for fools. This season will reveal more. There are others, but those are the bigger ones. And when we factor in the whole complimentary football thing, which is McD's thing, it shouldn't be that difficult to connect the dots. Not to mention, all of these things collectively not playing to Allen's core strengths. No matter how it's sliced, Allen's completion % dropped by 10 points and his rating dropped by over 10 points under Brady. People can spin it any way that they want to, but there's absolutely no good angle there. Until further notice, but we're not dealing with Bill Walsh or Don Coryell here, we're dealing with an OC in his first season, one that produced low-end production otherwise and who was fired mid-season in his second season in Carolina, and that Carolina association is also not insignificant. Also one that's having to fit whatever his plans are under McD's complimentary football umbrella. It bodes poorly.

What we're going to find out this season is that "the 2nd half version of Diggs" was entirely due to Brady's use of him, not because of Diggs himself. Just as these progressive revelations have revealed, there's more to the Diggs drama than is now out publicly. Just remember, last year at this time, any notion of any Diggs drama was a "nothing burger," which clearly wasn't true. Allen's completion % and rating under Brady didn't plummet into the realm of the bottom-dwelling because of Diggs. Season long under Brady if it held for a full season, Allen would have finished ranked 30th & 23rd respectively, and ahead of absolutely no one significant. If that doesn't change, drastically, them were in trouble this season. When the last time a 21-year old WR did anything in the NFL? IDK, I'm sincerely asking, but it's tough to envision that it happened to any significant extent. ... Just looked. Jefferson, Keenan Allen, Chase, Moss, Cooper and Evans. Coleman's not even close to being in their company.

That's going to depend upon Brady's offense. I can envision Shakir being a top-10 WR though depending upon the scheming. A good OC uninhibited by his HC should be able to get that out of him. Samuel had 92 & 91 targets the past two years. Not sure why that changes much, particularly in a run first offense. His YPR likely won't be much more than his career 10.7-ish. Brady's approach with McD breathing down his neck is troubling. If Allen's completion % and rating under Brady don't improve from the 60.7% and 85.5 that it was, it will be problematic regardless of who's playing WR.

Yeah, but being sheltered from the wind is huge.

I don't think he's going to last all that long simply because he's not even proven himself to be average. It's like Brady and Belichick. This notion that he would have done anything but what he did in Carolina, where he was fired midway through his second season there, and which was bottom quartile offense ranking, without Allen is ludicrous. Nobody wants to hire Belichick because apart from being old, he's never done a damn thing w/o Brady and he's not bringing Brady with him. In 11 seasons w/o Brady as his starting QB he's been to the playoffs twice, and is 1-2 in the playoffs. Miserable. Ironically that single win was over Bledsoe's Pats. LOL Bledsoe's one of the worst playoff QBs in NFL history. Lamar Jackson's not good either but he's somewhat better than Bledsoe was. Anyway, I digress, Daboll wasn't accomplished as an OC either and his only two above miserable seasons as an OC or HC offensively were also with Allen. Could be Brady and Allen, not their coaches. Just sayin'. HINT: It is. That's not to say that a see the forest for the trees type of OC wouldn't make our offense prolific, I believe one would. We'll never see one here under McD however. On top of what you said, also going against Brady is the false narrative that Cook was something under him when he wasn't. I wouldn't want to be relying on Cook given how he played under Brady last season. And what, Davis? He's a Moss clone at best, not even a Singletary clone. He brings less to the NFL from college than either of them did. As to Coleman, it'd be wise to assume that his trajectory is going to be what Samuel's has been the past two seasons except with a lower catch%. I have no idea why anyone thinks that he's going to a reliable and consistent WR when he wasn't in college.

That's a great point. Your right, it's going to be very comfortable up there and the view killer. Barring one of those odd record cold games, get rid of the wind and it's comfortable. It's not as if WNY-ers don't know how to dress for cold.

Our offense should be several things that it hasn't been and doesn't seem to be shaping up to be this season either.

I'm not either nor have been, but we got what he was billed as coming into the league. But to the point, the guys in the video said that he got stronger as the season wore on, which is false narrative, not fact. He got weaker as the season wore on. I'm still trying to envision WTF we're doing on offense, it changes every season and last season it changed mid-season. We need to run Allen less, then we need to run him more, etc. It seems that when their offense doesn't put up they simply turn to Allen to do it all. That's not a plan, that's McDesperation, and it's damn good for McD that Allen's up to the task. Imagine that with our past QBs ... SMH As to Cook, he's not a three down RB and he's never been proven to carry more than a very average number of times on a season with any great results. He is what he is, but they knew that when they drafted him. ... or should have known. The problem with our offense is that we have no one in charge that is capable of seeing the forest, not simply the trees. We defer to whom Allen likes rather than someone knowledgeable and with the experience to make an offense be the best that it can be and to get the most out of Allen coupled with the least risk. This season McD apparently wants to, in the interests of "complimentary football," run more and focus more on a shorter passing game. That's the exact opposite of what Allen's strengths are. It's also complete reversal of what's made us most successful offensively. And this nonsense that slowing the offense down helps the D [blah blah blah] ... I mean SMFH ... Given Allen, and all that he's capable of doing, one would think that we could keep Ds guessing while opening up huge plays regularly. We do to an extent, but it's not because of scheming more often than not. It's difficult to envision that changing as long as McD is here. Hiring someone like that would threaten his tenure given our repeated defensive failures in the playoffs, and well, ... LOL ..., we all know that he's not going to do that.

Also depends upon when you buy your tix. I've purchased them in the lots before. The prices often come down. I live too far away now to go to more than a game or two per season.

Thanks! What's interesting about your experience is that the pricing is notably more than what it said in the survey that they sent out what, two years ago or so now. I'm in a similar situation. Of my three kids, only one, my youngest daughter, is interested in going to games and interested in sports pretty much at all outside of rec participation. But we live 6 hours away. We're planning on going to the Ravens game and even overpaying several hundred bucks per ticket, it puts the new stadium costs in perspective. I've sat in the clubs before and it's fine, but I would never watch the game from the inside, and IMO the clubs are overrated except for weather games, which don't always happen in Nov/Dec, many are nice. ... at least by WNY standards. LOL I only go to the weather games if they're big games anyway. I don't need to see us crush Carolina in the driving cold rain. TV's fine for that. So I'm with ya on the country club-ish nature of them. The whole mention of sushi for example, I mean LOL. WNY is a Wings/Hotdogs/Blue kinda place. Upgrades from bleachers in the endzones would be nice, but that's automatic and cheap and otherwise I enjoy moving around and seeing the games from different angles when I go, whether home or away. For me it's as much fun in the lots tailgating as the game is. I can do without being pampered for three hours during the game. LOL Either way, that pampering isn't worth a lot of money to me. IDK, ya think? It seems that for the people having purchased those that money's not a big issue. Otherwise I would think so too. I do think that there's going to be some wailing and moaning as the lower priced structure is revealed in the same manner. There's something severely off about not letting loyal Bills fan WNY-ers know what's going to be available and for how much. It's disingenuous.

Did they exchange a Go Bills at the semi-circle sink where they were taking a leak? 😁 Aren't we all semi deranged. 🥸

That shouldn't be shocking despite the rhetoric to the contrary. You buying them?

Cook posted the following rushing lines in 6 games under Brady other than for the Dallas game: 17 for 73, 4.3 ypc 16 for 43, 2.7 ypc 10 for 58, 5.8 ypc 20 for 70, 3.5 ypc 16 for 48, 3.0 ypc 13 for 36, 2.8 ypc Playoffs: 18 for 79, 4.4 ypc 18 for 61, 3.4 ypc Total in those 8 games, 128 for 468, 3.7 ypc He had one rushing TD in our early season blowout of Miami and another in our blowout vs. Dallas. That's it on the season. If Cook is going to be the #1 then he'll have to do much better than that rushing.

"Looked" is very subjective. IMO this is the season where the wheels finally come off of the wagon and McD starts taking heat for lack of being able to deflect it any longer. We'll see. You didn't answer the question though. Was there a reason why not?

I did watch the video. I was going to run through it again, although not sure if I want to invest the time. They contradicted themselves a couple of times and were inaccurate on a few things, more the narrative-driven stuff. For instance, they said that Cook got stronger as the season wore on, which is flat out the opposite of what happened. They also essentially ignore the fact that it was Allen's rushing, not Cook or the other RBs, that accounted for the increase in our rushing yardage and 1st-Downs. Cook actually got fewer 1st-Downs under Brady on average. In fact, of Cook's 7 games under Brady, 6 of 9 were his lowest 1st-Down producing games on the season. His yards-per-carry average plummeted to 3.5 his last five games including the playoffs, to bottom-dwelling territory. He was not good to finish the season. If he does that this season all season he'll end up not being here next season. The only exception for Cook was that Dallas game where Dallas came in completely off and worn out from the Philly game Sunday night prior to playing us. That was their biggest game of the season. I'm not a fan of either Dorsey or Brady, but if we're going to be honest, Brady's offense was not significantly better than Dorsey's if better at all. They were fitting their points to the narratives. Keep in mind that our offense averaged 19.3 PPG against three pretty crappy defenses to end the season. After our bye week it averaged 21.9 PPG, which is 4.6 PPG fewer than our season average, in those five games. In the playoffs not one player stepped up to much more than average, if even that, besides Allen. What they largely ignored when talking about "Brady's offense" is how our D played significantly better allowing 18.1 PPG with Brady as the OC and under Dorsey it averaged 18.4. The statistical distributions of the games under Brady v. Dorsey were essentially the same otherwise. I have a question(s) though, for anyone, but since you and I are engaging, for you now. What is the identity that the team is creating on offense? Effectively, not on paper. Keep in mind, it started with the switch from Dorsey to Brady, on paper/narrative anyway. Has that identity been consistent over the past few seasons?

That's interesting, most people blindly accept the false contested catch(es) narrative. I get an Alec Pierce/N'Keal Harry vibe from Coleman except with a lesser YPR. Not quite James Hardy, but closer to Hardy than to Watkins. The other nonsense about Coleman is this two-sport athlete gibberish. The narrative is akin to making him out to be a successful basketball player. He played a single season, was among the players that never played. He logged 10 minutes of playing time and scored 5 points in six games all season. He had one game with 5 minutes played, another with 2, and three with 1 each. It's not even relevant. Not to make a mountain out of it, but those on the pro side are making a whole lot more out of it than is actually there. On the age thing, I also don't get why McBeane like these "youngest player in the draft" types, we've been burned in the early years of at least two now and it's common sense that it will take longer for them to develop, particularly in Coleman's case and players like him, whereby against NFL talent in college he did not fare well at all.