PBF81

We don't have three starting caliber LBs to stick into our 4-3, how are we going to find four. If you're going to point to Beane's drafts, good luck with that. The reason for that is that we don't have three LBs of starting caliber. Poor drafting has left us a dearth of talent that needs to be worked around. But Beane's doing a great job. Sure he is.

I suppose. OTOH, if Von Miller plays every bit of his 34 years old, doesn't come back to 100% (very likely), and Rousseau doesn't improve like most of our draftees on the DL haven't, then it's the opposite. That latter one has to do with coaching. We'll see I suppose. Talking about it between us between now and then ain't gonna change the outcome. LOL

😂 Why, for someone that's already irrevocably made up their mind. You obviously don't think that my time is worth much.

McD is very much like Levy except that he doesn't have the overall talent that Levy had. Both will get you into the playoffs, but neither is going to out coach his counterparts deep in the playoffs.

We've regressed offensively for sure. A lot of that had to do with Beasley's absence IMO. But the D, I simply think it was overrated to begin with for whatever reasons. Regardless, in McD's pressers he's trying to be like Belichick but he hasn't earned that. His "explanations" are non-explanations. All very closed and no accountability. I have to think that's by design. It was one example to illustrate the point, there are hundreds. Come on ...

Sounds like excuse making to me.

Well, we know that something's causing our defense to play like crap in the playoffs, they should correct it, whatever it is. HINT: It wasn't the Safeties coach. You raise a good point by implication. Good coaches figure things out on their own, they don't have to try to reinvent what they've seen elsewhere. Every team is different, if you try and coach it the same way that you coached another team, that's a mistake. McD apparently cannot do that. In other words, a good coach takes the talent that he has, and maximizes it. I don't think that there are too many people out there, including McD apologists, that would strongly suggest that he's gotten the most out of this roster, ... that he contributed to building by the way. In fact, come playoff time he gets less out of it defensively.

Last year's SB winner allowed an average of 18.75 PPG in the playoffs, a max of 27 2020 Season: 19.5, max of 26 2019 Season: 25, max of 31 2018 Season: 20.7, max of 31 2017 Season: 16.7, max of 33 2016 Season: 20.3, max of 28 2015 Season: 20.7, max of 31 2014 Season: 13.3, max of 17 2013 Season: 22, max of 35 2012 Season: 14, max of 20 The average of those averages is 19.9. Us over the past five playoff games: 29.8, with games allowing 31, 36, and 38. Here are some additional arguments. In 2020, we allowed the Chiefs to score 38. The Browns held them to 22 that season, and the Bucs to 9. Last season, of "13 Seconds" fame, we allowed 36 points to the Chiefs in regulation. We had the 1st-ranked scoring D. Pitt, with the 20th-ranked scoring D allowed 42, while Cinci and it's 17th-ranked D allowed 24. This season, our 2nd-ranked scoring D allowed 27 points to Cinci. The Chiefs' 16th-ranked scoring D allowed only 20 to Cinci. It just doesn't seem as if playoff football is McD's gig.

31 points would have won 8 of the last 13 Super Bowls. One could argue that you are ignoring numbers to make a point.

That feeds into what we're discussing. As QB Bills said above, it depends upon how big one dreams. I'll relate it to entrepreneurship. If someone starts a business, but never takes any chances, that business isn't likely to grow and become what it could have been. Many of us see that it's pretty obvious, and you seem to imply the same, that we're only going so far with McD, and that distance does not include a championship. You seem to be content with it while others are not. Am I willing to risk possible regression in the hopes of winning the big prize? Sure I am. You are not, seemingly. So it really depends upon one's perspectives and goals. Nothing wrong from a fan perspective simply wanting to go to and enjoy games, or enjoy them on TV. Many fans have loftier goals tho, and upon realizing that those goals won't be met, they insist upon changes. McD "made the playoffs" with Taylor in 2017. So why did we go get a QB? (Allen) That's easy, to upgrade. Many felt that Taylor wasn't adequate to win us a Super Bowl. They were likely correct. But we upgraded because he wasn't cutting the Webers. Are we not to try to upgrade our coaching, wherever therein the issue lies? Teams move on from good QBs constantly. Look at Cousins. Washington cast him off for that reason. As merely one example. The question should be, why is coaching exempt. Look at it this way, before we had oscar meyer hot dogs. Now we've upgraded to hebrew national, an improvement. But neither are Sahlens or Zweigle's.

That's it right there, some need to dream bigger. Imagine if Kurt Warner had come into the league from stocking shelves at a supermarket as he was, and had been satisfied with a backup QB job. ... for example. Again, what's the goal, a championship, or to simply outperform the team that averaged 6.6 wins/season from our last playoff appearance to when they got here. Some people appear to be satisfied with that. As long as we have well ranked offenses and defenses, simply make the playoffs despite never advancing to a Super Bowl, and have Allen, I guess their goals are met. Which is fine I suppose, it's just not our goals.

Agreed. And that's the question that everyone needs to ask themselves, what is the standard, the level of expectation. If it's simply to outplay our 6.6 wins/season since our last playoff appearance before they got here, that's one thing. They've done that and continue to do it. But for many of us that's not what it's all about, it's about winning a championship. Which they haven't even sniffed. The shortcomings have been discussed here ad nauseum. But here's the thing, fan pressure often helps initiate changes. Allen's not getting any younger and his style of play isn't going to go far into his 30s. We're already eyeing a rebuild of sorts with some of our better players leaving, best in one case with Poyer. Oliver and Edmunds could be gone, neither is stellar, but they're among our better players. While more and more fans will realize this, by the time that they do, Allen may be spent. And when will they realize it if we keep "making the playoffs," in what to date has been poor division during their tenure. During McD's time here, the Jets haven't made the playoffs at all. Miami once, and they nearly beat us with Skylar Thompson, in our house, and over the past four seasons without Brady NE has made it twice, being ousted in the WC round twice, getting hammered by us and getting beaten by a mediocre Titans team. We can speculate as to how long Allen can keep this pace up playing superman ball, but at the same time he's always one good hit away from who knows what. He takes a whole lot more pounding than most if not all QBs.

Well, here's the problem with that. We were just talking about our highly ranked defense. #1 for much of the season, #2 in the final analysis. How come we're so good during the season, but for the last three seasons, in the postseaon, our D no-shows? Once again, from my post above, here are the points allowed this post-season by the teams considered to be contenders, and it's the contenders that we need to beat. Us: 29 PPG in Playoffs Cinci: 13.5 PPG in Playoffs KC: 20 PPG in Playoffs Philly: 7 PPG in Playoffs Niners: 17.5 PPG in Playoffs Are they all really that much better than us? I don't think that KC is 9 PPG better than us for example. The others might be, but 15.5 PPG different (Cinci), 22 (Eagles), 11.5 (Niners)? And for the sake of argument, say that your argument is true at face value. Whose fault is that then? Because at some point this must then come around to Beane. Instead, we get this circular method of reasoning with apologists pointing to McD, those pointing to Frasier, those pointing to Beane, and they just keep fingerpointing at others. That's not going to correct things, ... neither is firing the Safeties Coach, the one coach whose two starters were missing much of the season, one all of it, the other some of it while playing injured the rest of the time, but when they did play healthy they were tops and his only starting S was regarded as the best at his position. Just sayin'.

I'm not sure that the discussion revolves around correcting it at this point. But to your point, before you correct it, you have to know why it's not working. There's an inexplicable (or explicable depending upon one's viewpoint) reason for why we have the 2nd-ranked scoring D in the league during the regular season, but for the past couple seasons it plays to dead last standards in the playoffs by the same regular season standards. ... and worse than any other serious championship contender. Remember, we were favored this season to win it all. Us: 29 PPG in Playoffs Cinci: 13.5 PPG in Playoffs KC: 20 PPG in Playoffs Philly: 7 PPG in Playoffs Niners: 17.5 PPG in Playoffs Someone responded that teams crank up their offense in the postseason. The reality is that they crank up their D too. So why couldn't we, but the rest of the contenders could? That's a discrepancy that really needs to be accounted for. My argument is that since the players didn't change, and other than for Miller we essentially had all of our guys back for the playoffs, it shouldn't be the players. It can only be one other thing. McD has a lot of power here apparently, which should have been obvious when they hired him and let him choose his own GM essentially. He is defensive minded, but people posting here seem to be split as to whether it's a Frazier-controlled offense or a McD-controlled offense. But shrouding that status in mystery, by McD, also points to a coaching issue in the form of a cover-up of sorts, and to be frank, a lack of accountability. I mean how many times can coaches state the obvious, "we just need to do better," when using it as an excuse for a loss. I mean, yeah, duh! What, we as fans didn't know that. Yet, that's the rote response of McD's. He himself says that Frasier's running the D. So which is it coach? And to be straight here, who cares if we have the #1 D all season but then come into the playoffs and play like we have the last ranked D. Frankly, I'd rather rest our defensive players some during the season, let the offense win the games, even if we finish 10-7 and make the playoffs, who cares if then we crank the D up. I'd rather have that. Regular season rankings in and of themselves don't win games. At times I get the impression that our team seems to think that once our D steps onto the field that for some other inexplicable reason the opposing offense is just going to mentally collapse and cash it in because our D is ranked so highly and due to that stigma. That seems how we play sometimes. If the choice were finishing with the #1 ranked offense and defense and losing the AFC CG or in the D round, or limping into the playoffs at 10-7, hell, or even 9-8, tightening things up, then winning the Super Bowl, I'd choose the latter. That's just me tho.

That's how forums and fans are. In five more seasons that "state-run blind McDermott support" sentiment as you state it, will turn to what we're saying now. Some people catch on sooner than others. Coaching held us back during our SB years too. Can you imagine if we'd had Parcells or Johnson. We'd have won a championship or two.

LMAO, yeah, the losers. And we were one of 'em, ... again. The Eagles had the 8th ranked scoring D this season, the Chiefs the 16th. The former allowed 7 ppg in its two playoff games, the latter 20 apiece. KC played Cinci as well, and Jax, who was playing better offense with a far better QB than Miami with Thompson. The Eagles held the Giants and Niners to 7 apiece. Granted, Purdy came out for that game, they were still no worse than Miami with Thompson. Everyone talks about how great Daboll was, well the Chiefs just held his O to 7 points.

Agreed ... and to add some additional perspective, KC has allowed 20 points in both of its playoff games, the Eagles have allowed 7 points in both of theirs, a 13.5 ppg average between them. We allowed 27 and 31, and 31 to a team with a third-string QB, for an average of 29, over twice their average. Scroll down to Playoff Results ... https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2022/

Seriously? It plummets to what would rank DFL in the NFL during the regular season. There's a reason for it, because it seems to be unique to us. Imagine if our offense did the same.

So in essence you're saying that once we get to the playoffs, we can't stop a cold. Unfortunately that doesn't carry much water. We've allowed 31 ppg in our last 5 playoff games. Against some of the same teams, here are the point totals allowed by the winning teams in the last 10 playoff games this season alone: 17, 24, 14, 20, 7, 10, 12, 20, and 7. So for some reason all the teams ranked lower than us in defense during the season, somehow, managed to do what we're incapable of doing, ... against the same "good QBs." Does that make sense to you? Once again, it has coaching written all over it to me.

So then why does it plummet in the playoffs to what would essentially rank last? ... 32nd that is.

Well, that's the difference in fan experiences and expectations seemingly.

Well, a couple of thoughts here. There are reasons why we were in the running for most dysfunctional team during that stretch. It should hardly be the bar by which future coaches are measured however. Secondly, is that then the standard, merely "making the playoffs" despite routinely being beaten by the better teams in them, ... while allowing a team led by Skylar Thompson, in our own house, to nearly beat us? I'm not telling anyone what their standard should be, if that's your standard, then great. Mine's a little higher though, and as I point out, they're not giving us complementary tickets, we're on the paying end of this business relationship. And our expense sheet is about to get a whole lot heavier once that new stadium is built. Despite this conversation, there is the likely possibility that while perhaps good, again, depending upon definitions, that McD, Beane, Frasier, etc. are not great and not capable of getting us to the Super Bowl much less winning one. People can argue all they want on this, but that is a looming possibility, and I'm not quite sure what else explains our Defense, the unit that we've by far put the greatest resources into both draft and free-agency, going from 1st or near 1st during the regular season to statistically DFL once we get to the playoffs. It's obviously not the players/roster, because they don't change like that.

I posted this in another thread about Tim Graham's statements just now ... ------------ If giving up on Beane and/or McDermott isn't the answer, then what's the question? What's the standard of Bills football? After all, the owners surely view it as a business, as do the coaches and players. But the fans aren't allowed to consider it a business too? Again, it' be one thing if they were handing out complimentary tickets to games, but they aren't. And the prices for the new stadium include PSLs (not business?) and skyrocketing ticket prices. Are fans to treat it as charity? If the standard is the "Last 20 Years," where we've averaged 6.6 Wins since 2000, the first year of our playoff drought, then sure, I suppose it's not the answer. But if reaching and winning a Super Bowl is, then it likely is. As a refresher, Frasier, who should have been improving during his time here, has allowed over the past 5 playoff games the following average metrics: 31 Points Against us per game 25 Completions per game 40 Passing Attempts per game ... for 279 Passing Yards per game 2.2 Passing TDs per game 4 INTs in all 5 playoff games, all four against NE (2) and MIA (2), none against Cinci or KC 25 carries for 120 Rushing Yards per game 1.2 Rushing TDs/game 388 Total Yards 31 of 63 3rd-Down conversions (49.2%) total in all five games 7 of 8 4th-Down conversions (87.5%) total in all five games 25 1st-Downs per game allowed 2.2 Sacks/game generated 1 Fumble Recovery in all five games I would imagine that the YPP allowed blows too. Can get that if we really want, but this paints all the picture we need of our illustrious playoff defense. Going down that list, those numbers would rank as such in regular season stats: DFL, 31st, DFL, DFL, DFL, 18th, 15th, 27th, 30th, DFL, DFL, DFL, 22nd, and 31st. So in case it's not obvious, as soon as we've gotten to the playoffs, our defense goes from #1 ranked or near there to NFL worst. That's not McDermott, Beane, or Frasier?? McDermott is obviously a part of that. So is Beane considering that 9 of his 14 day 1 & 2 draft picks have been on defense, and that his last three 1st-rounders were all defense, and 4 of his last 5 1st-rounders defense, with his only non-defense 1st-rounder having been Allen five drafts ago. They've also been D-heavy in free-agency. So perspective is relevant here. And what's the defense going to be like when, as now, they need to start putting those day 1 & 2 resources to offense? In short, if the bar is "The Last 20 Years," then there's cause for continued celebration. If not however, the above defensive performances are never going to get us there. Keep in mind that Frasier has regressed as such, despite, according to him and McBeane, having better talent. Everyone's obviously going to draw their own conclusion. 31 of 63 3rd-Down conversions (49.2%) total in all of our last 5 playoff games 7 of 8 4th-Down conversions (87.5%) total in all of our last five playoff games 25 1st-Downs per game allowed Those first two would rank DFL during the regular season, and by no small margin.

Well, now that we have the reason for our inability to make the Super Bowl corrected, ...