PBF81

IDK, our D has played pretty pathetically against some pretty awful offenses.

Easy, I was joking. You really didn't take what I wrote literally, did you? RiotAct got it.

Well, that's my point, ours ain't either. Eagles rank 4th in Rushing YPG allowed, Jets 28th, but keep in mind that (without looking) it's quite possible that many of those rushing yards are at the ends of games against a worn out Jets D and simply consuming time in already won games by their opponents. I don't know, but it's a good speculation. We rank 20th in YPG. This next stat is what makes me say that. The more important one is YPC allowed, where the Jets rank 11th, the Eagles 19th, and us at 29th with YPC allowed of 4.1, 4.2, and 4.7 respectively. We'll see how it shakes out. Otherwise, you're saying that we're going to hang at least another TD on them more than any other team, including three teams ranked 2nd, 4th, and 6th in scoring did? ... and at least twice their average allowed at home. I hope so, but that seems really optimistic.

I suppose, in the same way that we ignore the fact that the Giants, due to no particular action on our part, blew not one, but two opportunities at the end of each half to put that game away.

On the second week leading up to another game? ... as in today and this week? You do realize that we just had our bye week, right? New game on Sunday.

That sounds great on paper, but the Chiefs' D at home has been sick. They're ranked 2nd behind Baltimore and SF whose Ds are excellent, and just ahead of Dallas. Their D has allowed only 14 PPG at home, 19.5 on the road. Bet the Under. My key to the game is stopping Pacheco. If we can do that IMO we win, by how much who knows, but if Pacheco has another big day like he just did or like he had vs. the Jets earlier in the season, could be trouble. Eagles' RBs logged 120 yards on 18 carries against us, 6.7 YPC, and Hurts added another 65. Pacheco also did a number on the Jets D in NY.

Maybe McD told them all to have a nice holiday and now he's trying to reel them all back in after realizing that we have a game on Sunday. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

McD?

BTW, based on the reports about Pegula not even considering firing McDoesn'tKnow, that will be nowhere near the final nail. There are likely many more nails to come, expect that coffin to be tightly nailed down long before Pegula pulls the lever on that apparently. I'm guessing that he'll have to have his hand forced by fan and media pressure.

Which makes more sense in terms of assigning success to one or the other?

We all do. I'm sure that Buffalo would be a nuthouse for days if we won one! Never meant to insinuate that you did. I don't disagree when you say can, but the reality is that it wouldn't be due to proper coaching in any likelihood, and particularly not for four straight games. For those on the side of "who's better," that doesn't really matter, pretty much any coach that isn't a complete dunderhead we could say the same for. And hell, for all the flak I direct at McDoesn'tKnow's way, if we won one on his watch, I'd put a bust of his on my family room shelf.

It's obvious to anyone that has their eyes open and is being objective. Any unsubstantiated narratives, which is most of them, to the contrary are quickly falling by the wayside. And let's suppose for a second that we do manage to go 4-1 or 5-0 and slink into the playoffs as the 7th seed, maybe 6th, what on earth are the odds that we can win four straight games with him at the helm against a field of coaches that all but categorically if not categorically are better than he is. The only way would be on the strength of talent, and we don't have enough edge to overcome that for 8 or 9 straight games.

Thank you!! The only reason why Kyle's here is because of his friendship with Josh. What you said above is yet another example of a lack of leadership in the coaching dept. Who knows what the dynamics are there, maybe McDoesn'tKnow is afraid to provoke Josh, which quite frankly isn't unreasonable given that he knows next to zero about offense. Just sayin'. He knows that if it ever came down to a popularity contest between himself and Josh, that the results would be equivalent to that of a WNY-wide poll on Ranch v. Bleu.

Some are going to jump on you for saying that, but that's tremendously on point! McD's priorities, in varying ways, not least of all in coaching loyalties and his propensity for nepotism are not properly aligned to be a head coach for a championship caliber team. How much longer does that need to play out that way before Pegula has a clue. I do think that we'll start finding some things out once McD is gone. Stuff always trickles out once someone is fired for incompetence and mismanagement. Not to mention, some may want to leak things in favor of their own careers. If someone is fired for a decision that they didn't make, it's one thing to "take one for the team" while employed, but once fired, the gloves are off.

At the end of the day, McDoesn'tKnow has pawned off all kinds of stuff onto his staff. That Peterman move, even amongst his own staff, was not endorsed by anyone but him. Everything else he's explained away by muttering "Trust The Process." He's his own worst enemy and that will continue to play out as long as he's here, unless he gives up a good amount of control of both sides of the ball to others, but it's not very likely that his prized former all-mediocre Carolina staff has anyone on it that is capable of doing that to the extents necessary. ... Brady pending given the unknowns there, but they are unknowns. Two games in hype mode is hardly a pattern there. So we'll see, we're all hopeful. Even if he finds those people, his game management skills, which are key HC traits for championship coaches, are notably subpar. Any time that you draft a QB 7th overall in trade-up fashion, you start him, unless it's detrimental to him, which it wasn't. Let's not forget that fan and media heat was already beginning to mount, which means that McD was already, or likely was focusing on saving his bacon. After our 2019 season there was already a growing sentiment that McDoesn'tKnow wasn't right for the job. It was only after Allen took off, which I attribute to Allen and his comfort with the level of play in the NFL along with his attitude, that things began to change. So it was the play of our QB that saved McDoesen'tKnow. So how is it that given what we know about him and his offensive "prowess" there, coupled with his own statements as to not having a clue in essence, that he's the one responsible for how good this team has been since then? From him we get "Process," "winning culture," as if winning games as a direct result of QB play is going to create a losing culture or even an apathetic culture somewhere, other ill-defined soft accolades that don't translate to anything concrete in the winning dept., and nothing but galactically stupid game-day decision-making, horrible use of timeouts at time, strategies from the '90s, and other things that have actually prevented us from reaching the ultimate prize after the players sealed it, most notably "13 Seconds," which in and of itself clawed defeat from the throne of victory. Why any of that is going to change after nearly a decade remains an unsolveable mystery.

LOL Hyperbole indeed then. I'd make a $1,000 wager on that with you, but you'd quickly see that that's a complete lie. So yes, please, go ahead and dig up those "daily posts" with me obsessing about Peterman. Meanwhile, your blatant leapfrogging of the question hasn't gone unnoticed. Now, if you'd like to switch from ad hominem to actual discussion, I'm game. Otherwise give it a rest if you don't mind. Looking forward to that string of "daily posts" about Peterman. Good luck!!

Interesting stuff, thanks!! Nice work too! In '17, we also only beat two winning teams that season, and only one team that made it to a divisional round, yet lost, which was Atlanta, which had the 15th ranked offense and the 8th ranked D, so good, not great. Also in '17, we were the worst team with a winning record in the league that season.

Clinical level? When's the last time he was mentioned? Hyperbole much. So you don't think that it's relevant that McD was the only person in the entire world at that time, that supported Nathan Peterman, because he saw something in him, while sitting a 7th overall draft pick? You don't think that there's anything related there in terms of his viewing our offense, that might lend at least a smidgen of explanation as to the woes of our team? ... please don't validate that.

Well, there's far more evidence to suggest that it's far more unlikely than it is more than remotely possible. Whether or happens against the odds remains to be seen.

Jesus Christ plays for the Fins? No wonder they're leading the AFC in points scored and will win the division. Otherwise, none of it could possibly have to do with a "defensive-minded" yet offensively strategically bereft coach that was once the only person in the world that truly believed that Nathan Peterman would give the team the best chances of winning, right?

That spawned some other thoughts. The worst 8 teams in the league, the bottom-quartile if you will, include the 4-win Jets, Titans, Giants, Skins, and Bears, the 3-win Cards, the 2-win Pats, and the 1-win Panthers. Collectively they have 26 wins, 11 of which are against each other, so those are dismissed. As to the other 15 combined wins, an average of not even 2 per team, only three teams have lost to them more than once. Atlanta, three times, to the Titans, Cards, and Washington. Denver, to Washington and the Jets, both in the first five weeks. And us, to the two that you mentioned.

And we could easily be playing the Chargers for that spot on a few weeks.

Contraption ... 😂

It shouldn't be unrealistic. In essence, you're telling the new coach that if he underachieves, he's gone. He could be gone anyway except with the contract in hand, but most coaches move on and get other jobs anyway, which comes out of their past contracts. So if you're looking for a head-coaching job, and the Jets or Panthers come calling with 3-year $20M contracts, or we offer you competitive per annum compensation to work with Allen, with a commitment to extend and keep you assuming that you also don't underachieve, you're saying that they'd opt to go to the Jets or Panthers instead? Most new head coaches don't get five year contracts, do they? Otherwise, I'd even offer them more money and give 'em a five year contract with plans on eating it after 2 years if it doesn't work out. Not sure I see much of a difference except that in one case they don't get fired, whereas in the other scenario they do. I'm not sure that'd be the case. With Tyrod Taylor, sure. But with Josh Allen? I have difficulty envisioning that. For me personally, I'd take a one-year flyer like that to with the opportunity to coach Allen & the Bills to a championship with the possibility of continuing on. At the end of the season if you fail, make your pitch to the owner, if it makes sense, you stick around for another season to see what happens. If you can't coach an Allen-led team to the AFC CG, not sure you're right anyway. IMO teams make too much out of how much a head coach is paid compared to the players. Under Wilson, he didn't want to spend a few million more on great coaches and we paid the price, but now we make decisions like Von Miller which pales in contrast to a HC making say $10M instead of $5M, say on a four year contract, losing what, $10M if he's cut after two seasons. Agree there.

That's the way to approach it. LOL