PBF81

If it's not obvious then don't sweat it. It's not that important.

The Jets can't score. It's extremely difficult to win games when you can't even average one offensive TD per game. Not sure how they're going to win this one. Boyle may be better than Wilson. He may not be as well. Even if he is, he'd have to be a whole lot better.

Check out the context. Did you do that? It'll make more sense then.

No doubt. I'm simply not big on needing firsts in order to win. Anything could happen. Simply pointing out the trends and patterns going into this. And since when have we been playing our best ball? Just sayin'.

No team scores on every drive, obviously. With the single early season high exception of Miami, we haven't put up more than 25 points without the aid of more than 2 turnovers. Philly has only turned the ball over more than 2 times just once. Our offense is going to have to play better than it did vs. the Jets if they hit their 32-point home-game average in this game. That's a lot to ask given where we are now as a team. Brady's debut was overrated, despite that being an unpopular notion, he was aided by 10 points all but gift-wrapped by STs & D, and by one huge play that we haven't seen all season otherwise. Those things aren't likely to reoccur. But yeah, the offense is likely going to have to do what it hasn't done this season.

One of the most beautiful things was the Montana-to-Rice timing pattern.

Well, somehow they've managed to beat the Fins, Cowboys, Chiefs, and Vikes by averaging nearly 30 PPG against them, which is more than we've done. Not sure it matters which offense of ours shows up, we should be much more concerned that our overrated D gets exposed. It's been great against teams with siht QBs, but not so great against teams with good ones that are well coached. And as usual, it's pretty unlikely that we'll outcoach them. It's a lot more likely that we'll need 30+ points on the board to beat them. They've averaged 32 PPG at home. The Over is 48.5, that sounds like a good bet.

OK, ... and how many times did we go 8-8? Who were the QBs in each of those seasons?

Couldn't have happened because he's a drunken sot now, could it have.

If he wins the Super Bowl, I doubt you'll find any fans that care beyond that. We'll all be so ecstatic that it won't matter. We'll see what happens, but it would be wise to suspect that our defense is about to be exposed against the teams that we'll be facing from now until the end of the season, with the exception of New England. ... which ironically already exposed it. We face the 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 8th Scoring Offenses coming up, the Chiefs at 14th, and the Pats that already hung 29 on us in their highest scoring game of the season. If we end up with a top-10 scoring defense after that it'll be damn near remarkable.

Not sure that it's as big a gamble as is made out. Think about it, and keep in mind that up until this season there hasn't been much competition within our division since Allen got going, so with that in mind, how many coaches that we've had during our drought yearswouldn't have won our division during the past three seasons, and therefore simply made the playoffs? For sure we have underachieved in the playoffs, which with Allen many coaches could have and may have done. It's not fair to compare our coaches from the drought era that took us to 8-8 or 9-7 with schlep QBs, to McDimwit with Allen. It wouldn't be any different If McD had Manuel, Edwards, or Losman, and it wouldn't be fair to compare him to a team that has Allen. It's also a real stretch to think that he'd have had our team done what it has with Manuel, Edwards, Losman or even Bledsoe. As it is, his offense scored approximately 100 points less than Ryan's did with Taylor's. It's a tough argument to suggest that taking one of our 9-7 drought era teams, swap out Orton or Bledsoe, or one of our 8-8 drought era teams and swap out Taylor, Bledsoe, or Johnson, with Allen, that they wouldn't have generated that extra win, two, or even three, maybe more, to get us into the playoffs. McD's offenses were ranked signficantly worse than Ryan's were, all with Taylor at QB. His defenses were about the same although ranked slightly worse. He also hasn't had to content with a Brady-led Pats in the seasons in which we won the divison.

Ultimately that stems directly from a lack of proper leadership however, from the top of course, or for anyone proposing sincerity in the efforts otherwise, then an ignorance of what needs to be done. In short, incompetence. Either way, 7 seasons in, an Allen QB'd team needs to have been much further along, particularly in the playoffs, than it's been and remains.

The question that needs to be asked, is whether or not McDimwit with Allen is getting out of the team with Allen what his peer predecessors got from their teams with QBs like Orton, Bledsoe, Taylor, Johnson, Edwards and Losman, who all finished with records from 7-9 to 9-7, several of which also nearly made the playoffs On a side note, unmentioned by anyone to date, in the six season prior to our playoff drought, we made the playoffs in four of the six seasons prior and since our Super Bowl years and Polian's firing, and we also lost those in the WC or Divisional Rounds. Now we have Allen, the standard needs to be significantly greater.

Generally speaking, few in the NFL talk serious personal smack about anyone else in their "fraternity." That's why what coaches, players, etc. say about one another is nearly meaningless. They'll never be honestly critical with few exceptions. They certainly shouldn't be let off the hook for idiotic rookie errors years into their tenures.

If he can take us too the playoffs by us winning, and not with a bunch of other teams imploding, and get us at least to the AFC CG, and not lose that one due to some idiotic coaching blunder, or better yet, win the damn thing and advance is to the Super Bowl, again, playing without blundering it away, win or lose, then this becomes a whole new conversation. If he can't get us past the Divisional round again for the second time in 7 seasons, if we even make it, them he's made his own bed. Until then ... Either way, not sure I see Pegula eating the crow that would be necessary to admit a McDimwit type blunder in extending him rather than waiting too see how the first half of this season played out. As always, it's not as if it comes down to a forum vote here, so we're all captive to Pegula. Otherwise, maybe we'll have further insight after Sunday's game. Every game is a must-win now. The thought of having a mid-round pick is an appealing one.

We also have to realize that he only fired Dorsey due to fan & media pressure. He repeatedly stated his story for Dorsey. I'm not sure he gets kudos for having his hand forced, any more than he does in supporting Peterman over Allen. ... yet another reason ...

Not too mention coaching. It's far from evident that he's been properly much less optimally coached.

Where in Germany?

Wayne Fonts ... LOL Yeah, that'd be bad, but that seems to be a good comp. Why Dallas? They've beaten much better teams than we have or than the Jets have. People can spint it any way they want to.

Yeah, pretty much, but that means out-executing the opponents. We haven't done that against the worst teams. So doing it for a number of games that would be required to hit some of these unlikely projections doesn't seem like an odds-on bet. Luck isn't a strategy or methodology for winning games. No coach goes into games telling his team, let's hope we get enough luck with TOs to be able to win this. Then not to mention any coaching gaffs as well as then doing it in the playoffs if we get that far. If we can do that for more than a single game, it'll be a first this season.

The Browns have beaten both the Niners and Ravens, and two of their three losses are to teams that are currently 6-4, presently seeded, and they lost both those games by 4 points. That's a little different than the Jets. Not sure how they're doing it, but those are the facts.

No, it isn't poor methodolgy for the purpose illustrated. How many games this season have been aided to a win by a huge passing plays of that distance? Have you looked? How about over 50 yards? I applaud your optimism that we'll get STs & D help in setting us up for 10-14 points each game, coupled with the notion that we'll have a deep pass for a TD every game, but unfortunately there's almost no basis for that. Again, big-plays and turnovers are not something that can be game-planned in. When you get them, great. When you don't, then you'd better be able to out-execute the opponent otherwise. It really is that simple. Again, in games where we've logged 2+ Takeaways, we're 4-1. In games that we haven't, we're 2-4. That doesn't bode well for the gauntlet that we're about to run. Particularly since teams like the Chargers have only one game with 2 Giveaways.

Kelce's 34 let's not forget. That's hardly an age where receiving types typically see a significant downturn in their play. As for TEs, one of the greatest receiving TEs of all time, Gonzalez, fell off at 33. Kelce almost has what Gonzalez had at the age of 34 now. This week's game should put him past that. So he's doing incredibly well for his age, but his contributions are going to continue to significantly diminish, generally speaking, going forward.

You've got it right. Anything else is excessive optimism. But first things first, gotta go take care of business @ Philly on Sunday. We have the advantage of an extra day of preparation, not that that typically works in our favor, and they're coming back from out west on a Monday night. The outcome of that game will tell us a lot. Win, and not because Philly implodes or anything, but win well, and it's a new season in a sense. Lose, and that'll pretty much end any talk of playoffs for us. Yeah, of course. And it's not as if it comes down to a forum fan vote as to what happens. LOL But how disappointing would it be if we "make the playoffs" again, but lose to a team like Cleveland, Houston, or Pittsburgh in them. McD's disposition at this point likely depends upon how well he can do that, ... or conversely, not do that. And BTW, Coughlin is a better coach than McDimwit will ever be.

And that'll be a great test of who we actually are.