PBF81

If the choice is to simply make the playoffs and get our a$$es kicked again in the early rounds or a higher pick, for all 7 rounds, might be better to get the pick. Who cares about simply making the playoffs anymore. We have Allen! Anything less is underachievement with this offense. Making the playoffs is one thing. That was a good goal in 2017, not today. Hopefully the goals for us are greater. What we do know is that to date we have not beaten a team the likes of Philly, KC, or Dallas, two of which are on the road. Miami will likely be more than the challenge it was at home and when we had two Takeaways that set-up 10 points for us, and the Chargers are likely underrated having lost four games to three current division leaders and Dallas, by 2, 3, and 3 in three of those games. NE has better coaching and already beat us. Of course we have the talent to win any of those games. On the coaching side, we're at a disadvantage in almost all of them. The ball is in McD's court. As usual, what we want we have little control over.

KC's WRs leave a lot to be desired. It's inevitable the Kelce hits the wall anytime. The thing is that their D's really improved. We have to prove that we can beat teams of that caliber. If we do it, great! If not, I guess the consolation is that we'll be picking in the middle of rounds then. GO BILLS!!!

Indeed. It seems that the majority of complaints about our running game are about when we're running just fine, gobbling up huge chunks of yardage, then we abandon that and force the passing game. Why? Is that what McDimwit calls complimentary football? It's mystefying at times. No one is saying that we need to be a running team first, but teams are obviously going to shut Allen down, when they do, to one extent or another, then run, particularly if that's working. Common sense there, yet ...

LOL, looks like someone struck a nerve. No. Does it seem as if that's what I was doing? Come on now. Actually that's not true. Take away Shakir's big play and we put up slightly below-average what their opponents have in terms of passing yards, and only more than the Broncos, Chargers, Raiders, and Giants. Conspicuously two of the teams we beat and one that we lost to. Without that play, we'd have been right smack in the average of what they've allowed against them, and only 4 more yards than Denver, and otherwise, again, only ahead of the Raiders, Chargers, and Giants. Our rushing production ranked ahead of only two other teams that they've played, which is also therefore below-average. The Jets also tied for the most TOs they've had in a game this season with 4. So no, without Shakir's play, we did not do better than average, we were average at best compared to other teams that they've played, and ahead of only teams that shouldn't be anywhere close to where we are offensively. Dismiss the rest as you like. Well, yeah, we need to see it consistently, and all that I was attempting to do was to reinforce that and give pause for this notion that we're retracked as many have suggested. At the end of the day, we were one huge STs play, one huge Defensive play, and one single huge Offensive play away from posting a below-average number of points (15), yards, and passing yards against the Jets. We were already only ahead of two other teams on the season in rushing yards. As to the KC/Philly game, did you actually look at the stats from that game? If so, did you happen to notice any key differences, or similarities given those differences? I'll help you out for purposes of avoiding any confusion. The Chiefs, with a mere 4 minute time-of-possession advantage, put up only 57 fewer yards vs. the Eagles than we did. They put up more 1st-Downs, 23 to our 22. Now, imagine if you will, if it's not stretching yourself too far here, whether or not you think that with the same 14 (or so) minute time-of-possession advantage that we had, they have been able to add to their already ahead of our 1st-Down tally, much less add an additional 57 total yards? Not too many people would consider that an unlikelihood. So no, it wasn't all sunshine and rainbows, ... as many here seem to be suggesting it was, and that some sort of new team is back. Once again, relying on big-plays and TOs is no basis for any methodology for success. At the beginning of the season it was also pointed out that we overly relied on Takeaways for our success, but that this was not a good basis for sustained success. To wit, when we have 2+ Takaways, we're 4-1. When we don't, we're 2-4. If that pattern holds, first, what are the odds that we'll generate 2+ TOs from teams like the Eagles, Cowboys, Fins, Chargers, or Chiefs? Given that, which of the two molds do we fit into more for those games if we do not? The Chargers have only committed 2 TOs once this season, never more. The Cowboys have had two games with 2 or more, once with 2, once with 4. The Eagles and Chiefs less so, same with the Fins, probably our most difficult games otherwise. The only two teams that we've beaten without a reliance upon TOs, are the Giants and Bucs, both of which we barely beat. This Jets game was another one of those like the Skins and Raiders games. Ironically, we all thought the same things about our season then that many are saying again now. If there was a point here, it's that it is not wise to do that in this case. Part of good strategic analysis is to separate first and foremost, the things that are sustainable elements to some sort of methodology or set of tactics, from those which are not. Poor QBs throwing INTs, unanticipated FRs, and 80+yard big plays for TDs simply are not a sustainable element to build a core methodology. They're nice when they happen, but are also a lot less likely to occur against the types of opponents forthcoming on our schedule than against teams like the Raiders, Skins, Giants, and Jets and their crappy QBs. Hope that helps.

Have the Mrs. or someone in your family do it. I can't do it myself like some people can. I look like some stoned person gave it to me. LOL I taught my wife how to do it, takes a few minutes for her now.

If McD wins the Super Bowl, I'll go personally wash his f'n car!

Uh ... yeah. These guys are usually pretty tight. According to them we've easily had the easiest schedule. Bills: -4.7 Atlanta: -1.4 NO: - 1.2 Carolina: 1.1 Tampa: 2.0 Are you seriously arguing this? We've played the Jets twice, Pats, Giants, Skins, Denver, Tampa, and the Raiders. Not one of those teams has a winning record. Denver's .500. We also played Jax and lost, Cincy, also .500, and lost. The only team that we've beaten with a winning record is divisional rival Miami. Their schedule has also been weak and their wins are similar, they also haven't beaten a team with a winning record.

Yes, that's the high-level narrative. Keep in mind however, we struggled in the Red Zone, going 1-of-4, and we hardly shone on 3rd-downs going 5-of-13, 38.5%, which is tremendously average. 20% of our total yardage was one play. Other than that 81-yard pass play for a TD by Shakir, we had three drives over 23 net yards, only one resulted in a TD. There's stuff to work on.

The defensive rankings of our opponents has been similar. Going by Scoring Defense Ranking: 9th, 11th, 12th (twice), 13th, 21st, 23rd, 25th, 28th, 30th, and 32nd. Now we go into the gauntlet. Offense: 1st, 2nd, 5th, 8th, 14th, and 31st (Pats, who've already masterfully beaten us by putting up their biggest point-total of the season) Defense: 3rd, 5th, 16th, 23rd, 24th, 25th (Pats) In balance O/D ranking pairings we have, in scheduled order: @Philly: 5th/16th @KC: 14th/3rd Dallas: 2nd/5th @Chargers: 8th/24th NE: 31st/25th @Miami: 1st/23rd And either way, even if you don't think it was the easiest, we have a grand opportunity to show our stuff against a much tougher schedule forthcoming. No one's going to confuse the Jets, Pats, Giants, Skins, Bucs, Broncos, or Raiders with the Eagles, Chiefs, Cowboys, or even Chargers.

That's a very good point! Our schedule to date has by far and away been the easiest of any team in the league. Now it changes to one of the toughest of any team in the league, quite possibly the toughest over the last 6 games. It'll be a great barometer to see what we have, on both sides.

Nice summarization! We need to keep in mind as well, that 17 of our 32 points were either set-up by the D or that one single big play to Shakir. Those are things that cannot be counted on from game to game. Our first FG was set-up by STs handing the ball to our offense at the Jets' 21. We netted 3 yards before settling for a FG there. The ball was handed to the O already well within FG range. Our first TD was set-up by Douglas' INT at the Jets' 23. Then of course that 81-yard TD by Shakir. Otherwise, 15 points, one TD and 3 FGs. Hardly prolific. Again, the point, those first three are not things that can be planned in, particularly against good teams. This was a Zach Wilson-led offense, or should we say lead offense given that it's weighted down by him, quite possibly in his last planned NFL start as a #1 QB ever. If/when we show up like that against @Philly and @KC it'll begin to look more like it may stick.

Indeed A lot went right for us otherwise too. We're gloating over the number of points we put up vs. the Jets, but that was at least partially aided by the D setting us up for 10 of those nearly in the red zone. Still good, just sayin'. @Philly will be a far more accurate test as to where we stand in terms of what our ultimate goals are. We still have McDimwit as our head coach. It's unlikely that we don't see anymore questionable coaching from him. Just like he couldn't see the blatant issues with Peterman, he stubbornly stood by Dorsey too. Both times fans and media had to force his hand.

This thread should be rather amusing as it progresses. 😅

Over that punk Gardner too!

Better OL is a big part of it. Torrence was a great draft pick. That's a big part of peoples' stated frustrations, the lack of much emphasis on our OL on Beane's watch.

If it comes down to tiebreakers, it's incredibly unlikely that we get in. It's the opposite of 2017. Let's simply see whether we can give Philly a game first. That will determine the outlook for the last quarter. We have the advantage of an extra day to prepare. Not that we've been strong on preparation, nonetheless.

Yes, I understand that. Thre's still no way to do it despite the try. As you said, having the Jets' D on the field for nearly 40 minutes takes a toll. The eye test even said so yesterday. There's not one team on our remaining schedule against which we can expect that luxury.

Wilson's finished as a planned starter in the league. LOL, in college Boyle had 1 TD and 13 INTs as a backup. 48.4% compl. %, 4.5 YPA, 2.4 AYPA Yikes!

I understand all that. There's no single metric that encompasses exactly how good a D is. Having said what you said, the converse is also true. Which is why we should not use this game as a significant indicator as to future performance. i.e., vs. teams like the Eagles, Chiefs, Cowboys, or even @Miami the second time. We'll have another edge against the Eagles on Sunday, as they're playing out west tonight.

Yeah, my bad, for some odd reason I thought that they were still determining games by the number of points scored. I hadn't realized that they changed that. Hence my having said Scoring D. https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/view/defense/table/passing/sort/totalPointsPerGame/dir/asc

Moved out by a little over a point per game. They were at the bottom of the top 10 prior to this game. Completely agree on the uncomplimentary part.

Maybe so. We'll see come Sunday.

Agree generally, but it's far from a #1 ranked D. They're the 12th ranked scoring D.

Yeah, we'll see. The Jets D has slipped though. They're ranked 12th in points allowed.

That's fair and reasonable. As for me, I want to see how they play this Sunday. Beat Philly and my optimism will grow. We've been through too much of this up-and-down crap as Bills fans. Let's see if it holds. It'll become more difficult for Brady the more video becomes available. New things (coaches, schemes, players on teams, etc.) always have a temporary advantage.