dave mcbride

We’re not super rich and NYC is in my opinion the best place we have ever lived by far (including 8 years in LA and 2 in DC). Been here nearly 21 years too. Still love Buffalo, of course! Nexy time you’re in NY, get in touch!

I think the mid-second round is the sweet spot for RBs - not an overinvestment, but early enough to nab a truly talented player. McCoy, Bell, Mixon, Derrick Henry, Matt Forte, Ray Rice, Maurice Jones-Drew, Clinton Portis, Travis Henry ... lotta talent historically in that round.

No doubt. I'm not saying we should be investing firsts in RBs; just that the Bills have been historically terrible in later-round RB evaluation. Btw, did you see my addition above about Dwayne Wright and Ralph? Remember that? Incidentally, Shady's 2017 season was measurably better than anything Bell ever put up ...

You are not listening to me. The guys they drafted in later rounds weren't any good. To a man. Full stop. None. Nada. They didn't suffer because they were blocked by superior talent. They just sucked, mostly. That's my point. Everyone talks about how good talent at the RB position can be found in the later rounds. That hasn't been the case with the Bills, and we have 4 decades of evidence to prove it. The RB talent situation in Buffalo has historically been the opposite of the dime-a-dozen scenario that gets thrown about so frequently. Can that change? I hope so. But I'm not betting money on it given past history. Christ, remember when Ralph butted in during the draft and pushed for the drafting of Dwayne Wright in the fourth round the same year they drafted Lynch? He apparently saw some Fresno State clips and was smitten. Now that's some classic Buffalo Bills history!

Meh re Gillislee. I am thinking of a back that can actually produce beyond 500 yards rushing / 800 rushing-receiving. Fred is the only *good* RB they've had that they didn't draft in rounds 1 or 2. 5 years from now, we're going to remember Gilislee (out of the league now after completely flaming out in NE and serving as a very short term steroid-related replacement for Ingram in NO) as a guy who had a cup of coffee in the NFL and not much else. When you're highest AV is 4 ( https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GillMi00.htm ), you ain't headed to the history books. Yeah, you can point to to his ypa, but he was a crappy receiver, and after he fumbled once in NE early in the season, he wasn't good enough at the rest of the things RBs are supposed to do to merit playing time. His legend on TBD is inflated to say the least. He also led in one category (in one season on a limited snap count), not several. Anyway, I'm focused on guys who turned out to be good players, not rushing-once-for-500-yards guys. Guys who produce at what I regard as a legit level get at least 1250 yards from scrimmage via rushing and receiving. Fred (who wasn't drafted) is the only one who did it (3 times), and moreover was the only one came close except for Rob Riddick in 1986, who combined for just over 1000. I don't give a crap about the Joique Bells of the world. He wasn't drafted by the Bills and never played a friggin' down for them either. He was a classic case of a Lions RB -- not very good but a guy who accumulated some (modest) stats because he was the only person to hand the ball off to. In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

I get that, but my point is that the guys who backed them up weren't actually any good. It's not like they were the U circa 2000, with McGahee waiting in the wings behind Frank Gore. They also did spend a pretty fair amount of late round picks on RBs over the years. Again, though, none turned out to be good. The best were Riddick, Bryson (a third rounder), and Morris.

Belichick has actually drafted RBs twice in the first round for the Pats: Michel and Lawrence Maroney.

When it comes to the Bills, Bills history is sadly something that should kept at the front of one's mind--certainly as much as league-wide trends. Freddie didn't even start with the Bills -- he played 3 seasons of pro ball for the Sioux City Bandits and the Rhein Fire before coming to Buffalo. He was picked up from NFL Europe. He was never on anyone in the organization's radar screen on draft day. The teams that tried him out his draft year were the Packers, Bears, and Broncos.

A couple of these players had some decent moments (Shawn Bryson), but none were any good relative to actually good NFL RBs. 40 years with basically nothing beyond backup production from the RB position among players taken after rd 2 is truly pathetic.

Here is a list of every Buffalo Bills RB draft pick who was taken *after* the second round going back to 1978. It is a truly sorry list. There is not one player among the 25 players selected who turned out to be a difference maker by any definition of the term. Sammy Morris was probably the best of the bunch and he ran for only 3000 yards in 12 seasons. Longtime backup, basically. Not one of the RBs listed below ever ran for 750 yards in a season. Anyway, while many teams have clearly found good RBs after round one, The Bills have a 40-year history of never finding one. 2016: Jonathan Williams 2015: Karlos Williams 2011: Johnny White 2008: Xavier Omon 2007: Dwayne Wright 2005: Lionel Gates 2002: Jarrett Ferguson 2000: Sammy Morris 1999: Shawn Bryson 1998: Jonathan Linton 1996: Leon Neal 1995: Darick Holmes 1991: Amir Rasul 1990: Eddie Fuller 1989: Sean Doctor 1988: Bo Wright 1987: Jamie Mueller 1987: Kerry Porter 1986: Carl Byrum 1983: George Parker 1982: Van Williams 1981: Rob Riddick 1979: Mike Harris 1978: Dennis Johnson 1978: Steve Powell

?? - the Mets made the playoffs the year after he left. And as I'm sure you're aware, the Mets lost both Syndegaard and Matz - two of their three best starters - to injury in 2017.

He's basically a criminal who managed to escape the hand of justice, no? https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2017/11/29/16715556/jimmy-haslam-cleveland-browns-pilot-flying-j

After reading this, Haslam for me replaces the Jerry Jones/Snyder as the worst owner in the NFL. What a snake.

Huh? Seriously. My point -- and my only point, really -- is that winning the coin toss bestows an inarguable advantage to a team. Even if they don't score on the opening possession -- an again, a 43 percent opening-drive score rate is high -- they still end up with an advantage because mathematically they're more likely to end up with more possessions than their opponent overall and hence more opportunities to exploit weaknesses of a tired defense. Equally important, look at the recent trend line. 4 out of the last 5 games (80 percent) have ended with a first round knockout. Coincidentally, rules changes that favor the offense have gone into effect in that same period. In the regular season, teams that win the toss win 52.7 percent of the time, which is not insignificant (think of a baseball team that goes 85-76). In the postseason, though, where the quarterbacks are generally better (and playing in a rules system that is increasingly friendly to good QBs), it goes up to .667 percent, which is obviously very high. The team that gets it first in postseason OTs is also working with a 43 percent chance of delivering a knockout blow with no possibility of a response. Again, that's really high. It's not as if the opponent is going to score 100 percent of the time after making a stop (not even close, actually). The fact that 8 out of the last 9 wins have gone to the coin flip winner should register with people, but apparently it's not.

I thought he had a way better roster vs. Carolina and both of those Giants teams (especially 2007; they had no business losing that game). It was arguably better than Philly's in 2004 too; Brady was a good bit better than McNabb and Dillon was a beast that season (and to be fair that Eagles wasn't as close as the score indicated). Bear in mind that i think he's the greatest coach ever.

I'm cherry picking data? Come on. The data is exactly as I've shown it: 67 percent of the time, the coin flip winner wins the game, and 43 percent of the time he does it in a first round knockout in a quarter that's ostensibly 15 minutes. I'm doing the opposite of cherry picking here. You don't offer any evidence yourself except cliches about "stopping them on D."

But it's not actually 50-50 even if the team doesn't score right away. In trading possessions, they will get more chances to expose a tired defense than the opponent. It's very simple math. 9 out of 21 first round knockout punches, 14 out of 21 wins total, 8 out of the last 9 going to the coin flip winner, and 4 out of the last 5 ending in a first round knockout. At what point do the numbers register with you?

A team that gets a stop yet doesn't score itself allows the opponent a second chance. If the coin flip winner scores on the second possession, the ratio remains an unfair 2-1. It's basic math. The team that wins the coin flip wins 2/3 of the time historically, and 88 percent of the time in the last few years. In the last five matches, 80 percent of the coin flip winners scored ended the game on their opening drive.

14 out of 21, 8 out of 9, and 4 out of 5. You said above that you assumed the bias would be small. I have collected data that shows that the bias toward the coin flip winner is actually massive and only getting more and more pronounced (possibly because of rules that favor the offense). The numbers are the numbers.

Scoring on what is effectively an opening drive at a 43 percent rate is very, very high. More importantly, though, it means that in only 57 percent of the games will the opposing team even have a chance at the ball. If given a choice, no team will defer given these numbers. And if they fail, the team that won the toss gets a SECOND possession to their one. Most of the games above that weren't decided on the first possession were over by the third possession. Only a small handful dragged on into 4th and 5th possessions. Anyway, 14-7, 8 out of the last 9, and 4 out of the last 5. Those numbers are extremely difficult to argue with.

It was certainly was as final as the Jeffrey play. If the call gets made, there is 1:45 left on the clock and it's first down with only one TO left for the Rams. If you assume three plays take around 15-18 seconds and then add on 78 seconds for between-play runoff, the Saints would have kicked the FG with about 8-9 seconds left. The Rams would have got it with 3-4 seconds left if it was a touchback, and zero time if they returned it. Game over. It's basic math. Also, no comment on Belichick's string of decisive victories in Super Bowls?

I am only talking about playoff games - games between teams with offenses that are presumably competent at worst. I can't speak to the regular season.

Obvious and blatant pick (he takes out two guys!) that wasn't called.

Um, you might want to reconsider after watching this brutally obvious and blatant pick play that went for 38 yards late in the game:

I sorta agree about NRC, but remember: the mind is the most powerful organ of all, so regardless of his physical position, he was out of the play. The pass was on target. But you're right, he panicked and basically choked. I'm honestly not sure of your other point. The Rams are a good, talented team that overcame a couple of chokes by Gurley and put it together against an opponent they were about even with on the coaching and talent fronts. A lot of these games are see-saw affairs. Christ, when is the last time the greatest coach in NFL history had a "decisive win" in a SB? To paraphrase your favorite coach, it's hard to win against good teams in the NFL.