dave mcbride

Nice: throwing out insulting nicknames because someone doesn't agree with you in an attempt at cut-down humor. Also find me posts where I indicate that I ever thought Taylor had a ceiling that was ever higher than "decent QB" who was the best option the Bills had at the time given the other options out there.

I've had this argument before. Just because a pass hits a receiver in the hands doesn't mean it's very catchable. There was a knock-down drag-out argument years back when a Taylor pass sailed off the top of Watkins' fingertips when the Bills were down by one score against the Pats and on their last possession, and the tendency was to blame Watkins because "it hit him in the hands." It was essentially uncatchable, however, and an errant throw. I will agree that Antonio Brown makes that catch. Clay is a serviceable TE -- not horrible by any stretch -- but he's not on this team to make catches like that. Hardly any TEs in the NFL make that catch given the starting point that Clay was at. I like Barnwell but don't always agree with him. I have a higher opinion of Allen than he does, but I see where he's coming from.

I agree with this 100 percent. The worst case scenario isn't Locker but (at least in terms of production) Jeff George - who actually had some very good seasons. Allen has a better attitude, of course. What I'm saying is that talent will get him places that guys like Locker and David Carr couldn't get to.

I strongly disagree that it was accurate enough given where Clay was in the EZ (right where he should have been given the QB's arm strength; plus he was wide open), where it landed, and the rotation of the pass. (I've said so much about this that I worry that it'll be written on my tombstone!) Look: he missed two wide open receivers in the end zone that game. Did they lose because of that? No, but the opposing QB made three accurate throws to the EZ on his three tries.

That is a fair point, although I'd counter that slightly by saying that his best game by far in every area was against Minnesota. It was also on the road and against an upper tier defense too.

Just to play devil's advocate (I've said too much already), working back to someone like Allen given his arm strength is not always the best choice. We're not talking about an arm like Matt Ryan's here. He overthrows people a LOT. I wouldn't blame Clay for that. He was wide open in the middle of the EZ and Allen missed him.

Exaggeration is a weapon of the weak, and I advise against it. I disagree with you, that's all. Are you suggesting that it was a remotely accurate pass?

No, that's not what he said. He said he watched every qb play of their last two games and factored that into an overall analysis of their entire seasons so far. Barnwell is about as good as it gets even if I don't always agree with him. My hunch is that if he said great things about Allen, no one here would be criticizing him. As I said above, I like Allen and the sky is the limit with him, but he is at the moment very error prone -- too many inaccurate passes and a lot of INTs (although not an inordinate # for a rookie). He needs a better cast, but he needs to get better too. Barnwell isn't wrong to say this, and he emphatically indicates that he's not declaring anyone a bust. I said "focused." He said he watched every play of the last two games so that he could flesh out an overall assessment. He's not really glowing about any of these guys except Mayfield, and he is correct to be glowing about him. He's good.

He did clarify that he only focused on the last two games of each of the QBs. He was upfront about that.

We can agree to disagree. I think it would have qualified as a circus catch: doable for some but not most, especially TEs known for their blocking. Charles Clay, a decent TE, is not a flexible, high-talent leaper like, say, Antonio Brown. Gronk would not have made that catch, I don't think.

I'm not arguing because you're not presenting an argument (unlike Bandit). How is what possible? Can you please explain instead of being cryptic?

Agreed about the avoidance of pressure; it was impressive. You also know that I think that Zay Jones should have probably held onto that ball he was interfered with on. Upper tier receivers hold onto those. That was more catchable (even with the mild PI) than the Clay one.

He made a great play up to that point. Regardless, it was a poor, inaccurate throw. Christ, it wasn't even *remotely* a spiral. I can't believe I'm arguing about this.

I don't understand what you are saying or what the percentage refers to.

Agreed. Something to note is that McDermott can clearly coach up an average defensive unit so that they're good enough, and the talent level is already pretty good to the point where it'll be solid next year even if they add no one. The issue is offense, offense, offense.

Why is it biased opinion and why are the arguments bad? Is Josh Allen better than what the performance output says he is so far? Don't get me wrong - I like him and think the sky is the limit. But he's simply not accurate enough at present (watch other good qbs and you'll see what I mean), and if he doesn't fix that, he's going to struggle to succeed. I can't believe people don't see this. Only Bills homer fans would zero in on Charles Clay alone for that throw-and-catch failure at the end of the Miami game. It was a straight-up inaccurate wounded duck rotating like a helicopter.

This. The blind homerism is strong here, my friend.

I'll say it until I'm blue in the face, but that was a bad throw to Clay. Objectively so.

Pitt will still likely make the playoffs provided they can beat NE (a big if, I know). If they're in, no one is going to want to play them because they can score. Interestingly, while many here and elsewhere skewered Le'Veon Bell, it's now apparent that he's signficantly better than Conner (especially as a receiver), and Conner is now hurt. Bell's absence has hurt the Steelers.

I think the Lions have a very good shot. Carolina has to play NO twice, and the Lions play the Bills, Minnesota (in Detroit), and close with GB. I think an 8-8 team gets in this season. Alternatively, if GB beats Chicago in Chicago, they have the Jets and then the Lions at home. They could get in at 8-7-1. I don't think they'll beat Chicago, but they have an X factor in Rogers.

... and yet they're 8-5, could easily be 10-3, and have one of the most dynamic young rosters in the league! Me either. They are in every game.

26 is right here given that pretty much the entire starting o-line of AZ is on IR. You can't say that about the Bills.

And look what happened to Fassel. Am I wrong to think that firing Payton led to his blackballing in the NFL? That was the scuttlebutt back then ...

I strongly remember it being Bruce being the one who threatened to throw him off the plane. My wife went to that game (we lived in LA at the time) and said it's the only time she has feared for her bodily safety. 69 percent on FG kicks in 1990 and 62.1 percent in 1991. Those numbers are terrible, even for back then. They were 22nd out of 28 teams in FG percentage in 1990 and 26th out of 28 teams in 1991.

Good stuff. Matches up with the eye test too. Foster seems like a more talented receiver to me.