DrDawkinstein

While we may not make draft picks there, we sign plenty of FAs to the Offense. So I cant say it is prioritized, or less prioritized by a large margin. The OLine additions we've made this year, just with McGovern and Edwards, are huge. Let alone spending a high pick on Torrence which is already paying off. This is the best OL we've had in McD's tenure, and possibly in decades. So no excuses there for the Offense. And while their performance may leave us wanting, we have enough talent at skill positions to be showing better results than we have been. Outside of Kelce, I dont see any All-Pros or even Pro-Bowlers on KC's Offense. I'd also argue we had lesser talent back when Josh was spreading the ball around and setting records for most unique WRs to catch a pass in games.

No, and they never will. At least not publicly. They may communicate with the team if the team sends it in. But we'll never know, and NFL officiating will continue to live behind the veil of smoke and mirrors. Exactly where the league office wants it.

I attribute the 2nd half production to having to play from behind, so the Offense is pressing more, taking more risks, and playing with more urgency. Which is closer to how they should be starting the game instead of flat, listless, and unprepared.

See my other post. Scoring more points early means sustaining drives which means less possessions for the opponent which means less points for the opponent. If the Bills scored 10-14 points in the 1st half instead of... 3 (jfc), the whole game changes from there. No guarantee the Pats still score 13 in the 1st half or 16 in the 2nd. Of course, no guarantee the Bills score in the 2nf half either. But the point is, change the outcome of one failed drive and the entire game changes. Yes. This is the point I'm trying to make as well when saying we just need 10-14 points in the 1st half instead of 3. Doesnt even need to be a big lead, but be productive early, score some points, and everything changes.

Not necessarily the "main" problem. But they recognize they can do better and it is the only thing within their control. They cant fix/change/control the coaches, so they have to tighten up and do what they can as players. It would certainly help if the players got their ***** together. We'll see how the game plan goes after that...

Where did anyone say that? What I AM expecting is 10-14 points in the 1st half, which makes it a completely different game.

Exactly. And if the offense can actually be productive in the first half, and sustain drives, and put some points up - that completely changes the rest of the game. It means less possessions and scoring chances for the other team. It means our defense is on the field less. It means the opponent changes their play calling. Etc. It all starts with the Offense. The Defense, even with all their injuries, did enough through the first 3 quarters that any bit of a complimentary Offense should have given us the lead in the 2nd or early 3rd quarter, and then the rest of the game goes differently.

"Jim Harbaugh went 2-4 in 2020, capping a 47-22 run (.681) over six years. Since @PeteThamel reported the Michigan allegations began in 2021, Michigan has gone 33-3 (.917). Conference record has improved from 34-16 (.680) to 22-1 (.956)" link

Outside of anything else, this is a really good point.

If we had 22 Stefon Diggses, we'd have at least 1 Super Bowl by now.

Yeah, makes sense. 2nd and short should open your entire playbook to getting stuff out you might not normally do. I like moving the chains, and I like running the ball when needed. But I think the point is, we are wasting the opportunities for the Offense to be explosive and just running milquetoast all the time.

I'd love to know how much yardage each play gained.

I figured they brought Dodson in since he is supposed to be a bit more stout against the run. But Dodson was no better. Probably worse. More great coaching.

I was also going to go with "...checks notes..."

Bold thread the day after Ben Johnson's offense managed to score a total of 6 points.

This is my biggest, and really only, knock on Beane: He gets fixated on players for YEARS. Same thing happened with Emmanuel Sanders. Tried signing him for 2-3 years, and by the time we finally could, he was over the hill and a shell of his former self. Yet Beane signed him as if he was in his 20s. Repeat with Von Miller. Beane locked on him since the Denver/Carolina Super Bowl, tried to get him to Buffalo, and then years later paid him like he was in his prime.

Dont forget starting his career in 2017 under the tutelage of... Rick Dennison.

13s lost us our chance at a Super Bowl, and looking like it's ultimately leading to McD losing the team.

Is Andy Reid available in the draft?

Great line. But wasnt Gruden traded for picks?

Yes, this is another "Josh cant run anymore but he still kinda wants to so he has a moment of hesitation and THEN throws and it disrupts the timing of the entire thing so the guy drops the ball and we dont get the conversion and Josh should have just tucked it and picked up the 2 yards we needed" situation. It happens every game now. Coaching has managed to RUIN Josh, not make him better. If people are worried about longevity, I'd rather have classic, running Josh for 5 more years than this Josh for 10.

Nah man. It's the HC's job to know. McDermott is just the DC.

Bills by a Billion. The Pats STINK. ***** the Pats. Bills 31 Pats 9

I'd rather they call up Isabella.

I'm not saying it would happen or will happen or it would be easy. Just illustrating the point that the viewership would follow the players. You guys are really spun up on this whole thing No one is seriously arguing the bold. The whole point was the owners need players more than the players need owners. Starting a new league would be tough, but at this point, there is no reason the players/CBA dont take a larger share of the existing league now that all of the founding owners are dead/out.