folz

I understand that there are always guys out there that you could go for, but, there is no guarantee that a new guy can get it done either (even if they did somewhere else). I don't know that I'm in for change, just for the sake of change. For instance, we get enamored by coordinators who have recently done well. But, let's look at Vic Fangio for a moment---great coach, not taking anything away from him, but... Since 2009, Vic Fangio's defenses have averaged a ranking of 13.8 in points against and 13.6 in yards against. Since 2009, McDermott's defenses have averaged a ranking of 10.8 in points against and 12.4 in yards against. In the playoffs, since 2011, McDermott is 10-10, 3 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss) Prior to this season's playoffs, Fangio (since 2011) was 5-5, 3 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss). [Almost identical, up to this season, just with MCD having more overall games.] As a head coach, Fangio was 19-30 in 3 years with Denver, no playoffs (granted his QBs were Flacco, Bridgewater, and Lock). From 2015-2023, Fangio's teams (as HC or DC) were 0-2 in the playoffs with 7 years not making the playoffs. I know Philly just had a great playoff run and knocked off the Chiefs with a great defensive performance, but there is no evidence that Fangio would improve on what McDermott has done here in Buffalo overall. Maybe he would, but that's a lot of turnover to kind of get pretty much what we already have. I don't think Belichick was a realistic option for either side (the team or Bill). Nor frankly would I have wanted him as coach of the Bills. Not sure how Anarumo would be an improvement. Seven years as a DC in the league. Only one top-10 ranking in 7 years. The last two years, the Bengals finished 31st and 25th overall in defense. Just because Cinci beat KC in the playoffs once? And not that I would have endorsed it, but the only reason to cause so much turnover and change would have been if the team wanted to take a shot at a young, up-and-coming offensive coordinator like Johnson. But again, no guarantee. Plus there is the learning curve of being a first-time head coach, a new coaching staff, roster turnover, new offensive and defensive schemes and philosophies, etc....how long do we give the new guy to get it done before we're asking for another change and caught in that 3-year coaching turnover cycle? As close as we are, I think it's a big ask to think someone else can come in and just easily win a Super Bowl in their first two years. I understand that we'll never know if we don't try, and I know that our defense has not been great in the playoffs (for various reasons each year)...but I would like to at least point out that at the end of regulation in the last three playoff games against the Chiefs, K.C. had a combined 6 points more than the Bills. Six points across three games! We were like 3 plays, 3 bounces of the ball away from maybe 3 Super Bowl appearances. And that's not even taking into account the horrible refereeing in the two Championship games vs. K.C. It's frustrating as all hell, but I don't see a good enough reason to blow it all up in the hopes that someone else gets us that one more play/lucky bounce of the ball/referee call(s).

Back to boobs and Josh's fiancé, I thought Hailee looked amazing at the NFL Honors show.

Yet, blowouts (and wins) can be prevented by shaky calls. And allowed with no calls. Sometimes it is a very fine line between a close game and a blowout. The only penalty on the Eagles offense all night was the Brown OPI. No holding calls. No false starts (except on STs). No illegal formations. No hands to the face. None. I swear, every time we play the Chiefs in the post season, beyond just the bad spots in the last game, we have at least two drives killed by a holding call or whatever on the offensive line. Let's say last night on the Eagles first scoring drive, on say 2nd and 10, the refs call holding. Now, it's 2nd and 20, and much more likely a punt (rather than a score) and giving the other team good field position. That could be a 14-point swing in a game on just one call/no call. And turn the momentum. Let's say the refs made two holding calls (or whatever) on Philly's O-line in the first half that stopped one Philly TD drive and their FG drive. Most people won't necessarily question two holding calls in a half. And let's say KC scores with that good field position after those punts. We are talking about a 14-14, 14-10, or 14-7 game at the half instead of 24-0...and its still a game---not a blowout---with just two calls. Obviously though, last night, the game turned on the two Mahomes interceptions. In just 4 plays, the Eagles scored 14 points (late in the 2nd)...blowing the game open. So, you are also correct about trying to not allow the refs to be able to affect the game. I do agree with you that you have to take it out of the refs hands as much as possible. But let's not fool ourselves...K.C. didn't get the same treatment from the refs last night that they have seen so often over the last few years. Exactly what these guys said. Plus, most of the country got to see the villain slayed, which leaves a good taste in their mouths about the NFL, rather than the biased refs narrative playing out all off season. Fans like seeing the villain lose almost as much as they like seeing their guy win. Remember the two underdog-Giants Super Bowl wins vs. the Evil cheating Empire?

I'm totally on board with fixing the D-line. A stud pass rusher and some beef in the middle would go along way, imo. I think Carter is going to develop well. But it looks like Daquan may be at the end. Everyone else is good to very good or still an unknown, but very little to no consistent high-end play. I think we all knew that the defense would take a step back this year, especially when Milano got hurt again. The defense held their own pretty well this year, but let's not forget that it was without Poyer, Hyde, Tre, Milano, Floyd, Dodson, Siran Neal, Dane Jackson, Shaq Lawson, Tim Settle, Poona Ford, Linval Joseph, AJ Klein. Now I know it was time to move on from most of those guys (not bad decisions), but that is a lot of experience in this defense that walked out the door. I mean 12 defensive players left the building (and another was out most of the year) and we didn't really have the resources this year to improve on the talent (or experience) that was leaving the building (even if that talent was old or mediocre). As I said, I don't think any of those guys would have made a difference this year, but we've talked so much about the loss of Diggs and Davis, but there was a much bigger turnover on the defense. Creating a much bigger transition year on that side of the ball. I think the defense will be a big priority for the team this year in free agency and the draft. Also, over the last three years, the Chiefs and Eagles represent 5 of the 6 teams that have made the Super Bowl (the 49ers are the only other team to appear in a SB over the last three years). So, I thought that I would look at some defensive rankings of those two teams versus the Bills over those three seasons, just to see where we stack up (not sure if anything can be made of it though): 2024 Points allowed Yards allowed Sacks Pressures Chiefs #4 #9 #19 #15 Eagles* #2 #1 #14 #7 Bills #11 #17 #18 #13 2023 Chiefs* #3 #2 #2 #10 Eagles #30 #26 #19 #15 Bills #4 #9 #4 #9 2022 Chiefs* #16 #11 #2 #1 Eagles #8 #2 #1 #3 Bills #2 #6 #15 #13 * Super Bowl winner And just FYI, team defensive rankings since 2009: Year Fangio defenses McDermott defenses Points Yards Points Yards 2009 --- --- #10 #11 2010 --- --- #9 #5 2011 #4 #14 #20 #11 2012 #4 #3 #18 #8 2013 #3 #14 #4 #12 2014 #22 #15 #23 #12 2015 #21 #16 #1 #5 2016 #28 #12 #25 #25 2017 #20 #26 #21 #29 2018 #4 #5 #18 #30 2019 #21 #25 #9 #24 2020 #29 #26 #5 #8 2021 #17 #17 #1 #1 2022 --- --- #1 #3 2023 #5 #2 #4 #5 2024 #2 #2 #3 #9 AVG 13.8 13.6 10.8 12.4 Sean's defenses were top 10 in points allowed 10 times in the last 16 years. His defense has been top 10 in yards allowed 8 times in the last 16 years. Vic's defenses were top 10 in points allowed 6 times in 13 of the last 16 years. His defenses have been top 10 in yards allowed 4 times in 13 of the last 16 years. I know our defense has not fared so well in the playoffs of late, and that is most of people's issues with Sean's defense. I'm just pointing out these rankings because I think sometimes the grass looks greener in the neighbor's yard. Or, we take for granted what we do have. Some Bills fans act like Fangio is the greatest defensive mind ever and McDermott sucks. As for playoffs, since Fangio came back to the league as defensive coordinator in 2011, their playoff records look like this: Fangio: 8-5, 4 Championship game appearances, 2 Super Bowl appearances (1 win, 1 loss). Fangio's teams (as HC or DC) missed the playoffs 7 times over that span. McDermott: 10-10, 3 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss). McD's teams (as HC and DC) missed the playoffs 4 times over that span. Prior to this season's playoffs, Fangio (since 2011) was 5-5, 3 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss). Almost identical to McD...just fewer overall playoff games. From 2015-2023, their playoff records were: McD: 9-8, 2 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss), 2 years missed playoffs Vic: 0-2, 0 Championship game appearances, 0 Super Bowl appearances, 6 years missed playoffs And if we add in this year, from 2015-2024: McD: 11-9, 3 Championship game appearances, 1 Super Bowl appearance (loss), 2 years missed playoffs Vic: 3-2, 1 Championship game appearance, 1 Super Bowl appearance (win), 6 years missed playoffs. I know I'll probably be called a Homer for this post...and I'm not saying McDermott is better than Fangio...just pointing out that the gap probably isn't as big as some people think.

So Lamar gets All-Pro, Josh gets MVP, and Saquon gets a ring. I guess that's fair. [Though would have preferred Josh and Saquon swapping spots, of course.]

👆The above stat is actually really crazy when you think about it. -Ryan is 35th on the all-time passing list (There are 22 HOF QBs with fewer passing yards---but, of course Fitzmagic played at a time where QBs threw a lot more). -Fitz is 39th on the all-time passing TDs list (There are 16 HOF QBs with fewer passing TDs---again, gotta look at era and time played too). His numbers are actually almost identical to Jim Kelly's stats. And Jim never won a Super Bowl...but, obviously had much more post-season success (and 4 SB appearances---with a revolutionary offense). I would love to see it happen for Ryan (to go in as the greatest journeyman QB ever---I mean, that is something). But, a sub .500 record and never making it to or playing in the playoffs would seem to kill his chances, imo. People remember the post-season. He is the QB with the most passing yards and passing TDs without a playoff appearance. In his defense though, being the journeyman that he was, he was basically shipped from one of the worst teams in the league, to another one of the worst teams in the league throughout his career. He was never really given a chance in a good franchise, with a stable coaching staff, and a good team around him. Are there other QBs in the HOF who have the stats but not the team success? Now to the question of can you write the story of the NFL in that era without that player. And really, I think you could write the story without Ryan (he might not make the cut if it were a documentary), it just wouldn't be nearly as much fun if you left him out. And I actually wouldn't mind if they put him on the Wall of Fame one day (though there are plenty of guys in front of him in line still---and I get why some people wouldn't think he is worthy of that honor). I mean, yeah, he only played 4 losing seasons in Buffalo, but honestly, despite the team's records, he was a bright spot in the darkness of the drought. And he has really embraced Buffalo, both while he played here and since he retired. Pretty amazing to kind of be a legend in a city that you only played 4 losing seasons for. But again, lots of guys ahead of him still (Butch Byrd, Kyle Williams, Cornelius Bennett, Eric Moulds, Ted Washington, Fred Jackson, Brian Moorman). Not sure if this thread is tongue-in-cheek, but I like it either way (and that you've kept the drive alive). I don't think he'll ever make the HOF, but I do think you can make a case for him at least.

Very Surprised...but very happy for Josh, the team, the Allen family. Congrats Josh! So well deserved...and overdue. Thanks for embracing Buffalo [Western New York/Southern Ontario] and putting us back on the map! Go Bills!

Ok, I actually watched the whole video. This analysis is from one person only (Steve Smith). The video is from week 9 or 10. Keon had only played 8 games as a rookie and had 36 total targets. Smith admits that he didn't like him coming out of college, so, he of course is also wanting to confirm his bias. He also says things like, "Am I being critical, yes, but prior to the trade for Amari Cooper, this is a guy that they said was going to replace Stefon Diggs." No one expected him to replace Diggs. Different types of receivers, Bills offense was going in a different direction (bigger, stronger WRs), he wasn't expected to perform as a #1 WR (Bills were easing him in his rookie year). So, that already calls into question his analysis. Also, when this video was made, Keon's last two games he had just gone for 170 yards and a TD. No mention of that. Keon was coming on at that point (just before the injury). Maybe Steve wanted to keep his pre-draft analysis relevant. Now, does he have some points about Keon's footwork, or strength at the line, or whatever, sure, yeah, Keon probably has a lot to improve on/get coached up on. He was a rookie with only 8 games under his belt. BUT, Smith's film analysis consisted of 5 plays: Play 1: It does look like Keon is the #1 read, he does not get clean/great separation. But Steve says himself, it's not Keon's fault that Josh didn't go to him, because the LBer cracking down on the RB closed the window. So, play one...could be better technique, but not his fault. Play went to Shakir for 6 yards, close to a first down. Play 2: He's against Jalen Ramsey (a very good CB). Josh drops the snap, so the play is already busted from the get-go. Jalen jams Keon good, but then Keon releases and is actually wide open down the field, but Josh does't get him the ball. Steve says, "Does he win in the end? Yeah, but..." Can't quite tell from the video, but it looks like the play goes to Shakir for a first down on the scramble drill. And in the end, Keon won against Ramsey and was open, so... Play 3: Keon is on the far right. Josh reads the field from left to right, hitting Shakir, his third read, over the middle. Again, could Keon's footwork have been better on his route, sure, but he was at best, the 4th read on the play. And the play went for a 16-yard completion and first down to Shakir. Play 4: Again, Josh starts reading the field from the opposite side of Keon. So, again, Keon is probably the 4th read. When Josh got to his second read, he started to run, because the line was collapsing. Josh scrambles for like 6 yards and the first. [With both plays 3 and 4 Smith and the host say things like, Josh isn't even looking at him...even when the play breaks down, Josh isn't looking for his big man. Smith actually says, "the quarterback isn't even looking at him...the QB is like I'm playing 10 on 11." Josh wasn't looking at him because he was like the 4th read in the progression.] Play 5: Is a Coleman reception. A beautiful 23-yard sideline catch. Steve starts out by saying, "This is a good play, but..." "Does he make the catch, yes, great catch, but..." So, the really bad plays he has to show us are: one great catch, another play he wins on a scramble drill but Josh doesn't find him, another play that Smith says wasn't Keon's fault, and two plays where he was like the 4th read in the play (not to mention that all 5 of those plays still ended up being positive plays for the Bills---4 of them went for first downs). Tough to take his analysis too seriously---despite agreeing that Keon probably does need to work on his technique. But, that's for all rookies really.

Dude, where are you getting this? If it's your eyes, I'd say get them checked. Now, I'm not saying the Bills should go into next season expecting Keon to be a #1 or anything...but a bust? Come on. Fans these days are so impatient and never take into account any real-world factors. Keon had 568 yards and 4 TDs. He was 8th among rookie WRs, just below Xavier Worthy (only 82 yards behind Worthy---on 4 fewer games). BUT...Keon was injured pretty bad in week 9 against Miami (concussion, wrist injury). He missed 4 games and wasn't quite himself still when he came back. Plus, when you are out for 4 games and still iffy for two more, the offense needs to move on---find other ways/other players to go to. When you come back (as a rookie/not some all-pro), it may be tough to work you back into how the offense with how its developed while you were out. For instance, after the injury (and outside of the NE game the final week of the season when the backups were in), Keon only averaged 3 targets per game the rest of the season. If you pro-rate his games pre-injury out to a whole season, he would have had 842 yards and 6 TDs. (Remember Keon just had his first 100-yard game and followed it up with 70 yards and a TD the two games before the injury---he was coming on.) That would have put him over Worthy and Odunze, and right about the same stats as Marvin Harrison, Jr. Also, if you think 8th on the rookie WR list (despite the injury) is bad, well let's look at target shares: Thomas Jr: 133 targets; Nabers: 170 targets; Bowers: 153 targets; McConkey 112 targets; Harrison, Jr.: 116 targets; Odunze: 101 targets; Worthy: 98 targets; Coleman: 57 targets. If you pro-rate Coleman's stats out to the number of targets that Worthy had, he would have had 956 yards (Worthy had 638). If you pro-rate his stats out to the number of targets that Nabers had (the most of all rookies), Keon would have had 1,658 yards (Nabers had 1,204). Now, pro-rating just gives an idea...I'm not saying Keon would have had those stats with more targets, but it just shows that you can't just look at yards for rookies and call Keon a bust, without also looking at his injury and the disparity in number of targets. I mean Keon only had 33% the number of targets as Nabers, for instance. Not only does that affect the stats, but more targets and more games means more experience and possibly a quicker development as well. Coleman did have the best yards/reception and yards/target of any rookie WR this year. He was actually 4th in the league among all receivers (not just rookies) for yards/reception and tied for 15th among all receivers in yards/target (tied with Ja'mar Chase and Khalif Raymond). And all of the rookies above him played a full season (17 games) except for Nabers (who missed 2 games, but still somehow had the most targets of any rookie WRs). I think people are foolish to write Keon off. In fact, no rookie should be written off after just their first year.

With Josh, I think we have enough talent to make a Super Bowl (we have been close a few times now, but for the bounce of a football here and there). But, as far as does our talent-level match-up with the other contenders? Let's see... Yeah, I guess that I would define elite as top 5 at your position across the league (others may have a different definition). So, how many Bills are top 5 at their position? Josh, absolutely Dion, yes, been one of the best LTs for a couple of years now Taron has been a top-5 (probably top-2 or -3) slot corner for a number of years now (if he isn't slowing down) Cook (he's on the edge, but I might give him the nod). Over the last two years, he is 6th in yards from scrimmage by RBs and tied for 4th in total TDs by a RB. His stats are about equal to guys like Kyren Williams, Breece Hall, and Joe Mixon. With really, only Henry, Barkley, Gibbs, and Robinson above him (though he does have 1 more TD than Robinson). Plus, all of the other guys on the list have a significant number of touches more than Jimbo. For instance, just this year James had 239 touches. While Barkley had 378, Robinson had 365, Williams had 350, Henry had 344, Gibbs had 302, Mixon had 281, Hall had 266. I think I talked myself into saying yes for James. (Interesting stat, as I was looking up RB numbers---RB consistency award goes to Tony Pollard. 2023: 1,316 scrimmage yards and 6 TDs. 2024: 1,317 scrimmage yards and 6 TDs). Milano (if healthy, definitely top-tier. Top 5? Maybe? Probably?) Spencer Brown is a possibility (but I don't know enough about other teams' tackle play to say, but he had a great season and is a monster). Christian Benford: Not sure I have him as elite (top 5 at his position) quite yet. Maybe by next year he can get there. Shakir: If you were to break it down to just slot receivers, I might call him elite. But, don't think you can call him an elite receiver (overall) yet (as much as I love him). That's pretty much it. We may have some other guys with potential, but at the moment, no one else really can be considered elite. So, I would say the Bills have 3-5 elite guys at their positions, with a couple of guys on the fringe. But, I guess the question is (in relation to the OP's question of if that's enough for a SB), how many elite guys do other contenders have? KC: Mahomes, Humphrey, Thuney, Jones, McDuffie (Don't think Kelce is elite anymore). So, a solid five for KC? Granted, outside of QBs, it's a more solid 5 than our 5. Philly: Barkley, Brown, Carter, DeJean?, Baun?, Hurts? Mailata? Johnson? (Don't think Hurts is a top-5 QB; Baun, Mailata, and DeJean all had great seasons...but can we call them elite after just one good season? And the Philly line definitely had some inconsistencies this year (as far as Mailata and Johnson are concerned). Is Lane Johnson still what he was at 34/35 years old?). So, three definite...and maybe up to 6 elite guys. Ravens: Jackson, Henry, Roquan, Humphrey, Hamilton, Madubuike? Andrews? A solid 5 or 6? [Correct me if you think I'm wrong about the other teams.] So, I'd say it probably takes a solid 5 (with one or two guys also on the fringe). We have a solid 3 or 4, a more iffy 5 than the other teams, and a few fringe guys. So, I would say probably two more solid elite guys would have us at the level or better than the other contending teams (would love to see those elite players added this year at DE/DT or DE/WR). Even just a proven, stud FA/trade pass-rusher would go a long way in balancing things out talent-wise, imo.

Agree. I always thought the refs had it in for the Bills (especially against teams like New England, etc.). But the first time I actually questioned whether the NFL was actually steering games to get the outcome they wanted was Super Bowl XL (2005/2006 season). Jerome Bettis was playing in his last game (about to retire) in his hometown of Detroit. The NFL so wanted the storyline of The Bus riding off into the sunset in his hometown with the Lombardi trophy. Plus Pitt probably had a much bigger following than the Seahawks. The refs literally took two TDs off the board for Seattle, both on horrible calls...and those were just the most egregious bad calls of many others. No doubt in my mind that Seattle wins that Super Bowl if not for the refs interfering. I don't understand why they think they have to create storylines. It's similar to the Olympics now too. In the Olympics now, the tv coverage has all of these pre-packaged segments about certain (American-only) athletes that they want to promote or have sad storylines or whatever. They push certain storylines down our throats (and then that athlete comes in like 12th---and they barely even show us who actually won---because they're not American), rather than just letting the sports/events create the storylines naturally. And I'd bet that the stories that would come about organically would be just as compelling as any created storylines. I wish the NFL realized this. Let things play out how they are meant to and there will naturally be storylines to discuss, rather than trying to push so hard to make certain pre-planned stories to come about. I think the NFL believes that having a dynasty team (like New England and now KC) is good for business. It breeds familiarity with the international crowd and now young female markets that they are trying to expand into. I think with NE, they thought having that dynasty built their business. Which I don't actually believe is true (or the main cause of growth in the league), so they wanted a new dynasty (KC). And they also knew that people will also tune in to watch "villains" in pro-wrestling too. I remember watching the Super Bowls of NE vs. NYG just hoping to see NE lose. I mean, we were all told that when free agency came about that that would spell the end of dynastic NFL teams. Yet, post-free agency, we have had the two biggest dynasties of all time. I mean, how does that happen? Are Brady/Belichick and Reid/Mahomes really just that much better than anyone else who has ever coached or played in the league that they could have dynasties during free-agency? Take away the help they get/got from the refs and how many fewer Super Bowls do they have? How about their overall record? Not only does in call the league into question, but it makes me question if any of these guys are actually even GOATs. Really good players and coaches, but would they be considered the GOATs if not for the refs/NFL help? To me, the NFL has to go one way or the other. Either let us know that the NFL is like pro-wrestling with pre-planned storylines (entertainment only---the outcomes really don't matter) or bring integrity back to the game. But, somehow I don't think either of those things is going to happen. So, now I don't worry as much about winning a Super Bowl (if the NFL office decides, not the players on the field, then why get disappointed...it is a pre-determined outcome that we can't do anything about), so I just enjoy watching and rooting for the Bills and taking joy in the season and individual games and accomplishments rather than pinning everything on a Super Bowl win. Ironically, our best chance of winning a Super Bowl may be these next two years (as we move into our new stadium). The NFL really likes new stadiums. Sad that's how it is, but not sure I can be convinced otherwise at this point.

And how many playoff teams had to face an offense the caliber of Kansas City with Goat-candidates Reid and Mahomes in 4 of those 5 losses? Kansas City has averaged 30 points in the playoffs under Reid and Mahomes (vs. all teams). The year they scored 42 on us (in overtime)---two unstoppable offenses that year---they also scored 42 on the Steelers in the playoffs. I know we didn't face them in the playoffs in 2018, but that 2018 KC squad was the 3rd highest-scoring offense in NFL history. I know the last couple of years they haven't been quite what they were back in 2018, but we are still talking historic stuff over those 5-7 years overall (in which 4 of the Bills playoff losses fall). Not to mention a little help from the refs here and there. For what it's worth, McDermott's total playoff points against average is 28.3 points. (Still not great, but again, weigh in 4 years vs. KC) Over the last three seasons, the average score for playoff winning teams is 31 points. Over the last 5 years, it is 30 points. Playoff teams score a lot of points these days. No question that McDermott and the Bills need to find some defensive answers vs. KC (I think a stud pass rusher would go a long way) and it would be really nice to see the playoff defense improve overall---but I think the stat is a bit misleading. Not many teams have had to face a dynasty that many times in such a short span. Manning's Colts only lost to the Pats 2 times in the playoffs. Marino's Dolphins lost to the Bills 3 times over 6 years. Oakland lost to the Steelers 3 of 4 years in the 70s. But how many teams have been up against what we have?

How much do we need to change? How close are we? Here's some interesting stats for you. The Bills and Chiefs have played each other 9 times in the Allen/Mahomes era. Here are their total points in those games (combined): KC: 243 total points BUF: 242 total points If you were to say, what were their total points at the end of regulation in those 9 games: KC: 237 points BUF: 242 points If you take out the 2020 season (when the Chiefs were just a better, more experienced team than we were), then since the 2021 season (the last 4 years), we have played the Chiefs 7 times. The total combined scores for the teams in those 7 games are: KC: 179 points BUF: 201 points Hard to fathom. As to next year, my priorities would be: a proven, stud pass rusher added via trade or FA; I think Carter will develop into a really nice DT, but I wouldn't mind seeing some young, talented beef to replace/spell Daquan; Fix the safety position (however that happens); WR; Corner depth/improvement; LB depth.

Not sure if anyone did a final tally or anything for this thread, but anyone wringing their hands over "giving Worthy to KC" as the narrative goes (another Buffalo blunder), well, I think the story is far from being written still. Some people act like Worthy had one of the greatest rookie seasons ever or something. He had a very good rookie season, but let's hold off on crowning him. I couldn't find a list deeper than 25 players, but of the most receiving yards by a rookie receiver, Worthy doesn't even sniff #25. Numbers 24 and 25 are Mike Evans with 1,051 and 12 TDs and Keenan Allen with 1,046 and 8 TDs. Worthy had 638 receiving yards and 6 receiving TDs. If you include his rushing stats, he had 742 yards and 9 TDs. Six rookie receivers had more receiving yards than he did this year, 7 rookie receivers had more than Worthy's rookie totals in 2023. He had a good year, but let's keep it in perspective. {I understand that means you can say all of the same things about Coleman---since he is one spot right below Worthy in the rookie numbers, but that is ok, we weren't looking for him to come in and be a number one WR right away in an everyone eats offense---plus he missed time} Coleman had 567 scrimmage yds and 4 TDs in 13 games, with one 100-yard game. (And Coleman wasn't quite right for at least a couple of games back from injury). Worthy had 742 scrimmage yds and 9 TDs in 17 games, no 100-yard games. I know Keon didn't do much in the playoffs. But thus far, if you take away the non-catch in the Championship game, Worthy has averaged 48 yards and 0.5 TDs in K.C.'s two playoff games. It's not like he put that team over the top or gave them something they didn't have. Obviously both players will continue to grow and learn and may both turn out to be very good players. And this is not a down on Worthy post (I hope he does well, except when playing the Bills). It is just to calm the KC got us again sentiment, if it's out there. So again, I don't think we can make any determinations after just their rookie years. Game averages 2024: Worthy 43.64 yards/game, 0.53 TDs/game Coleman 42.77 yards/game, 0.31 TDs/game Yards per Target: Worthy: 6.51 Keon: 9.75 Yards per Reception: Worthy: 10.8 Keon: 19.2 I still think the Bills got the right player for Buffalo and there is no need to play into the narrative of KC one-upping us again here.

Remind us again how McCarthy's track record is way better. I don't think you can, other than to say he won one Super Bowl (which is nothing to sniff at...he won the big game---but track record tends to mean overall). Mike McCarthy Sean McDermott Wins/losses: 174-112-2 (.608) 86-45 (.656) Playoff record: 11-11 (.500) 7-7 (.500) Playoff bids: 12 of 18 yrs (.666) 7 of 8 yrs (.875) McDermott: 7 years with Josh Allen, 1 year with Tyrod Taylor [2 Conference Championship game appearances, 0-2] McCarthy: 13 years with Aaron Rodgers, 5 years with Dak Prescott [4 Conference Championship game appearances, 1-3; 1 SB appearance (win)] Yes, McCarthy has a Super Bowl. He also coached for 18 years (13 with a first ballot HOFer, and 5 with another very good QB). Are you telling me that you don't think McDermott could get a team to 2 more conference championships, and win 1, if he coached for 10 more years (with Josh as his QB for at least 6 more years)? So, how much better is McCarthy again? Payton had a first-ballot Hall of Famer as his QB for 15 years. He only made 1 Super Bowl appearance. 1 in 15 years. Yes, it was a win (he did it). But you guys would be going crazy if we only made 1 Super Bowl appearance in 15 years with Josh. Payton had 6 seasons with Drew Brees where they didn't even make the playoffs. Can you imagine missing the playoffs 6 times with Josh? The board would explode. From 2010-2017, the Saints (with Payton and Brees) missed the playoffs 4 times, lost a Wild Card game, and lost 3 divisional round playoff games. How would Bills fans have felt about those 8 seasons if it were MCD and Josh? Payton w/Brees McDermott w/Josh Wins/losses: 152-89 (.630) 77-38 (.670) Playoff record: 7-7 (.500) 7-6 (.538) Playoff bids: 9 of 15 yrs (.600) 6 of 7 yrs (.857) McDermott: 7 years with Josh Allen, 1 year with Tyrod Taylor [2 Conference Championship game appearances, 0-2] Payton: 15 years with Drew Brees, 1 year with Russell Wilson, 1 year Bo Nix [3 Conference Championship game appearances, 1-2; 1 SB appearance (win)] Now I'm sure we'll hear, yeah, but Josh is way better than Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers. Guarantee? Come on guy...you can not guarantee anything. what a joke. Interesting Topic, after Josh just did an interview like a week ago saying he basically has two goals for his career, stay in Buffalo his whole career, and bring a Super Bowl victory to the people of Buffalo. A huge part of why Josh loves Buffalo is because of the culture of the team that Sean, Brandon, and The Pegulas have created. I can GUARANTEE (😉) you that Josh does not want a new staff or to be traded and I bet that he blames himself as much as the coaching staff, front office, or other talent for the team's failures (that's just who Josh is).

Looking at the career life of other top running QBs, the age range is pretty defined, with a few outliers: Of the top 10 running QBs in NFL history (not counting Josh and Lamar), Cam retired at 32/33, and on the other spectrum, Fran Tarkenton was 39 and Aaron Rodgers is 41. The other 7 guys (Elway, Young, Cunningham, Vick, Wilson, McNabb, and McNair) were all 35-37. But, for almost all of them, their last year or two they were a bit of a shell of their former selves. So, for a running QB, is the shelf life of top play til about 34-35 years old maybe? Now, Josh is a better passer than many of the guys on that list, so he could probably last a bit longer, once the wheels start slowing down (like a Rodgers---not that Aaron ever ran quite to the extent of Josh). Josh is 28. And some of those guys played in a much harsher league for QBs as well. But, I'm going to say a solid 7 years left. Possibly up to 10 years if they keep a really good team around him at the end of his career (like they did for Elway and Manning at the end of their careers). A lot of great QBs currently are playing longer than guys back in the day, but I doubt Josh makes it in the league to 40 yo with the contact he takes.

I love fans who equate every loss to just being outcoached. Such a simplistic way to look at football, imo. Just like those (probably a lot of the same people) who appear to think that every single win is Josh doing it all by himself...the coaches and other players have no part in the wins.

Agreed fellas! Two plays: The Worthy catch at the 2 should have either been an interception or an incomplete pass. Worthy did not have equal possession of the ball with Bishop before it hit the ground. Probably should have been ruled incomplete. KC kicks a FG there rather than getting the TD. -4 points. I thought that Kincaid had the first down on the third down play. No measurement or review for that, just spotted short. Oh well. Then it appears that Josh makes the first down. The ref with the clearest view has it spotted for a first down. The ref from the other side, who did not have a clear view, marks it short. Then as he comes towards the pile, he moves his mark back further. And then as they are talking and setting the ball, they move it back further. Tony Romo noted it on the broadcast. He literally said they moved the spot back twice. And again, on the most crucial play of the game, no measurement even. They just go to video and confirm short. If it had been called a first, as the ref with the better view had it, it would have been very hard to overturn with review. Both announcers and the CBS on-air referee said that they thought it was a first down. Buffalo was already close to field goal range, instead KC takes the ball over and scores a TD on a shortish field. That is a 10-14 point swing. So, just those two plays alone altered the score of the game by 14-18 points. It is much easier to take these losses and just enjoy the fun of the games/season when you start viewing the current NFL more like Pro Wrestling. Come on, you know the NFL wants KC to get the three-peat (or at least keep that storyline alive for two more weeks). Watch Kelce announce his retirement just before the Super Bowl and KC magically wins and he gets to ride off into the sunset with Taylor and Jason (and then they break up within a year). Now, I'm not putting everything on the refs by any means though. We definitely did not play our best, and we still had our chances to go and win that game. We just didn't get it done. I don't think there is any one person to blame for it (Mcdermott, Beane, Kincaid, Josh, the defense). We just didn't make the plays (on offense or defense) in the clutch. I think that is a talent issue probably, but I don't put that on Beane either, he was so strapped this year with dead cap, he couldn't do a lot. Which is why everyone was calling this a rebuild/retooling year. I know some people will still be focused on offense and WR in the offseason (and I'm not saying ignore it---especially if we don't retain Amari), but what this team really needs is an elite pass rusher #1 (we hoped we had bought that with Von, but it just didn't work out); a big, stud DT #2 (watching the Philly, Washington, and KC D-lines today...we didn't measure up); and a revamped secondary (fix the safeties, add depth). With McD's defense, you need to get pressure with your front four and have good coverage. We have a ton of good draft picks and will be released from the dead cap money. So, we should continue to contend over the next few years, but most likely, with a much more talented team overall than this year's team. [Not that I don't love this year's team and am happy with all that they accomplished.] And as Simon and others said...no shame ultimately in losing to some GOATs (Reid, Spags, Pat, Travis) as much as it sucks to do it for the fourth time. After we lost our fourth SB back in the 90s, our team was old and falling apart. We've lost 4 heartbreakers to KC in the playoffs, but this team is still in their prime. Maybe that is a good omen for the future. We can still overcome/avenge these losses. [Just trying to take a positive spin on things---outside of the refs.] Go Bills!

Time to take down the new Death Star! Use the Force Josh...trust your feelings. Go Bills!

I'm not so sure that the OP is wrong. Though I don't think it is because Reid hates or doesn't respect McDermott, it's just who Reid is (arrogant competitiveness). [And, despite winning the playoff match-ups, I'm sure Reid isn't thrilled about going 4-4 overall against his former pupil.] I lost respect for Andy Reid and the Chiefs after the first AFC Championship between these two teams. They were arrogant and kind of rubbing the Bills' nose it as the clock wound down in that game and in its immediate aftermath. And they say that teams take on the demeanor of their head coach. And all of the trick plays, etc. Again, I'm not so sure they run them because it is their best chance to win as much as it is the Chiefs (Reid) wanting to show how smart they are and embarrass the other team a bit (same for Dan Campbell). There is no doubt in my mind that he targeted Worthy in that game to try to prove that KC once again one-upped Buffalo and got the better guy. Lest we forget, the only reason he has Mahomes is because of McDermott and the Bills. Yes, Worthy only had 5 touches that whole game, but they all came on the first and third drive. Remember the first drive was 2 plays and Mahomes intercepted, drive two for KC was a 3 and out. So, the third drive was still their scripted plays coming into the game. The fact that Worthy wasn't targeted the entire rest of the game (Worthy wasn't as big a part of their offense yet), almost proves that he did it on purpose. He can say it was just to get him involved, but I'm pretty sure it was Reid trying to one up Buffalo. Hard to say the lateral was one thing or the other. Remember, not only was it close to the anniversary of the Homerun Throwback, but Frank Wycheck had just passed away. So, the whole NFL was talking about the Homerun Throwback. Now, Kelce is known for his crazy lateral plays, so it could have just been that. A player at the end of the game trying to make a play for his team to get the win. And it is hard to tell from the game footage (would need to see the All-22), but it does looks like Toney is positioning himself before Kelce throws it. Could it have been an option?...1:25 on the clock, 2nd and 10 at midfield, down three. The play being to Kelce, who can take it, but you design a trailer (kind of like a hook-and-ladder) to follow for the lateral if it is there. When Toney's man left him to go tackle Kelce, it was there. But, even if it was planned, I don't think you can definitively say Reid did it to stick it to the Bills based on the circumstances and time in the game and because it wasn't on a kickoff. But then again, I wouldn't put it past him. I may just sound like a bitter Bills fan, but I do think that Reid and the Chiefs are arrogant (sore winners and sore losers). And I wouldn't be surprised if McDermott feels a bit differently about Reid now than when he first took the Bills job. I don't think there is any hate on either side and I'm sure there is still mutual respect...but if you don't think these two guys want to beat each other more than just about any other team at this point (which brings out their competitiveness), well, I don't know what to tell you.

Great calls Gunner. Hope you are wrong about Brady to the Saints. From what I can find regarding the Saints interview process: Darren Rizzi: Interim Head Coach. Long shot (or no shot) for the job, imo (went 3-5 down the stretch as interim HC, fans would explode). Anthony Weaver: Dolphins DC. Completed online interview. In-person interview scheduled for Friday. Mike Kafka: Giants OC. Completed online interview. In-person interview scheduled for Saturday. Joe Brady: Bills OC. Completed online interview. Can't interview again until after AFC Championship game. (2nd interview scheduled for next week) Kellen Moore: Eagles OC. Completed online interview. Can't interview again until after NFC Championship game. (2nd interview scheduled for next week) Mike McCarthy: In-person interview scheduled for next week (hoping they pounce on McCarthy, the only candidate with a lot of NFL experience---though with their other choices, it does seem like they are maybe wanting to go young and innovative). Kliff Kingsbury: Commanders OC. Saints have requested an interview, but no first interview has happened. So, Kingsbury (if he wanted to) cannot interview with the Saints until after the Super Bowl if they advance. If eliminated, he could interview next week. If Commanders go to Super Bowl, I can't see the Saints waiting until after the Super Bowl to interview him for the first time. So 5-6 guys still in the race. Unfortunately, it sounds like Brady is high on the list. Hope they go a different direction. 🤞

As far as Super Bowls, for the last 8 years, no HOFers yet, as too many players are not eligible (still playing or recently retired). So, I won't add that into the data. From SB 1 (1966/67) to SB 50 (2015/16), the average number of HOFers on the Super Bowl winning team is: 5.92 HOF players. Now that number is skewed a little down as there are still a decent number of guys from those later years still to get in (Brady, Brees, Gronk, etc.). But, it is at the same time inflated a bit by teams like Pittsburgh that had 14 HOFers on each on their 4 Super Bowl wins in the 1970s. Teams back in the day seemed to be a bit more stacked (prior to free agency). For instance, in the first 14 Super Bowls (1966-1979), the winning team averaged 10.5 HOFers. From the start of heavy free agency (late 90s) until now, when all is said and done, my guess is that SB winning teams will have averaged more like 4.5 HOFers on their squads (in this era). https://www.profootballhof.com/football-history/hall-of-famers-in-the-super-bowl/ The below linked article shows how many Pro Bowlers or AP 1st-team All-Pros each Super Bowl winning team has had. [It doesn't separate PB/AP, if a team had either a Pro-Bowler or a 1st team All-Pro, they were included---but not doubled up.] I extrapolated some data from it: -The average Super Bowl winning team (all SBs included, 1966-present) has had 6.7 Pro Bowl or First-Team All Pro players. -However, over the last 10 years (2014-2023), the Super Bowl winning team has only averaged 4.3 Pro Bowl or First-Team All Pro players (SB winners were generally a little more stacked back in the day---as I previously stated). SB Winners with just 1 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (2): The 2007 Giants and the 2020 Bucs. SB Winners with just 2 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (2): The 2011 Giants, and the 2018 Patriots. SB Winners with just 3 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (4): The 1970 Baltimore Colts, the 2006 Colts, the 2008 Steelers, and the 2016 Patriots. SB Winners with just 4 Pro-Bowler/First-team AP All-Pro (5): The 2001 Patriots, the 2003 Patriots, the 2014 Patriots, the 2015 Broncos, and the 2021 Rams. 13 of 58 Super Bowl winners had 4 or fewer PB/AP players (or 22.4% of the Super Bowl winners) 16 of 58 Super Bowl winners had 10 or more PB/AP players (or 27.6% of SB winners) So, the bulk of teams (50%) had between 5 and 9 PB/AP players https://athlonsports.com/nfl/ranking-every-super-bowl-champion So, if going by Pro Bowl, All-Pro, HOF (as blue chip), I would say in the current era most Super Bowl winning teams have like 5 blue chip guys. If going by draft selection as blue chip (1st or 2nd rounder), well generally 48% of starters are from rounds 1 or 2, so about 12 players per team. If taking only first round starters as blue chip, then teams average about 7 first rounders starting on their team. The Bills only have 2 PB/AP selections (Allen and Dawkins) (as only 7% of previous SB winners). The Bills do have 8 First-Round draft selections on the team (Allen, Cooper, Kincaid, Miller, Oliver, Rousseau, Elam, and Trubisky---ok, not sure the last two really count since they're rarely on the field) and 10 Second-Round draft selections on the team (Bishop, Coleman, Cook, Dawkins, Epenesa, Johnson, Phillips, Rapp, Samuel, and Torrence). So, the Bills have like 13-14 1st or 2nd rounders starting or in heavy-rotation. They have 6 first rounders starting or playing significant minutes. How many future HOFers for the Bills when the history is written? Josh, Von...then anyone else? Cooper? Dion? Maybe Cook, if he keeps scoring 18 TDs/year, but probably not. Don't really see anyone else with a possible HOF trajectory. Could Keon develop into one? I don't know. So, probably only 2, maybe 3 HOFers on the roster. Though, looking at the more recent Super Bowls (1990 to present) there will probably be at least 20 SB-winning teams with 4 or fewer HOFers on their squads. Couldn't find any relevant information on Bills players coming out of high school (without looking up each guy individually). But on all of the lists I looked at of best HS prospects over the last 10 years, 20 years, all-time---I did not see any Bills players on those lists (but each list was only like the 20 best of the last 20 years or whatever, one list was 50 best---so by no means exhaustive lists). We know Josh wasn't a 4- or 5-star college recruit. But not sure about the rest of the guys.

Which is interesting after hearing what Sean Payton had to say after the Broncos game last week: "They’ve done a really good job in the last year of focusing on their run game, and then partnering that with the skillset that Josh has. I was more surprised at the effectiveness of it.”

That is a crazy stat. On the year, Buffalo is +24 in turnover differential. Baltimore was +6 in turnover differential (and turnovers ended up being a key part in the Bills playoff win over them). Kansas City is also +6 in turnover differential on the year (hopefully we can get them to cough up a couple too, despite their recent success holding on to the ball).

One of the often over-looked aspects of the Pegula ownership has been the video teams and social media teams that they have brought in/developed. The team videos are of the highest quality and the social media team knows how to play the game. Yeah, I may be a little old to appreciate the fast editing and weird references of vids like these, but I have to say I did laugh out loud watching the third video, at the "Will Clapp Moment of Appreciation." 😁