folz

That is not really a fair comparison. The Chiefs and Ravens were solid franchises with a winning culture already established and continuity in their front offices and coaching staffs. All they needed to do were replace a few old parts. Do you really think if KC hadn't drafted Mahomes and stuck with Alex Smith for a few more years they weren't still an annual playoff team? They might not have been vying for a Super Bowl, but they still would have been a good team. Same with the Ravens, if they kept Flacco instead of Lamar. They'd still be a playoff-level team. No one in 2017 would have been saying they needed a total rebuild from the studs up. On the other hand, the entire Bills organization: ownership, front office, coaching, culture, talent-level, salary cap, etc. had been a complete mess for the better part of 20 years. They had to clean out the entire front office and football administration levels, had to fix the salary cap, turnover almost the entire roster, get the team out of a sustained losing culture/mindset, etc., etc. You cannot compare those two situations and say look how quickly they turned it around. Of course they did, they had a hell of a lot less work to do to turn it around. After a 17-year playoff drought, we have made the playoffs two out of the last three years. No, none of us are satisfied with just making the playoffs, but how can you say it is not a huge step in the right direction. Obviously this is an our staff sucks and needs to be fired because they picked Josh Allen and not Patrick Mahomes or Lamar Jackson post. Those two QBs were placed onto teams that were already built. Josh has had to be part of the build of the entire team here; a very different circumstance for the QB, the coaches, and the FO.

Hey Congrats KitchenerKaizer! Big Win! Tough loss on our end, wish we were advancing with you, but at least your Titans beating the Pats makes the day a little more bearable.

No it doesn't mean that at all. It is like when a family member fails at something; you're there to support them, pick up their spirits, and tell them we believe you'll get it next time. It's being a good fan. A Buffalo fan!

No question...the offense has turned around with Tannehill and Henry has been a beast down the stretch. Would make for a good smash-mouth game. I think our two teams match up well against each other. So let's both get over this first hurdle and see what happens. I'm sure Tannehill has some Patriots demons he'd like to exorcise too (like the Bills---since he played in the AFC East for so long).

Please kick the snot out of the Pats! How about a rematch of our teams in the AFC Championship game? One can dream... Good luck!

Exactly! To use this guy's method (of cherry picking stats), then Gilmore is not an All-pro either: Per PFF's own stats, he is ranked 41st in tackles (by a CB) and he's tied for 25th in receptions allowed https://www.pff.com/nfl/players/stephon-gilmore/7016 And per PlayerProfiler.com, he's 22nd in receptions allowed, 19th in yards allowed, and 30th in yards allowed per reception. https://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/stephon-gilmore/ Looking at those rankings alone (41st, 25th, 22nd, 19th, and 30th), then obviously Gilmore may be good, but not an All-Pro (as he stated about Tre)---per similar standards. Now let's look at Tre vs. Gilmore in the stats that actually count (per pro-football-reference.com), not made-up guesstimations by someone on PFF's staff: Player Targets Completions Comp. % Passes Defended Yards allowed Yds/comp. TDs allowed INTs Tackles (solo) FF FR Sacks TDs Gilmore 101 51 50.5 20 582 11.4 0 6 53 (44) 0 1 0 2 White 91 45 49.5 17 626 13.9 0 6 58 (48) 2 0 1 0 They both had All-Pro seasons! From Next Gen Stats: "In 2017, the Patriots signed CB Stephon Gilmore away from the division rival Bills. In the same off-season, Tre'Davious White was drafted by the Buffalo Bills to replace Gilmore. This season, both have dominated with comparable coverage numbers." [Among them defensive success rate: 60% for Tre, 63% for Gilmore; and in yards per target; passer rating; and completion percentage).] "Stephon Gilmore & Tre'Davious White have been in their own league in terms of not allowing a TD given their target volume. They are the only two players in the NFL to be targeted 50+ times as the nearest defender and not allow a TD." How this guy can think that Gilmore is All-Pro #1 CB in the league and Tre isn't even in the conversation for All-Pro, when their stats are almost identical, is beyond me and obviously shows some type of bias. He says there is more to playing CB than preventing TDs. Ok, but I'm struggling to think what is more important than preventing the other team from scoring and taking the ball away from them (which Tre did 8 times to Gilmore's 7 when you add in FF and FR). And he says Tre's interceptions were based on luck and bad QB play, so apparently his 6 count less than Gilmore's 6. Did Gilmore face only All-Pro QBs all year? He mentions Tre getting two off of Duck Hodges, well on the same day Gilmore got two off of Dalton---who was benched earlier in the season because of bad play and doesn't have an offensive line or anyone to throw the ball to except for Boyd. And none of Gilmore's interceptions had an element of luck (like a tipped pass)? Of course not, Gilmore's were all skill and Tre's were all luck. Yeah, right. And he harps on Tre's yards allowed when he only allowed 2.75 yards more per game than Gilmore. This guy is either an idiot or a person with a biased agenda.

I agree that I'd like to see Duke dress over Foster. I'll take a little hit on special teams for more potency on offense. Knox and Kroft will get the majority of any TE targets, so playing Sweeney probably doesn't help much. Smith hasn't had a penalty in a while and is a very good blocker. So... I wouldn't mind seeing Yeldon get more touches, but if you don't dress Gore, who is your short yardage, power back. I'm not saying that Gore has consistently succeeded in that role, but can Yeldon be that guy? I'm not sure. And most of what Yeldon does, Singletary can do. So, as long as Singletary stays healthy, there wouldn't be that many touches for Yeldon.

He was also pivotal in the Steelers game, made a couple of game saving plays!

Poor tackling. You can blame Daboll and Josh and the offense all you want. And yes, Josh missed a few plays that were there to be made and took some bad sacks. But they were going up against the best defense in the NFL. A team that is putting up historical numbers. The Pats have held teams to an average of 12.9 points/game. And we scored 17. Did the offense need to be better, yes, but they weren't the main reason for the loss in my mind. A few notes: Josh is only the 2nd quarterback this season (along with Watson) to throw two TD passes against the Pats D; John Brown's TD in the 3rd quarter is the first and only TD Gilmore has given up this year; Beasley is only the 2nd receiver this year to gain 100 yards against the Pats defense. This just in...the Pats D is really good. And the completely unbalanced time of possession in the first three quarters, didn't give the offense many opportunities or a chance to get into a rhythm. The real reason the Bills lost was unusually poor tackling by the defense. There were so many plays where not just the first guy, but then the second guy missed the tackle. They let Michel and Burkhead look like All-Pro backs. So, if you want to blame something, it should be that. Back to fundamentals this week boys. Still, though I'm not taking a moral victory out of this, for the most part, I'm proud of the team. They went in and played hard for 60 minutes. Had a 4th quarter lead and almost pulled the game into a tie at the end, despite being on the road, against the best in the business, and with the refs, let's say, not being friendly towards them. It's disappointing that the team couldn't get over the hump today, but there is no question that this Bills team can play with the big boys in this league. Take each game as experience. There is a lot to learn from this one, in a playoff-type atmosphere, for their future playoff games. Yes, I said games (plural). And hopefully next week they can gain some confidence and momentum against the Jets, and go into the playoffs confident and battle-tested. Go Bills!

No McDermott? No Beane! No Beane and no McDermott? No good.

Apparently Hughes has been dealing with a groin issue since about mid-season. It has obviously been affecting his play. Jerry is still a top end DE at pressures when 100%.

I really haven't noticed a tackling issue with Levi this year (or last) overall. But on the TD yesterday, yes, he made a poor decision. It wasn't necessarily poor tackling (technique-wise at least), the problem was he took a too-aggressive angle toward Conner, either wanting to make a big play, or because he didn't realize how fast Conner is. The way he tried to tackle him seems to me just a by-product of being a bit too aggressive. As the ball is snapped Levi is at the 6-yard line, he then backpedals to the 5-yard line. As the ball is thrown, Levi makes his break. Conner catches the ball at the 11-yard line and turns upfield. Levi takes an aggressive angle toward the ball carrier, angling from the 6-yard line toward maybe the 8.5- 9-yard line, where he expects to meet Conner. But at the 8-yard line, he realizes Conner is moving faster than he thought. So, he levels off along the 8-yard line, where they make contact. But the problem was, Levi was at the 8 and Conner was already at the 7.5-yard line, so Levi was in a poor position to make the tackle and all he could do was throw his body at him. Had he instead sprinted toward the sideline, along the 6.5- to 7-yard line, taking a wider angle, he would have at least been able to get in front of Conner (to have a chance at a better tackle) or at least slow him down so help could get there (Milano was not far behind).

Hey Stranded...I was in that same room with you! I was in college in Boston at the time and went to the Fours every Sunday to watch the games, including that one. I lived at the back end of Charles Street, so it was an easy walk to get there. So many great memories from that place. After one win, some big Bills fan standing next to me actually picked me up and held me above the crowd in celebration. The camaraderie was great. Many of us were strangers to each other...but it felt like you were with family.

That is the standard comeback to any "conspiracy theory." And it is completely inaccurate.

First of all, we all know that McDermott is a "control freak" to a certain extent. He'd probably admit that himself. So no news there. I bet there aren't too many head coaches in the NFL who weren't. You don't get to that position (or at least you don't succeed at that position) without trying to control every detail of your operation. There are so many coaches who fail, not because they don't know their Xs and Os,, but because they can't juggle all of the tasks of a head coach. You need someone who is a bit of a detail-oriented, control freak. Secondly, to take one incident and try to portray that as who the person "really" is, is so disingenuous. Like we have had a completely false picture of McDermott this whole time, and he's actually a douche, as one poster ranted. Does one outburst or moment where he may have lost his cool (for good reasons or not) erase all of the other moments of this man's life? The fact that his players love him, that he's respectful to everyone in the building, all the way down to the food servers and janitors? That he's always good with fans, that he is a good family man, etc., etc. Ridiculous. And for anyone to compare it to Marrone seems wrong too. There were so many rumors and stories of Marrone being disrespectful to players, media, and people in the building, and he was never really warm with fans either. That has not been the case with McDermott at all. In this day and age of social media, if people were really disgruntled or McDermott was really a dick, it would slip out here and there from players or staff...just look at the Jets this year. But, when you listen to the players talk about McDermott, it is always with a lot of positive emotion. There is no way they are all that good of actors to be faking it. And to portray the reason we don't know about it as being Terry Pegula has every single person in the organization and the media lying and hiding things is so over the top. I'm not saying they don't try to manage the image of the team and organization, every company (and person for that matter) does to a certain extent. It's called public relations and people get paid a lot of money to do so. But to make it seem as if Terry is controlling the media, etc. like a mob boss or dictator, just sounds like sour grapes to me from Sullivan. No offense, but that guy should have been off the Bills beat many, many years before he was finally let go. Third, I think there are some great journalists across the different fields of journalism, including sports coverage. But let's not kid ourselves, there are some bad ones too and there are some with huge egos themselves (so it is funny to me when they call out someone they are reporting on as being a huge ego). And some of them act like they are uncovering Watergate. It's a game. It's sports. It's entertainment. They're not saving the world or stopping rings of corruption here. I am constantly annoyed by questions at pressers. Some can't even form a coherent question. Some ask ridiculous questions. Some ask things that really aren't nice. Some ask things trying to prove an angle that they wrote about to prove they're right. The same question gets repeated over and over because I want my own sound bite directed at me. I can understand coaches and players getting annoyed with those types of bad reporters at times. (I'm not saying Fairburn is one of those bad reporters, honestly I don't know enough about him to say one way or the other.) If the incident is true as reported, then I'm not saying maybe McDermott should have handled it differently, but I'm trying to think why Fairburn would even report that they were practicing fake punts. What does that really bring to your readers or listeners? First of all, maybe they practice that every week, but usually during the nonmedia portion of practice, in which case it is not news. Or maybe it is for this week specifically, in which case, you are giving a disadvantage to the team you report on and want access from. So, why even report it? No one really cares about that information, except the opposing team of course. It seems more to me like a young reporter trying to find something else others aren't reporting on, so he had something different to say or write, in the hopes of more clicks/readers/listeners. They have to understand that their audience is almost all Bills fans. We don't really want you reporting things that could be detrimental to the team, if it isn't something that needs to be reported (meaning a bigger story of more import, you know, a real news item). Let's say a reporter is in the locker room and a player has left their playbook open on a bench. Should that reporter read that and then publish a story talking about what's in the playbook? It may be interesting, but I'd rather that not be in the press to create any disadvantage for the team. And I would completely understand anyone in the organization being upset about that and feeling as if that reporter had betrayed their trust. Now I'm not saying what Fairburn did was to that level or even wrong necessarily, but I can see McDermott feeling like it was the same type of breach of trust. People in the NFL are ultra-competitive people. I can understand getting upset if you think someone is giving away your secrets after you've invited them into your house. This "story" doesn't change my positive image of McDermott in the least.

Don't forget that Gronk was wearing a brace made of metal on his elbow that day and that was what he used to drill into Tre's back/neck/head area. It wasn't just his bear forearm. He basically used the brace as a weapon. Luckily Tre still had his helmet on. But what if Gronk connected with Tre's neck directly, under the helmet, with that brace rather than his helmet or shoulder pads? With all of his weight (Gronk is a big dude)? He could have broken Tre's neck. The helmet swing looks and is much more shocking and Garrett deserves everything he gets for it, but the Gronk play to me was just as reckless in regards to another player's health, was just as dangerous, and also used an object as a weapon. So I'd say the plays are pretty similar, despite the Garrett play looking and feeling much worse. And Rudolph was very lucky that he got hit with the underside of the helmet which had some padding on it. If Garrett had connected with the back (hard shell) of the helmet, who knows what could have happened to Rudolph. As to the great debate regarding Rudolph's culpability, it was probably smart of the NFL to hold off on any possible punishment for him for the moment until they could investigate and get a better idea of the initial stages of the skirmish. I think you have to throw out the "he kicked him in the nuts" stuff. To me it is clearly Rudolph just using his leg to keep Garrett away from him, not purposefully kicking him in the groin. If you've ever been in a fight with a brother, or cousin, or friend (serious or just play fighting) and they get the upper position and you are on the ground, you stick out your leg so they can't get close enough to hurt you or pin you down. That is such a normal, instinctive reaction. And if Garrett didn't already have a grasp of Mason's helmet when the QB's leg went up, he was definitely at least reaching toward him to do so. So the so-called "kick" is a nonfactor for me. The question then becomes was Rudolph trying to rip Garrett's helmet off. At first glance it seemed obvious to me that he was. But after watching the video a bunch of times, with the hand stuck in the facemask narrative in mind, some of Rudolph's body language could be seen as that being a possibility. So, it is probably good for the NFL to get to the bottom of that before handing out fines and suspensions. If they find, no he was just mad and trying to rip off Garrett's helmet, then you go to the rulebook. Is ripping (or attempting to rip) another player's helmet off a suspendable offense? Just a penalty? An ejection with no future suspension? A fine? And then you dole out the punishment according to the rules. If his hand wasn't stuck and he was just trying to rip off Garrett's helmet, then he deserves some punishment, but it wasn't anything beyond what happens in a lot of NFL skirmishes. So, punishable by normal standards. But what Garrett did was so far beyond a scuffle, or throwing a punch, etc. that he deserves the most severe penalty they can hand out. In regards to the initial tackle, I wouldn't call it a cheap shot by any means, but there is no question that he could have pulled up and not dragged Rudolph to the ground. The ball was gone before he dragged him down. He didn't body slam him or anything, it wasn't egregious, but the way Rudolph fell, he did pretty much land face first into the turf on a play that Garrett could have and probably should have held up on. It was a borderline penalty, but nothing more. Yet, I can still understand Rudolph being upset by it because it was totally unnecessary.

Hey So Tier, really it is just a difference in philosophy. Some fans want the most talented players, no matter what, because they just want to win. And I get that. We have been losing for so long, that a lot of people just want a winner at any cost. While other fans, like myself, want to like the team we root for, and want the players to be happy about playing for our team, give their full effort, etc. Yes, usually more talent will win over lesser talent, but we have also seen teams stacked with talent that didn't win because it just wasn't the right mix of players or the players were unhappy for whatever reasons. But, I'm not sure what you are talking about with lies. Do you really think that at the time each of them left, Marshawn, Peters, or Gilmore really wanted to stay in Buffalo? If you do, I think you are forgetting a lot of details and may be a little delusional. Marshawn obviously didn't like Buffalo. He was actually very vocal about it. When he left, it was the 4th year of his rookie deal. So, they would have had to make a long term investment in him. But, he wanted out and the Bills didn't want to take that risk because of all of the off the field incidents. Remember, he was one more incident away from a lengthy suspension and he was a public relations disaster. Plus, at the time, he was being outplayed by Fred Jackson. Why take that risk? Did he go on to play great for Seattle, sure. But at the time, it was the right decision to let him go. Peters was kind of a 50/50 thing. Yes, he was outplaying his contract, but he still had two years left on that contract. The team wanted to wait till the end of the season to discuss a new contract, and he wanted to be paid now. So, he basically forced his way off the team. And I will be the first one to say that I think the team handled that whole situation very poorly. But I don't think Jason and his agent handled it well either. By the time he did leave, he was so mad that Buffalo wouldn't have ever got his best again. Why would you want to keep a guy prisoner? He wouldn't have helped the team because he was so disgruntled. And with Gilmore, do you really think if the Bills offered the same contract as any other team in the league, he would have stayed? I really don't think so. And you just can't convince me that he didn't play half-assed down the stretch in 2016. He did and it was pretty obvious. In comes McDermott. Do you really think he wanted to build his new culture around a player that kind of quit a bit on the team? I mean, you make it sound like there were no reasons whatsoever behind the moves. Like the Bills one day out of the blue just decided to let three All Pro players go for no reason. And let's face it, neither Gilmore nor Lynch were playing at an All Pro level at the end for Buffalo anyhow. (Peters was maybe getting close to that.) After a couple of promising (but not spectacular) seasons (avg. 1,075 yds, 4.0/carry, 7.5 TDs), Lynch's last 17 games for the Bills he averaged 36 yards/game, 3.9 per carry, and had just 2 TDs (plus all of the off the field stuff). And Gilmore basically packed it in for half a season. Anyhow, it's not like we are saying these guys sucked or weren't very talented players. We are saying that with the circumstances surrounding each player at the time they left, it was probably the right decision for the Bills. A disgruntled employee can be a cancer to the whole team. Plus, like I said, I just want to root for players and a team that I like. It is more fun for me that way. And part of that is them actually wanting to play for our team. I kind of think that is really important. Like with the 90s teams. Those guys loved each other and they loved playing for Buffalo, they were part of the family. I think that is exactly what McDermott is building now. I don't know, maybe it is different for you, but don't paint it as we are lying about these particular players situations and that we are saying the team can do no wrong. We suffered a 17-year playoff drought. We all know full well that the team has made a ton of wrong moves. I just don't think that's the case with these three players. Peters is the only one I wish had stayed, but by the end of the contract dispute, I was fine with him going because of the animosity that had been created. Now, If you want to go back and talk about Nate Clements or Antoine Winfield or Pat Williams, etc. I'll gladly discuss why the Bills should have kept those players. I just think with the other three you are seeing both with hindsight and a bit with blinders on.

He didn't want to be in Buffalo and that last year, there is no question that he avoided contact and tackles. I remember one play where he literally jumped away to the side like a bullfighter. So, I wasn't sorry to see him go. Yes the team was a complete dysfunctional mess and maybe it sucked to play for a team or coaches like that, but you're also playing for your teammates, the fans, your family and friends, your own competitiveness, and oh yeah, because they're paying you a lot of money to do so. But he didn't do that his last year in Buffalo. There was a little quit in him. So, in essence, no matter how skilled he was, he was not a culture fit. Didn't have the DNA that McDermott and Beane talk about---self-motivated, team-first football players. Then he goes to a team where he is held accountable, where he doesn't have a disgruntled past with the team, where not even the Hall of Fame quarterback gets a pass. So, you better be playing your best ball. And to his credit, he is. But it was also the right move for the Bills at that time. He is a player that can walk into an established culture and be part of it, but not necessarily one of the guys that you want to build your culture around. Is he one of the best corners in the league now? Yes. Would he have been if he stayed in Buffalo? Probably not.

Just curious what the bolded statement is referring to. Ribbing from the fans and media? (Which I don't think Beane and McDermott would pay attention to.) Or are you talking about something team related that I just haven't heard about? But good post overall. I agree. I think maybe, despite the rhetoric, the coaching staff took Philly a little too lightly, in the sense that, it seems like they thought with the weather, our defense, and the injuries and turmoil for Philly, they could play a safe, conservative game on offense and rely on the defense. But that plan didn't work out too well. To me, that is on McDermott as the head guy for the overall game plan and effort, more than on Daboll (though he shares some of the blame as do the other coaches). Not to mention, the defense played as poorly as the offense. So, I'm not sure why Daboll is getting the majority of the blame from some fans. I also think some of it is just that we lost a little of our hunger with the Bye (maybe some of the guys thought the team had arrived already) and then we had to face two supremely desperate teams. It wasn't just that these teams' records were in jeopardy; in both situations, it was an ultimate pride game for those teams. And we weren't ready to match that level of animal backed into a corner desperation. But having said all of that, I still have total faith in the talent on this team and in Beane and McDermott. And I'm still in Daboll's corner too. I think they'll get the ship righted. Even great teams in great season can have a bad loss or two due to one circumstance or another. Now I'm not saying we are a great team yet (but do think we are on the right road there) or a Super Bowl contender this year, but we are still 5-2 with a great shot at the playoffs and then who knows. Maybe this loss will galvanize the team like the Dallas loss did for Philly, they get their hunger back, and go on a nice run. I am always amazed at how one loss (or a non-trade) can bring out the "fire everybody" crowd.

Positive vibes folks! We are at home. The team is good at half time adjustments. We're only down 4. And Josh is clutch down the stretch! Let's Go Buffalo!

Absolutely. Nine new starters, an offensive line that didn't even get to fully play together in camp or the preseason. They needed to find out who they were and get used to playing with each other. It was near impossible for them to come out of the gates on fire. They have actually been better than I thought they would be to start the season, except for the penalties and turnovers. They are just going to get stronger as the year goes on. I don't mind being ignored by the national media because I don't watch a lot of sports programming anyhow, or read much online (outside of for fantasy purposes and the Bills of course); and of course they are going to cater to the bigger markets. But I do agree with the OP that some of them go out of their way to discount the Bills. Every single year teams make it to the playoffs with soft schedules. But it is very rarely the topic every single time the team is discussed. Every time the Bills are talked about this year, someone has to say, well look at their cupcake schedule. It may have been mentioned once or twice that the Pats have a bit of a soft schedule, but with the Bills it is "They haven't played anyone man!" every time. Or how about this, the NFL put out a ranking of QBs the other day. Now, I could care less about rankings too, as it is one person's or organization's opinion. (For those who care, Josh is tied for 20th with Kyle Allen, just behind Mayfield, Goff, and Minshew). But the point isn't his ranking, it is the final sentence of Josh's blurb, "It's just a little disturbing when you see he has the second-lowest passer rating (72.5) among the 32 QBs with 10 or more starts since the beginning of last season." This is a ranking of QBs for this year, and yet he goes back to last year, which includes the rough start to Josh's rookie season that is so far in the rearview mirror, to make a point that Josh isn't good. I'm not saying Josh has fully arrived or doesn't still have a ton to work on, but how about talk about how he is playing this year, which is an improvement over last year. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001068790/article/qb-index-week-8-aaron-rodgers-soars-mitchell-trubisky-sinks I have no doubt that if we win, but it isn't a blowout, the media narrative will still be that the Bills haven't played anyone because the Eagles were injured and in turmoil. But, if they keep winning, and Josh keeps improving, eventually those narratives should start disappearing. And it will be all that much sweeter. I think it's just that we have been bad for so long that many media people (who aren't really paying attention) will just keep assuming that we are until the team (and Josh) really proves otherwise and then they won't be able to deny it any longer.

I don't put too much into PFF stats, but Josh probably won't be high on any QB lists right now for the simple fact that he has 7 interceptions and 5 fumbles (not all lost) in 5 games, with only 5 TDs. So, 10 or 11 turnovers vs. 5 TDs. That stat allows those who expect or want Josh to fail to bolster their opinion of him. And a two to one TO to TD rate isn't going to have you at the top of any lists. Now, we have watched every Josh play. We see the progression, we see the completion percentage rising, we see the comebacks and the great throws at times. We weigh in that 3 of those interceptions were against the best defense in the league when he was pressing too much and that he seems to have learned from that in how he played in Tennessee. So, our opinion of Josh will be higher than most from the outside or those just looking at stats. Josh hasn't had the 300 yard 4 TD-type of games, etc. (and frankly, we don't need him to), for people outside to say wow, he's good. We can say wow Josh won that game for us, but his stat line might be 200 yards 1TD 1INT. From outside that looks meh. The turnovers and penalties have kept this team from gaining even more yards and scoring more TDs. So, its just a matter of Josh especially, but the offense overall, cleaning up their game. If they do that (and Josh keeps steadily improving elsewhere), eventually people outside will start seeing what we see.

One is as bad as the other and won't get you where you want to go. If the question was a great offense with a terrible defense vs. a great defense with a mediocre offense, then maybe it is a discussion and I'd take the great defense and mediocre offense. But in the original post, who cares? Both teams will fail. If you can't score, you can't win. And conversely, you can't make a living playing and winning shootouts every week. You're one turnover from losing every game.

Hmmm...I just rewatched the play back a bunch of times and I think that you're right. (Originally I posted that the defender basically tackled Kelce.) After initial contact from the defender, Kelce tries to push him back and to the left and then make an incut to the right, which is when he fell. The defender was still making contact, but it was Kelce who was driving the contact, the defender was just trying to not get thrown back and stay with him. Probably a good no call afterall.

And from his highlights, looks like he has good hands and knows how to high point the ball.