Rubes

We still do that to some extent, with Gabe often being the one in motion and then providing the push. Sometimes others as well.

We totally use this play, and it works well. Probably because Josh is big and strong and good at it, but the push with Josh running is like a cheat code. Not sure why they think the Eagles are the only ones using it or good at it...

I would expect to see a lot of action in the short passing game, too, especially to the backs and TEs. Neutralize the rush, attack the short middle of the field. Run it when the line starts looking for the quick pass. Weather right now looking like rain but not a lot of wind.

Yep, that's the convention. The other convention is that the away team is supposed to be listed first, home team second (or away team on top, home team on bottom). So if you see a score listed, Bills would be on the left, Commanders on the right—or, alternatively, Bills on top and Commanders on bottom (😲). When a team's media group or the hometown paper is talking about a particular game, then they would usually refer to the Bills first, so then it would follow the @/vs. convention: either be Bills vs. Other Team (home game) or Bills at Other Team (away game).

I did that a couple years ago when Josh Allen got COVID. Just not THAT Josh Allen. Strangely, the humor was not appreciated then, either.

If Josh delivered a couple Super Bowl victories for us, I'd give him whatever the ***** he wanted.

Well, there *are* some folks here who actually work for the University of Utah…

I’ve lived in Salt Lake City for 26 years and only last season did I realize there is a huge Bills bar about 3 miles away from my house. Wild.

This thread is approaching Kiko Alonso levels. I’m here for it.

Location, location, location, baby...

I'm all for it if only for the good luck factor. This guy just wins Super Bowls.

A screen pass that works.

I get that, sure. I'm just responding to the comments in your original post where you were drawing several conclusions about what happened and why. Yes, we know what the end result is, but understanding why is the key to knowing how to best address it.

This is a nice analysis, but it's a good representation of the classic problem of having observational data and then trying to generate a causal narrative that explains it. Did teams realize that Josh does better against the blitz and thus stop blitzing him? Did teams realize that Josh doesn't like the short underneath throws and thus stopped blitzing him to force him to do that? It's hard to say what the cause was just from looking at the data. We all know that every team, every defense, would prefer not to blitz if they didn't have to. If your four-man rush is effective at getting to the QB, that gives you the ability to keep extra men in coverage, making the passing game more challenging. Sure, they'll throw in a few blitzes here and there to confuse things, but I think it's fair to say that pretty much every defensive coordinator dreams of having a defensive front four that allows them to blitz judiciously. That said, did teams stop blitzing Josh because they had strong front fours and didn't have to blitz? Did the Bills offensive line get banged up and worse during the season, making even mediocre front fours more effective? In other words, did teams stop blitzing Josh not because he's good against the blitz, or because they wanted to bait him into underneath throws, but because they just didn't have to blitz at all? That's more along the lines of what you want to try to answer, assuming you're looking for the causal explanation to the data you've observed. Nice work to this point! Generates good discussion, which is what we want.

Wow, I had forgotten all about that show. Great stuff! Seems like they should be playing cards while they're talking.

Fantasy football back then was quite the adventure. Required a lot of pencils and calculators, as I recall.

Well, if we get run on badly the first few games, those calls would probably be justified...

If I had to guess, I'd say they put him on the PS because he's not up on the defensive scheme and calls. Don't want to waste a roster spot until they know he's got everything down and can play. Remember, he's the guy who would be receiving the plays and calling it out to the defense, getting everyone in place. Takes some time to get comfortable with the coaching staff and others on defense. Keep the roster spot for now for the guys who have been in the system and can jump in on a moment's notice.

Just a little something to keep in mind...and interesting in light of the Bills losing three of their cuts to waivers this year...

You'd think this was the start of free agency or something...

He's looked good enough that I'd be surprised if the Bears tried to stash him.

McCoy was just released. He's a free agent now.

@Alphadawg7 is catching some heat for this take, but I for one appreciate the thought-provoking question. It's true we have a lot of good players at CB right now, but I have to think that the phrase "you can't have too many good corners" is one that can be taken literally. Then again, everything has its price. If someone is willing to give up a promising player at another position in exchange for him or any of those corners, I think Beane is one to listen. I don't think he's going to get anything worthwhile in a 1:1 trade, but if he is packaged with a late-round pick next year, it might be enough for someone to offer a MLB or OT to make him really consider it.

Holy smokes. I hadn’t really thought about it before, but if you had asked me before reading this, I never would have guessed it was just one playoff win! Ravens seem to have built an interesting narrative over this time…

I watched Edwards a bit during that Pittsburgh game, and I have to admit I was pretty impressed. The Jets starters are a teeny bit different than the Steelers backups, but still...