The Big Cat

You need to sit down before you fall down, junior. There's a reason your feeble attempts at being clever go entirely ignored.

how about heat maps?

B word all you like. You're welcome to B word at the sky when it rains, too.

because the guy who didn't get hired speculated about his willingness to bring back a dc he didn't know would join him? okay.

speaking of lazy arguments: you just nullified every argument posited here for all of time.

Hey, Bloke. I was being ironical.

So you're saying that NRC...just like Rex's "stupid dog **** stuck in 1970's overly complex, too cute for its own good" scheme did worse against better opponents? So may be...players...just aren't as good as other players??

I believe the defense would have been better...in the fantasy scenario. But given the possibility that Fred/CJ (and not Shady) would have stayed on at RB and that ??? would have been the QB, I don't know how anyone can begin to speculate the quantity of wins.

It's sort of like the firing of Karl Dunbar/hiring of John Blake. Fans were apoplectic...because the coach made a change at an area of weakness. B word B word B word about it, and as soon as the coach does something to make a change, it's time to B word some more. Why? Because the change wasn't Rex Ryan driving himself over The Falls. Lunacy has been running at an all-time high for the past 15 months. And I'm saying that with about a decade's worth of context. Probably not. But they might be playing better.

Just because Jackson (whom the Bills didn't hire, so the point is !@#$ing moot) wanted Schwartz doesn't mean Schwartz would have stayed. Also, for the price of 0-10 Hue Jackson? May be keeping Schwartz would have been worth it. May be. We had no QB, we had no Shady. The revisionist history saying Schwartz was locked and loaded to stay on at DC and if he had we would have been great is an insurmountably unprovable premise that fans have convinced themselves of/now judge the current regime by. And since treating this fantasy as a reality has now motivated 100+ responses to Schwartz's (unsurprising) success elewhere, I remain at a loss as to why. I don't understand why we're clamoring over false/alternate realities. On the other hand: Of course losing Schwartz was a loss. Nobody is suggesting it wasn't

ha, right. back pedaling. saying that it was never going to happen, that it was never a certainty and your rebuttal was speculation. back pedaling.

I guess then you'll continue to count your ifs and buts with nickels and nuts since the guy who didn't get hired speculated so.

No. This is a false and alternate reality that posters have clung to. It was never the case. So again, I don't understand the point of this thread, if the crux of the analysis rests on things that didn't/would never have happened. Otherwise, it's sour grapes, crying about things that don't fit what you think should have happened, regardless of whether it could. Link?

I don't understand the point of this thread.

well, we'll see how the bench works

they could also be having lousy years. they could also have lousy attitudes. LorAx's comments might lend themselves to the latter.

i just don't follow the logic of those who insist they do.

They get plenty of help. They don't get it on every play.

Well, you essentially echoed what I was saying last week: if you can't stay with your man 1v1, or you're losing him in a big way once a game...that's a problem. And it comes down squarely on execution.

I mean..."a little worse than average" is just a nicer way of saying "incompetent." I think our guys are incompetent too often. But not all the time.

They're being exposed as "not good." It's not that elite-level play is required. It's that competent play isn't even being achieved. I don't know many schemes built to function when your CB1 and CB2 dabble in incompetence at some point every week. The blown long play against SF The blown long play against MIA The blown long play against BAL (he gone) All of the Jets game Most of the New England game Key moments in Seattle We're talking about two to three losses negated by competent DB play. The only games not mentioned above featured an injured Jake Briscuit, the up and down Cardinals (although that was prob the DB's best game of the season by far) and Case Keenum, who still managed completions of: 31 yards 31 yards 28 yards 26 yards 24 yards 21 yards I think that the really tricky part about all of this is that the scheme is working every where else. An overhaul or even a philosophical rethink is bound to compromise the things the defense is doing well. So I guess the question is, would you rather do three or four things worse for the sake of doing one thing better? And if two of those things are stop the run and get to the QB?

"Growing up, taking accountability...executing and being a pro." But what would LoRax know about it? He's only been in the league since Prohibition. https://twitter.com/buffalobills/status/798568809044971520 Video embedded if you scroll down, couldn't link directly to it: http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-1/Bills-Today-Starting-jobs-up-for-grabs/d1f6b985-69b9-48fb-b68a-6d535cb02cfb Boy it sure sounds like he's talking exclusively about Darby with shades of Gilmore. Selective listening, may be.

I'm curious to hear more from the "we should have hired Hugh Jackson" crowd.

nope no sarcasm. good discussion indeed.

Fantastic.