finn

Flashbacks to the Bengals game. Picking up where they left off.

No pass rush. One on one matchups just dancing with your partner.

Someone compared him to a frantic squirrel trying to escape a dog.

I had the same thought. Throw to Davis = incomplete. We also don't have a slot receiver.

Looked to me like a miscommunication about the route. Beasley faked twice; if he had faked just once, the ball would have been in his hands.

Ok, that's the flaw of my thinking. I didn't see that KC's win percentage with the extra victory and same number of defeats would be better than the Bills' win percentage. Apologies for not thinking this through myself and thanks for explaining.

Unless we play the Chiefs. The league (via the owners' vote) appear to want KC in the Super Bowl. Why else would they give them a first-round bye on a silver platter as they did? As the Bengals coach pointed out, the rule for canceled games was already in place. The league contorted itself to benefit KC, throwing the Bills and Bengals a bone with the neutral-site concession. I don't understand why people aren't more upset. The bye is what is important, not the homefield advantage. The bias is unmistakable. If I'm missing something, please enlighten me.

I used to dismiss conspiracy theories out of hand, but at this point, I think it's naïve to deny the corruption. It starts with the league noticing that SB/playoff ratings are much higher with certain teams playing, or that betting is much higher with some teams. Then it's just a matter of putting a thumb on the scale whenever they can, like ignoring their own rule to pretty much ensure KC a first-round bye. As for the refs, how easy it is to find at least one per game who is willing to throw a flag or not in exchange for some quiet deposits in an offshore account or whatever? The irony is that this kind of corruption is pretty much the only thing that can kill the golden goose. So unbelievably stupid.

Well, it obviously doesn't guarantee subsequent victories. But it does guarantee a "victory" that week AND a week of rest watching rivals exhausting and injuring each other. That's a much bigger advantage than home field; I don't understand why people disagree. Adding an 8th playoff team and eliminating the bye for everyone is the only fair solution--and it has NO downsides. (KC fans will whine, but that's a plus in my book.) If the league doesn't adopt it, I'm ready to believe it's because they really do want the Chiefs in the Super Bowl.

I assumed the 3 referred to Damar's number and the 51 to someone else, but it belongs to a backup linebacker.

Sorry to be dense, but what does 513 refer to?

An It bothers me to give the Chiefs the first seed bye despite being beaten by two teams who wouldn't be given a chance for the top seed. Solve the bye problem and I'm on board. I posted a solution: eliminate the last wild card and have all surviving teams play in the first round.

But you see the problem with scheduling a makeup Bills-Bengals game, right? Either they need to play two times in a week or, if the playoffs get pushed back and they play in the off week, all playoff teams get a bye and they don't. Either way, they're punished. Since no solution is perfectly fair to the Bills, Bengals and Chiefs, why not eliminate their relative seeding altogether? If they meet, have them play in a neutral stadium. Determine their other opponents by coin flip. No bye for anyone; eliminate the third wild card. (Sorry, Fish.) KC might squawk that they won the most games, but they lost to both the Bills and Bengals, so that doesn't fly. The league has the same number of playoff games, so they shouldn't care. Minimum disruption, maximum fairness.

Right, but any solution is going to be unfair to someone, and this one seems mild compared to the others we've heard. Wouldn't it be ironic if they earned the top seed after this long, long season but didn't receive what they most need, a week of rest?

No, but how can the Bills play again this year? Would you be able to go all out, hit someone and be hit after what happened? I may be wrong, but it seems to me something broke. Other teams will be able to play, but I don't see the Bills out there doing any more than going through the motions. But the very opposite could happen if Hamlin recovers enough to indicate he's ok. Then I can see the Bills players and coaches channeling all these powerful emotions into the game, and nothing would stop them from winning it all for Damar.

I'm affected, too, and I wonder why I feel more emotional about this event than the countless other tragedies I read about all the time. Why this one? It's not just me and us; the whole country seems to be in distress.

This sounds like the best solution, especially if Hamlin is upgraded to stable condition before then and looks to be out of the woods. If he's not, I don't care what happens, and I suspect most Bills players will feel the same way.

Or Pickens and Woolen.

From all I can gather and what I know about the Bills, I would say, objectively, the Bengals are a nightmare matchup for the Bills defense. Burrow's fast release negates our strong DL, and although I trust our LBs to take away the short game, their three excellent receivers will be a problem for the Bills weakened secondary. To be blunt, I don't see how the Bills can stop them. On offense, I admire their DC's ability to be creative and to adjust on the fly. You don't see those qualities as much as you'd expect. And I'm worried that he will expose the Bills weak line and reliance on Diggs. If I stopped there, I'd say the Bengals win this game pretty easily. But there's an X factor: We have a Hulk. The league has never seen a player like Josh Allen. I think he will will this team to victory no matter what the Bengals throw at him.

(I think you mean "sleight," from Middle English, meaning "cunning" or "skill.")

I don't think they will. Their defensive coordinator sounds like he fully appreciates what he's up against in Allen. I expect him to play Allen like the Bills played Fields: Keep him in the pocket, assign a spy, and take away the deep ball. Force him to be patient while giving him less time than he usually gets when he extends plays on the run. It's not a perfect plan, because Allen is perfectly capable of picking a team apart from the pocket. But, as we've all seen, he can also get impatient and start forcing balls into tight coverage, ignoring the check-down. What I wonder is how this plan (assuming they use it) impacts the Bills run game. Any thoughts?

That does seem to be the pattern. Early in the season, the Bills were so confident of scoring and stopping the other team from scoring that they would opt to take the ball first when they could. Now, the offense seems to stall early, and the defense, as you say, gets gashed before they figure things out. Still gets the job done, but it's not nearly as gratifying to watch.

I see truth in both views. The line is in fact below average, all units are sloppy with penalties, tackling and drops, and Allen doesn't have enough weapons, which has led him to hero ball, for better and worse. But they are also battle-tested against tough opponents and bad weather and have dealt with a lot of injuries (how many teams have lost two all-pro players?). The idea that the defense is a paper tiger that can't handle elite QBs ignores the facts. I see a flawed but formidable team. If Allen is on, it takes a meltdown on the part of the coaches or the other units to beat the Bills. Even if he's off, they can still win with defense and coaching. I'm just glad they're my team. If I'm a Chiefs fan, I'm secretly terrified.

Those who rank the Chiefs above the Bills and Bengals should be reminded that these two teams beat the Chiefs four out of the last five meetings (four of the five in Arrowhead), with the one Chiefs victory in overtime at home when they won the coin flip and the Bills weren't allowed to respond. The evidence is clear: The Chiefs are at best only the third-best team in the AFC. Monday's game is a preview of what should be (and should have been last year) the AFC Championship game.

I get it that we can't expect greatness at every position. My point is that the meh-ness of the Bills offense is disguised by Allen's brilliance, and that many of his mistakes are due to his trying to work with average or below average talent. I remember that Gabe Davis catch, but I also remember his many drops and general invisibility. Cincinnati, Philadelphia, San Francisco, maybe even Miami could thrive with a competent backup QB. The Bills could not.