finn

Maybe the coaches, since they've kept him on the benches since midseason? Beane and his scouts, not so much concern. Why take Tarik Woolen in the third round when you can take Elam in the first?

And J.D. Williams, remember him? 4.2 speed and he sucked.

MacKenzie with the drop. Color me surprised.

It IS legal to run the ball, Ken. I mean, it's allowed in this league. Also, let me tell you about "play action."

Hines bailing out teammates mailing this one in.

Ken Dorsey: "Great! Let's keep the pass-run ratio at 10:1!!"

Always the long third down and let them make it. Rinse and repeat.

And Daboll before him. Before every call, he's asking himself, "Should I throw for 18 or run for four?" And he feels validated by every big throw Allen makes and so wants it again and again. Until the sacks and punts start piling up and they fall behind and, you guessed it, HAVE to throw. If I'm McDermott, I lay the law down: Run it or get fired. Nothing else will get through.

Not looking like a Super Bowl team so far. Soft D and a one-dimensional offense. One is bad enough, but you can't win with both.

Is there a reason they're not running the ball? I don't see a loaded box or anything. Is it Dorsey addicted to sugar again?

Do NOT throw to Davis or MacKenzie unless they're wide open.

Let's see some runs.

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.