buffalobully Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 The fins have the same opportunity to win the AFC division "predictions" as the Bills.
BuffaloHokie13 Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 So whether Brady's suspended or not, the Bills go 8-8? I'm not making the projections and have no idea where they chose the wins and losses. Though, based on the overall W-L's, even if we beat the Bradyless Pats* twice and Miami's record doesn't change the projections would still put Miami a game ahead of us. Not that they matter in the first place.
RevWarRifleman Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I really don't put much stock in preseason predictions, but this one has me scratching my head. In the insider piece on the Dolphins becoming the AFC East favorite, if Brady is suspended for any considerable time, they lauded the Dolphins as their pick - mainly due to their FA signings. This is what the said about the Bills: "The Bills last year had a bad offense and a great, underrated defense. Now that Rex Ryan is in charge, they are likely to have a bad offense and a great, properly rated defense." So, an offense that went 9-7 (and was a Bryce Brown goal line fumble away from 10-6) and added Clay, Felton, Incognito, McCoy and Harvin will be worse? Make some sense of that for me, will ya boys? Put it up on your bulletin board in your locker room for extra motivation this year. Go Bills
1billsfan Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 The Dolphins are kind of like the AFC's version of the Detroit Lions. Everybody predicts them to be good and do something, and every year they fall flat on their face. They will beat you badly if you don't take them seriously, but as soon as they're expected to prove the naysayers wrong in games that start to matter they collapse. I see the Bills as the AFCs version of the 2013 Seahawks and Niners, scary defense and just enough play makers to beat you almost every game. I think the Dolphins will finish about 8-8 and the Bills finish around 11-5. I know the Bills have proved nothing in a long time, but I really do think with all of these changes that the Bills will show that they're one of the best 10 teams in the NFL this year.
BuffaloMatt Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 To play Devils advocate. We were also a full game worth of starters vs. the Pats** to being 8-8 as well. The Bills have been middling for years now. That means a couple of bounces one way or another we could have been a disaster or very good. Until we prove otherwise we are what we are. I am high on this roster but also accept the prior statement. Well said!
eball Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I wish someone would do the legwork to find the last several years' of these jokers predictions and then post them alongside the actual teams' results. I think everyone would then realize just how much credence one should lend these prognostications.
YoloinOhio Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Nah, Fish schedule is brutal. Philbin is too. Edited May 11, 2015 by YoloinOhio
Deranged Rhino Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Nah, Fish schedule is brutal. Philbin is too. Philbin is the number one reason why I don't fear a Dolphin resurgence this year. He's milquetoast and he'll lose the team by December.
chris heff Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Why do people care at all about preseason predictions of a team's record? Because it's May.
Mango Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Why is the last Pats game so often marked as a loss for us? We were winning the first half, we were on a bit of a hot streak outside of the Raiders game. If anything it should be marked as not counting. So that makes us 8-7. But then if we play Devils advocate for us, instead of against us... Brown doesn't fumble in KC, we are 10-6 and make the playoffs. EJ doesn't get picked off by Superman, we're up to 11-5... OMG We finished 9-7, every team gets a couple good luck, and a couple bad luck games. I don't see why the Bills deserve to have their fortunes taken away, when no one else has that saddled upon them. I totally agree with this. I am just expanding on it. Taking the "could be wins" where we get the lucky bounce/call or two, then things are great. But you could also count the bad breaks and go the other way too is all I all I am saying. If we can say we were a JJ Watt interception away from another win, Chicago was also a Kyle Williams interception away from another win. Or we were a PI call away against Carolina from getting another loss. I am just saying we are what we are currently. A middling team that is hopefully on the rise. So until we prove otherwise it is tough to discredit pundits from considering us anything less or more than that.
johnwalter Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 i disagree, but i don't think it's absurd. fins are better at qb, ol - we've got them everywhere else.
The Real Buffalo Joe Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 The same people who said that we were gonna be 4-12 last year?
mattsox Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) This is what the said about the Bills: "The Bills last year had a bad offense and a great, underrated defense. Now that Rex Ryan is in charge, they are likely to have a bad offense and a great, properly rated defense." To ESPN: Edited May 11, 2015 by mattsox
Utah John Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 The Bills will be pundit-unworthy until said pundits decide our QB situation is adequate. I think the Bills helped themselves in FAs but not much in the draft. I don't have any idea how well Miami improved overall, but I keep having visions of Suh blowing up every single play we run, taking McCoy down for 2 yard losses on every run and Cassel down for 5 yard losses on every pass. It's Eric Wood and an unknown guard blocking (?) Suh, for Pete's sake. Maybe Suh is why they signed the FA fullback...
dollars 2 donuts Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) I haven't read all the posts, but I think this is being misinterpreted even further than what the OP thinks. Considering when Brady is likely to be suspended ESPN isn't even necessarily saying the Bills are an 8-8...they are likely a 7-9 team, that gets to improve to 8-8 without Brady in week two. Edited May 11, 2015 by dollars 2 donuts
DC Tom Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I'm not making the projections and have no idea where they chose the wins and losses. Though, based on the overall W-L's, even if we beat the Bradyless Pats* twice and Miami's record doesn't change the projections would still put Miami a game ahead of us. Not that they matter in the first place. I know you're not. I was commenting on the article's stupidity...Brady's out, the Pats don't win the division, but no one's record changes except the Pats'? So the real impact of Brady being suspended is in the NFC East or something?
KD in CA Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 This is what the said about the Bills: "The Bills last year had a bad offense and a great, underrated defense. Now that Rex Ryan is in charge, they are likely to have a bad offense and a great, properly rated defense." That's actually kinda funny and probably has at least a decent chance of being true.
eball Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Why is the last Pats game so often marked as a loss for us? We were winning the first half, we were on a bit of a hot streak outside of the Raiders game. If anything it should be marked as not counting. So that makes us 8-7. But then if we play Devils advocate for us, instead of against us... Brown doesn't fumble in KC, we are 10-6 and make the playoffs. EJ doesn't get picked off by Superman, we're up to 11-5... OMG We finished 9-7, every team gets a couple good luck, and a couple bad luck games. I don't see why the Bills deserve to have their fortunes taken away, when no one else has that saddled upon them. Detroit game was a lucky win. Vikings also. Folks will assert that if Jordy Nelson doesn't drop that bomb Green Bay beats us. So it goes both ways. And when a team literally has nothing to play for, as the Pats** did in W17, it's just not reasonable to claim the result has any meaning whatsoever. It was a preseason game.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Detroit game was a lucky win. Vikings also. Folks will assert that if Jordy Nelson doesn't drop that bomb Green Bay beats us. So it goes both ways. And when a team literally has nothing to play for, as the Pats** did in W17, it's just not reasonable to claim the result has any meaning whatsoever. It was a preseason game. And KC was "lucky" to beat us? Goes both ways. You can find those games for every team, including the Pats. Were they lucky to beat the Seahawks in the Super Bowl? Edited May 11, 2015 by PromoTheRobot
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 All this needs to be in the proper context. Before considering the result you absolutely must apply the ESPN adjustment. It is plus 3 wins for the Bills, so they will win 11 games this season. Last year they said 6 we won 9. Works every time!
Recommended Posts