Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
14 minutes ago, boco357 said:

Never heard anything about a fine for Jones.

 

didn't see a single finger-wag from anyone outside Bills fandom

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

I will admit you have a point. Take last week for example. My employer paid for me to see a doctor to see if it was ok to return to work. We chatted for two mins then he signed the slip. Then he somehow managed to sew my hand to my face. I was going to complain but then I remembered I'm not a doctor so I shouldn't have opinions on such things. 

 

Clearly this example makes your opinion on neurology a better one.

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted
30 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

every DB who ever played would gladly hit him like that if given the chance

 

 

Yep, this right here is the truth. For as much as the league powers are trying to make the game all safe & warm & fuzzy, I'm fairly certain most (all?) defensive players still have the attitude of "I want to kill the QB." Lol

Posted
13 minutes ago, John in Jax said:

Yep, this right here is the truth. For as much as the league powers are trying to make the game all safe & warm & fuzzy, I'm fairly certain most (all?) defensive players still have the attitude of "I want to kill the QB." Lol

 

the only bigger wish is the o-line wanting a full head of steam downfield to righteously clock a DB

 

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I'm moving the goal posts?  You say "The topic is how well did Barkley perform on a bad Bears team, not whether the Bears won or lost the games, because then we'd have to compare the defenses "  Do you think the Bears defense threw Barkley's 10 INTs in those 3 - >300 yd games with the Bears that you reference?  Do you think that throwing 2, 3 or 5 INTs in a game has no bearing on whether or not the team lost, especially a team with a poor D that can't get the stop after a turnover?

 

Look, GG.  Don't paint this as quibbling about statistics.  Your contention is (here, I'll quote you): "Why do you wash away Barkley putting up 41 points last year, or having multiple 300 yard games with a craptastic Bears team, as if they're anomalies?  Allen's physical gifts come in handy when he needs to manufacture a heroic 4Q comeback.  With Barkley, the hope is that he doesn't make the boneheaded mistakes that we've seen Allen make in the first 3Qs that the comeback isn't needed. "

 

It's entirely appropriate to point out that those 3 - 300 yd games also involved 10 INTs, and that (since INTs tend to contribute to a loss, especially with poor D), the team lost - presumably in significant part because of Barkley's INTs.  It's entirely appropriate to point out that every QB has good and bad games and it's not appropriate to hone in on that 41 point performance against the Jets (which as I recall, involved 2 Jets INTs resulting in Bills points) while ignoring the rest of Barkley's professional work. 

 

To say that Barkley won't make boneheaded mistakes (ie INTs) therefore comebacks won't be needed when you're looking at a backup QB who has a significant track record of throwing INTs, is to cherish a worldview with a stunning blind spot.  No, Barkley won't make the same boneheaded mistakes Allen makes, but he does make mistakes.

 

 

I can't even.

Here:

image.png.6707a065ce0778fc9665b2db1a7a2bb1.png

 

The 3rd quarter 9 play "turnover on downs" was the drive where Allen was injured.  3 plays before the "no play" injury, so Barkley had 6 plays ending in an incompletion - plus an incompletion cancelled by penalty and a "delay of game" penalty.  So somehow Barkley's 6 plays ending in a turnover on downs and another 6 play drive ending in an INT show that he could move the ball better, and the two drives where Allen moved the team within FG range (for a hit and a miss) don't count?

 

 

 

I won't say you're crusading to start the backup, but you appear to have a couple large blindspots when you calculate your "good probability that this particular offense would perform better with (Barkley) under center".  I'm not sure how you're calculating that "good probability that this offense would perform better with Barkley" but it seems a little selective from here.

 

 

 

 

Do you want to also look at advanced stats, that show the situations of when the turnovers occurred - such as the telling stat that 18 of his 19 career interceptions happened when his team was trailing, and that 15 occurred in the 3rd & 4th quarters?  Or that 10 of 19 INTs were in games where he passed >40 times?  How do these stats show that his INTs were the cause of Bears' deficits in points?

 

I'm the good probability that this offense would perform better with Barkley at this point, because it's obvious that he has a better command of a very complex offensive system than Allen.  Nothing more, nothing less.  

Posted
37 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Where did you see leg tremors?

 

And with all of the emphasis put on concussions by the NFL, you're doubting the doctors?

Right?! Im not sure how this argument even exists. Its ALL based on speculation.  We are on the outside looking in and no one has access to him or his chart. What are we even doing here??

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

This is a good time for @Roger Goodell to chime in about reviewing all hemlut to helmet hits and valuing player safety. 

 

Supposedly this was already done, the NFL said it wants ALL helmet to helmet hits eliminated from the game.  Apparently it depends on what team applies the hit.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said:

Cripes, how badly did singletary hurt himself?

 

Great playmaker, but this doesn't bode well.

 

 

Allen and Singletary will play Sunday.  You can book it.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Especially when it apparently has zero consequence

 

he barely had a step of momentum, Josh traipsed down the garden path into that one

 

Burfict exhibited that full speed streamlined hit for a critical analysis.

 

 

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Clearly this example makes your opinion on neurology a better one.

 

Clearly you have again missed the point. I am not a neurologist; I am, however, reasonably capable of having conversations with doctors who have treated patients for concussions as well as performing basic google searches on the subject. Although this does not make me an expert in the field, it allows me to gather enough information to at least ask some good questions, like why would we want to rush our QB back after sustaining what appeared to be a somewhat serious head injury before the typical time frame for recovery would suggest?

 

https://brighamhealthhub.org/prevention/when-is-it-safe-to-return-to-play-after-sports-related-injuries

 

Quote

Levels of Sports-Related Head Injuries

 

Grade 3 – Mild traumatic brain injury (TBI), characterized by a sudden change in mental status or loss of consciousness for less than 1 minute, or amnesia for less than 30 minutes.

 

Quote

Grade 3 – We recommend that athletes wait at least 10 days before they participate in any activity that can result in head trauma. 

 

Edited by VW82
Posted
40 minutes ago, VW82 said:

 

If he gets cleared to play less than a week after laying on the turf unconscious...

Has this been definitively determined? I just watched it again on my DVR, and from 4-10 seconds after the hit, he's moving/lifting his legs, and then at about 18 seconds after the hit he rolls over (on his own; wasn't pushed over by staff).

×
×
  • Create New...