Lil' Dummy McKenzie.........offical team character builder

[Rico]

3 hours ago, Chandler#81 said:

I’m over him. Bummed we signed him to an extension, speed notwithstanding. ‘Face of the franchise’ was funny. It’s old now and his play doesn’t rate a starting position. 

I supported him 100% because I did not want the ex-Jet scrub starting, let alone on the team. Too bad he looked pretty Jet-sy against KC.

[Freddie's Dead]

2 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

Where does it state that in the rule?  The rule only states this:

 

Item 3: Stopping Clock A player under center is permitted to stop the game clock legally to save time if, immediately upon receiving the snap, he begins a continuous throwing motion and throws the ball directly into the ground.

Item 4: Delayed Spike A passer, after delaying his passing action for strategic purposes, is prohibited from throwing the ball to the ground in front of him, even though he is under no pressure from defensive rusher(s).

 

Read the last half of the rule book, which shows the approved rulings, which apply the rule book and clarify.

[Buffalosouth]

On 10/16/2022 at 10:05 PM, BADOLBILZ said:

Lil' Dummy is doing a bang up job of keeping would-be blowouts close with drops and turnovers......general physical awkwardness......and dumb decisions that cause Ken Dorsey to smash his hardware.

 

Sure.........they could be 6-0,  scoring 35 points per game with a better slot receiver and McKenzie on the sideline(like last week against Pittsburgh)..........but his bumbling has helped them learn how to win unnecessarily close games.

 

Here's to Lil' Dummy...........making easy wins difficult.   Dude is a character builder. 

 

Rest easy... Khalil will get there.

[Da webster guy]

weak post.

 

He's a great spark for the offense, and still will have a decent role despite an off game.  Lil Dirty has come through us many times before, just had an off day.

Daboll loved him, Allen and Dorsey do too, thats enough for me.

[DrDawkinstein]

6 hours ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

We're just gonna disagree.  McKittrick has made enough plays for me while here to be cutting him some slack.  I just don't understand those that want him gone.  We won the freaking AFC East last year because of him!  There's just way too much "what have you done for me lately" around here for my taste.

 

I just went back through the first 8 pages of this thread. There were a lot of complaints and detractors. Not a single one suggested to cut McKenzie. One poster mentioned using him in a potential trade package, but that's the most extreme suggestion made.

 

What the rest of us have said is that he should be moved back to #4 or #5 WR, and only used situationaly, like on jet sweeps. At least until he can prove himself again. That is literally how McD got such a great game out of him in New England; benching for mental mistakes that helped him find his focus.

 

He had a good game last year. He has a long and diverse history of mental errors as well.

 

Give Shakir a larger role, and let McKenzie earn his way back in.

 

Is that unreasonable? Do we disagree that much?

[Freddie's Dead]

14 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

I just went back through the first 8 pages of this thread. There were a lot of complaints and detractors. Not a single one suggested to cut McKenzie. One poster mentioned using him in a potential trade package, but that's the most extreme suggestion made.

 

What the rest of us have said is that he should be moved back to #4 or #5 WR, and only used situationaly, like on jet sweeps. At least until he can prove himself again. That is literally how McD got such a great game out of him in New England; benching for mental mistakes that helped him find his focus.

 

He had a good game last year. He has a long and diverse history of mental errors as well.

 

Give Shakir a larger role, and let McKenzie earn his way back in.

 

Is that unreasonable? Do we disagree that much?

 

You missed the GDT.  Plenty of bench him, trade him, cut him posts there.  This thread is just piling on.  I especially liked the ones that said he shouldn't suit up for the SB if we get there.  I disagree that benching him helped, and I disagree that he has a long and diverse history of mental errors.  He does have a long history of making plays, first downs, and clutch catches and runs.  No problem with giving Shakir more touches, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on McKittrick.  He's earned some slack with me, but clearly a lot of posters here don't want him anywhere near the field.

[2020 Our Year For Sure]

30 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

You missed the GDT.  Plenty of bench him, trade him, cut him posts there.  This thread is just piling on.  I especially liked the ones that said he shouldn't suit up for the SB if we get there.  I disagree that benching him helped, and I disagree that he has a long and diverse history of mental errors.  He does have a long history of making plays, first downs, and clutch catches and runs.  No problem with giving Shakir more touches, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on McKittrick.  He's earned some slack with me, but clearly a lot of posters here don't want him anywhere near the field.

The GDT isn't canon.

[BADOLBILZ]

22 minutes ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

You missed the GDT.  Plenty of bench him, trade him, cut him posts there.  This thread is just piling on.  I especially liked the ones that said he shouldn't suit up for the SB if we get there.  I disagree that benching him helped, and I disagree that he has a long and diverse history of mental errors.  He does have a long history of making plays, first downs, and clutch catches and runs.  No problem with giving Shakir more touches, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on McKittrick.  He's earned some slack with me, but clearly a lot of posters here don't want him anywhere near the field.

 

 

I wasn't in the game day thread...........I actually ATTEND all home games and watch the road games with much of the same tailgate contingent.........I'm not fiddling around on the internet with you neurotics during an actual game.    Never have, never will.   So piling on??   GTFOH Freddie.    Do you think only people who were in touch with the GDT on TSW could deduce how badly he's played this season?   You should see the outtakes from Stef Diggs uncle Charlie that they had to edit out!

 

[US Egg]

2 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

You should see the outtakes from Stef Diggs uncle Charlie that they had to edit out!

You got them?

[CheshireCT]

7 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

Ok we will just reserve the personal attacks for Bills players who aren't "well-liked".  

 

 

how about no one?

[DrDawkinstein]

9 hours ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

You missed the GDT.  Plenty of bench him, trade him, cut him posts there.  This thread is just piling on.  I especially liked the ones that said he shouldn't suit up for the SB if we get there.  I disagree that benching him helped, and I disagree that he has a long and diverse history of mental errors.  He does have a long history of making plays, first downs, and clutch catches and runs.  No problem with giving Shakir more touches, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on McKittrick.  He's earned some slack with me, but clearly a lot of posters here don't want him anywhere near the field.

 

Dont ever reference the GDT. What happens in the GDT, stays in the GDT thread and does not reflect reality. It's why many of us stay away from the board completely on Sundays.

 

To the bold... well, ok man. You can disagree with what we've all seen with our own eyes. Even classic homers like myself.

[FireChans]

9 hours ago, Freddie's Dead said:

 

You missed the GDT.  Plenty of bench him, trade him, cut him posts there.  This thread is just piling on.  I especially liked the ones that said he shouldn't suit up for the SB if we get there.  I disagree that benching him helped, and I disagree that he has a long and diverse history of mental errors.  He does have a long history of making plays, first downs, and clutch catches and runs.  No problem with giving Shakir more touches, but I'm not ready to throw in the towel on McKittrick.  He's earned some slack with me, but clearly a lot of posters here don't want him anywhere near the field.

Do you think McD benched him for no reason?

 

I'm not sure how anyone can believe this.

[NoSaint]

14 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

This is weird logic.  McK tripped trying to stop his route because the ball would have been behind him had he kept going on his route.  I think McK should have been able to stop his route and catch the ball but the ball was still thrown behind him.  You are looking at this as the ball was in good position where McK tripped but not taking into account he tripped because the ball placement forced him to stop his route immediately.

though we see dozens of balls any given game that pull guys away fro coverage, hits etc… 

 

he’s pointing out has he simply executed to stop it would’ve been a perfectly normal placement but because he tripped it made the placement seem more extreme than it would’ve looked with the receiver staying on his feet 

[Success]

37 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

though we see dozens of balls any given game that pull guys away fro coverage, hits etc… 

 

he’s pointing out has he simply executed to stop it would’ve been a perfectly normal placement but because he tripped it made the placement seem more extreme than it would’ve looked with the receiver staying on his feet 

 

Maybe - but I think the whole debate on it is interesting. I've seen the best receivers in the league fall down, and drop easy ones.  The offenses that McKenzie committed on Sunday don't warrant the somewhat over-the-top reaction on this thread - particularly since he is a guy who has come through for us before.

 

[Boatdrinks]

I think Bills fans would like McKenzie to play well. It’s just difficult to get past the vaguely unsettling feeling that his next play could spell disaster. He’s shown some ability to make big plays but has just as many or more negative ones. As a player McKenzie is a contradiction. 

[BADOLBILZ]

9 hours ago, CheshireCT said:

how about no one?

 

Clutch your pearls if that suits you.   Bad players getting jeered is part of the checks and balances of pro sports.

 

As a consumer,  if you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything and I don't think anyone wants to see would-be SB season come to a halt because a bad player just kept getting reps.    

 

Bill Polian was criticized for not replacing the increasingly weak-legged Scott Norwood after the 1989 season.   He was then terrible in 1990.........bottom third of league in fg % and atrocious on kickoffs.   But Polian was stubborn and Norwood was his find.   He left an unnecessarily very weak link in the lineup and lost a SB because of it.

 

Maybe you will drive in from Cheshire for the post SB loss parade where the crowd cheers for the cryin' Lil' Dirty at the podium after he drops the winning pass.........I'd prefer we bypass that and get a W instead.     

[CheshireCT]

4 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Clutch your pearls if that suits you.   Bad players getting jeered is part of the checks and balances of pro sports.

 

As a consumer,  if you stand for nothing you'll fall for anything and I don't think anyone wants to see would-be SB season come to a halt because a bad player just kept getting reps.    

 

Bill Polian was criticized for not replacing the increasingly weak-legged Scott Norwood after the 1989 season.   He was then terrible in 1990.........bottom third of league in fg % and atrocious on kickoffs.   But Polian was stubborn and Norwood was his find.   He left an unnecessarily very weak link in the lineup and lost a SB because of it.

 

Maybe you will drive in from Cheshire for the post SB loss parade where the crowd cheers for the cryin' Lil' Dirty at the podium after he drops the winning pass.........I'd prefer we bypass that and get a W instead.     

 

Fortunately, your "critiques" have no bearing on the Buffalo Bills or its collective decision making.

 

The distinction that you don't seem to understand is the difference between criticizing someone's performance vs. unfounded and rude personal attacks.

 

What do you hope to achieve? the entire crowd chanting "lil dummy" the next time he drops a pass? Would that make you feel better?

[HappyDays]

18 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

 

This is weird logic.  McK tripped trying to stop his route because the ball would have been behind him had he kept going on his route.  I think McK should have been able to stop his route and catch the ball but the ball was still thrown behind him.  You are looking at this as the ball was in good position where McK tripped but not taking into account he tripped because the ball placement forced him to stop his route immediately.

 

A pro receiver shouldn't have any trouble stopping his momentum and sitting down in an open area in zone coverage. In fact this scheme calls for it. This is one of those things where because the result was negative we're looking for excuses. If McKenzie had simply kept his balance and caught the ball as it hit him in the chest no one would be criticizing the pass for being behind him. Let's just call it what it was, a really bad game for McKenzie, and move on.

[HappyDays]

3 hours ago, Success said:

I've seen the best receivers in the league fall down, and drop easy ones. 

 

Yeah, well, McKenzie isn't one of the best receivers in the league. When elite players have a bad game you accept that. When a gadget player with a history of clumsy play makes a series of possibly game changing mistakes in the most critical game of the season you can't just hand wave that away. McKenzie will still make some plays for us this year but I don't trust him in crunch time. Imagine it's 4th down on the last drive in the Super Bowl and someone tells you the ball is going to McKenzie. You're honestly telling me you feel comfortable in that moment?

 

Edited October 22, 2022 by HappyDays

[Scott7975]

12 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

A pro receiver shouldn't have any trouble stopping his momentum and sitting down in an open area in zone coverage. In fact this scheme calls for it. This is one of those things where because the result was negative we're looking for excuses. If McKenzie had simply kept his balance and caught the ball as it hit him in the chest no one would be criticizing the pass for being behind him. Let's just call it what it was, a really bad game for McKenzie, and move on.

 

Uh I already did that.  I said numerous times that McK should have been able to stop his route and catch the ball.  I even said it in the post you quoted.  McK sucked in this game and made mistakes.  That doesnt mean the pass wasnt behind and thats the reason why.  Im not making excuses for McK.  Im calling it as I see it.  McK should have been able to stop and catch the ball.  The ball was behind.  Both can be and are true.