Why is this board so negative?

[Don Otreply]

1 hour ago, BufBills83 said:

Asking for a friend.

BBFS, 

 

if everything isn’t perfect, everything sucks, it’s kinda comical really, the “doomers” / “ realists” are out in force, they just don’t realize it’s they who suck a good deal of the time, 🤣😂😁👍🍸🚬

 

”Don’t be Upsetty have some spaghetti “ 🍝 

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

[HurlyBurly51]

44 minutes ago, Breakout Squad said:

Allen has several years left in his prime. The Super Bowl appearance(s) will come…. Winning is a different story 

If he makes it, he will win.  Wait, wrong thread🙃

[NickelCity]

Desperate for a trophy. It's the hope that kills you.

[<bills4life>]

5 minutes ago, MJS said:

I would say so, yes.

And that’s the double edged sword. Objectively pointing out some hard truths, automatically qualifies one as being pessimistic.  At least on this board anyways.  Homerism would probably be  the correct term to describe many posters.  I get it people love the Bills.  Some of us love the Bill too, but will never blindly make excuses or not criticize blatant mistakes.  

[90sBills]

18 minutes ago, ghostwriter said:

I would say that peaceful is a better word. I will extend the olive branch out over and over again before I write someone off as a dbag.

Not very peaceful. 

[Avisan]

7 minutes ago, &lt;bills4life&gt; said:

And that’s the double edged sword. Objectively pointing out some hard truths, automatically qualifies one as being pessimistic.  At least on this board anyways.  Homerism would probably be  the correct term to describe many posters.  I get it people love the Bills.  Some of us love the Bill too, but will never blindly make excuses or not criticize blatant mistakes.  

Except those "hard truths" are always something like "Beane is a bad GM," "McDermott is a failure of a coach wasting Josh Allen's career," "The Bills are going to struggle to move the ball at all," "The Bills will go 7-10 and miss the playoffs," etc.

 

And the kicker is that the objective data we have available to try to evaluate the potential truth of these subjective statements is, without fail, mixed or antithetical to those "hard truths" being doomed around the board.

 

The ACTUAL hard truth is that the Bills are by all reasonable estimations a well-run football organization and one of the most objectively successful teams not named the Chiefs for the past five years, and that winning a Superbowl is really, really hard when you have to go through a dynasty in your conference to even get to the big game in the first place.

 

 

[stevestojan]

Because even marriages that start from Stockholm Syndrome can go south. 

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, mrags said:

Oh I’m sorry. Here I thought I was giving my opinion to the OP and his question as to why people on this board think negatively about the Bills. 
 

maybe next time, in a thread titled “opinions of negative posters” you can give yours. 

I just thought I’d stand up for some of our HOFers.

[<bills4life>]

6 minutes ago, Avisan said:

Except those "hard truths" are always something like "Beane is a bad GM," "McDermott is a failure of a coach wasting Josh Allen's career," "The Bills are going to struggle to move the ball at all," "The Bills will go 7-10 and miss the playoffs," etc.

 

And the kicker is that the objective data we have available to try to evaluate the potential truth of these subjective statements is, without fail, mixed or antithetical to those "hard truths" being doomed around the board.

 

The ACTUAL hard truth is that the Bills are by all reasonable estimations a well-run football organization and one of the most objectively successful teams not named the Chiefs for the past five years, and that winning a Superbowl is really, really hard when you have to go through a dynasty in your conference to even get to the big game in the first place.

 

 

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. However there is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that McDermott has had his fair of shortcoming's, primarily come playoff time.  I think McDermott is a fantastic coach during the regular season, a phenomenal culture builder, and a true professional.  With that being said, I also believe that he is not the one to lead us to the Superbowl. Does that make me a pessimist? At some point, something has to give.  Repeated playoff futility or being thrilled about being on a “run” and being relevant again.  

[Avisan]

Just now, &lt;bills4life&gt; said:

I don’t disagree with a lot of what you said. However there is enough anecdotal evidence to suggest that McDermott has had his fair of shortcoming's, primarily come playoff time.  I think McDermott is a fantastic coach during the regular season, a phenomenal culture builder, and a true professional.  With that being said, I also believe that he is not the one to lead us to the Superbowl. Does that make me a pessimist? At some point, something has to give.  Repeated playoff futility or being thrilled about being on a “run” and being relevant again.  

It means you have an opinion?  But that opinion is no more true than anyone else's, and nobody really has the data to back a given position up, either.

 

All coaches have shortcomings and make mistakes, and winning vs. losing a given game dramatically affects the level of scrutiny a coach will fall under (even if the winning head coach made more head coaching mistakes during the game).  McDermott has had some very visible errors that have led to losses in the playoffs, but there have also been some pretty outlandish circumstances (Texans game, for example) and discrepancies in player performance (last year's Chiefs game).  Reid is now a HoF-bound coach, but he was long considered a choker that couldn't handle the big game.  The Manning/Coughlin Giants were middling teams that got hot/lucky at the right times with good enough position group matchups to take down the GOAT dynasty twice.  The whole thing is just kind of a crapshoot, so any given opinion on the matter is just our own howling into the void.

[MJS]

41 minutes ago, &lt;bills4life&gt; said:

And that’s the double edged sword. Objectively pointing out some hard truths, automatically qualifies one as being pessimistic.  At least on this board anyways.  Homerism would probably be  the correct term to describe many posters.  I get it people love the Bills.  Some of us love the Bill too, but will never blindly make excuses or not criticize blatant mistakes.  

I see that, and I think there are posters who effectively point out issues and are realistic about the team. Many are just negative and what they say is a "hard truth" is just an empty gripe without real evidence. It goes both ways. Fans being optomistic without evidence and fans being pessimistic without evidence.

[4merper4mer]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Pry the depressing feeling that we're wasting the most physically talented QB to ever play the game of football's career.

And none of it is his fault at all.  He’s just a poor little millennial victim.

[MJS]

1 hour ago, mrags said:

Ok fine. I’m a pessimist. I don’t care. Apparently you do 

Nothing against you. Just an observation. Realists don't usually have to call out that they are realists. It's self evident. And people only talk about being realists when they are being negative. A real realist is just as willing to point out the positive as they are the negative, and not be emotionally entangled in their opinions so they can view things objectively.

[<bills4life>]

2 minutes ago, Avisan said:

It means you have an opinion?  But that opinion is no more true than anyone else's, and nobody really has the data to back a given position up, either.

 

All coaches have shortcomings and make mistakes, and winning vs. losing a given game dramatically affects the level of scrutiny a coach will fall under (even if the winning head coach made more head coaching mistakes during the game).  McDermott has had some very visible errors that have led to losses in the playoffs, but there have also been some pretty outlandish circumstances (Texans game, for example) and discrepancies in player performance (last year's Chiefs game).  Reid is now a HoF-bound coach, but he was long considered a choker that couldn't handle the big game.  The Manning/Coughlin Giants were middling teams that got hot/lucky at the right times with good enough position group matchups to take down the GOAT dynasty twice.  The whole thing is just kind of a crapshoot, so any given opinion on the matter is just our own howling into the void.

Fair enough. You make some good points.  I think you have more patience than I do.  The hard part is having the wisdom to stay the course or blow it up and move in a different direction.  Hopefully you will be right and Sean will lead us to the promised land. 

[mrags]

18 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I just thought I’d stand up for some of our HOFers.

Allen is going to have more rushing TDs than OJ by the time the new stadium is built. Probably have more than Thomas also by then. Oh, and he’ll likely be 3rd in all time rushing yards by a Bill by the end of his career. He’ll likely have more passing yards than Jim Kelly in 3 years and he’ll probably have more passing TDs between 2-3 years. 
 

I can’t say anything bad about Bruce. He WAS the best Bill of all time. But Allen will put up historical TD numbers in his career and by the time it’s all said and done, it won’t even be a question as to who the best Bill of all time is. 

9 minutes ago, MJS said:

Nothing against you. Just an observation. Realists don't usually have to call out that they are realists. It's self evident. And people only talk about being realists when they are being negative. A real realist is just as willing to point out the positive as they are the negative, and not be emotionally entangled in their opinions so they can view things objectively.

Well, in my defense there’s already so much positivity in this place I’m just being a voice of reason. There’s plenty that I’m happy about.

[K-9]

59 minutes ago, NickelCity said:

Desperate for a trophy. It's the hope that kills you.

[<bills4life>]

2 minutes ago, mrags said:

Allen is going to have more rushing TDs than OJ by the time the new stadium is built. Probably have more than Thomas also by then. Oh, and he’ll likely be 3rd in all time rushing yards by a Bill by the end of his career. He’ll likely have more passing yards than Jim Kelly in 3 years and he’ll probably have more passing TDs between 2-3 years. 
 

I can’t say anything bad about Bruce. He WAS the best Bill of all time. But Allen will put up historical TD numbers in his career and by the time it’s all said and done, it won’t even be a question as to who the best Bill of all time is. 

If he can stay healthy, I see no lies here. Bruce and Josh are my favorite players to ever wear a Bills jersey. 

2 minutes ago, K-9 said:

[<bills4life>]

Just now, mrags said:

See, here I am trying to be positive and this is what I get 

😂 

[The Firebaugh Kid]

Alcohol and the innate billsy sense of impending doom.

[GASabresIUFan]

Wow, you guys should read the Sabres' board.