Buffalo Bills: 2020-2021

[Andrew Amerk]

Rams fans are crying that they got robbed on that 4th and 9 call at the end. They fail to remember that they wouldn’t even have been in that position at the end without the 7 points the refs gifted them on that botched interception call. 
 

There aren’t many more things in this world more beautiful to watch than JA stiff arming huge defenders. I also enjoyed his grabbing the facemask penalty and his unsportsmanlike conduct penalty after he was horsecollared. 

Probably off topic, but the NFL needs to fix their rule where a 5 yard defensive holding penalty and a 15 yard roughing the passer penalty offset each other. Not only mathematically should this make it a 10 yard penalty, but it also means the defense has a “free shot” at a QB if they know a 5 yard holding is coming on them. 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Andrew Amerk

[Taro T]

12 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Rams fans are crying that they got robbed on that 4th and 9 call at the end. They fail to remember that they wouldn’t even have been in that position at the end without the 7 points the refs gifted them on that botched interception call. 
 

There aren’t many more things in this world more beautiful to watch than JA stiff arming huge defenders. I also enjoyed his grabbing the facemask penalty and his unsportsmanlike conduct penalty after he was horsecollared. 

Probably off topic, but the NFL needs to fix their rule where a 5 yard defensive holding penalty and a 15 yard roughing the passer penalty offset each other. Not only mathematically should this make it a 10 yard penalty, but it also means the defense has a “free shot” at a QB if they know a 5 yard holding is coming on them. 

It was a 10 yard offensive holding penalty that offset the roughing the passer call.  Had it been a 5 yard penalty such as illegal motion, the 15 yarder would've been enforced.  10 yarders offset 5's & 15's.

[Andrew Amerk]

14 minutes ago, Taro T said:

It was a 10 yard offensive holding penalty that offset the roughing the passer call.  Had it been a 5 yard penalty such as illegal motion, the 15 yarder would've been enforced.  10 yarders offset 5's & 15's.

Appreciate the clarification. For some reason I thought holding was only 5, my apologies. 
 

I still think the two shouldn’t offset though. 

[Taro T]

21 minutes ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Appreciate the clarification. For some reason I thought holding was only 5, my apologies. 
 

I still think the two shouldn’t offset though. 

Defensive holding is only 5 yards but carries an automatic 1st down with it.  Offensive holding is 10 yards from the LOS or the spot of the foul when the ball is beyond the LOS.

And agree, personal fouls should either negate all lesser fouls or they should at a minimum net out the extra 5-10 yards.

But, then again, IMHO intentional grounding should be 5 yards from the spot of the foul in addition to the loss of the down.  Because penalizing it as a spot foul with loss of down is EXACTLY what would happen if the QB was sacked there (which is what would've happened without the grounding penalty).  And grounding gives the QB the possibility of having the ball stay at the original LOS w/ only the loss of the down (just like any other incomplete pass) & avoids any possibility of fumbling while getting sacked AND adds the very slight possibility the defender continues on & gets called for a penalty for hitting the QB after the ball was thrown.

[Ogre]

3 hours ago, SwampD said:

Thank you, Josh, for not only being good,

24/33 for 315 yds 73%comp; 4 Td by arm,1 with the legs.

The best part he is still growing.

 

1 hour ago, Eleven said:

And on top of that, an interception?

Without that obvious mistake by the officials he would be 25/33 for 315+(whatever those yards were) 76%comp. 

We most certainly have a QB.

[Andrew Amerk]

[nfreeman]

6 hours ago, Eleven said:

If you didn't see the refs trying to screw the Bills on that nice Kroft catch, that's on you.  Vegas played a role.

Hi, @SwampD you are correct, and hi @nfreeman you are not.

Dude.

Do you think on balance the Bills benefited more from questionable calls in that game or were hurt by them?

The interception looked like a bad call.  But even your fellow conspiracy theorist @SwampD soberly agrees that Kroft was guilty of offensive pass interference.  More importantly, the Rams started that drive down 18 pts and 59 yards away from the end zone.  The Bills' D was unable to stop the Rams' O from doing whatever they wanted for the rest of the game.

Meanwhile, the game was over when the Bills didn't convert that 4th-and-9 with 15 seconds left... until THE REFS, THE REFS, THOSE DASTARDLY REFS gave the Bills a first down on a borderline PI call drawn by a rookie WR.

In any case, I'm glad that JA gathered his wits and led a terrific game-winning drive.  He was Bad Josh for most of the 2nd half, but he didn't fall apart completely and he won the game for them at the end.  The Bills definitely need to improve on D, though, especially the pass rush.

[SwampD]

The key point of this game is that we are becoming an MFT. When given the opportunity, we capitalized on the ref’s beneficence. We didn’t have the talent to do that in the past so the refs wouldn’t have even given us the chance.

Edited September 28, 2020 by SwampD

[Scottysabres]

Interesting game. Fun to watch. Defense is a bit scary. Offense looks good.

More games like this please. That is all.

[Eleven]

9 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Dude.

Do you think on balance the Bills benefited more from questionable calls in that game or were hurt by them?

The interception looked like a bad call.  But even your fellow conspiracy theorist @SwampD soberly agrees that Kroft was guilty of offensive pass interference.  More importantly, the Rams started that drive down 18 pts and 59 yards away from the end zone.  The Bills' D was unable to stop the Rams' O from doing whatever they wanted for the rest of the game.

Meanwhile, the game was over when the Bills didn't convert that 4th-and-9 with 15 seconds left... until THE REFS, THE REFS, THOSE DASTARDLY REFS gave the Bills a first down on a borderline PI call drawn by a rookie WR.

In any case, I'm glad that JA gathered his wits and led a terrific game-winning drive.  He was Bad Josh for most of the 2nd half, but he didn't fall apart completely and he won the game for them at the end.  The Bills definitely need to improve on D, though, especially the pass rush.

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/227116-the-interception-call

EDIT, also:  https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/j0wv84/gelber_this_has_been_called_an_interception_for/

 

Edited September 28, 2020 by Eleven

[That Aud Smell]

23 hours ago, SDS said:

Why would people‘s lack of understanding of probability cause their reputation to suffer?

Not quite sure I follow this*, but, at the very least, their take on Allen has been shown to be stupid for another week.

* Okay, I get it now. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~ref/nate-silver-was-right.html

12 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Rams fans

The who now?

Edited September 28, 2020 by That Aud Smell

[MattPie]

14 hours ago, Ogre said:

 

The Rams are a very good team and the Bills beat them. I was certain the game was over at 4th and 9 but I communed with the Force and saw the future. Or my renewed belief in them altered dark matter itself and combined with the vibrations from countless in the Bills Mafia to amplify their grit?

 

I'm going with quantum entanglement.

4 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Not quite sure I follow this, but, at the very least, their take on Allen has been shown to be stupid for another week.

Given the available data in a circumstance, you can make a risky decision and have it turn out OK. It doesn't mean anyone is stupid or wrong, just that a less probable outcome occurred. For instance, I can jump off an RV onto a table aflame with lighter fluid and *NOT* get hurt, but it doesn't mean the person telling me it's a bad idea was wrong. Josh Allen was a risky pick compared to the alternatives. It's nice that it turned out OK.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

The Bills are good.   Almost scary good.  The NFL is a bit of a joke.

Josh is not Jim Kelly, but he is very good and getting better.  He has a coach that understands his strengths and is using them well.  The execution is coming along nicely.

This is a fun team to follow and should continue to do well, but will also give the fans cardiac arrest some times too.

GO BILLS!!

MUST WIN!!

[That Aud Smell]

19 minutes ago, MattPie said:

Given the available data in a circumstance, you can make a risky decision and have it turn out OK. It doesn't mean anyone is stupid or wrong, just that a less probable outcome occurred. For instance, I can jump off an RV onto a table aflame with lighter fluid and *NOT* get hurt, but it doesn't mean the person telling me it's a bad idea was wrong. Josh Allen was a risky pick compared to the alternatives. It's nice that it turned out OK.

Understood. I'm not referring to anyone's take on the player as a prospect (at which time, I think it was fair to see him as having a huge ceiling and a deeply subterranean floor). What I was talking about was that someone at 538 published something last week taking a sh1t on Allen, saying he was still junk and that good numbers against the Jets and Dolphins meant little. Or something like that - I glossed it with my #BillsMafia fanboi glasses on.

[MattPie]

7 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

Understood. I'm not referring to anyone's take on the player as a prospect (at which time, I think it was fair to see him as having a huge ceiling and a deeply subterranean floor). What I was talking about was that someone at 538 published something last week taking a sh1t on Allen, saying he was still junk and that good numbers against the Jets and Dolphins meant little. Or something like that - I glossed it with my #BillsMafia fanboi glasses on.

Oh, don't mind me then!

[tom webster]

14 hours ago, Andrew Amerk said:

Rams fans are crying that they got robbed on that 4th and 9 call at the end. They fail to remember that they wouldn’t even have been in that position at the end without the 7 points the refs gifted them on that botched interception call. 
 

There aren’t many more things in this world more beautiful to watch than JA stiff arming huge defenders. I also enjoyed his grabbing the facemask penalty and his unsportsmanlike conduct penalty after he was horsecollared. 

Probably off topic, but the NFL needs to fix their rule where a 5 yard defensive holding penalty and a 15 yard roughing the passer penalty offset each other. Not only mathematically should this make it a 10 yard penalty, but it also means the defense has a “free shot” at a QB if they know a 5 yard holding is coming on them. 

I’m almost positive there used to be a “clean hands” provision where they would call the roughing penalty. 

[tom webster]

1 hour ago, MattPie said:

I'm going with quantum entanglement.

Given the available data in a circumstance, you can make a risky decision and have it turn out OK. It doesn't mean anyone is stupid or wrong, just that a less probable outcome occurred. For instance, I can jump off an RV onto a table aflame with lighter fluid and *NOT* get hurt, but it doesn't mean the person telling me it's a bad idea was wrong. Josh Allen was a risky pick compared to the alternatives. It's nice that it turned out OK.

The problem becomes when those supporting the likely outcome use absolutes and insist there is no chance. It’s always nice that whenever they are wrong about someone they just fall back to that “outlier” excuse.

[SDS]

3 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Understood. I'm not referring to anyone's take on the player as a prospect (at which time, I think it was fair to see him as having a huge ceiling and a deeply subterranean floor). What I was talking about was that someone at 538 published something last week taking a sh1t on Allen, saying he was still junk and that good numbers against the Jets and Dolphins meant little. Or something like that - I glossed it with my #BillsMafia fanboi glasses on.

You mentioned 2016, thus my response. They never make predictions from what I can tell, they only assign probabilities based upon their models. Sometimes the less likely thing happens. 

[Eleven]

3 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

Understood. I'm not referring to anyone's take on the player as a prospect (at which time, I think it was fair to see him as having a huge ceiling and a deeply subterranean floor). What I was talking about was that someone at 538 published something last week taking a sh1t on Allen, saying he was still junk and that good numbers against the Jets and Dolphins meant little. Or something like that - I glossed it with my #BillsMafia fanboi glasses on.

 

3 minutes ago, SDS said:

You mentioned 2016, thus my response. They never make predictions from what I can tell, they only assign probabilities based upon their models. Sometimes the less likely thing happens. 

It's here:  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-josh-allen-actually-good-now/

This part reads like a prediction to me:  "we should probably expect Allen to begin looking a little less like Mahomes and Wilson and a bit more like the player we’ve seen take the field the past two years."

[That Aud Smell]

17 minutes ago, SDS said:

You mentioned 2016, thus my response. They never make predictions from what I can tell, they only assign probabilities based upon their models. Sometimes the less likely thing happens. 

Yeah, for sure. I edited my response to indicate that I saw where you were coming from -- that Nate Silver was unfairly criticized for failing to identify a Trump victory as possible (when, in fact, he did just that - he just saw it as unlikely).

14 minutes ago, Eleven said:

 

It's here:  https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-josh-allen-actually-good-now/

This part reads like a prediction to me:  "we should probably expect Allen to begin looking a little less like Mahomes and Wilson and a bit more like the player we’ve seen take the field the past two years."

Reading that in the sober light of day, it doesn't sound as nasty as I'd first inferred. I mean, they've even got "probably", "little less", and "bit more" in there. That's probably right, going forward to Week 4. Isn't there something stankier in there? Such as: "Additionally, Josh Allen just frickin sucks lol."

Edited September 28, 2020 by That Aud Smell

[Eleven]

1 minute ago, That Aud Smell said:

Yeah, for sure. I edited my response to indicate that I saw where you were coming from -- that Nate Silver was unfairly criticized for failing to identify a Trump victory as possible (when, in fact, he did just that - he just saw it as unlikely).

Reading that in the sober light of day, it doesn't sound as nasty as I'd first inferred. I mean, they've even got "probably", "little less", and "bit more" in there. That's probably right, going forward to Week 4. Isn't there something stankier in there? Such as: "Additionally, Josh Allen just frickin sucks lol."

Yeah it's not too nasty.

[That Aud Smell]

Further to the same point: If the defense can pull its sh1t together, a QB who's just a bit less like Mahomes, and a little more like the hero ball idiot of days past, would still be good enough for a deep (and exhilarating) playoff run.

[Wyldnwoody44]

I'm just happy to have an offense for the first time in a decade.... Knowing it's not run, run, pass, punt and hope the D doesn't break. 

Now it would be great if our D played solid middle of the pack or better while the O kept this up. Strange how the strength of this team did a complete 180 this year. 

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, Wyldnwoody44 said:

Now it would be great if our D played solid middle of the pack or better while the O kept this up. Strange how the strength of this team did a complete 180 this year. 

It's strange business, isn't it? I'm not sure what to make of the D's struggles to date. Well, insofar as the Rams are concerned, I am comfortable with the notion that they got figured-out as the game went on by one of the league's great coaches.

This may go to show why it's so much more important to have an excellent QB than it is to have an excellent D. It's so, so hard to maintain an excellent defensive unit/level of performance, for a variety of reasons. And the league is just geared to favour the QB and his side of the ball.

Even so, I expect the D to regroup and have some solid outings in the coming 3 weeks.

[Radar]

6 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

It's strange business, isn't it? I'm not sure what to make of the D's struggles to date. Well, insofar as the Rams are concerned, I am comfortable with the notion that they got figured-out as the game went on by one of the league's great coaches.

This may go to show why it's so much more important to have an excellent QB than it is to have an excellent D. It's so, so hard to maintain an excellent defensive unit/level of performance, for a variety of reasons. And the league is just geared to favour the QB and his side of the ball.

Even so, I expect the D to regroup and have some solid outings in the coming 3 weeks.

I've thought for a while now that our defensive stats looked better than the defense really is. I know stats are the stats but this defense doesn't seem to put games away giving up leads . I thought going into the Rams game it would be a high scoring game and the offense would have to win it not the defense. The Rams have a good offense and are a well coached team but giving up a huge lead like that?