Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 minutes ago, Gatorman0519 said:

yup... If Allen did not lose his mind before halftime we'd have 3 more points. 

Allen didn't lose his mind.  It was the 2nd missed snap between 2 guys that rarely work as a battery.

This was the exact opposite of the wind game last year.  Between injuries, conditions, & bad luck they lost by less than a FG.  The Bills will be fine.  

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 2
Posted
Just now, Taro T said:

Allen didn't lose his mind.  It was the 2nd missed snap between 2 guys that rarely work as a battery.

This was the exact opposite of the wind game last year.  Between injuries, conditions, & bad luck they lost by less than a FG.  The Bills will be fine.  

Correct 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
36 minutes ago, calti said:

that was awful...well the Bills 2 week dynasty is over. time to get back to reality.  we are NOT the team to beat.We will be in the mix among 7 or 8 teams at the end.

belichek coaches this team they coast to the SB.  We cant manage the clock. A junior league team manages the clock better.

So a team down 5 defensive starters going into the game, as well as the 3 DT, losing the #3 Outside CB, as well as not having/losing 3/5ths of a starting line, and having the top 3 receivers, and #1 TE limited due to cramps/injuries/hear and sticking tight to/dominating the play against a purported top 5-10 team is now one of “7-8 teams?” There are not 7-8 teams that could have performed that well in that state.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted

The coaches cost us this game. Missing players is an excuse when you lose by 2 and leave 20 points on the field. Bad playcalling and guys clearly not ready to go.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted
23 minutes ago, sabresparaavida said:

So a team down 5 defensive starters going into the game, as well as the 3 DT, losing the #3 Outside CB, as well as not having/losing 3/5ths of a starting line, and having the top 3 receivers, and #1 TE limited due to cramps/injuries/hear and sticking tight to/dominating the play against a purported top 5-10 team is now one of “7-8 teams?” There are not 7-8 teams that could have performed that well in that state.

There is only one team that could have performed that well under these conditions, and the Bills are that team.  They'd better pull it together fast, though, starters or not, because Baltimore is going to be a tough out next week.

Posted
1 hour ago, calti said:

that was awful...well the Bills 2 week dynasty is over. time to get back to reality.  we are NOT the team to beat.We will be in the mix among 7 or 8 teams at the end.

belichek coaches this team they coast to the SB.  We cant manage the clock. A junior league team manages the clock better.

Myopia is a word that comes to mind. 

Posted

My main concern is this is the 8th or 9th close loss in a row.  That is beyond just bad luck.  It is the glaring weakness of our coaching staff and it is endemic now. We have to win close games.  You cannot be great until you do.  No excuses anymore. The one thing I would say about the Kelly years, that they have not eclipsed yet despite how exciting they seem to be, is they found a way to win close games all the time. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

I can’t read much into this game.  Large number of starters gone from both sides.  Extreme playing conditions.  It was a hell of a game.  The next time around against Miami may prove a more reliable telling of how these two teams actually compare.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
Posted
30 minutes ago, Weave said:

I can’t read much into this game.  Large number of starters gone from both sides.  Extreme playing conditions.  It was a hell of a game.  The next time around against Miami may prove a more reliable telling of how these two teams actually compare.

Agree,

A bills wouldn't be wrong to look at this game in a similar way to the Buffalo/New England game in Orchard park last year in the wind storm.  A lot of things happened (weather, injuries) that will not be the same going forward. It is a loss and it counts, just like New England beating the Bills last year.....but this loss isn't a good predictor of the future.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

After watching that game am I the only one who wonders why, in the NFL's infinite wide, the September meeting between these two teams is in Miami and the December game is in OP? Someone upthread said the conditions today were dangerous and I don't think that's hyperbole.

  • Like (+1) 3
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, JustOneParade said:

After watching that game am I the only one who wonders why, in the NFL's infinite wide, the September meeting between these two teams is in Miami and the December game is in OP? Someone upthread said the conditions today were dangerous and I don't think that's hyperbole.

The conditions were no more dangerous than a normal September game at many SEC / ACC schools.

The league can't have a schedule where the Bills only host in September and October and the Dolphins only host in November and December.  Someone is going to have to play in Miami in September, and someone is going to have to play in Buffalo in December, and it really doesn't matter who.

Edited by Eleven
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted (edited)

Eh, don't worry about it; learn from it and move on. I still liken this season for the Bills to '96 GB. It's your year. Stay patient. Ride the defense and don't worry about a September loss in Florida heat (the HHH Metrodome curse for Favre -- who just couldn't win there). Don't worry about it. The Bills will outlast their division to the playoffs and get their home games. Injuries will test and forge new strengths (Brooks, Freeman, Chmura all out at the same time...  hey, it turns out Levens is real running back). Re-learn, re-forge, and win. There will be setbacks, but ride the defense and a scrambling Allen when needed, and win. Don't overreact or worry at this.

Edit: And what the hell is this "it's too hot/humid" garbage? Do you expect the NFL to cancel a Bills game from lake effect snow? Shut up. Every college and high school football team in the south plays in this heat. Suck it up, any crybabies who worry about heat and humidity. whiners.

Edited by DarthEbriate
Posted
2 hours ago, Eleven said:

The conditions were no more dangerous than a normal September game at many SEC / ACC schools.

The league can't have a schedule where the Bills only host in September and October and the Dolphins only host in November and December.  Someone is going to have to play in Miami in September, and someone is going to have to play in Buffalo in December, and it really doesn't matter who.

The NFL did that for aeons.  Indeed there were years where the Bills had no home games after Thanksgiving and all their road games in December were in warm weather cities.  I remember looking the weekly NFL schedule in The Talking Phone Book where cold weather teams never had more than 2 of their last 6 games at home unless they were in a dome.

Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Marvin said:

The NFL did that for aeons.  Indeed there were years where the Bills had no home games after Thanksgiving and all their road games in December were in warm weather cities.  I remember looking the weekly NFL schedule in The Talking Phone Book where cold weather teams never had more than 2 of their last 6 games at home unless they were in a dome.

I'm going to need to see those Talking Phone Books, then.  I haven't followed the Bills since I was 5, like I have the Sabres, but I've followed them since I was about 16 or so, and I don't remember seasons where Buffalo had a noticeably heavier autumn home schedule.  Could it have happened a couple of times?  Sure.  But I don't think it was a general practice.

In 1975 (WELL before I was 16, and even before I was 5, thank you!), they had three home games in the second half of the (14 game) season.  42% of the home schedule.

In 1985, they had four home games in the second half of the season.  50%.

In 1995, they had four home games in the second half of the season.  50%.

I did not find an instance where the NFL Bills did not host a home game after Thanksgiving.  

Bears:  1975, 42%; 1985, 37.5%; 1995, 50%.

Jets:  1975, 42% (and two of the away games were in cold cities in November and December); 1985, 50%; 1995, 50%.

Giants:  1975, 57%, with one away at Green Bay in late November; 50%; 1995, 50%.

New England:  1975, 42%, with a trip to Buffalo as well; 1985, 50%; 1995 50% (with two trips to cold cities, including Buffalo, in the second half of the season).

Green Bay:  1975, 42%, with a trip to OUTDOORS Minnesota as well; 1985, 50%; 1995, 50%.

The data doesn't support your memories (this is a phenomenon that happens to me all the time, too).  I don't know when the "Talking Phone Book" brand was first used, but I don't think that brand goes back as far as 1975 (although the company that published it does).  Even in 1975, there is only a slight bias against cold cities hosting games, and that's almost 50 years ago now--we've made one or two advancements in climate control and health since then.

 

Edited by Eleven
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Eleven said:

The conditions were no more dangerous than a normal September game at many SEC / ACC schools.

The league can't have a schedule where the Bills only host in September and October and the Dolphins only host in November and December.  Someone is going to have to play in Miami in September, and someone is going to have to play in Buffalo in December, and it really doesn't matter who.

It was 112 degrees  including humidity factor honestly thats some  Dangerous ***** the NFL pulled today .

Oh what am i saying they let  Tagovailoa back in the game who Clearly Had a concussion

 

Edited by Buffalonill
Posted
1 hour ago, DarthEbriate said:

Do you expect the NFL to cancel a Bills game from lake effect snow?

This, on the other hand, has happened.  Well, games have been moved, at least.  But that's because it was impossible / impracticable to travel to the stadium, and not because playing conditions weren't ideal.

I'm with you; play the games in the weather.  LSU manages to play Saturday at noon, you know?

  • Thanks (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, JustOneParade said:

After watching that game am I the only one who wonders why, in the NFL's infinite wide, the September meeting between these two teams is in Miami and the December game is in OP? Someone upthread said the conditions today were dangerous and I don't think that's hyperbole.

It seemed like a tradition that Miami had to play in Buffalo in December during the early 90s.

Posted
16 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

You cant be serious. 

Look up heat index 

I am serious--and your post, before you edited it, said *excluding* humidity.  I wish I had not cropped it so closely.

Anyway, I know what a heat index is.  I've lived in the South.  It was 89 degrees and pretty humid.  It's not exactly unheard of for professional athletes to compete in such conditions.  Even amateur athletes do so on a regular basis.

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, MattPie said:

It seemed like a tradition that Miami had to play in Buffalo in December during the early 90s.

Yessir it does seem so, doesn't it? I had the same recollection.  And that is OUR faulty memories!  

1990:  December 22.

1991:  September 1.

1992:  October 4.

1993:  September 26.

1994:  October 9.

So in the early 90s, it only happened once.  The rest of the home games against Miami were either in summer (1991) or very early autumn.

 

Edited by Eleven
Posted
1 minute ago, Eleven said:

Yessir it does seem so, doesn't it? I had the same recollection.  And that is OUR faulty memories!  

1990:  December 22.

1991:  September 1.

1992:  October 4.

1993:  September 26.

1994:  October 9.

So in the early 90s, it only happened once.  The rest of the home games against Miami were either in summer (1991) or very early autumn.

 

Doesn’t mean it didn’t snow in those games.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...