That Aud Smell

Oh, for sure. There was clearly no dedicated spy. A huge mistake, in that situation. Not sure if that was the call, or if it was called and the players failed to implement. Hear, hear. In my simplistic NFL brain, I understand that QB scrambles are more dangerous against man coverage and less dangerous against zone. I've now re-watched the play several times and have concluded that there were probably some man-elements but also some zone over top that. Where are our Madden players at? There's probably a term or even terms for this kind of coverage. I mean sh1t -- isn't Cover 2 mostly just man-to-man with the 2 safeties playing a deep zone? I can't readily recall a play that was more fun to re-watch. Allen's big scrambles have that way about them.

Interesting. When you watch the replay, it sure seems like each Chief defender is glued to a Bills receiving option. So much so that there's one Chiefs defender - #23 - who loses a chance to tackle Allen because he's following Cooper to the sideline (where another Chiefs defender is following Shakir). Of course, there are coverage schemes that are a combination of man and zone. Just a fascinating play to watch over and over -- focusing on one element each time. The last time I re-watched, I was impressed by how athletic the Chiefs left DE was -- Bills RT (Van Dermark (sp?)) pushes the DE way wide -- and I'd thought he was out of the play as Allen steps up -- but the dude adjusts in an instant and nearly makes a play.

Adams' vision and plan for Levi can be heaped on the pile of Adams' miscalculations and failures in judgment. I try not to think of the fact that Levi's anticipated arrival was, I inferred, supposed to take the sting out of losing Reinhart. Who else did the Sabres get out of that deal -- Kulich? *le sigh*

and a couple of crucial short yardage first down conversions. Mostly, the futility seemed to come from the 6+ 1st down runs that went for -1 to 2 yards.

So many guys had a chance at him. 17 is just a special player. That said, when I watch the replays it seems like the Chiefs were in man-coverage. Or at least mostly a man-coverage scheme. Actually, it's hard for me to judge -- since the formation was so bunched up, so close to the line to gain.

Respectfully, I think you need exposure to more of Cooper's interviews over the years. He is a very lowkey, serious guy. He generally presents with a flat affect. He is also very intelligent -- even cerebral. I don't think any of that suggests that he's a loner or depressed. I'd go more with reserved, quiet, and introverted, but also a fiercely intense competitor. Add to that: He can track a long ball's flight in the air like nobody the Bills have had in recent memory. This deserves recognition. They couldn't do more than get 2 yards a pop all over the field and then -- incredibly -- they got 2 running scores from inside the opponent's 5. Both beauties too.

I also agree with this. You hear it all the time - and it sounds cliche' - that it's so important to stick with that run game even when it isn't working. So, cliche' perhaps, but also very true. Doing so helps keep the defense honest. Oh and by the way, Allen wasn't sacked.

I love their RBs this season. That said, it's an unusual day to be celebrating them -- insofar as the RBs go, the Chiefs totally stifled the Bills' run game last night.

I was at the stadium at our customary perch in the first few rows of the 300s. Allen's 4th down run occurred right below us. There's just nobody quite like him in pro football. Waxing a bit philosophical: I've now fully abandoned the anxious lament of "Will 'my team' ever win a title? Because, if'n they don't, everything is for naught. All is vanity.* " I'm here to say: Eff that. Last night's game - and Allen's incredible game winning play - is *it*. Don't get distracted by a desire for more (because that desire is never sated). Don't be misled by narratives that fulfillment is found only in championships. I'll treasure so many moments that have occurred at that stadium over the past several years -- almost all of them involving Allen dropping that second "L" in his name and going full Alien. I won't treasure those moments any less because they didn't involve a win in February. And those moments and memories are already more than sufficient. It's low hanging fruit for cynics to scoff: "Ha. Loser talk." That's fine. I'm not interested in debating it. I'm just giving witness to my truth. *"All is vanity! What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?" Ecclesiastes 1:3.

I like binary distinctions. There are those who enjoy gifs here. And there are those who don’t.

Lol - yes. I’m aware of that stuff. Whatever. Just win, baby.

lower body is what i heard and read.

Same. This certainly appears to be the plan. This prompted to think about how much trust Allen has in him -- likely because he's a vet who puts in the work, and is where he needs to be when his QB needs him. And while I'm not crazy about him being a featured element of the passing game, the reality is that he doesn't need elite separation skills when the play is breaking down and it's a scramble drill with one of the league's best QB's. (Otoh, I can recall several planned, in-rhythm passing plays where his inability to separate is painfully obvious.) Anyway. Credit to Hollins, he's been coming through for the team.

Elaborate, please. The guy had the filthiest hands I've ever seen (at least, as far as the Sabres go). Same. One of these years, I'm thinking the winter trip to Florida will be replaced by a winter trip to Quebec.

This is reminding me -- was it @Eleven who was just furious with the signing because the guy hadn't scored a goal (or come close to it) in his however many NHL games? I remember defending the signing at the time. Saying the Sabres had a cost-controlled 4/5 and PK d-man for the foreseeable future. That position didn't age well.

Pegula's toady. Nothing more.

I ... I would be down for this if only for the comedic value. It would be pretty incredible. Especially if the player they got for Byram was objectively (or even arguably) not as good as Mittelstadt.

Fair enough. When I see a guy in a position that he's fooked up and fumbled a dozen different ways, I tend to think about whether he should have been hired (appointed) in the first place.

Good stuff - maybe especially the part I snipped. The timeline is a fascinating one. How'd he get in the front door like he did? And by what process(es) did he so firmly entrench himself in Pegula Land? I guess it may also be a dull story. Garden variety sycophant sh1t.

I think we're talking past each other. I'm not talking about his job performance. In response to something you'd said (about there being a narrative that Adams was/is unqualified), I was asking about his qualifications for the job. Which I understand to be a separate issue from job performance.

I was (am) asking if there's a competing narrative that Adams was/is qualified for the position he holds. Not whether he's been good at the job. Also, I agree with this.

Infuriating that he's trying to make hockey trades in-season. It's (almost certainly) too late, Opie. The time to get this sh1t done was this past offseason. Is there a competing narrative that he's qualified? Do tell, if so. I take things as they come. Assess each situation on its own footing and merits. The rumour mill saying that Adams is eager to make a big move in November has me #smdh as the kids used to say. I won't bash Adams for failing to make a meaningful (and helpful) in-season hockey trade. Because as far as I'm aware, those generally don't exist. I also respect the pool of hockey knowledge here. If there are examples of such trades from the past, I'd love to be reminded of them. (But be prepared for me to rejoin: Those are exceptions that prove the rule.) Fair play on other GMs who've been fully turbl. To be clear: I haven't said Adams is the worst GM ever. I have been stuck on - and pissed off by - just how flipping unqualified he was when he was anointed -- errr, appointed to the post. I also remain intrigued by the idea that there are some who view Adams as an "evil genius." Whomst among us thinks Adams is an evil genius? (Or something close to it.) Whomst, I ask!

Infuriating, if true (which it presumably is). Further proof that Adams is a rube — an under qualified Opie.