There's been a lot of talk after the last two Bills' losses about the Bills giving the game away themselves rather than getting beaten by other teams. I think this distinction is highly subjective and frankly doesn't produce much helpful analysis or discussion. On the contrary, it seems driven by homerism more than anything else.
Think back to the Bills' wins this season. One could argue the Seahawks gave away the game by poor tackling and by sloppiness (not paying attention on the fake field goal). The Jags also tackled poorly, and failed to score TDs on several drives when they either got only FGs or came away with nothing (like the Garrard INT to end the first half)
The Raiders had their game at the Ralph well in hand, and offensively "gave up" when they went 3-and-out to allow the Bills to drive and kick the winning FG.
The Rams also had their game with the Bills in solid shape but gave up a poor pick 6 to lose the lead.
The Chargers had three turnovers against the Bills. Didn't they give the game away?
I think it's a silly distinction to draw. Teams lose and win because of all these things. One could easily argue that the better team on that day was pressuring the other team into making those mistakes (the same thought process applies to committing penalties). Edwards' pick 6 against the Jets was forced by a pass rush that was superior to the pass blocking.
Last year, the Pats went 18-0, but then they lost the Super Bowl. Because of that, they are no longer the defending league champions. The Giants were the better team on that day. Simply put: you are exactly as good as your record shows (or, in the playoffs, you are only as good as your last win).
When Edwards has time, he makes good decisions with the ball. If the receivers get open faster, if the line provides more time, if the running game works better, the pick 6s won't happen. But all these things are happening because defenses are successfully poking their fingers in the Bills' weaknesses.
Why argue about such an unclear, unhelpful distinction?