Texans 31, Bills 10: Week 8 Film Session
Once again, we've entered a realm in which discussing a most recent Buffalo Bills game leads to nausea rather than euphoria. Their 31-10 loss to the Houston Texans was every bit as exasperating to re-watch on tape as it was to take it in live at the stadium, because once again, the Bills had a superior opponent on the ropes for most of the game. Credit Houston for staying patient, but credit them also for realizing that, just like New England and New Orleans before them, the were facing an opponent susceptible to blowing solid performances late in games.
The film has been re-watched, the stomach meds have been ingested, and we've got a few talking points to go over today. Let's get this over with.
The run defense. That old adage that a defense can tire out over the course of a game is completely accurate. Buffalo's run defense isn't just dead last in the league because they generally stink at stopping the run, folks - they're also dead last because the offense can't give them more than a few spare moments per game to get some oxygen on the sidelines.
Case in point: the Bills' run defense was by no means dominant in the first half Sunday, but it was, at least, not awful. Houston was actually out-rushed by Buffalo in the first half (aided, of course, by Terrell Owens' 29-yard touchdown on a reverse). The Texans wound up rushing for 186 yards on the day, but only 67 of those came prior to halftime. If you think some of that didn't have to do with both the sheer amount of time they spent on the field (39:08) and their undermanned depth chart, think again. Considering all of the factors, we couldn't have asked for much more from the run defense, particularly early in the game.
The offensive line. In a more ideal football world than the one we're involved with right now, the "quarterback vs. O-Line debate" - meaning which one is more important to the success of an offense - has always been one that's fascinated me. (I fall on the quarterback side of the argument, by the way.) As bad as Trent Edwards and Ryan Fitzpatrick have been this season, however, it's hard to imagine many quarterbacks being successful behind this offensive line.
I counted five separate times in this game that Fitzpatrick hit the final step of his drop - and one of those was a three-step drop - and was immediately surrounded by Texans defenders. Individually, each Bills lineman - yes, even the revolving door of suck at right tackle - is capable of winning a matchup one-on-one. Houston simply brought pressure straight up the middle and/or stunted, and with Mario Williams commanding attention on the outside, it became too much to handle logistically for these young players. Pockets were collapsing around Fitzpatrick more frequently than the Texans were picking up first downs. We already have a pretty definitive idea that Edwards will re-claim his starting role in Week 10, but given the way the line is playing right now, we're likely to see both of these quarterbacks before season's end.
Get healthy, Shawn Nelson. I'm not saying that the lack of a receiving threat at tight end is the underlying problem behind all of Buffalo's offensive issues - that's obviously not the case - but in watching this offense, the lack of a short-area receiving threat is painfully obvious. (It's made even more painful by the fact that, for whatever reason, the Bills refuse to play Fred Jackson in that role, as they did at the beginning of the season).
Derek Fine is a tough customer and a valuable blocker and special teamer, but he's completely worthless right now as a receiving threat. Same goes for Jonathan Stupar, who has been unable to turn a solid pre-season into anything other than extraordinarily average play on the field in games that count. Meanwhile, Nelson continues to miss games with migraine issues, though Dick Jauron did say Monday that he's expected to practice this week and next, and play in Tennessee. Nelson's only got six catches on the year, but he's a weapon at a position that is, once again, completely non-existent in Buffalo.
Aaron Maybin. I wrote a piece about Maybin last week, so I'll keep this brief. Once again, Maybin had a sack lined up this week, but it was taken away from him by an opportunistic Aaron Schobel. He gets a little better rushing the passer every week, and Perry Fewell is starting to find ways to get him free in games. If Schobel's groin injury lingers, we're likely to see Maybin much more than usual until the veteran returns to full health.
I spent a great deal of my energies watching Maybin in the second half, mostly because the game itself was clearly going to be out of hand soon. Watching Maybin play - from a technical standpoint right down to the way he moves around on the field - he just looks every bit like the 21-year-old he is. He looks uncomfortable in his own skin, like he doesn't have full control of his body yet. The guy busts his butt on every play, and while he makes mistakes, his motor is better than any defenders' on this team. Give him time to mature not only as a football player, but from a body standpoint, too. He's making (extremely) slow, steady progress week to week.
Reggie Corner. I've been meaning to say this for a couple of weeks, but after his performance against Houston, it needs to be said - Corner is the epitome of what's wrong with Buffalo's defense. Corner's a good football player. He's quick, he's active, and he flies all over the field. But boy, is it easy for opponents to find ways to beat this guy. Whether it's mental mistakes or (more frequently) just being overmatched physically, Corner is a player that opponents attack. On the other hand, I'd like to see more of Ashton Youboty - once again, he's giving the Bills solid reps as a reserve DB, and acquitting himself nicely.
Jairus Byrd. There. I said his name. Soak in the happy feelings... and move on.
Bye week problems to fix. Not exactly playing the role of Copernicus here, because these are all fairly obvious, but the top three things that the Bills absolutely have to fix during the bye week if they still fancy themselves playoff contenders are:
Line play. The young guys up front are still working hard, but there are way too many mental errors and physical breakdowns. Not only does the line play need to get better, but Alex Van Pelt needs to figure out a way to finally mask some of their deficiencies.
Sustaining/ending drives. This has been a problem all season, but in particular against Houston. Buffalo's offense has picked up 116 first downs in 8 games, an average of 14.5 per game. Opponents have picked up 161 first downs on Buffalo, an average of 20 per game. The disparity has been especially skewed over the past three weeks, where Buffalo's opponents have a 59-38 advantage in this area.
Getting healthy. This isn't something the team can actively fix, obviously, but if the team can get key players back, it's only going to help. We already discussed Nelson and Edwards. Keith Ellison, Aaron Schobel and Donte Whitner are all "still sore" according to Jauron in yesterday's press conference (via BuffaloBills.com), and are considered day-to-day (or, in this case, week-to-week, probably). Bryan Scott is back and ready to go; he'll practice this week. Jonathan Scott is getting close as well. Jamon Meredith's knee injury was a sprain, and the Bills are looking at it as a week-to-week thing as well. Same goes for the knee injuries for Kyle Williams and Corey McIntyre, who, when they were injured in Week 7 at Carolina, were considered to be 2-3 weeks away from returning.
Obviously, some of those lingering injuries carry more importance than others. But Buffalo was so banged up in Houston that they literally needed to use every available body on the roster just to field a full 45 active players. Getting more depth is critical for this team, and hopefully the bye week will help them accomplish that.
0 recs |
62 comments
|
Comments
Probably not what we need.....
Did it seem like Marshawn was dancing alot? When Fred got the ball he seems to be the more down hill runner. I know it is hard to judge based on the youthful line but there were at least 3 runs where if Lynch just put his head down and ran forward he would have picked up 3-4 yards versus dancing around looking and struggling to get back to the line.
Another thing, what happen to the middle of the field for us??? All of our passes seem to be to the outside passes, besides late in the game where Houston just opened up the middle. I know that Nelson makes a big difference in this area but we are not even attempting to work this area without him.
This is frustrating……
by MikeEverett08 on Nov 3, 2009 9:05 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think marshawn has been dancing a lot in every game since he’s been back.
it makes me yell at the tv.
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 10:00 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Do your yells sound like this:
The Bills don’t pay you to dance – hit somebody!
Cause mine do
I was born in Buffalo, and NO, it's not a suburb of New York City
by Ghetts on Nov 3, 2009 10:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
more like YOU JKDSHF*&^(s&dtFJKDSFO9)89UDJF90S8DF7 &sdf&(HDKLSJFS099 SON OF A (sd()f&dsKJLLWERKLWEWF98W7E6WEWE8R907)(^78520-7& QUIT DANCING AND HIT THE HOLE
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 11:56 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Dancing is what they have done their entire career
and because of superior athletic ability, they have gotten away with it. Just watch any college game. Dancing just does not work in the pros (except against our defense). Guys are just too fast.
by jpheff on Nov 3, 2009 5:08 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
i disagree. marshawn has never been much of a dancer. he’s known as the guy who brings the hit, and blasts ahead through the tackles instead.
by quantumuprising on Nov 4, 2009 9:27 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lynch danced on 3rd and 2 and could've had the first down....nope, punt.
They are hard to play but not hard to beat.
- Mike Lombardi on the Buffalo Bills
by Sluss88 on Nov 3, 2009 1:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He has to dance because whenever he tries to go up into the hole the O-Line has already collapsed and he gets rammed.
Bills fan? In Colorado? It's more likely than you think.
by UZ on Nov 3, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Disagree on the emphasis towards QB
Obviously it has not been great. The O-Line is the main point of emphasis. Not just this O-Line. The O-Line for the last decade. I can’t remember the last time we had a QB who could drop back and check all options. Hence the check down, pop warner offense we are running. I see no other option. Throw in no running game or run blocking and were done from the start.
So much talk about cohesiveness and gelling and it’s theory. One weak link and this line is over challenged. We lost two starting lineman counting Schouman since game two. Our demise started then. We have had four RT’s since then and some other injuries on the other side that has destroyed this unit. I am not sure what the answer is because we can’t control injuries. I just hope it doesn’t get worse.
Excuses are a sign of weakness!!!!!!
by VanScottM on Nov 3, 2009 9:22 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
there are qb's who get it done with no O-line though.
watch aaron rodgers against the vikings both games this year. Jared Allen abuses the OL for the packers all day, but Rodgers keeps his team in the game and makes plays…
The point of this isn’t “aaron rodgers is amazing” or “oline doesn’t matter.” The point is that guys who can play QB in this league at least show signs even when they have no oline. Neither Edwards nor Fitzy shows signs more than glimmers of this ever, and neither can be a starting quarterback in this league.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 9:35 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Consider How Awesome Rodgers could be
If he had a better O-Line. Your arguement is valid. When the Colts lose in the playoffs, when the Patriots lose in the playoffs it all comes down to protection of the QB. When Manning and Brady are rattled they perform like 50% of the QB’s in the league. When they have protection they play like elite QB’s. Also, better QB play is a must for this team, but MO is lets start up front. We have a good group of young inexperienced line man. We have lousy depth, ie Chambers. Bringing in another QB for this line would be adding another log on the fire.
Excuses are a sign of weakness!!!!!!
by VanScottM on Nov 3, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
interesting. I think we pretty much agree.
My response would be that our O-line, besides RT, just needs development time, the talent is there. The QB position is where we need to acquire talent.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 10:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We need a LT too
I don’t think Bell will ever be good enough there. He might be able to be a decent RT though, but needs more bulk.
Hangartner has struggled this season too. Who knows if we can count on him in the future?
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Nov 3, 2009 1:38 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Wood is our C of the future.
Delightfully Ignoring The Truth since 1995.
by NeverendingOptimism on Nov 3, 2009 7:12 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Oline
I think it is very hard to judge the individual performace of the young guys on the line since to be successful they have to play as a unit. When Bell was going offside every other play that was easy. When Hang was rolling the ball back to TE, that was easy. Same with every right tackle who has been on the field and allows his amn to go untouched to the QB. It is much harder on plays the just “blow up.”
by jpheff on Nov 3, 2009 5:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Aaron Rodgers played good in both games – but lost. A bad O-line can really negate any good things a QB has; Rodgers holds onto the ball too long, a bad O-line in combo = sacks.
Edwards holds onto the ball too long (even when he has time) = sacks.
I was born in Buffalo, and NO, it's not a suburb of New York City
by Ghetts on Nov 3, 2009 10:18 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s like Edwards needs to hold onto the ball too long, to attain that uncomfortable feeling, even when it shouldn’t be there.
Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 3, 2009 10:43 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
he did lose, and he may hold onto the ball a bit too long
but he also moves well in the pocket, and kept his team in the game against a bigboy offense with some serious passrushers coming after him. again, I don’t mean to make this about aaron rodgers. sorry for getting us off track.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 10:47 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not to make this about Rodgers
who I have on my Fantasy team and absolutely love, but he is ridiculous in how long he holds the ball. I counted a few of those sacks that he could have thrown the ball away. Also he is not decisive about first downs. There were a couple of times he could have run for a 4 or 5 yard first down but wanted to throw and missed out on the first down.
That said, I would have him with the Bills any day.
I really like Edwards. The fact is that as a QB you need your receivers to make plays for you. I still remember how Edwards squeezed an awesome pass to stone hands Royal, I think it was the NE game last year, and Royal dropped it. That’s a play that would have moved the chains. Edwards has had problems with his receivers sticking to the ball. Play-making receivers make a difference. One thing I loved about Eric Moulds was that he was made of velcro. If the ball was anywhere near him he would stick to it.
The other thing no one has really talked about is Lynch being absent in the first 3 games. That had a significant impact. The opposition pass rush has as much to do with the absence of a credible running game. And with Lynch missing all that practice and real play time, there’s much to catch up on.
by Ono on Nov 3, 2009 12:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Consider how bad Rogers would be with our O line
Watch a GB game carefully and count the seconds after each snap. How many times did the pocket collapse around Rogers at the end of a 3-step drop? How many times did Rogers have 3-4 seconds to throw and was able to step into his throw, a very rare experience for our QB lately. GB’s line is playing far better than ours. There is hardly a comparison. I’m not saying Rogers isn’t better than our Qbs, just that his line is also much, much better. Most of his sacks have come when he has held the ball longer than our QBs get to hold it in a full quarter of play.
by Sixteenthback on Nov 3, 2009 1:04 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, the Green Bay o-line is better than ours, which allows Green Bay to flood the field with receivers. That’s what has made Rogers look good. He always has a target to hit. The Bills have felt their o-line is so shaky that they have run most plays with 2 TE’s held in to help block — which in turn means we have only two WR’s on the field. And if all we have out there is Evans and Owens, it’s pretty easy for the defense to shut them down, at which point the QB looks like he is holding on to the ball too long.
Until our o-line is at least as good as Green Bay’s (and that’s not saying much) it is going to be close to impossible to get an accurate sense of how good either Trent or Fitz really are.
by Macktruck on Nov 3, 2009 9:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Defensively
We were struggling against the run going into this game. Starting without Williams, losing Ellison, finally losing Schobel. Add this to Mitchell, Whitner, Scott, McKelvin. Thats seven out of eleven day one starters. I am surprised they have lasted as long as they did Sunday. This team has alot of guts, just not enough quality depth.
Excuses are a sign of weakness!!!!!!
by VanScottM on Nov 3, 2009 9:26 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
But
don’t you think that the fact that we are without 7 or ll starters and that the defense has held up quite well, is an indication of quality depth.
No defense can hold out that long. I remember even the vaunted Eagles defense of the early 90s, I remember watching a game in which they got pounded and pounded by Emmett Smith and eventually in the 4th quarter, he began to rip long runs. I think we have a very good defense and the depth has been pretty quality too. We are getting absolutely no help from the offense.
by Ono on Nov 3, 2009 12:13 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The defense hasn't held up quite well
We’re dead last in run defense. They’ve gotten run over all year, especially the past month.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Nov 3, 2009 1:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We are ranked last, yes
but we see the defense not give up points until late in the 3rd and 4th when they get worn down.
If TOP were close to even, we stand as good a chance as any to win because our defense is good enough to hold down the fort.
I think the run and pass defense rankings don’t tell the whole story.
by Ono on Nov 3, 2009 4:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW...
Chalk up another season-ending knee injury (Owen Daniels) to the Field Turf. I really think that stuff is bad news, at least it seems to be on Bills’ field.
Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 3, 2009 9:42 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
Is this field turf thing a prevalent theory?
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Nov 3, 2009 9:49 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, there’s lots of stuff you can look up on it. Ill do a little research and report back, but its what we were always told growing up. There’s a lot of major league baseball players who have definitively had careers shortened/ended from playing on turf on montreal/toronto/tampa. Most of the players who play for toronto and tampa now refuse to do off season workouts on turf.
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 10:02 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
http://sportsinjuries.suite101.com/article.cfm/injuries_on_artificial_turf_versus_natural_grass
http://www.hss.edu/conditions_artificial-turf-sports-injury-prevention.asp
there’s lots of inconclusive results
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 10:10 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A different point of view at: http://sportsinjuries.suite101.com/article.cfm/injuries_on_artificial_turf_versus_natural_grass
While there are more injuries on turf by number, they are often less severe injuries – turf burn / turf toe instead of ligament and neural injuries.
Earlier research by Meyers and Barnhill examined the rate and severity of injuries on FieldTurf brand products versus natural grass (2004). The 5-year prospective study tracking high school football injuries found that there were "higher incidences of 1- to 2-day time loss injuries, 22+ days time loss injuries, head and neural trauma, and ligament injuries were reported on natural grass."
by Krenn on Nov 3, 2009 10:09 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Bill Polian and AJ Smith are gone, so there's not the usual balance between "sane" and "others." Ralph has mentally checked out since 1994. It's a very dangerous time. The coalition for reason is extremely weak.
by thatguy34 on Nov 3, 2009 10:12 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
From a study standpoint, i think its safe to say that not nearly enough research has been done.
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 11:58 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
One other thing to consider – the studies (generally) note that there are more muscle degredation injuries on turf and more ligament injuries on grass. Two things to be noted from this:
1. It has been very well shown that many ligament injuries (aside from the catastrophic kind – like butler getting rolled up on) are cause by muscular imbalance or weakness – this is usually the case in non contact or light contact acl/mcl injuries. Therefore, the weaknesses caused by the constant pounding and training on turf done by the bills could in the long term lead to injuries that may be sustained on other fields.
2. It has long been surmised that switching between surfaces is worse than any of the surfaces singlehandedly. I’m sure there were more than a few of us who did the football/basketball or basketball/baseball combo in highschool, and ended up with nasty shin splints or knee problems because of the surface switch. Just think of what that could do to the bills in division play – an even split of surface change that could wreak havoc.
Nothing concrete here, just musing based on what little evidence and experience there is.
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 12:20 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I never played on the stuff (finished school before it “took the field”), but I do train on it a little bit, running pass drills and routes in my cross-training. I know firsthand it’s really tricky stuff because the top layer moves separately from the bottom rubber/sand layer.
It feels nice to run on, for sure, but the worry is there for a good amount of atheletes. That being said, it’s nowhere near as bad as dual-use fields: Miami, Oakland, etc. I remember the Eagles old stadium had chunks of concrete missing and the turf was loose, and players would snap ankles when not aware of it.
Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 3, 2009 10:51 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Artificial turf usually means astroturf. FieldTurf was designed to solve the problems with old-style field surfaces.
by syrbillsfan on Nov 3, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
very interesting.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 10:19 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Field Turf is good. I think it was the AstroTurf that had all of the problems. AstroTurf was carpet on pad and concrete. Field truf is a grass-like fabric loaded with sand and adjuncts so it has a base like dirt, but softer than hard-packed soil.
by syrbillsfan on Nov 3, 2009 12:21 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nah, read the articles – they say at first field turf might be better, but over time it becomes compressed/hardened just like the others.
Besides, there’s also a lot of slipping/friction problems with those darned rubber pellets and differential layers.
by quantumuprising on Nov 3, 2009 12:37 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Nothing beats a slightly damp natural playing field :)
by syrbillsfan on Nov 3, 2009 2:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Offensive Line vs Quarterback Debate
Given the problems with the offensive line there isn’t any quarterback including Jim Kelly who could perform well. Trent Edwards career, given he already has had two concussions, is in jeopardy playing behind this line.
by penance on Nov 3, 2009 9:46 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
make lemonade
Great assessment of the current situation. So, IMO it is now the coaches’ jobs to find a remedy. One example might be more roll outs for the QB,. We have a young mobile OL. I think Edwards is more mobile than Fitz. I don’t think we are utilizing our “strengths” (such as they are). Design an attack that tries to mitigate the pressure. You watch other teams adapt and be flexible. When the opposition’s DB says it was “easy” to defend our offense because of it’s lack of dimension, our coaches are compounding the problem, not working to resolve it. At this stage, we have nothing to lose and everything to gain, e.g. TOP, yardage, points etc. To continue with the status quo is – INSANITY.
by fansince60 on Nov 3, 2009 9:51 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I think Edwards throws horribly on the run. I’d rather see them re-install Jackson into the short passing game.
Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 3, 2009 11:16 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
What I find fascinating in all of this.........
is that we are pining for guys like Jonathan Scott ,Jamon Meredith, and Keith Ellison to get healthy……..
my god we suck :-)
Pass the chocolate cake!
by norcaliangelsfan on Nov 3, 2009 10:15 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
we definitely have talent problems
but it’s only injuries + lack of depth that can lead to a team that plays like this.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 10:48 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Lynch vs. Jackson
I know you will defend him again, Brian, but it’s time to get Least Mode off of the field when we need key yardage, or a screen play is called(!). If he had caught that ball, he’d still be running free. Two blockers in front, and not a white jersey within 15 yards. That 3rd down play cost us dearly at the time.
Among his many faults, Jauron doesn’t have the gonads to make Jackson the rightful starter at RB on this team. How does any defend the handful of targets Jackson has had in the passing game the past 4-5 games?
The Dick Jauron version of the K-Gun...the Squirt Gun.
by ChipShot on Nov 3, 2009 10:59 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I know you will defend him again, Brian
Kind of hard for me to defend him when I agree with you.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Nov 3, 2009 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
man "Least mode?"
Thats rough on our very own
Private Dancer…………
Dancer for money……..
doesnt do what we want him to do………
Needs more Ike apparently.
Pass the chocolate cake!
by norcaliangelsfan on Nov 3, 2009 11:11 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think all the hardware on his teeth is slowing him down. I love the kid’s heart, but I have yet to see a threat of the dominance featured backs usually display.
Twitter: helping to make anti-social people anti-socially social.
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 3, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
whether or not he's a premiere running back
Beast mode is one of my favorite things to yell. ever.
Jonathan Stupar won the Heisman…while playing in the NFL!
by JPH on Nov 3, 2009 11:21 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Where is the game planning....
Teams come out with game plans. Last night both teams had great First drives. Very methodical, you cant stop me type of play calling.
We seem to hope to put the Def on the field first and thrive off of their success….Which has been the only reason we really have scored(Good Field position).
Working hard is what we are constantly told at Press Conferences….. Does that mean we are constantly out coached and out of position?
I am not picking on the coaching as that has happened enough…but I am saying “IF these guys are playing hard for the coaching staff” as we are told, then why havent we figured out how to get the hard work onto the playing field.
All I seem to see is players trying but constantly out of position. Either our Team IQ is aweful or they are “going with the plays that are called.”
We need more planning from the coaches…. They are cabable of it…. I once saw it, against the Pats in Week one…
by MikeEverett08 on Nov 3, 2009 12:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Must've left with Turk...last year we always scored on the opening drive.
Not that I miss Turk at all.
They are hard to play but not hard to beat.
- Mike Lombardi on the Buffalo Bills
by Sluss88 on Nov 3, 2009 1:14 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
So many problems
It’s just Groundhog Day each week, each year with this team.
I really wonder why Jackson isn’t used in the passing game any more. Screens, dumpoffs, slants when he lines up at WR all gone. Why? This coaching staff is so clueless about using players’ strengths.
I’m glad you finally mentioned Corner. He looks exactly like he did last year…overmatched, a step late and unable to get the job done. I want to see more Youboty too, he’s simply a better player. Corner might be ok in time, but he’s nothing more than a 4th CB. I still can’t believe people thought this guy was a better option that Drayton Florence this offseason.
~K
"As the governor of Louisiana once said, the only way Chris Kelsay can lose his job is if he got caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy."
by Kurupt on Nov 3, 2009 1:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Agreed. Youboty is the forgotten man in this D. He was lights out through 2 games last year playing the nickel and he’s bigger and faster than Corner. Why doesn’t he get the nod ???
by Leo Crow on Nov 4, 2009 11:40 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
He initially fell out of favor for not playing through being hurt. I don’t think he has come back from that.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.
"Matt’s pretty valuable to y’all. Cherish him." - BG
by MattRichWarren on Nov 5, 2009 6:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I completely disagree with your assessment
that a good Q.B. can play behind a terrible line. A good argument from my point is that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers won the Super Bowl with Brad Johnson at QB, while the Ravens won with Trent Dilfer. Of course, having a superior defense is also a plus.
Watch Tom Brady or Tony Romo, and they have all day to throw. Of course, they both are extremely talented. When the pocket collapses on Brady, he steps up and completes a pass. I doubt Brady would have the time behind this line. When a QB get’s an extra 1-2 seconds, that gives him extra time to find a receiver or running back that will eventually get open.
All of the top personnell people have always stated, “you win in the trenches”! And that also applies to the running game. A good running game takes pressure off the Q.B. The Bills cannot get a running game or passing game going.
by BuffaloWhiner on Nov 3, 2009 5:30 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
A good argument from my point is that the Tampa Bay Buccaneers won the Super Bowl with Brad Johnson at QB, while the Ravens won with Trent Dilfer.
Flashes in the pan. One-time Super Bowl winners based solely on their dominant defenses and offenses that could capitalize.
I obviously wouldn’t be averse to the Bills winning a Super Bowl that way, but if you have to choose between the QB and the OL, you ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS take the quarterback. Period. You can be a contender with a great OL and a not-awful QB. You can win championships, plural, with a great QB and a good enough OL.
Buffalo Rumblings. On Twitter.
"You miss 100% of the shots you don't take. --Wayne Grezky" --Michael Scott
by Brian Galliford on Nov 3, 2009 6:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t understand the logic behind pointing out mediocre QBs who won super bowls behind good offensive lines as evidence that a good QB couldn’t pley well behind a bad OL.
Pittsburgh has a terrible OL. Roethlisberger does fine. Arizona has a bad OL, but Warner gets rid of the ball. Rodgers is playing great in Green Bay. The Bills have a very comparable run game to the Steelers and Packers and run the ball much better than Arizona does.
I signed up for Second Life about a year ago. Back then my life was so great that I literally wanted a second one. In my Second Life I was also a paper salesman and I was also named Dwight. Absolutely everything was the same. Except I could fly. - Dwight Schrute
by kaisertown on Nov 3, 2009 6:53 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
H-E-L-P
This team has talent that isn’t being utilized properly.
Jackson should be the starter w/ Lynch the backup.
Why can’t Maybin play Linebacker when we are so short there.
Blame the lines all you want but some of that is coaching. When McNally was with the Giants under Fossil, the same people considered to be the best line in football were not playing that way and now Buffalo is using the same scheme from someone without the resume McNally had.
QB’s – Not developed properly!!
Injuries – More than any team since Rusty Jones Left.
Any Questions?
by LITBeaver on Nov 3, 2009 5:58 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Jackson hasn’t been that great since his great start to the year. Neither has Lynch of course.
Playing Realistic Optimist at Buffalo Rumblings since 2008.
"Matt’s pretty valuable to y’all. Cherish him." - BG
by MattRichWarren on Nov 5, 2009 7:02 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

by 





















