Jets 27, Bills 11: Three Good and Three Bad
Jerry Jones and Jimmy Johnson set out to build a great football team 22 years ago. They reportedly decided to build a team that could beat the toughest team in the NFC. If the Dallas Cowboys could beat the toughest team, they could beat everyone else, so the logic went. That team was the Philadelphia Eagles. Whether or not that story is true, after getting routed early in the 1991 season, the Cowboys handled the Eagles routinely, beating them in the playoffs on their way to two Super Bowl victories.
Fast forward to the 2011 Buffalo Bills. Since winning the Mark Sanchez-sponsored Turnover Bowl in 2009, the Bills have lost four straight games to the New York Jets. The Jets have handled the Bills easily during the last three encounters. Ryan Fitzpatrick has played poorly in all four losses. The Jets are a solid team, having played in the last two conference championship games. They have beaten Tom Brady and the New England Patriots three times in the past two years. The Jets should be Buddy Nix's Eagles.
The Bad
The Running Game. The Jets take away what a team does well. For Buffalo, that's running Fred Jackson. Take out Jackson's oh-by-the-way 23-yard run when the game was in hand for the Jets, and his numbers don't look good: 17 runs, 59 yards, and a 3.5 yards-per-carry average. Buffalo has been best spreading out the defense and pounding Jackson inside. The Jets are better when the offense puts more defensive backs on the field. The more backs, the more elaborate Rex Ryan's blitzes become. Chan Gailey's offense had more success running with tight ends on the field, particularly when Lee Smith and Scott Chandler played together. Nix and Gailey need to re-think this position. Chandler has been good and Smith holds promise, but both are probably better reserves than starters. A good tight end in the Heath Miller mold, who excels as an in-line blocker, may be one of the last pieces to Buffalo's offensive puzzle.
The Passing Game. In stud Darrelle Revis, Antonio Cromartie, and Kyle Wilson, the Jets have a fearsome trio of cover corners that make it very tough to throw to receivers. Stevie Johnson was contained. Outside of one tremendous effort by Johnson, Buffalo's deep game was shut down. The Jets defense gets a lot of media attention for their cover corners and blitzing, but a key to their defense are the underneath zones. The Jets take away the outside receivers while blitzing four or five rushers. That leaves as many as four defenders in coverage against no more than two receivers. New England and Pittsburgh have had success against the Jets in the past in the underneath zones, but have good receivers that excel in between the hash marks. The Pats got nine receptions from their tight ends, Ed Dickson of Baltimore found success against the Jets, and no one in the short zones could cover Jason Witten of Dallas. David Nelson is a good receiver, but he isn't a durable tight end that can make a living in the middle of the field. There were plenty of situations on Sunday where Fitzpatrick could've used a big, mobile target down the center of the Jets' zones.
Pass Defense. Sanchez looked like the quarterback calling the game on Sunday. Much like Phil Simms used to, Sanchez triggered a simple but effective passing game made more lethal by the Jets' commitment to the run. Sanchez spread the ball around, beating the Bills on crosses and digs. They picked up 14 first downs through the air, as well as pass interference penalties that kept the team moving. Buffalo's determination to limit the Jets' ground game made any concerted effort to get to Sanchez difficult at best. Once again, the team's lack of an edge presence that can get to the quarterback proved an enormous liability.
The Good
Run Defense. The Jets ran the ball 35 times if Sanchez's numbers are discounted. They ran for 129 yards. That's a 3.7 yards-per-carry average. That's really good, especially for a Bills defense that's been absolutely ripped apart by Jets runners in the past five games. The longest Jets run was 10 yards. After watching Thomas Jones, LaDainian Tomlinson, and Shonn Greene break long runs at will in past games, containing them in this fashion represents real improvement. Buffalo has gotten a lot tougher in the middle of the defense with Marcell Dareus, Kelvin Sheppard, and Nick Barnett. The Bills may finally have the horsepower to match up with the Jets' power game.
Defense. Buffalo didn't lose this game on defense. Had the offense done anything, the defense was good enough to win with. Despite two Fitzpatrick interceptions late in the first half, they held the Jets to just three points. They forced a punt and a field goal in the first two Jets drives of the second half. The Jets gained just eight yards to set up the Nick Folk field goal. Buffalo had two drives to do anything (the drive starting at their own one-yard line notwithstanding). The Jets' first touchdown drive came after Jackson's fumble. Buffalo's defense held well late into the third quarter, giving the team a chance. While there are no moral victories, Buffalo knows that its defense can play with the Jets.
Pass Protection. Ron may prove me wrong on this, but from a once-through viewing, it seemed that the Jets didn't get their normal pressure on the quarterback. The Jets recorded five quarterback hits in 31 passes, a total that seems low for them. With a guard playing left tackle, the Bills gave Fitzpatrick time. The Jets confused Fitzpatrick, but never hurried him to the point that he couldn't have gotten into a rhythm. Buffalo's line has a lot to work on this week. Getting beat on short-yardage run blocking stands at the top of that list. They should be able to view their protection against the Jets' exotic blitzes as something they did right.
Overall
Buffalo is built a lot like the Patriots. They play out of a spread most of the time, and rely on scoring to win games. The Jets are built to counter that type of team. It showed on Sunday. Buffalo does run the ball well, and is starting to gel on defense. I'm of the opinion that Buffalo is one good tight end and a pass rusher away from being able to play with the Jets - and according to my premise at the top, that will also put the Bills in the playoffs as a serious contender.
The AFC East is a three-horse race. Buffalo's got an edge on New England. New England has an edge on the Jets. The Jets have an edge on the Bills. New England and New York get to lay into each other for a second time on Sunday evening. With a win at Cowboys Stadium on Sunday and a Jets loss, Buffalo could be atop the AFC East again. Buffalo will need to live up to their end of the bargain against America's Team Sunday at 1PM.
172 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Reall solid playcalling got us a lot of these wins. They make Fred and Fitz look better than they would running some other offense and I give Chan most of the credit on how this team has developed. But the Jets defense coming off the bye seemed better prepared and we didn’t seem to have the necessary adjustments. So for the first time this year I really think Chan got schooled. Not saying the offense played great, but what we were trying to do seemed entirely covered prepared for in the first half. Also think he needed to try the screen game earlier. A well timed screen should punish these underneath zones (if we dont want to go deep, or cant, which is the other simple solution).
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
Chan said the loss was his fault in his press conference. He said he did not have the team prepared enough to play them. I think in the long run this loss will teach this team alot more than squeaking out a win.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 9:57 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
The lack of screen plays had me very frustrated. If their game was going to continue to be underneath, that type of play seemed the perfect call. The times they ran it, it proved vital to their “success.”
I don’t understand why Spiller wasn’t used in this role yesterday. I would have loved to see him play more WR, but I also realize him trying to school the Jets DBs is a comedy of errors.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:21 AM EST up reply actions
I was thinking the same thing with Spiller. I know Freddy is our horse this season and sometimes you don’t want to out clever yourself by getting away from what got you there. But Spiller to me seemed like a nice antidote, particularly in the screen game. They would really have to respect his speed.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 11:29 AM EST up reply actions
Exactly. Fred has been their screen guy all year and I don’t want to see him lose touches (he is my favorite player), but using Spiller there might have been the cute little trick Galiey could have employed. Put them both on the field at the same time. Spiller’s supposed to have good hands and elite speed. Right now, I think all he has are bench sores.
I think Gailey missed an opportunity.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
Agree 1000% on Spiller
Yesterday was the perfect time to make him a central focus of the offense. With the Jets keying on Fred Jackson and Revis taking away Stevie, taking advantage of CJ’s speed was the right thing to do. I would also have used Scott Chandler more — while DJ is certainly right that a first-rate TE would have been even better, Chandler has decent hands and great size, but Fitz ended up targeting him mainly as an afterthought.
Chan was right — this loss was partly on his failure to be more creative and to use some weapons that the other team wasn’t expecting.
I am tired of hearing this
failure to be more creative
Why in the hell would he think he didn’t have to implement a creative game plan? Did he really think the Bills roster was so much more talented than the Jets that he could afford not to be creative? If that is the case, fire him now. Chan is not a new HC….he should know better. I call BS!!!!! Chan is just trying to take the blame because his players got their a$$es kicked. As to the real reasons Smith and Spiller were not used more…..we will never know.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
I thought Chan was being sincere yesterday when he took the blame. I wouldn’t put it all on him, but surely he was part of it. The Jets players themselves keep saying that the plays the Bills ran against them were the same ones they had seen last year. So this is not B.S. I frankly don’t know why Chan Gailey, normally one of the most creative coaches in the league, didn’t load up this particular game plan with all kinds of new twists and turns knowing how important the game was. It’s a headscratcher for me. And I’m also puzzled as to why we are seeing so little of CJ Spiller, who clearly hasn’t lost any of his speed and who has executed some plays for long gains the few times he has been able to touch the ball. There may be good reasons for not giving Spiller more plays, but at the moment I (and several others on this website) can’t figure it out.
That is scarey because Chan has had plenty of time to get creative
If he truly is an offensive genius, wouldn’t a game vs the Jets D be the perfect time to show it? And Spiller continues to prove me right…..bad use of a high draft pick. In a year where he was supposed become more involved in the offense, he instead is being used less as the year goes on. I never thought Spiller would be a bust, but he is moving closer to that “bust” tag rather than farther away from it. In his limited touches yesterday, he managed to fumble the ball….luckily, it went out of bounds.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
As I said, it really puzzles me why Chan didn’t put more into this particular game plan, but as so many people have noted it really didn’t have much that was new in it compared to what the Bills have been doing this fall. On Spiller, I don’t know what to think. He did fumble out of bounds yesterday, but he has also had some plays in previous games that have shown a lot of promise. At his news conference after the game Chan said that the reason Spiller didn’t get more touches against the Jets had nothing to do with him and that he is going to see a lot more action in future games this year. If that’s true, why not use him against the Jets in ways they might not have been expecting?
I’m not upset at Chan so much as baffled.
Unless they use Spiller as a deep threat WR, I really don't see it making a difference
Jackson isn’t the reason the offense stunk. And sometimes the best answer the one that is right in front of your face…..Chan did put everything he had into this game. So that means that Chan either doesn’t have any better ideas or he doesn’t have the players to implement the game plan he wanted to run…..I’m hoping it is the latter.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
Chan's Genius
Will only go so far, evidently Jet’s have “our #” Chan’s still Chan which isn’t bad and our team still needs more talent. Surprise, surprise. And yeah Spiller is either a under utilized “Maybin” or a bust! We can’t underlook the obvious under utilizing of Spiller and whats his name Smith? But is that more Nix than Chan’s fault? I’m thinking Nix.
by buffalobacker on Nov 9, 2011 12:00 AM EST up reply actions
Completely agree
Freddie has been The Man this season, but if putting Spiller on the field in a certain circumstance will help us win, I’m all for it.
The lack of screen plays had me very frustrated.
The Jets played press the entire game – you don’t screen against press coverage. that’s why you only saw 1 screen
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 1:49 PM EST up reply actions
http://www.football-defense.com/defending-the-screen-pass/
Man coverage can render the screen pass play completely useless.
here’s a good explanation that I found and is exactly what the Jets did – they played press man all game long which is why Gailey didn’t call it.
Fact is the Jets are built to beat the Pats and the Bills are emulated after the Pats at this point but much farther behind in some key areas.
IMO – the best way right now to beat the Jets is for CJ Spiller to get more touches and beat them with speed. It sounds stupid but his speed can kill a defense. I’d put both CJ and Fred behind Fitz all day long and run a litany of plays
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:12 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t know, there was a lot of switching going on for that to be entirely press man.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
i’m not re-watching that game so if you do you can confirm but that’s what I saw. They weren’t press the whole game but they were a lot and they were man almost the entire game.
It’s extremely tough to screen against man – which is why they didn’t – I thought that was common knowledge
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:18 PM EST up reply actions
Linebackers were dropping into zones werent they? Calvin Paces interception comes to mind…. but maybe that was just a confusing man.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
well sure – but you can have a CB playing man and have LBs playing zone. Didn’t you notice Wilson trailing Nelson on that play – he had a step – but Fitz failed to read the zone player dropping back. he was doubled and Fitz threw an awful throw.
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:22 PM EST up reply actions
Fitz said they could have run screens
If you go to Fitz’s postgame news conference on the Bills website you will find that he was asked explicitly if the coverage the Jets were running made it hard to run screen plays and he answered with one word: “no.”
and honestly I could care less about the screen game. When you’re playing a team that plays man coverage the whole game and you can’t do crap about it, it means your WRs cannot beat their man or Fitz cannot recognize where to throw the ball as far as leading a WR.
The best QBs LOVE man coverage because they can put the ball in a spot where the WR can make a play – so either Fitz cannot do that or the WRs couldn’t get any separation.
personally i’m leaning more towards Fitz on this one – he looked atrocious
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:20 PM EST up reply actions 2 recs
routes were my issue
when facing man to man coverage… don’t try vertical routes the entire game, especially with your #1 against revis, and your #2 just coming off injury. i felt we should have been working crossing routes underneath with our slot guys, which i saw NONE of. no drags, no ins, and we didn’t take advantage of mismatches where LBs were on Namaan or Nelson very often. i saw more than one play that Nelson was wide open, and Fitz never looked off his initial read. All in all, the offense was doing exactly what we have done, what they had two weeks (7 weeks) to study, and then were somehow surprised that they had answers for what we like to do.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
If I see nelson run another 10 yard and in/out and Fitz throw it to him with 2 defenders there i’m gonna break my TV.
Those underneath zones that you mention are a perfect way to attack that defense. The defender is trailing and either the front 7 guys are blitzing or falling back and as long as the WR recognizes which it his he adjusts his depth accordingly and he’s open. it’s almost impossible to cover a crossing route the entire time.
I have to think that Gailey had no faith in Levitre and Rhinehart holding up or something – dubious playcalling for sure. Glad Gailey recognized that
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:47 PM EST up reply actions
no excuse
i won’t pretend like the jets don’t have an amazing cover defense. but if we are going to spread it out, we need to be dropping passes to HBs and TEs in the flat and underneath, or else we need some crossing routes from slot receivers. regardless, what we saw is what was expected, and it wasn’t effective.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
mark my words – Spiller gets a bunch of rush attempts next game against the Jets – he’s the perfect type of player to play against that defense
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:52 PM EST up reply actions
so far the trend does not indicate this at all
how many snaps has Johnny White gotten as the #2? As Chan said in today’s press conference “We have to see how it works as time goes on. This year maybe he doesn’t get involved as much as we thought he might.” That doesn’t tell me that it is a significant priority. that said, i agree that we need to recognize if Spiller creates a missmatch (he certainly has that “extra gear” and so should be able to get to the edge, should the line assist.) and how we can use him to exploit that. My hopes are low, as you know, i drafted him for fantasy. like on purpose. and even i had to cut my losses and accept that for now, he is little more than a whimsical pick at a time when they didn’t know what was on the roster, and they knew that keeping marshawn probably wasn’t an option, and fred was little more than a journeyman that was aging. none of those things are the case, right now. I still believe, as he continues to state, that he will be a good player for this team, when all is said and done, but for now, the expectation of his production comes solely from his draft position, which CHIX has clearly demonstrates means nothing at all to them. He is THEIR pick though, so i believe he will be afforded every opportunity, in the long term.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
sorry
as Chan continues to state… that spiller will be productive in the long term. too many "he"’s in there to not potentially be confusing.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
so far the trend does not indicate this at all
no it doesn’t – not even remotely.
how many snaps has Johnny White gotten as the #2?
thats irrelevant though – Spiller is the fastest guy on the field when he’s out there and a dang er to go the distance anytime he touches it. Notso is more Lionel Gates like.
I still think Spiller will get more and more work as defenses figure out the Bills and force us to utilize other options more and be more creative.
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 7:56 PM EST up reply actions
point being
that fred will get every running snap until someone shows a reason that they should replace him, even for a handful of plays. “problem” is that Fred is too good at everything, his versatility limits the need for anyone else’s involvement.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
agree creativity is limited
but keeping it simple is what allows us to “plug in” other people quickly and easily. otherwise, i agree, in the long term, we will have far more formations, packages, and creative ways to attack opponents. that comes with continuity.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
rec'd.....I agree....Fitz was not doing his job very well
poor reads…..poor throws…poor result. I just hope Johnson’s frustration wasn’t with Fitz (did you see the shot of him sitting on the bench pissed off?). I thought that signing Fitz was supposed to encourage Johnson to resign?
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
excellent post.
to move the ball against the jets, along with better quarterback play, the bills need more athleticism at TE and a WR who is an actual deep threat.
on defense, its the same story as its been all season. need the freak athletes on the edge that can wreak havoc on the QB and be more formidable in coverage.
on a side note: did u keep track of how many times the bills took a shot on 3rd or 4th and short? i remember a couple plays the bills needed 5 yds or less to move the chains and fitz decided to throw a 9 route to a completely overmatched donald jones. of course it would fail and an exhausted bills defense would be thrown back out onto the field
How many times has it been 3rd and five and our guys are running 4 yard routes. Running routes long enough for first downs is something we need to practice.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 9:59 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
um ya i totally agree.
my point is to set up high percentage throws on most 3rd & managables. on 3rd and 5, get 6 yards. dont throw up a prayer for 25. yes i think a 25 yd pass is a prayer when ur QB cant consistently put it in a guys bucket and a WR who cannot adjust and make a tough catch
Yah I just think the bigger more cosintent problem is running routes to short for the third down. We do not even try going deep enough to be a major problem at this point.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 10:20 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
This is something I really noticed at the game.
There were even a couple of tosses on 3rd-and-1 or 2 that would have called for a power sweep or something that is almost guaranteed to just get that bit of yardage and the first down.
I felt like Chan had gotten spoiled throwing touchdowns on third down last week, which is just not something you can expect to do on 3rd and short against the Jets.
You will not need prayers you do not need your soul. You will be in a place not even the. Undead. Walk. --abayarde
I saw that, and have mentioned it so much in the past that I decided not to go with it
I thought it would be more of a discussion talking about how to beat the Jets through future team building.
I get the “beat the man” philosophy. But on third and short, get the first down.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Nov 7, 2011 11:17 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
As usual, solid post DJ. However, where is play-calling on the bad list? I know you only can list three bad things, and there were about 7 that come to mind, but play-calling to me was a big factor in the loss. Especially once we actually got into a rhythm, and could have scored a couple of times (at the end of the first half, and in the second half). Drives stalled because of strange play-calls, and not opening up the playbook. As you mentioned, Fitz had time to throw for most of the day, so they could have probably opened up the passing game a little more than they did.
"Slowly all the roles we act out become our identity. And in the end we are what we pretend to be." - Jerry Cantrell.
Gailey playcalling seemed scared at times. He was to scared of the jets defense to try anything that was not up the middle.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 10:22 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
totally agree – playcalling and timeout usage, bad challenge all go on the coach and Gailey had a bad day.
by JustAskTheAxis on Nov 7, 2011 10:25 AM EST up reply actions
Agree on playcalling but timeout usage and the challenge were irrelevant. In fact, I think Chan was gonna use the timeout to talk over the fourth down, so they challanged (cause if you are gonna burn a timeout anyway, you might as well). Even if he thought it was a longshot, it is worth it in that scenario.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 12:38 PM EST up reply actions
you’re probably right about that, but I think it’s totally irresponsible to blow a challenge on a spot if you’re not 100% certain you’re going to get it – I also see so many times that teams, in close games, burn timeouts in the second half of games… To me, it’s just not worth it to give up your only chances to stop the clock late in a game to make sure you have the right play on 2nd and 7… either way, you’re right and it wouldn’t have mattered much yesterday anyway
by JustAskTheAxis on Nov 7, 2011 1:05 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks
I framed this on how Buffalo can improve in the off-season, eg: build to beat the Jets.
Noted though. Too many bad’s to list.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
definitely not sold that our Defense was “good” – we let an average offense run all over us when we needed stops, and a QB who completes about 55% of his passes hit us for a 20/28 day… The only reason it stayed remotely close was because of the two gift turnovers in the first half – when they didn’t turn it over in the second half, they dropped 24 on us… the D definitely was not as bad as the O, but they were not good either.
The D was on the field WAY TOO MUCh. they did a good job until late in the game. No way you can say the D was not good when the Jets only had 3 points at the half
Never confuse movement with action.
~Ernest Hemingway
by NolaBillsFan on Nov 7, 2011 10:39 AM EST up reply actions
The defense was only on the field for close to an hour yesterday. Thats no biggy.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 10:47 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
I agree – but like I said, they were getting gashed and were fortunate that we got 2 lucky turnovers to remain at 3-0 – it should have been a lot worse…
by JustAskTheAxis on Nov 7, 2011 11:04 AM EST up reply actions
That’s not luck, that’s a defense coming up big.
Of course Jets fans will feel like the score should have been much higher, but the defense came up when it couldn’t stop the run and simply stole the pass.
That’s solid play, it’s not like a unicorn shat that ball in Byrd’s hands.
You will not need prayers you do not need your soul. You will be in a place not even the. Undead. Walk. --abayarde
Not sure how Sanchez just dropping a shotgun snap that hit him in the hands or an awful overthrow to the middle of nowhere were coming up big
by JustAskTheAxis on Nov 7, 2011 11:16 AM EST up reply actions
no, but one good play by Byrd may bail the defense out on the scoreboard
but it doesn’t change the fact they were getting dominated on a regular basis by the Jets.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
They did?
they did a good job until late in the game.
Didn’t they allow a 10 min drive where the Jets repeatedly shot themselves in the foot and had to covert several 3rd and longs….which they did. A few great plays by Byrd and Wilson masked on the score board the butt whooping our defense received.
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
Buffalo's defense held the Jets to 12 points until halfway through the 3rd quarter
Only one turnover was a gift. The Bills jammed Keller, and kept him from getting into his route. Sanchez threw to a spot, and Keller wasn’t there.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Bills run defense from awful to mediocre
Jets run game ypc affected by Sanchez kneeldowns. No gains over ten yards means lots of consistent 3-6 yard plays. That includes 3 of 4 first down conversions on running plays. Bills weren’t masacred, but D-line players were moved time and again.
Without the kneeldowns it’s like 3.7 ypc. They really didn’t affect it that much.
"Slowly all the roles we act out become our identity. And in the end we are what we pretend to be." - Jerry Cantrell.
All I know is that every time I watched the Jets run, they broke tackles and got the yards needed for first downs. I don’t care how low their average was or that they contained them under 200 yards finally. The Jets’ running game contributed heavily to the Bills’ inability to mount any sort of a comeback.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:25 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
Somewhat agree
Not allowing bigger runs was nice, but it sure seemed like Greene was pushing the pile every time. IT seemed like he didn’t get hit until he was through the line or past it routinely. The holes were there, but closed up somewhat quickly. Although the YPC wasn’t high, it still looked like the Jets controlled the ground game and were effective.
~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 7, 2011 11:32 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Sure, but our run defense wasnt anywhere near the reason we lost it was better and good enough. Especially considering the time they were on the field
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 11:38 AM EST up reply actions
They lost because they couldn’t score points nor allow the defense to catch their breath. The offense had a hand in the defense being unable to stop those first-down runs.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:55 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 12:06 PM EST up reply actions
The average I listed was after Sanchez's kneeldowns were discounted.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
I guess it was appropriate that the Bills wore white
It sure looked like it was their first time..
"WE PROTECT AND LIVE FOR THE HONOR OF RIDING IN THE WAGON BLASTER" -abayarde
by BuffaloBlueBlood on Nov 7, 2011 10:52 AM EST via mobile reply actions
I believe we need a gamebreaking WR
More than a big time TE. If you look at the difference in why teams win games, it comes down to big plays a lot of the time. Gamebreakers that can make huge plays to allow their team to win. The Jets have Santonio Holmes, and he showed his abilities even with the limited throws that came his way. That TD catch was unbelievable.
Look at the Lions, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, etc. Guys like Calvin Johnson, Anquan Boldin, AJ Green, and Andre Johnson make huge plays that on many occasions are enough to get the team a win.
Stevie Johnson is very good. But we need another guy. Nelson should be on this team a long time. But he’s a possession receiver. We need speed, and athleticism. Donald Jones and Naaman Roosevelt are not going to do it for us.
I hope we draft a WR high next year.
San Diego has two good receivers, and they caught three passes against the Jets.
The facts show that teams with good tight ends are able to do more against the Jets than teams with good receiving duos. The Jets are built to play against wide receivers, not tight ends.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Nov 7, 2011 11:15 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
The Patriots have 3 possession weapons in Welker, Gronkowski, and Hernandez. I don’t think you need a gamebreaking WR in the mold of Moss or Owens. I think they need players who all teams have difficulty matching up with.
Welker has that lateral speed in traffic. Gronkowski is a man among boys and Hernandez is a size mismatch for everyone he faces.
The Bills need players who can outperform their opponent no matter what they try to do on defense.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:28 AM EST up reply actions
Welker has proven to be much more than a possession receiver. He’s quick, he has big play making ability after the catch, and he leads the entire league right now in yards.
A big TE would be nice to have. But I would choose a play making WR first. It doesn’t have to be a freak like Megatron, but we need a guy there badly.
Welker’s bread and butter is playing the role of possession receiver. It’s what he does in those lanes that separates him. He’s not the typical split-out WR, who automatically goes for the deep pass play. He simply presents a mismatch in the center of a defense and is able to extend plays based on those things.
He’s an amazing player. Simple as that.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:54 AM EST up reply actions
We need both a deep-threat WR AND a TE
DJ in the past has argued that we need an ultra-fast WR to be a real threat down the sidelines in addition to Stevie Johnson, and after watching the game yesterday I have no doubt he is right. I’m sorry but Donald Jones is best as a slot receiver using his strength and toughness to gain yards over the middle, not as a speed guy on the edge. But I would also agree that a first-rate TE in the mold of Heath Miller is a crucial piece for this offense, with Chandler as an excellent #2 TE and Lee Smith as our #3. Surely we need both. The good news is that those two additions are the only things left we need on offense.
Our top priority, however, has to be a pass-rushing OLB or two. It interested me that Justin Rogers made his debut as the dime CB this week, with Reggie Corner a healthy scratch. That suggests that the coaching staff continues to be high on Rogers and believes he is coming along — which in turn means we may be able to hold off on using a high pick on CB this coming year and focus on OLB (x 2), TE and WR instead.
Maybe, but beating our corner for the dime spot is a long way the kid upgrading our nickel package. Given our age at this position, another body is a good idea.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 12:08 PM EST up reply actions
As DJ and I have observed on earlier (and happier) threads, the question is whether the Bills could afford to pass by the CB position this year given all their other needs and also given the fact that they took two CB’s in the 2011 draft. There’s no question they will need to use a high draft pick on another oneat some point, but it may be possible to wait until 2013 if they are confident that Williams and Rogers can both be eventual starters. Rogers playing dime back doesn’t answer that question, but if the inevitable injuries occur and he moves up to nickel for a couple of games we will know a lot more. What I was pointing out is that he has apparently moved beyond Reggie Corner on the depth chart despite Corner’s experience.
Thanks
If I were Buddy Nix, and I’m not, I’d add John Carlson and Anthony Spencer in free agency. I’d then think really long and hard about Vincent Jackson, pending injuries.
Carlson in the middle, Nelson working the crossing routes and medium zones, and Johnson and another receiver working deep might be too much for the Jets to stop. A tight end like Carlson (or Tyler Eifurt?) is the type of guy that could catch 10 for 100 and a couple touchdowns, breaking the back of the Jets’ defense.
I’m warming to the idea of a Spencer-Courtney Upshaw pass rushing combo.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
I really like the idea of adding John Carlson as well
Then add the WR from Penn State you have had your eye on and we would be in great shape.
Derek Moye
He’s been pretty good lately. He’s listed at 6-5, probably 6-4, but he’s lankly like Nelson. He’s the type that might give Cromartie some problems.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
We Need TE AND WR
AND O/L and D/L And QB AND….
by buffalobacker on Nov 9, 2011 12:12 AM EST up reply actions
Agreed
Maybe we don’t need that superstud in the Calvin, Andre or AJ Green mold, but the offense certainly needs a player that can stretch the field and make plays all over it. Jones and Roosevelt don’t scare defenses and don’t draw any attention away from Stevie. They need somebody that defenses don’t match up with well and draw extra attention from time to time.
~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."
You mean... Lee Evans?
sorry… couldn’t resist
by lord gloom on Nov 7, 2011 12:01 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Haha
I was actually going to add that maybe we can re-sign Evans after the Ravens cut him after the season. :)
~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."
I was watching the Ravens/Steelers game last night. Didn’t see Lee Evans go on the field at all. Then I looked him up online – his stats for the year are 2 catches for 45 yards. FOR THE YEAR! We truly got the better of that trade!!!
I think he’s injured still.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
Yup
Exactly why his numbers are like that….
~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."
Which means
We made out well on that trade….as for receivers, anyone know more about the kid from NC?
And that would be who?
~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."
Dwight jones I think he will be a bill next season.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 8, 2011 8:12 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
And what happened to special teams???
Non-existent. We used to be one of the best in punt and kick returns. Now we don’t get past the 20 on KR, and we never have a punt return over 10 yards. This needs some major improvement. Especially with talented guys like Smith and Spiller on this team.
Brad Smith isn’t a fast returner. Spiller goes down on first contact.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:28 AM EST up reply actions 2 recs
I think Brad Smith is a waste of cap space for us. Not sure what he adds to the team. We have better kick returners, better running backs, better receivers, better QBs. So, why is he on the team? He might be good for another team, but I don’t see how he fits in with the Bills.
by mxsd on Nov 7, 2011 11:57 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
He does a number of things, but none apparently good enough to slot him as the starter. (I’m not sure why he’s the defacto KR man.)
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
cap space doesnt matter for us, we arent up against it.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 12:09 PM EST up reply actions
rec'd....you are on fire today
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
I’m already sick of seeing stories about how the Jets are so good, so dominating and the Jets are back, etc….This game showed nothing except that the Bills did not play well enough on offense. If the Bills played 5 wide with a no-huddle the entire second half they would have scored a lot more and maybe even have won.
The refs were the biggest factor in the 2nd half. In a game where both teams are clawing for every yard gained, the refs gave the Jets 2 freebies at the 1. I really wanted to kick Ed Hochuli’s ass.
I would like to see Chandler sent out as a receiver keeping the back in to block more it seemed the Jets could not match up with his size. I also think our recievers need to watch tape of the Giants receivesr to learn better positioning to make the catch or get more pass interferences called. I am amazed in at least 4 games the team we play gets the PI called and either just prior to or after the same thing happens to our receiver and nothing gets called. It ends drives. I also don’t like taking the back out on short yardage cause it allows the D to play pass only unless Fitz runs. Where was the wildcat? I am sure Smith would have liked to make a few plays out of that formation against his old mates.
I was glad to see the wildcat left in its cage.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:30 AM EST up reply actions
3.7 yds a carry is good for the Jets
not for us.
Yds/carry in itself means little. If they ran 35 times, it means they were being effective running. Running that many times means that they felt they could push the pile and wear the defense down and then strike later. It also opens up play action.
I don’t understand how this team is built to win. I still think this is 2008 redux. We beat up on the easy teams, win a couple of nail-biters and lose a couple of nail-biters and think we are just a player or two away. When we are in fact a less than average team who needs good breaks to win.
I think playcalling was awful all day
There were way too many runs right up the gut, that didn’t work at all. Gailey called a slow developing run on 3rd (or maybe 4th) and short early in the game that was easily stuffed. With the Jets bunching the interior in obvious run situations, I don’t know why there weren’t more outside runs or quick throws behind those bunches. The calls were just so predictable with little chance of success barring Freddie busting through a small crevice or breaking some tackles. We needed more out of Chan’s calls. Dial up some creativity if the simplistic stuff isn’t working…at least try something different, right?
It’s painfully obvious that this offense needs more playmakers, especially at WR. There’s no deep threat (Jones isn’t one) and nobody to stretch a defense. On the deep throws yesterday, which was nice to see again at least, only Stevie had any sort of separation. Jones was blanketed all day long, per usual. Fitz’s inaccuracy deep doesn’t help, but neither does the lack of separations.
I agree that Fitz looked confused and uncomfortable all game long. I don’t know if his chest/ribs were bothering him, but he just didn’t look right out there. It may be due solely to the Jets and the lack of open receivers, but he needs to be a whole lot better.
So what’s the plan with Brad Smith? We’re halfway through the season and all we’ve seen are a handful of Wildcat snaps and tentative kick returning at roughly 20 yards a pop. They gave him a nice contract and there still doesn’t seem to be any semblance of a plan to use him consistently. They already have a player in Spiller that they heavily invested in and wasn’t good enough to produce much…is Smith another player like this now? It may be time to get Spiller the kick returns at this point, IMO.
Speaking of Spiller, the team just continues to use him less and less. Here’s his offensive touch total by game this year: 6, 5, 2, 4, 4, 5, 2, 2. I don’t remember him getting any targets in the passing game yesterday and he only received the carries when Jackson was banged up. It was no surprise he fumbled when he got hit on his first carry. I’m not advocating more touches for Spiller because I continue to believe he’s a bad player, but the usage of Smith/Spiller, two guys that were brought in to inject life in an offense that still needs some playmakers, is just alarming. So far, both look like wasted additions especially when the team could have simply added more traditional players (Ryan Mathews, Dez Bryant, so on so forth). If the team was going to add gimmicky players, at least use them!
I have a feeling this game starts a major slide. With three roadies coming up, the team needs to regroup quickly and start playing good football again. They are already in big trouble with this loss having games in NE and NY still, along with the AFC North continuing to chug along. It’s looking more and more likely that this team will need to finish 6-2 to have a legit shot at the playoffs. A loss in Dallas Sunday makes it extremely difficult to envision any scenario with the Bills in the playoffs. It’s a must-win game and the team needs to come to play.
~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 7, 2011 11:25 AM EST reply actions 2 recs
I feel much the same as you, K. It’s been obvious to me that this team is great when Fred and the run-blocking are great. Fitzpatrick looked like someone they can’t win with yesterday. That’s alarming.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:34 AM EST up reply actions
I don’t know if the play calling was terrible. I think the Bills ASSUMED that the Jets would expect all the inside screens that they’d been using to great effect in previous weeks… so they tried other strategies. The one or two times they DID try the inside screens, they worked great. Had they stuck to what had been working, and forced the Jets to prove they could stop it, they probably would’ve done much better. A screen game makes those “amazing” cornerbacks an afterthought in the game.
I would have liked more screens too
But not sure they would have made a huge difference. Our offense just isn’t good enough to beat the Jets’ D at this point.
~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."
I thought the same thing
but still they should have tried to run their good plays and execute them…. sigh
The Enigma continues
That’s going to be my new nickname for CJ – the enigma. .
I don’t remember him getting any targets in the passing game yesterday and he only received the carries when Jackson was banged upI understand that to be a true enigma, you have to show more than 2-3 flashes of brilliance and he may have only shown that many in 24 games total so far, but this guy has to get more touches. Success breeds confidence and he is in need of both right now. You don’t get that w/ 2-3 touches per game. He seems like a good kid that works hard and has a good attitude but man it’s frustrating to see such lack of utilization/production. The cold and windy games are coming. If we can’t pound the rock and get some TEs involved when we need to against above average D’s (and I’ll put the Dolphins in that category too) then we go 8-8 this year.
by AlwaysaBillinPhilly on Nov 7, 2011 12:17 PM EST up reply actions
Agree on all except the receiver
I’m not sure having another great deep threat helps. Revis covers Johnson, and Cromartie covers the new deep threat. Wilson covers Nelson. Nothing changes. Big deep threat like Vincent Jackson and Randy Moss have laid eggs against the Jets. But the big, Witten-type TE causes a lot of issues for their defense, because their safeties are better at blitzing than covering.
I’d be open to getting both. I’d rather see John Carlson come to town, or draft Tyler Eifurt, than a receiver. If they can pull of both, the better.
I agree with everything else you said.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
We need the WR for competing against other teams
The plan this year was to use Easley as the other deep threat, but he ended up on IR. I think Donald Jones can be very valuable, but not as the #2 WR.
Yes
But I think Buffalo needs a pass catching TE more than a receiver, though they do need both. I wouldn’t break the bank on Vincent Jackson or draft a WR in the first round. I’d support paying for Carlson or drafting Tyler Eifurt or Michael Egnew. Nix’s MO is getting value in the mid-rounds at receiver. Moye is that type.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
doesn't matter who you have going deep if Fitz can't get him the ball
Time to change your sig back to QB?
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
The Jets are built to beat a team like Buffalo. Until Buffalo can get a TE capable of working their interior zones, it won’t matter who is at QB. Even Brady and Manning struggle against this team.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
see: Scott Chandler
i blame Chan and the system for not utilizing packages that maximize his mismatch on LBs and safeties. Unless being 3-10 inches taller than the opponent isn’t an advantage.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 7, 2011 10:02 PM EST up reply actions
Read below
My opinion on him is there in response to a post by you.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
They barely used Chandler and when they did he succeeded, I think they need to consider him part of the team and actually use him more. I’m not saying that I wouldn’t like a Finley or Davis type of TE but it won’t make a difference until Chan actually calls the plays in. There was no reason not to throw more to Chandler, he was extremely productive when they called his number – they just didn’t call it often enough!
Rebuilding a team properly takes time and patience
well said ...rec'd
"Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu
If you ask a question you don't want an answer to, expect an answer you don't want to hear.
Play calling I felt was a definite bad for the Bills, I understand the Jets made it difficult
But Chan killed his team with that stupid dive out of the challeneg, the Jets had everyone including the kitchen sink up on the line. Chan or Fitz need to make sure there is an option to get the heck out of that type of situation. The Bills D I felt gave a better than good effort against a team that wanted to dominate them. But I agree DJ, we need to make our team into something that can beat the Jets, once we do that, we can start being serious about playoff talk.
Goose22- "I have a quick first step, I’m so good just go an ask my rep
I look like Tarzan but play like Jane" Aaron May(have)bin
That scenario was calling for a shuffle pass, or even a run by Fitz to the edge.
"Go check on the ribs!"
by TheAfghanTwilight on Nov 7, 2011 11:35 AM EST up reply actions
I understand him using the challenge there (hey, free first down, the timeout isn’t a big deal)… but in some way, it may have given his team the impression that he didn’t think they could get 1 inch. I also don’t understand why Fitzpatrick didn’t just sneak for it!!!
Overall, I felt like Gailey over-thought everything. Instead of running plays that had been successful all year, he tried other stuff, thinking “the Jets will have counters for all my regular stuff.” In reality, the few times they ran plays that had been successful throughout the year, they worked.
Exactly. He might have been thinking he wanted a timeout anyway, in which case, might as well throw the challenge. What the Jets did on D wasn’t simply straight up man, they were taking chances on underneath routes and good play-calling should be able to test that. We didnt get there.
I have low expectations. But high hopes.
by greysquirrel on Nov 7, 2011 12:40 PM EST up reply actions
I think Ed Hochuli should be one of the 3 bad things in the game. I think it had a chance of being a close game, but 2 gifts of PI calls near the endzone led to 2 touchdowns, and one ridiculously obvious offensive PI by Burress on McKelvin led to a catch at the 1 yd line – another TD. Take away those 3 calls, and I’m guessing 2 FGs instead of 3 TDs would have been the outcome.
That being said, I still think the Bills were outplayed. I just think that without gifts from the refs, they might have had a chance to stay in the game, and perhaps pull something out of their hat in the 4th quarter.
I agree those were bad calls
But the Bills were outplayed. However, without those PI calls that Jets offense doesnt look as good.
Chan Gailey’s offense had more success running with tight ends on the field, particularly when Lee Smith and Scott Chandler played together. Nix and Gailey need to re-think this position. Chandler has been good and Smith holds promise, but both are probably better reserves than starters.
I am confused…. Does this mean that because we did better with those guys on the field, they aren’t good enough? I mean, last time I checked (two seconds ago) CHANDLER LEADS THE LEAGUE in TDs for a TE. I don’t understand how this means that he isn’t a starting caliber TE, or that he should be a reserve. That makes ZERO sense to me. I realize you are speaking to “the run game” but there are plenty of NFL offenses that feature a pass catching TE who is only ok or average in run fits… but the fact they can score in the redzone or that they can get that clutch third down reception, surely offsets the fact that they may not offset an ineffective lines’ inability of blocking all by themselves. i don’t know what kind of production you expect from a TE, but I personally am MORE than happy with a league leading 6 TD’s from a free agent. Seems as though your expectations are for a TE to be some sort of unstoppable superhero. With that kind of view, you are going to be disappointed with every single tight end between now and the end of time. IMO.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
I am confused…. Does this mean that because we did better with those guys on the field, they aren’t good enough?
yup – that statement confused the hell outta me too.
And you want your pass catchers out there when we’re running so when we play action he’ll be left alone. Chandler is in no way shape or form an issue for this ball club and should just be on the field more. He’s tenacious as a blocker, maybe not the greatest, but he’s certainly willing.
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:39 PM EST up reply actions
I wasn't overly amazed by smith
but chandler is obviously one of the best TEs in football right now. I don’t hear Saints fans complaining that Jimmy Graham isn’t an amazing blocker. There is only one Jason Witten, and TE’s like Jimmy Graham, or Gresham, or Vernon Davis weren’t drafted to be blockers. We didn’t even draft our TE, and yet he leads the league in expected production. I don’t understand what Der Jaeger is looking for. Confusing.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
oh
and he is tied with Gronkowski, who needed 44 receptions for those 6 TDs, to Chandler’s 18. So I agree with you: we just need him on the field even more. we can change our identity some, and still have that spread offense to bail us out- but once the snow flies, we better be able to run the ball. and to do so from some I-formation, or similar packages, might be a plan that we should have already been working on implementing.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
we just need him on the field even more
especially since HE’S BIGGER THAN GRONKWOSKI!!! He’ll hold up better to the shots you take in the middle of the field. why we don’t use him more is unsettling
by J2 on Nov 7, 2011 2:51 PM EST up reply actions
i like the caussin promotion.
hopefully we see more “big” formation (2te) sets due to the added depth. i realize spreading the defense creates lanes for fred, and can get a “hat on a hat” but i don’t see why we wouldn’t implement strong I, weak I, standard I formations, along with some 2 or 3 te sets in short yardage. we have been very, very weak in short yardage, and i believe that additional strong blocking could be beneficial if we ever tried, or developed those types of plays.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
Chandler has caught 18 passes all season. That’s good for 28th in the league among tight ends. Just because he’s big and can score in the red zone doesn’t make him starting calibur. Butch Rolle used to catch a ton of red zone touchdowns, but he was never better than the third tight end on the roster.
Compare that to a player Buffalo can acquire in the off-season: John Carlson. Carlson is 6-5/250 and a good in-line blocker. He’s out for the season with a hurt shoulder, and didn’t put up big stats with the Seattle QB carousel in 2010. With Hasselbeck playing on 2008, he caught 55 passes as a rookie for 5 TD’s, and came back the next year with 51 catches and 7 TD’s.
Carlson’s a better blocker than Chandler, and Chandler’s on track to catch 36 passes in a career year this season. I like Chandler, but he’s a sub-package guy in my opinion. Carlson as the starter, with Smith as the second blocker for two TE sets, and Chandler as a situational reserve is about the right mix.
Carlson is far from a super hero. He’s a good blocker and a good receiver that could give a team like the Jets fits.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Nov 7, 2011 10:04 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
i am also a Carlson fan. I know of a lot of TEs who have potential for success. I also think, that it is unfair to compare receptions as relative to production, seeing as we feature NO RUN FORMATIONS. we are a spread first offense, and that rarely means a TE on the field. that also means when you look at a west coast style offense that runs “base” sets that feature 2 wr 1 te 2 rb or 3 wr 1 te 1 rb sets, that those guys are getting far more opportunities for production. stats are a product of the system, and the circumstance, and so it is often unfair to compare two different guys, who have different use or role in a system. basically, apart from a direct comparison on the same team, at the same time… i can’t put much stock in that. what i see is 3 x the td production when compared to gronkowski, the TE with the same number of TDs this season as Chandler. but he is utilized MORE in the offense, but has the same number of scores. This means that we could be missing out on opportunities for additional production out of chandler, simply because we don’t run in “big” (heavy) set like the pats are (obviously to take advantage of Hernandez and Gronk both)
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 7, 2011 10:11 PM EST up reply actions
rather than 3x the production
let me rephrase as the same production in roughly a third of the attempts.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 7, 2011 10:12 PM EST up reply actions
So, you think Chandler is that good?
And, by your logic, if we just put him on the field more, he’d produce more TD’s?
I don’t buy that at all.
Chandler benefits from the spread. He takes advantage of a defense covering three-four other receivers. He gets the best coverage match ups. A guy like Carlson would produce equally or better, and he’s a better blocker.
I also don’t buy your Chandler-Gronkowski comparison. You discount stats due to system, then rely on them for this comparison. Gronkowski is a far better athlete than Chandler, and a better blocker. He plays in an offense where Brady throws to everyone if they’re open. So that works against him.
My argument from the top is that Buffalo should go two-TE versus the Jets since they had success with it. Bringing in a guy like Carlson doesn’t detract from that or make it more confusing. Nor does saying that Chandler is a reserve, but that he should play in two TE sets. In two TE sets, the reserve TE plays.
I just don’t think Chandler is the kind of tight end that can make teams pay in the middle of the field. I think Carlson is. Maybe the team gets lucky and Chandler becomes that guy. I’d welcome being wrong if it benefits the team. I just don’t see it.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
i think he is good enough, and can get even better. I followed him when he was in dallas, and though it was only preseason, he was productive in their system. so it isn’t like i am just making a random assumption. i have already seen him assimilate two different style systems in a short career, and has proven to not only be a matchup problem, but capable at recognizing coverages, and running routes that allow him to get open. If you don’t see the same, i can’t help you there.
the matchup is the same for a TE regardless of how many WRs are out there. so in that, i disagree with you. If you think you can cover him with a safety or a corner, you will probably be disappointed. and he has proven he can run with LBs, and use body position to get open. i can agree that in focusing their attention on the spread, he can take advantage of open seams. in that regard, he is maximizing his potential in the current system. He is being used most closely to Jimmy Graham in New Orleans.
I discount direct comparison based on system, and then provide you with an explanation as to why. One could argue that if Chandler were plugged into the Pats’ offense in RG’s spot… that he could produce just as well or better, as he is already scoring as often, in a different system that has him on the field less. It is equally possible that his additional plays could dilute his effectiveness and he would have similar stats as RG- such as more receptions and yardage, without increasing scores… and i can’t help but wonder if that would make him viable to you, or if he would need to be in the TOP 10 of each category to be good enough to you.
I don’t see any reason to assume Carlson would/could/will have more success in a two TE set here than Chandler would. This really only comes across as an obvious preference (bias?) to Carlson over Chandler. I don’t know that I understand, or can support this line of thinking. Again we would be asking a guy to assimilate a new system, and be productive, and there is certainly no guarantee of this in the NFL.
I think Chandler has shown he can impact a team in most any area of the field. he has ripped big gains in the middle whether in our own territory, or in the redzone. he has scored from outside the redzone, in the middle of the endzone, and in the corner of the endzone. He has effectively run screens, as well as blocked for screens, and in line. the thing we haven’t even seen attempted really is asking him to consistently take advantage of the short middle after the WRs clear out the underneath, though he has shown capable of this, albeit in limited fashion, as well. There isn’t really much else I can say to “convince” you, other than maybe suggest you go back and look at the bulk of plays where he is featured, and see how he produces. If the NFL is a “what have you done for me lately” league: his resume says “lead the league in scores from my position, and compare to the greatest TEs this team has ever known…. AT THE MIDPOINT of the season.” That is good enough for me. Doesn’t have to be for you. I just disagree with your assessment, particularly the blatant contradiction in the section I highlighted above.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 7, 2011 10:48 PM EST up reply actions
I couldn’t agree more – there is no reason to not use Chandler more. Has he shown that he can’t be effective when out on the field? NO – not even close.
His miss use is Chan’s fault and one that needs correcting – he needs to see the field more
by J2 on Nov 8, 2011 8:26 AM EST up reply actions
Just because I don't see Chandler in the same light doesn't mean that I need help
It means that I don’t think he’s as talented as Gronkowski or even Carlson.
The match-ups change depending on a lot of factors. When Buffalo goes spread, Chandler sees a lot of linebacker coverage because the safeties have to worry about three receivers. That’s a lot different than Gronkowski. The Pats play 2 TE’s and 2 WR a lot, meaning that Gronkowski is playing against a base defense, with a linebacker at the line and a safety in coverage. He matched up with Wilson most of the game against Buffalo. It’s not the same.
I do not think Chandler can do what Gronkowski can. Gronkowski is a better all around athlete. There’s probably very few fans or experts that would take Chandler over Gronkowski. Chandler could catch 20 TD’s and I’d still take Gronkowski over him based on talent.
I also think Carlson is a more talented athlete. Until Chandler receives focused attention from a defense and still produces, I’ll view him as an overachiever that’s best as a reserve.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Really if chandler produced 120 points all by himself in one season. You would still rather have the other player. Just a little craziness in that imo.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 8, 2011 12:14 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
It's exaggeration for effect.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
The match-ups change depending on a lot of factors. When Buffalo goes spread, Chandler sees a lot of linebacker coverage because the safeties have to worry about three receivers.
so you are saying there is a time when Chandler or any tight end is on the field and being covered by someone other than a safety, a LB, or a corner? By who? a DE or DT? Chandler and most TEs are mismatches for most defenders. that is what makes them a valuable part of the team. that and the ability to help in pass protection, or being a big outlet target when protection fails. If you don’t agree, i would gladly listen to the circumstance that you feel the guy with 3-10 inches on a defender is somehow now creating a mismatch. Gronk scored twice on george before he managed the pick, right? so i guess the matchup was good, except for when george recognized and made a play. So, in any matchup advantage, the play can still be made by the defender. i would never argue otherwise. but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t take advantage of mismatches.
Chandler could catch 20 TD’s and I’d still take Gronkowski over him based on talent.
This statement is literally insane. You are suggesting the guy who scores 20 TDs is a lesser talent? How? Would you not want Steve Johnson on your team, if he scored 20 TDs, but wasn’t “an excellent blocker”? That is crazy to me, and probably very few fans or experts would agree with you assessment.
It is obvious that you have a man crush on Carlson. That is understandable. I wanted Buffalo to draft him when he came out, as I have been calling for a TE for the past 5 seasons at least. You are welcome to your opinion. In fact, everyone is entitled to their own wrong opinion. Doesn’t make it the end all, be all. Just means sometimes people are wrong. Perhaps I am wrong. But for now, the stats benefit my point of view, in my (and many fantasy owners and Buffalo fans’) opinion.
BTW- John Carlson in four years of college attained 100 receptions for 1093 yards, a 10.9 yard average catch, and 8 TDs. Subsequently, Chandler had 117 receptions, for 1467 yards, a 12.5 yard average catch, and 10 TDs…. In just three seasons.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
somehow *not creating a mismatch.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
You're missing the point on the match-ups
Defenses can play base defense against the Pats and match-up. New England regularly plays Branch, Welker, Gronkowski, Hernandez, and a back. New England is so hard to stop because the defense, unless it’s like the Giants with a bunch of rushers, doesn’t have an ideal set to play. If they play 4-3 or 3-4, a linebacker is a mismatch versus Gronkowski. If the team plays a nickel package, New England will run. So Gronkowski is seeing linebackers, who pass him off to safeties.
Teams play Buffalo’s offense is various passing defenses with extra defensive backs. Those defensive backs have 3, and sometimes 4, receivers to cover. Chandler isn’t getting jammed at the line because Jackson is a threat to run. The safeties are mostly worried about the receivers. Chandler is coming open against coverage that isn’t focused on him and isn’t dedicating backs to cover him.
Proof: check Chandler’s touchdown vs. New England where he came open on the right side of the offense. The Patriot backs focused on the two receivers. Chandler ran three yards, turned around, and was wide open. He’s the least threatening of the Buffalo receivers.
I have no crush on Carlson. He’s more talented than Chandler. That’s my view on this. I don’t base this on fantasy stats. He’s physically more talented. He’s a better blocker, he’s only two inches shorter, and he’s faster. He’s also had two seasons of production at the pro level.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
and you are being condescending for no reason.
i am missing nothing. spreading the defense is the reason ANY OF OUR PLAYERS ARE OPEN. it is a technique that gailey is choosing to use. i am saying that if we ran more running formations, he would have the same matchups that you discuss or point out, and yet- he still has a size advantage.
I have no crush on Carlson. He’s more talented than Chandler. That’s my view on this.
so what i guess i am saying is you are inferring your opinion that Carlson is better, even though, there isn’t exactly ample evidence for this opinion. i can’t say you are definitively wrong, any more than you can say that i am definitively wrong. ultimately it comes down to two opposing views. I think Chandler is effective enough to be a competitor at this level. You do not. Unfortunately for you- Buddy Nix and Chan Gailey agree with me, and I value their opinions more. They are the ones who evaluate NFL talent for a living. I am happy to let you be happy with your opinion. (side note: since the seahawks have so many other weapons that are used and all. i mean, surely Carlson hasn’t benefited from the fact that he is the best target on the team the last 2 seasons.)
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
and you are being condescending for no reason.
Argument by ad hominem is a fallacy. If you can’t convince me of your point, and I’m being reasonable (which I’ve demonstrated in general over the course of the past 30 months), then it’s not the receiver of informations fault.
spreading the defense is the reason ANY OF OUR PLAYERS ARE OPEN.
You’re generalizing. This isn’t true. Cincinnati and both New York’s shut down Buffalo’s spread offense for periods of time. The spread gives the receivers favorable match-ups, but it’s on the receiver to read the defense and get open. It’s Gailey’s “beat the man” argument. If this were true, Buffalo’s receivers would be consistently open. They aren’t.
i am saying that if we ran more running formations, he would have the same matchups that you discuss or point out, and yet- he still has a size advantage.
Chandler would still have his size advantage, but the defense would be different. With Buffalo playing the Jets, who mostly ran a 2-4-5 against Buffalo, Chandler didn’t get jammed at the line, and ran routes against linebackers. If Buffalo went into a more traditional set, like a 2 TE offense with Smith in the game, the Jets would counter with their base 3-4. In the 3-4, Chandler’s going to get jammed off his route (which we saw happen to Keller on Sanchez’s interception). Chandler’s not thick enough like Witten to effectively stay on time in his route while being jammed. After beating the jam, Chandler would face safety coverage, like Witten, Gronkowski, etc. It’s bracket coverage. Chandler has to stay on time and beat two players.
He’s has to do none of this against a nickel or another passing defensive variation.
so what i guess i am saying is you are inferring your opinion that Carlson is better, even though, there isn’t exactly ample evidence for this opinion
Carlson tested better in the draft process. He’s faster running in a straight line, and he’s a better change of direction athlete than Chandler, mostly because it’s hard for someone as large as Chandler to cut quickly.
Carlson played in a horizontal passing offense in Seattle that placed a ton of emphasis on the tight end working the short zones. He responded with over 100 receptions in his first two seasons. Yes, some of that comes from the system, and playing with a good quarterback. A good deal of that comes from Carlson’s talent. Carlson’s also a better blocker and can be both an effective in-line blocker and a flex receiver. Chandler isn’t really good at either. He’s best as a move tight end where he can get good run fits. That’s partially why I think he’s a reserve.
I think Chandler is effective enough to be a competitor at this level. You do not.
Did I ever say this? At the top, I said this:
I like Chandler, but he’s a sub-package guy in my opinion.
Which means I do think he’s effective enough to be a competitor in the NFL.
Unfortunately for you- Buddy Nix and Chan Gailey agree with me, and I value their opinions more
This is an appeal to authority. You cannot prove that Buddy Nix or Chan Gailey actually agree with anything that you’ve said. Chandler is the Buffalo starting tight end. He’s been on the team for one draft and one very short free agent period / training camp cut period. During that time, Buffalo added Lee Smith, someone Nix alluded to wanting to draft in the mid-rounds. There is zero proof that if another better option was available, that Buffalo wouldn’t make an move at the position. The best you or anyone knows is that right now, Chandler is the best tight end on the roster, evidenced by the fact that he is starting.
side note: since the seahawks have so many other weapons that are used and all. i mean, surely Carlson hasn’t benefited from the fact that he is the best target on the team the last 2 seasons.
Carlson is out for the season.
In his rookie season in 2008, Hasselbeck only played seven games, and Seneca Wallace played the majority of the snaps. Carlson, as a rookie, led the team with 55 catches. The next season, however, Hasselbeck played 14 games. TJ Houshmandzadeh caught 79 passes, and Nate Burleson caught 63 passes. Carlson caught 51. In 2010, the Seattle offense went a different direction, with Mike Williams, Deon Branch, and Justin Forsett catching more passes than Carlson, who caught 31 balls.
So he’s excelled as a rookie, as the focal point of the passing offense with an average NFL QB. He’s also excelled with a good quarterback when he was the third option. Even in his down year, 2010, he put up comparable reception totals to Chandler this season.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
by Der Jaeger on Nov 8, 2011 9:14 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Argument by ad hominem is a fallacy.
“The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.”
At no point did I claim that your logic was unreasonable. But accusing me of missing your point, is an attempt at invalidating my own view, and is in no way a confirmation of yours. Actually, I kinda feel this is the pot calling the kettle black. You also have provided no clear evidence as to why I need to believe or support your perception (Carlson is a superior talent) in the matter.
You’re generalizing. This isn’t true. Cincinnati and both New York’s shut down Buffalo’s spread offense for periods of time. The spread gives the receivers favorable match-ups, but it’s on the receiver to read the defense and get open. It’s Gailey’s "beat the man" argument. If this were true, Buffalo’s receivers would be consistently open. They aren’t.
In general, it is true. The usage of spread formation is obviously to spread the defense vertically, as well as horizontally. The spread doesn’t need to provide the favorable match up in this case, as I have already simply stated that I feel his size creates the mismatch to any defender. I was simply adding that the philosophy of the system is to allow exactly what you said: a man on man matchup where your man has an opportunity to beat the defender. This doesn’t invalidate Chandler’s size advantage. If anything, it confirms the advantage. Also, you have added another assumption to your argument: that all buffalo receivers are inherently better than their defensive counterparts. Your claim that they would be “consistently open” is not actually a fact, even if you would like to pass it off as one.
I like Chandler, but he’s a sub-package guy in my opinion.
Which means I do think he’s effective enough to be a competitor in the NFL.
To clarify, my intention was a starting caliber competitor, rather than a reserve, as that was the matter of contention originally. your choice for simply disregarding the original argument can allow for this kind of backpedaling.
This is an appeal to authority. You cannot prove that Buddy Nix or Chan Gailey actually agree with anything that you’ve said.
I disagree. Nix drafted him out of Iowa in 2007, while he was still with the Chargers. Chan has made him the starting TE, and has utilized him regularly in the offense. One week of facing one of the toughest defenses in the NFL doesn’t erase the previous 7 weeks of production. I don’t see why you can’t accept that he produces results, regardless of the specific circumstances they may occur under. Understanding and taking advantage of mismatch of personnel is the primary function of NFL coaching staffs. Adding reserve TEs on a team devoid of TE talent doesn’t mean that they haven’t endorsed their starter by awarding him a starting role, allowing him opportunity for production, or the fact that he has maximized those opportunities by being productive.
The best you or anyone knows is that right now, Chandler is the best tight end on the roster, evidenced by the fact that he is starting.
Negative. Just because you don’t have a personal connection to the staff, doesn’t mean that no one in the world does. You are simply making an assumption, and also have no evidence to support this claim. The fact is, at very least, Chan and Buddy know whether or not an “upgrade of the position” is desired or necessary; this is independent of how you feel about the situation. Normally I try not to argue on terms of technicality, as obviously it isn’t very productive, and generally speaking, is upsetting to the person who feels as though the point of the discussion is being overlooked, or sidestepped, solely in order to be “correct”.
I am going to choose to disregard your insistent passion for Carlson. I feel as though the comparison is moot. They are both on different teams, with different talents, from different draft classes, with different evaluations, and regardless of draft position or any other point you would like to make, until he were to become a Buffalo Bills, there is no way to translate his supposed success in this time and place and circumstance. To disagree with this, would only further show how opinionated you are on the topic. Personally, as I already advocated, I too am a fan of the guy. But that doesn’t mean that because there are other talented TEs in the league, that Chandler isn’t the player I have described, as it pertains to my perspective.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 8, 2011 10:41 PM EST up reply actions
additionally
i forgot to address this above.
After beating the jam, Chandler would face safety coverage, like Witten, Gronkowski, etc. It’s bracket coverage. Chandler has to stay on time and beat two players.
He’s has to do none of this against a nickel or another passing defensive variation.
Not having to do it (or having yet done it, should that have been your point), and not being capable of doing it, certainly aren’t the same thing.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 8, 2011 10:46 PM EST up reply actions
True
But Carlson has proven an ability, where Chandler has not, mostly due to scheme. Given the other facts (Carlson has been a productive leading receiver and a third receiver, better in-line blocker), a “might be able to” vs. a “can do” is an easy choice.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Carlson has been a productive leading receiver and a third receiver, better in-line blocker
again, i will revert to the fact that we can’t say Chandler is incapable or even less able. For all you and I know, he has not been asked, or will not be asked, to have this role.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
by ThaRealTruth on Nov 9, 2011 12:51 PM EST up reply actions
additionally
you are attempting to relay opinion as fact. Aside from a shared opinion by an ultimate authority (which doesn’t really exist) then it is impossible to state that Carlson is a “better in-line blocker” as a fact, unless there was evidence to support this. In order to validate this, too many variables would need to be eliminated: For example, as I have already mentioned, we would need a direct comparison of these skills in a controlled environment, such as a mini-camp/game situation (what have you) where they have the same fundamental components surrounding them, and are being used in the same capacity, which is not the case here.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
If you’re going to counter my arguments, don’t use wikipedia. It’s poor form. That’s not what ad hominem means. An ad hominem argument in latin means “to the man.” An ad hominem argument argues against the man instead of the argument. You pointed to a perceived condescending attitude, instead of the argument.
Also, you have added another assumption to your argument: that all buffalo receivers are inherently better than their defensive counterparts. Your claim that they would be "consistently open" is not actually a fact, even if you would like to pass it off as one.
I never said that Buffalo receivers are inherently better than the man covering them. Those are your words. I said that Gailey’s spread puts receivers favorable match-ups. That’s not the same.
You said spreading the defense is the reason ANY OF OUR PLAYERS ARE OPEN Are you backing away from that? By your exact words, the spread formation and the favorable match-ups it creates are the reason Buffalo receivers are open, and by extension, the reason Chandler is open.
To clarify, my intention was a starting caliber competitor, rather than a reserve, as that was the matter of contention originally. your choice for simply disregarding the original argument can allow for this kind of backpedaling
This is weak. I disregarded nothing in your original argument. I used your exact words in part of my argument, when you tried to put me onto the path of stating that Chandler isn’t an NFL level competition. You can’t clarify and then say I’m backpedaling. Either stick by your statements as they stand, or change them as the argument goes along. Clarifying your position and then blaming me for ignoring what you meant to say isn’t backpedaling from my position, as you’re trying to frame it.
Nix did draft Chandler. But that doesn’t mean that Nix or Gailey view Chandler as the best option at TE for this team. They may view him as the best option for this team right now. Chandler has been productive, but he’s 28th in the league in catches among tight ends. Those are hardly the numbers that would convince anyone that he’s a red-chip or even purple-chip starting NFL tight end.
I am going to choose to disregard your insistent passion for Carlson.
To disagree with this, would only further show how opinionated you are on the topic.
More arguments against me instead of my argument. I’ve shown no special passion for Carlson. I’ve pointed to facts regarding Carlson’s speed, and facts regarding his production. You’re not disregarding my passion. You’re disregarding the facts that I’ve laid out because they are contrary to your argument. You’re then arguing that I’m somehow emotionally tied to a Seattle tight end that’s on injured reserve.
I’m going to continue to point out every false argument you make so long as you keep putting words into my mouth and using a steady stream of ad hominem arguments.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
If you’re going to counter my arguments, don’t use wikipedia. It’s poor form.
That particular quote is referenced, so you can just imagine that I own the book. IN FACT:
Ad hominem circumstantial constitutes an attack on the bias of a source.
which is basically what you are doing here. So, if you insist on employing this mentality, you too are bound to its rules.
I never said that Buffalo receivers are inherently better than the man covering them. Those are your words. I said that Gailey’s spread puts receivers favorable match-ups. That’s not the same.
no, you said:
If this were true, Buffalo’s receivers would be consistently open. They aren’t.
You said spreading the defense is the reason ANY OF OUR PLAYERS ARE OPEN Are you backing away from that? By your exact words, the spread formation and the favorable match-ups it creates are the reason Buffalo receivers are open, and by extension, the reason Chandler is open.
This would be true, if and only if, we are classifying Chandler as a receiver. I personally was recognizing his role as being all inclusive, as most TEs are. Additionally, what i said, and meant, is that our players are a product of the system, and our Head Coach’s philosophy.
You can’t clarify and then say I’m backpedaling. Either stick by your statements as they stand, or change them as the argument goes along. Clarifying your position and then blaming me for ignoring what you meant to say isn’t backpedaling from my position, as you’re trying to frame it.
The original matter in question was whether or not he was to be used in a reserve role, or a starting role. My view had already been clarified. i was simply attempting to point out, that you seem to have disregarded the fundamental purpose of the discussion, as it had begun. As far as it being “weak”, that is simply your perception. I feel it is valid.
Nix did draft Chandler. But that doesn’t mean that Nix or Gailey view Chandler as the best option at TE for this team.
Evidence? Did they pursue additional options? Did we seek a trade? Were there not free agents (Zach Miller?) or trade bait (Greg Olsen)? He is starting. He is the best option for TE ON this team. That matter surely, can’t be in contention.
Chandler has been productive, but he’s 28th in the league in catches among tight ends.
you keep reverting to this point, which i have addressed numerous times. production isn’t simply determined by number of total catches, any more than it is solely about touchdowns. However, ask any fan, any coach, any player and they will agree that the most important statistic is WINS, and the next important is SCORING.
I’ve shown no special passion for Carlson. I’ve pointed to facts regarding Carlson’s speed, and facts regarding his production.
And yet, you have not offered any additional examples, and are choosing to disregard my facts laid out about chandler, because they are contrary to YOUR argument. Again, the pot calling the kettle black.
At no point have I intentionally “put words into your mouth”. I am simply attempting to fully understand your argument, and offering my counter position. You are just as guilty of attempting to debunk my view, with ad hominem argument as well. In fact, at no point in this discussion have I heard anything even closely resembling an argument against Chandler. I am simply reading a “pro- Carlson” retort to each and every point that I make. Obviously, this is an exercise in futility, and not worth either of our time. Spare me the further condescending remark… and when Chandler is the starter in years to come, I will gladly accept your apology. Should we pursue Carlson, or maybe even ANY other “starter at TE” then, I can concede that your assessment was accurate. Otherwise, I will appeal to the authority of our staff, as much as I like, because they dictate the team that we watch and love, period.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
By your exact words, the spread formation and the favorable match-ups it creates are the reason Buffalo receivers are open, and by extension, the reason Chandler is open.
Again, you are choosing to disregard the fact that I have over and again pointed out that it is Chandler’s size that creates the mismatch. Formation was your argument, and if we are going the path of “by extension” then Chandler is a product of the system as much as any receiver is.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
Appeal to authority
This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject.
So you don’t believe that Chan Gailey or Buddy Nix are legitimate authority? I guess I just hold them in high regard for no reason.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
I’ve pointed to facts regarding Carlson’s speed, and facts regarding his production.
and you have intermingled these with opinion, which you inherently are attempting to pass off as facts. IE: Carlson has these statistics, ergo he is a better blocker. Can you cite some blocking stat comparisons for me? So that I can better understand why this is a fact, and not an opinion?
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
until the Bills use Chandler more like the Patriots do with Gronk I cannot do anything but agree with you. He hasn’t been asked to do those things so that means that he can’t?
I’d love to see more packages with him in tight – that will make our offense more versatile. He has shown nothing that suggests he cannot do what Gronk because he hasn’t been asked to do it.
using Chandler more would make our offense more versatile and less reliant on Fred while allowing defenses to be more confused. I’m confused as to why we don’t use him more – personally.
and who the hell cares about Carlson or Gronk anyways? They shouldn’t matter at all in this discussion because we’re talking about the Bills and chandler and how we should use our own players more wisely.
by J2 on Nov 9, 2011 2:26 PM EST up reply actions
using Chandler more would make our offense more versatile and less reliant on Fred while allowing defenses to be more confused. I’m confused as to why we don’t use him more – personally.
I can’t understand not utilizing 1 or more TEs to assist with blocking, when we have 2 backs who have already proven an ability to press the edge.
and who the hell cares about Carlson or Gronk anyways? They shouldn’t matter at all in this discussion because we’re talking about the Bills and chandler and how we should use our own players more wisely.
to be fair, there will always be a need for comparison, as it provides point of reference. However, that being said, I agree with you wholeheartedly. The discussion was about Scott Chandler and his viability as a starting caliber TE, versus his apparent lack of sufficient talent to be more than a reserve. How we got off on the Carlson/Gronk tangent is really just an indication of us diverging from the original discussion.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
right – the diverging completely ruined the conversation. the conversation was that Chandler isn’t used as much as he should be – which is accurate.
Not using Chandler because the Bills run a spread isn’t Chandler’s issue – it’s Chan’s – he needs to be more versatile and use weapons like Chandler more and make our offense more versatile – which will in turn make us less predictable which in turn should make our offense more successful.
yes – comparisons are needed but when they detract from the original discussion they’re a distraction.
by J2 on Nov 9, 2011 3:06 PM EST up reply actions
agree on all points
and appreciate your ability to understand/support my perspective. I am not going to try and say that there is no guy in the world who might be better, but in no means does this detract from Chandler’s demonstration of capability in the role he is being asked to assume.
i realize that Chandler ranks between 25 and 40 in almost every major category, not including TD production. But when we don’t feature TE based formations, it is difficult, if not impossible, to assess his ability to fit that role. Conversely, another player’s production on another team doesn’t dictate ANYTHING about SC’s production.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
Not using Chandler because the Bills run a spread isn’t Chandler’s issue – it’s Chan’s – he needs to be more versatile and use weapons like Chandler more and make our offense more versatile – which will in turn make us less predictable which in turn should make our offense more successful.
this is perfect. i can find no fault with this logic.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
We're getting nowhere
I don’t know what book you’re referencing, but that’s not what ad hominem means. Nor does appeal to authority mean what you say it means either. Appeal to authority means you back your argument by claiming an authority takes your stance. Which you can’t prove.
You have puts words into my mouth. You have disregarding my facts, or discounted them, while stating that I’ve discounted yours, which I haven’t. You’ve claimed that I have some sort of emotional tie to my argument, which I don’t.
You won’t receive an apology. I am debunking your views. That’s what people do in an argument.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
Nice
Sir you know your shall I say… Stuff!? Go Bill’s! Careful of the Jaeger!
by buffalobacker on Nov 9, 2011 12:26 AM EST up reply actions
Arguing against PhD's does have it's advantages
I think I’ve gotten beat up for using every one of the 42 commonly recognized fallacies.
Starting the official Buffalo "Draft a Pass Rusher in the First Round in 2012" campaign.
conceivable then, that you are employing similar tactics now.
I don’t mean this as a dig. I am simply trying to point out that as much as you want to attack the fundamentals of my perspective, causing them to be invalid, you are employing the same methods that you are accusing me of, to do so.
We can agree on one thing though… I support your campaign… we need a pass rusher.
ABAYARDE IS NOSTRADAMUS JUST WATCH WE WILL NOT YIEALD TO NOBODY YOUR SOUL WE WILL TAKE
exactly how i feel.
But we need a big fast outside receiver, not so much a TE. Donald Jones is not good enough, not tall enough or fast enough or strong enough. That is our #2 need IMO, behind OLB, but if there is a good WR available in the first round on our pick, Floyd, Jeffery, Blackmon, and a couple more. Also we NEED to use SPILLER, when he gets the ball everyone sees his quickness and ability. Especially with a defense like the jets or the Bengals he can be very effective.
Fitzmagic
Dwight jones wr UNC is a guy to keep an eye on.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 7:08 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
What it comes down to is the same as every year with this squad. They need a truckfull of talented players to be relevant long term and are years off from getting close to that.
Hi, I'm Jim Kelly for the Mancuso Family of Dealerships.
by captainStros on Nov 7, 2011 7:22 PM EST via mobile reply actions
The only point I would disagree on is Stevie being in the Bad section
I had been getting down on Stevie over the last few weeks and starting to think that he really couldn’t handle the #1 spot. Going against Revis and putting up decent numbers I would call a win for us and Stevie.
While I still doubt he will ever be an elite #1 who can take over a game, I do have faith again that he CAN win any 1 on 1 battle.
"I got no problem with 7-9 coming off of 4-12 as long as I don't buy a couch there, you got to keep moving" - Mike Schoop
Among the long list of "bad"
has to be how Mangold completely neutralized Dareus. I know Mangold is very good but I was hoping Dareus was also very good. Dareus has a long way to go before he can hold his own against the likes of Mangold.
prediction for 2011 season is 5 and 11
Dareus is a rookie and mangold man handles everyone.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 8:02 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
This.
Mangold is arguably the BEST center in football.
by NordicBillsfan on Nov 7, 2011 9:17 PM EST up reply actions
Yah only center who made the top 100.voted on play members.
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 9:36 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yah only center who made the top 100.voted on play ers
"This is a chance to shine some light on the city, They say it’s too cold. I’m going to bring some warmth to it." Marcell Dareus
by matthew62 on Nov 7, 2011 9:36 PM EST via mobile up reply actions
I agree with your analogy
The Bills need to focus on building a team to beat the Jets, not the Patriots. Despite the past 2 seasons, I still feel as though the Pats are a more dominant franchise than the Jets. I saw it in a college game this weekend (it pains me that I cannot remember which game); a 2nd year head coach knocked off a better team. In his post game interview, he mentioned “climbing the ladder” in his conference. His point was that you cannot come out swinging for the best team in your conference (or division, as it applies to the NFL) right away. First, you need to focus on routinely beating the team just above you in the pecking order; to me, this is the Jets.
Let’s face it, you cannot expect to win the AFC East a season after you go 4-12. Realistically, if you’re going to make the playoffs, it’ll be in a wild card spot. Under this logic, and using the last 3-5 years as a basis, we’re competing with the likes of the Raiders, Chiefs, Ravens, Titans and the JETS; not the Pats, Chargers, Steelers or Colts (excluding 2011). If you can take out one of these teams every once in a while, good for you, but your immediate focus needs to be beating the teams that routinely compete for the 2 wild card spots. Once you can routinely beat those teams, then focus on routinely winning your division.
That said, to beat the Jets, you need to force Sanchez to turn the ball over and control the tempo of the game by keeping our offense on the field. To me, that equates to a solid edge rusher and a TE that warrants significant attention from their defense. Then again, we (the fans) have been begging for these things for some time now….
by CPT Shawn on Nov 8, 2011 10:16 AM EST via mobile reply actions


































