Good read.

[Yasgur's Farm]

http://walterfootball.com/season2007buf.php


Offense This Year: No one's giving the Bills much of a chance. Some of ESPN's talking heads recently discussed how horrendous Buffalo's offseason was, projecting them to have one of the top five picks in the 2008 Draft. Many of the mock drafts across the internet (http://walterfootball.com/draftdata.php) have the Bills in the running for Brian Brohm, Darren McFadden, Jake Long and Calais Campbell. Everyone's doubting them. Then again, no one really talked about how hot they were at the end of the year, when they finished 5-4, scoring an average of 22.9 points per game the final seven weeks of the campaign. And that was not simply smoke and mirrors; Buffalo beat the Jets and Jaguars, and nearly knocked off the Colts, Chargers and Ravens.

[Bufftp]

Good read.

[OpIv37]

I think we're in big trouble this year- especially on D- but even I don't think we're going to be drafting in the top 5.

[Tatonka]

I think we're in big trouble this year- especially on D-

wow there is a huge shocker.. who knew..

next your going to tell me that grass is green and the sky is blue.

[OpIv37]

wow there is a huge shocker.. who knew..

next your going to tell me that grass is green and the sky is blue.

yet, somehow, every time I post something about how bad the D is going to be, people argue with me. I thought it was pretty obvious myself, but half the board feels the need to argue it.

[Tatonka]

The line, led by left tackle Jason Peters, is as biggest and meanest the NFL has to offer. Lynch will have tons of running room on the left side, as Peters and guard Derrick Dockery will pave the way. Newly signed Langston Walker is an upgrade over Terrance Pennington at right tackle, and should definitely help decrease Losman's sack total of 47.

[Pinkerton Security]

Miami Dolphins: One of the rare rivalries where the better team almost always wins. Buffalo has claimed five of the past six battles

hahahaha. The next part about the Pats I'll leave out though...:sigh:

[Wys Guy]

It could happen, but what many don't seem to get on those 7 games, and our "5 games that we lost by 3 points or less," is that we got utterly schooled on the fundamentals.

That makes the question, for those honest, can we continue to do what we're doing resulting in big plays of the variety that brought us "close but no cigar" last year, and to an extent that we continue to do it to actually win games; because frankly w/o many of those big plays and STs set ups, we would have gotten slaughtered in many of those "close games." I.e., they were really only close in score, not in performance. That's a fact whether anyone cares to see the reality there or not.

and, the other question, is will our O improve by enough to significantly alter all of that exclusively. Because few with their heads screwed on straight see our D improving and it was terrible last year.

But here's where I have difficulty with notions such as these reflecting how "close" games were;

In those 7 last games:

Average ToP of 27:16
Outrushed by an average of 166-to-90
Outgained in Net Yardage by 24 yards
15.0 1st downs per game average (on the season only two teams finished worse than that as a whole, yet we are using games like this as a gauge for tremendous success)

Also, the two games in that stretch vs. Miami and the Jets raised these averages substantially. They go down dramatically if analyzing just the other five, the "close" games.

In those other five games upon which "conclusions of improvement" are being drawn here;

We were outrushed an average of 184 to 72.
Allowed 56 more net yards
Average ToP of 26:17 (deficit of nearly 8 minutes)

with no signfiicant change in the other stats.

So there is a good basis to challenge this notion.

[B-DON]

It could happen, but what many don't seem to get on those 7 games, and our "5 games that we lost by 3 points or less," is that we got utterly schooled on the fundamentals.

That makes the question, for those honest, can we continue to do what we're doing resulting in big plays of the variety that brought us "close but no cigar" last year, and to an extent that we continue to do it to actually win games; because frankly w/o many of those big plays and STs set ups, we would have gotten slaughtered in many of those "close games." I.e., they were really only close in score, not in performance. That's a fact whether anyone cares to see the reality there or not.

and, the other question, is will our O improve by enough to significantly alter all of that exclusively. Because few with their heads screwed on straight see our D improving and it was terrible last year.

But here's where I have difficulty with notions such as these reflecting how "close" games were;

In those 7 last games:

Average ToP of 27:16
Outrushed by an average of 166-to-90
Outgained in Net Yardage by 24 yards
15.0 1st downs per game average (on the season only two teams finished worse than that as a whole, yet we are using games like this as a gauge for tremendous success)

Also, the two games in that stretch vs. Miami and the Jets raised these averages substantially. They go down dramatically if analyzing just the other five, the "close" games.

In those other five games upon which "conclusions of improvement" are being drawn here;

We were outrushed an average of 184 to 72.
Allowed 56 more net yards
Average ToP of 26:17 (deficit of nearly 8 minutes)

with no signfiicant change in the other stats.

So there is a good basis to challenge this notion.


Wow, are you serious?

[ublinkwescore]

yet, somehow, every time I post something about how bad the D is going to be, people argue with me. I thought it was pretty obvious myself, but half the board feels the need to argue it.

:rolleyes:

[Generalissimus Gibby]

I think we're in big trouble this year- especially on D- but even I don't think we're going to be drafting in the top 5.

Gotta agree with this, we are in trouble at DT and CB on D and second receiver on the Offense. However, if we can get McCargo to step it up and Youboty to look good and get output from Parish and Reed then we will surprise. I think we get something about 20.