Can we all agree? [Archive] - BillsZone.com

HHURRICANE

11-04-2007, 08:35 PM

PromoTheRobot

11-04-2007, 08:44 PM

Congrats to JP for probably the best game of his career. Does he need to be benched to get him fired up like that? (Remember he got replaced by Holcomb last year, only to come back and go on a tear.) Makes me wonder in Jauron was trying to motivate him by starting Edwards.

PTR

camelcowboy

11-04-2007, 08:52 PM

I'll admit im impress with JP today. I said he needed a big game to keep his job and he delivered now he needs to build on this.

Tatonka

11-04-2007, 08:52 PM

if they bench him going into the miami game (arguable as bad a d as cincy) after he put up 450 in offense, they are ****ing stupid. the team would go absolutely ape****.. lee evans especially.

kinigirly

11-04-2007, 08:58 PM

i haven't seen jp so confident and comfortable in long while. i will echo what some other people have said though. my concern with jp has always been handling pressure. if he starts the pats game, we'll see if loses his cool or if he's put it behind him.
i think fairchild opened up the book because he wasn't scared to death of cinci. i think it'll be open next week. then against the pats we'll go mad conservative again.
as for dick, he's a politician.
the team as a whole is finding their groove and look good.

Mad Bomber

11-04-2007, 09:17 PM

MTBillsFan

11-04-2007, 09:36 PM

It's great to win the games we should! It would be AWESOME if we could've stollen the games from Dallas and the Donkies! I'm pleased with the teams progression and hardwork!

GO BILLS!

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 09:40 PM

We are 4-4. I like Edwards but JP got a win and managed a good game today.

The coaching staff made gutsy calls and "opened" up the playbook.

The coaching staff has gotten a mediocre talent, injury riddled, team to .500.

Losman led us to 459 yards of offense today.

What do my favorite Bills fans at the zone think???

Not that I'm your favorite Bills fans, but I'll chime in anyway;

It was a nice game and entertaining to watch, which is unusual for this team even in wins typically. Against the backdrop of the bigger picture however I remain utterly unenthused.

Three of our four wins were vs. the Jets (1-7) and Bengals (2-6). The Jets only win was vs. the Bengals for what that's worth.

This is typical of what we've seen for 6 or 7 seasons at least now even in our best seasons. We don't have a team that is capable of competing with even the league's mediocre teams routinely and without mitigators or "equalizers" in games and are at the mercy of favorable circumstances or soft opponents on our schedule.

Once again a team's primary offensive player had a case of the dropsies that helped us out.

Lynch was 28 for 97 and only 3.5 yards-per-carry prior to our last play of the game and his last TD run, which is normally fine, but he/we should have been able to do more in the prior 57.x minutes vs. Cincy. He could just as easily have been tackled for a loss too and probably should have been except for the extremely poor tackling by not one, but three Cincy defenders.

We logged no sacks and still struggled in the red zone.

Fun and entertaining, for a change, but not many positives to really hang our hats on going forward.

As well, the play of Evans, who's a stud, over the past two weeks merely indicts our coaching over the first 6 games. When you have coaches that need a 2x4 slap across the face, as ours so often do, in order to highlight the obvious positives for them, then it's not a good thing since that's the way they are all the time.

more cowbell

11-04-2007, 09:45 PM

The Jets lost to the Benglals

DynaPaul

11-04-2007, 09:50 PM

I'm happy with the outcome. Let's see if JP can continue the good play against the inept Dolphins.

TigerJ

11-04-2007, 09:51 PM

Crisis

11-04-2007, 10:01 PM

Jets only win is vs Miami not Cinci.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:05 PM

Jets only win is vs Miami not Cinci.

You are correct. My bad. The Jets best offensive game was vs. the Bengals.

My larger point stands, the Bengals have been one of the league's whipping boys this season.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:12 PM

Just ignore him.

He just takes out his miserable lonely life out on a game that's made for us to enjoy.

Was I fair, or not Crisis?

Am I wrong, are these threads not for discussing how we play, the overall games, the circumstances of the season, etc.

Let me ask you, let's suppose for a second that on the game's last play for us Lynch gets tackled behind the line of scrimmage setting up what would have been a 2nd-and-12 or so and we fail to convert for a 1st down and have to punt. That's a very fair and honest scenario assuming that you can be intellectually honest and see that at least two, really three players missed a tackle on Lynch, two that had him firmly, namely can be written up as awful tackling.

Regardless, let's suppose that happens merely for the sake of argument. The Bungals get the ball back, and Palmer and their passing game, which clearly was working, scores to win by 2.

How does that alter the mentality here?

I see a drastic difference quite frankly with tantrum throwers like Mad Bomber crying like a little girl at a state fair that whose cotton candy fell into the commode.

Yet, that scenario, particularly given the Bills finishing history, probably wouldn't have been very unlikely if a few Bengals players can make a simple tackle.

Yet, for nearly 58 minutes we struggled, at home, against one of the most hapless and miserable teams in the league, and now I'm taking heat for merely suggesting that while it was an entertaining game, it wasn't any harbinger of future greatness?

Sure, whatever.

I'd suggest reality checks and emotional exams for Mad Bomber for starters.

THE END OF ALL DAYS

11-04-2007, 10:19 PM

Wys, I did not think there was anything wrong with your initial post... its your opinion and you voiced it rationally and with no trash talking...

I think MB's isssue is that you may have waited till the cold hard reality of monday morning hit before you pooped on the Parade :)

BB4LIFE

11-04-2007, 10:19 PM

Three of our four wins were vs. the Jets (1-7) and Bengals (2-6). The Jets only win was vs. the Bengals for what that's worth.

If nothing else, having this easy part of the schedule can only help the confidence of the team

Dantheman1280

11-04-2007, 10:25 PM

Was I fair, or not Crisis?

Am I wrong, are these threads not for discussing how we play, the overall games, the circumstances of the season, etc.

Let me ask you, let's suppose for a second that on the game's last play for us Lynch gets tackled behind the line of scrimmage setting up what would have been a 2nd-and-12 or so and we fail to convert for a 1st down and have to punt. That's a very fair and honest scenario assuming that you can be intellectually honest and see that at least two, really three players missed a tackle on Lynch, two that had him firmly, namely can be written up as awful tackling.

Regardless, let's suppose that happens merely for the sake of argument. The Bungals get the ball back, and Palmer and their passing game, which clearly was working, scores to win by 2.

How does that alter the mentality here?

I see a drastic difference quite frankly with tantrum throwers like Mad Bomber crying like a little girl at a state fair that whose cotton candy fell into the commode.

Yet, that scenario, particularly given the Bills finishing history, probably wouldn't have been very unlikely if a few Bengals players can make a simple tackle.

Yet, for nearly 58 minutes we struggled, at home, against one of the most hapless and miserable teams in the league, and now I'm taking heat for merely suggesting that while it was an entertaining game, it wasn't any harbinger of future greatness?

Sure, whatever.

I'd suggest reality checks and emotional exams for Mad Bomber for starters.

You have the right to any opinion you want and that is what the board is for, its just frustrating to other posters that you cannot enjoy a win. Sure we made mistakes and we were only playing the suck bungles, but that is who we played this week. We got the job done. Enjoy the win, we don't get that many around here!

TheBrownBear

11-04-2007, 10:34 PM

Wys, playmakers make plays. That's what Lynch did and that's why he had 150+ yds rushing. Just because he could have been tackled doesn't take those yards away. If Adrian Peterson hadn't broken any tackles he would have ended up with 70 yds rushing today.

The problem for you is that you expect perfection and domination on every play. It's just not realistic at this level. Certainly, that's the kind of demanding expectations that make for a great coach (think Belicheck and Bobby Knight), but it makes for a miserable fan. The truth is success in the NFL is often about making something out of what is there...not dominating your opponent into submission. Our guys have finally been making some plays the past few weeks...lets hope they can keep it up.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:38 PM

You have the right to any opinion you want and that is what the board is for, its just frustrating to other posters that you cannot enjoy a win. Sure we made mistakes and we were only playing the suck bungles, but that is who we played this week. We got the job done. Enjoy the win, we don't get that many around here!

I don't know what to say Dan. I'm very sorry that you and others don't either A, actually read what I write, or B, simply can't.

Please don't hang that on me however.

I stated that this game was entertaining. The problem is yours, not mine after that. If you and others want to turn it into some gross statement that we've finally arrived, which is a notch below what's going on, then fine. I simply don't see it that way and have expressed as much.

When, if, we finish the last 8 games of the season then come back and tell me how FoS I was. Otherwise can we at least wait please before utterly invalidating my opinions on the meaning of this game for the future?

I'd wager you this, that by season's end, at least half of the people commenting on this game with undertones of future hope for this team will be ready to fire Jauron and some others by season's end. We'll see. But what would that say for the emotional stability of some of you here that seem to turn these forums into your personal attack venues?

Either way, reread what I wrote. If you have any issues with the factual stuff, let me know and we can discuss. Otherwise, wording it differently and given the backlash I've received already, I still think our team sucks hind teat and has merely benefitted from home games against the league's worst teams. So unless you think that the Jets and Cincy are anything but the league's worst teams, I'd suggest that one win otherwise is really meaningless on the grand scheme of things.

Either way, since no one can be gracious in return, I'll just quit couching things tactfully or even refuse to try.

WE STILL SUCK!

How's that suit ya?

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:40 PM

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:41 PM

Philagape

11-04-2007, 10:43 PM

People who get so worked up over others' opinions need to either put them on ignore or stay off the boards. This is not a place for sensitivity.

11-04-2007, 10:45 PM

Was I fair, or not Crisis?

Am I wrong, are these threads not for discussing how we play, the overall games, the circumstances of the season, etc.

Let me ask you, let's suppose for a second that on the game's last play for us Lynch gets tackled behind the line of scrimmage setting up what would have been a 2nd-and-12 or so and we fail to convert for a 1st down and have to punt. That's a very fair and honest scenario assuming that you can be intellectually honest and see that at least two, really three players missed a tackle on Lynch, two that had him firmly, namely can be written up as awful tackling.

Regardless, let's suppose that happens merely for the sake of argument. The Bungals get the ball back, and Palmer and their passing game, which clearly was working, scores to win by 2.

How does that alter the mentality here?

I see a drastic difference quite frankly with tantrum throwers like Mad Bomber crying like a little girl at a state fair that whose cotton candy fell into the commode.

Yet, that scenario, particularly given the Bills finishing history, probably wouldn't have been very unlikely if a few Bengals players can make a simple tackle.

Yet, for nearly 58 minutes we struggled, at home, against one of the most hapless and miserable teams in the league, and now I'm taking heat for merely suggesting that while it was an entertaining game, it wasn't any harbinger of future greatness?

Sure, whatever.

I'd suggest reality checks and emotional exams for Mad Bomber for starters.
Come on Wys, obviously if you completely change the outcome of the game, the mentality around here and how we view the team is going to change. You could say that about any game for any team. "Well if this had happened this way instead of that way and the other team got the ball and scored a TD and blah blah blah..." Yeah, all of a sudden we have a whole different game that never happened.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 10:52 PM

If nothing else, having this easy part of the schedule can only help the confidence of the team

Yes, very true. But it's not gauge of our talent. Other bad teams have beaten up on the Jets and Bengals. They're a combined 3-15 in case some hadn't noticed.

I fully acknowledged that this game had some good points to it. I was commenting on the mitigating factors.

I am still amazed. My brother while living in NYC told me about a farmer that brought a couple of animals to Central Park and one of them was a pig. He said that people were gathered around and enamored with this pig as if it were a goose that laid golden eggs. We had a chuckle in his relaying the story to me and I pointed out to him that some of those people had probably never even seen a real pig and were therefore truly enamored with it.

My point is that we win a game like this and the reactions of some are as if "we've finally turned things around," or how we "are finally headed in the right direction," and then there's the "See, I told ya so's" regarding Losman, which I simply don't see given the opponent. If Losman were that good he would have skidded the sheets vs. Denver (a relatively weak team and D) or Pittsburgh. Presumably he's somewhere in between.

This game was the best game that we've played under Jauron and is the closest thing that we've seen to a good, solid 4 quarters of play. But again, it was against the Bengals.

Either way, some people here react as if they've "never seen the pig" before. Are we that far removed from what good football is such that we start extrapolating wins over teams like the Jets and Bengals, and even to a lesser extent to mediocre teams such as Baltimore with a bevy of key starters missing, to mean more than what it means, not so dominating wins over some of the few teams worse than we are?

Mad Bomber blew a fuse because he didn't like my objectivity regarding future ramifications although while no one wants to admit it I've commented fairly positively on today's game, I simply haven't sold the farm to buy playoff tickets.

What if I blew a similar fuse and carried on the way he did on the opposite side of the fence and said that no one had a right to enjoy this game because we couldn't beat the Pats and Steelers? While you might like to think that's what I've said/done, that's simply not true. My posts on this particular game acknowledged that we played well.

There's short-term, mid-term, and long-term issues with this team. This game falls into the short-term category. Isn't it possible to discuss this game as well as the season on the same day? If not, then I'd suggest that the issues as to why not don't rest with me.

TheBrownBear

11-04-2007, 11:00 PM

If Lynch is so good, then how come for 28 carries, up until the last carry of the game, and throughout this season to date, and for over 57 minutes to date, he averaged 3.5 yards-per-carry?

Have you got an answer to that?

Let's discuss that for a moment.

Yes, I do. And I'd be happy to discuss. You seem hung up on the fact that the big play came on his last carry of the game. What does that have to do with anything? What if the 50+ yd run had come on the first play of the game or in the second quarter? Then I could say, "for three quarters Lynch averaged over 6 ypc until the Bengals shut him down in the fourth." Do you see how ridiculous your argument is?

Look at the stats...he ran for 153 yards at over 5 ypc. That's a fact. How many games in NFL history has a rb run for a 5 ypc average where every one of his runs was 5 yds. Yards come in various chunks at every position. I've always thought, as most others have on this board, that your removing of a player's best plays argument was a credibility killer for you that caused people not to take you very seriously; which is too bad because you do have some good things to say and your commentary serves the purpose of removing a little of the the sheen from the rose colored glasses that we Bills fans often look through after a win. But think logically about this argument that you seem to use over and over: if you selectively disposed of the top, say, 10% of plays made by every player in the NFL, you'd be left with utter mediocrity from every one of them.

And I never said that "Lynch is so good." I was simply making the point that he earned all of the yards he got.

As for the rather pedestrian 3.5 ypc that Lynch had accumulated up to this point in the season...I could give you a variety of reasons/excuses for it, other than "Lynch sucks" or is overrated. How about these....he's a rookie trying to gel with his o-line; the o-line has three (or is it two) new members and is taking time to gel; playcalling sucked early in the season; our qb's have sucked and provide no balance for the running game; we played against some tough defenses in Dallas, New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, etc.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 11:02 PM

Come on Wys, obviously if you completely change the outcome of the game, the mentality around here and how we view the team is going to change. You could say that about any game for any team. "Well if this had happened this way instead of that way and the other team got the ball and scored a TD and blah blah blah..." Yeah, all of a sudden we have a whole different game that never happened.

LMAO

Yeah, well that wasn't my original take Ed. It was a point made in argument.

I'd suggest starting from the beginning here. ;)

But once again, due to ADD and impatience in reading, my take on this game was that:

It was entertaining!
Lynch played a good game!
OL was so-so given the opponent, an extremely weak D and front-7.
Best overall day of Losman's career!

I'd better clarify "overall" before someone's tampon slips out!

By "overall" I mean his short game finally hit the mark. Not sure who followed it, but I had begun a thread in the interests of evaluating Losman, fully understanding that it was an easy opponent but nonetheless, to see how his short passes would go. And not for any reason other than to make notes and suggest that those supporting Losman should look at that for his future utility to this or another team and explained that in that thread.

It was not his best "scoring" game, but again, it was his best overall game. IMO

DL SHUT DOWN the Bengals Rushing game, a fact, not MO!
Didn't do quite as good a job on Palmer, particularly considering that we shut down the rushing game.
Specials teams was decent although we slipped in allowing a basic KR/TD on which the returnee barely made a move/turn.

Now, I've said the same things, more or less, before, yet everyone seems to think I've only torn this team apart.

They seem to be able to dig out the stuff that they need as ammo to put me on the firing line, but seem loath to actually read the stuff that I say that is positive. Again, not my fault although perhaps my problem.

Wys Guy

11-04-2007, 11:23 PM

Yes, I do. And I'd be happy to discuss. You seem hung up on the fact that the big play came on his last carry of the game. What does that have to do with anything? What if the 50+ yd run had come on the first play of the game or in the second quarter? Then I could say, "for three quarters Lynch averaged over 6 ypc until the Bengals shut him down in the fourth." Do you see how ridiculous your argument is?

Look at the stats...he ran for 153 yards at over 5 ypc. That's a fact. How many games in NFL history has a rb run for a 5 ypc average where every one of his runs was 5 yds. Yards come in various chunks at every position. I've always thought, as most others have on this board, that your removing of a player's best plays argument was a credibility killer for you that caused people not to take you very seriously; which is too bad because you do have some good things to say and your commentary serves the purpose of removing a little of the the sheen from the rose colored glasses that we Bills fans often look through after a win. But think logically about this argument that you seem to use over and over: if you selectively disposed of the top, say, 10% of plays made by every player in the NFL, you'd be left with utter mediocrity from every one of them.

And I never said that "Lynch is so good." I was simply making the point that he earned all of the yards he got.

As for the rather pedestrian 3.5 ypc that Lynch had accumulated up to this point in the season...I could give you a variety of reasons/excuses for it, other than "Lynch sucks" or is overrated. How about these....he's a rookie trying to gel with his o-line; the o-line has three (or is it two) new members and is taking time to gel; playcalling sucked early in the season; our qb's have sucked and provide no balance for the running game; we played against some tough defenses in Dallas, New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, etc.

No, I don't see how ridiculous my argument is. Do you see how ridiculous yours is?

The tone here is that Lynch tore up the Cincy D. Well, this just in, the Cincy D was allowing an average of 4.7 yards-per-game, we only got because of one last run on which the Bengals players, three of them, couldn't make a simple tackle when otherwise they had blown our play up. 30 of 32 other teams make that play and I'm being generous in allowing that one other team.

Don't get me wrong, great that he made it, but if he had played so well, then how come for 58 minutes he averaged, just as he has in every other game this season except for the Denver game and their pathetic front-7, just the same 3.5 yards-per-carry? Yes, it was fortunate that the Cincy defenders couldn't make a simple tackle, multiple players even. But that what it was, fortunate. It wasn't as if Lynch pounded through, they simply failed to make it. I'm sorry, but I'm not hanging my season long opinion of Lynch on that single run while ignoring 200 others.

If it had come in the 1st or 2nd quarter, then we wouldn't be having this discussion and it's quite possibly an entirely different game with perhaps us putting the game away, again, against one of the few worst teams in the league, in the 3rd or early 4th quarter instead of within the last couple of minutes.

But think logically about this argument that you seem to use over and over: if you selectively disposed of the top, say, 10% of plays made by every player in the NFL, you'd be left with utter mediocrity from every one of them.

I am thinking logically here, you are the one that isn't.

So then, you must think that McGahee is a much better rusher than Lynch then, right? After all, McGahee's average is significantly higher. He's had more 100-yard games, has more overall yards. Is that logical? Is it true? If not, then why not because if you're applying simple straight forward logic on basic stats that you use it must be.

I routinely subtract a RB's longest run, on ANY team, to see how he performed. Since apparently you've missed it, so do multiple very accomplished analysts on TV that have playing and/or coaching experience. So clearly yes, it is quite logical to separate out the "one-sy" occurrences from what routinely happens. You'd make a great front office staff member for our team running things as they currently are however.

And I never said that "Lynch is so good." I was simply making the point that he earned all of the yards he got.

Again, I made the exact same point prior to your even engaging me. Naturally you missed it. So why are we even discussing that.

However, since we agree, that he earned every yard he got, and given that through nearly 58 minutes all he did was to average a quite poor 3.5 yards-per-carry against one of the worse DLs and F7s in the game, how would you rate our OL? Didn't I more or less ask this already yet now you've been dancing around the issue!

I mean comment on the line. If Lynch had to work hard and "earn every yard," something we both agree on, and that his average while doing that on all but one run that could just as easily have resulted in a loss reducing his average even further, then how does that suggest that our OL played through those same 57.x minutes?

As for the rather pedestrian 3.5 ypc that Lynch had accumulated up to this point in the season...I could give you a variety of reasons/excuses for it, other than "Lynch sucks" or is overrated. How about these....he's a rookie trying to gel with his o-line; the o-line has three (or is it two) new members and is taking time to gel; playcalling sucked early in the season; our qb's have sucked and provide no balance for the running game; we played against some tough defenses in Dallas, New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, etc.

Gee BrownBear, that sounds awfully familiar! Maybe BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY SAID MOST OF THE SAME THINGS NUMEROUS TIMES! Hello, McFly!

I suppose when you say it it means something different than when I post essentially the same thing, eh? Could be everyone, including you now, that react to it differently.

As well, Dockery's in his prime. Jason Peters in his 4th season. Walker in his 5th season and also in his prime. How much time would you like to give this OL BrownBear? Lay it out! How many weeks to "gel" would you like to afford them? 8? 10? 45? What, how many?

Are we already there? IMO with seasoned linemen in their primes, and on well coached teams, half a season is all it should take max. So how long in your book?

TheBrownBear

11-04-2007, 11:54 PM

No, I don't see how ridiculous my argument is. Do you see how ridiculous yours is?

The tone here is that Lynch tore up the Cincy D. Well, this just in, the Cincy D was allowing an average of 4.7 yards-per-game, we only got because of one last run on which the Bengals players, three of them, couldn't make a simple tackle when otherwise they had blown our play up. 30 of 32 other teams make that play and I'm being generous in allowing that one other team.

Don't get me wrong, great that he made it, but if he had played so well, then how come for 58 minutes he averaged, just as he has in every other game this season except for the Denver game and their pathetic front-7, just the same 3.5 yards-per-carry? Yes, it was fortunate that the Cincy defenders couldn't make a simple tackle, multiple players even. But that what it was, fortunate. It wasn't as if Lynch pounded through, they simply failed to make it. I'm sorry, but I'm not hanging my season long opinion of Lynch on that single run while ignoring 200 others.

If it had come in the 1st or 2nd quarter, then we wouldn't be having this discussion and it's quite possibly an entirely different game with perhaps us putting the game away, again, against one of the few worst teams in the league, in the 3rd or early 4th quarter instead of within the last couple of minutes.

But think logically about this argument that you seem to use over and over: if you selectively disposed of the top, say, 10% of plays made by every player in the NFL, you'd be left with utter mediocrity from every one of them.

I am thinking logically here, you are the one that isn't.

So then, you must think that McGahee is a much better rusher than Lynch then, right? After all, McGahee's average is significantly higher. He's had more 100-yard games, has more overall yards. Is that logical? Is it true? If not, then why not because if you're applying simple straight forward logic on basic stats that you use it must be.

I routinely subtract a RB's longest run, on ANY team, to see how he performed. Since apparently you've missed it, so do multiple very accomplished analysts on TV that have playing and/or coaching experience. So clearly yes, it is quite logical to separate out the "one-sy" occurrences from what routinely happens. You'd make a great front office staff member for our team running things as they currently are however.

And I never said that "Lynch is so good." I was simply making the point that he earned all of the yards he got.

Again, I made the exact same point prior to your even engaging me. Naturally you missed it. So why are we even discussing that.

However, since we agree, that he earned every yard he got, and given that through nearly 58 minutes all he did was to average a quite poor 3.5 yards-per-carry against one of the worse DLs and F7s in the game, how would you rate our OL? Didn't I more or less ask this already yet now you've been dancing around the issue!

I mean comment on the line. If Lynch had to work hard and "earn every yard," something we both agree on, and that his average while doing that on all but one run that could just as easily have resulted in a loss reducing his average even further, then how does that suggest that our OL played through those same 57.x minutes?

As for the rather pedestrian 3.5 ypc that Lynch had accumulated up to this point in the season...I could give you a variety of reasons/excuses for it, other than "Lynch sucks" or is overrated. How about these....he's a rookie trying to gel with his o-line; the o-line has three (or is it two) new members and is taking time to gel; playcalling sucked early in the season; our qb's have sucked and provide no balance for the running game; we played against some tough defenses in Dallas, New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore, etc.

Gee BrownBear, that sounds awfully familiar! Maybe BECAUSE I'VE ALREADY SAID MOST OF THE SAME THINGS NUMEROUS TIMES! Hello, McFly!

I suppose when you say it it means something different than when I post essentially the same thing, eh? Could be everyone, including you now, that react to it differently.

As well, Dockery's in his prime. Jason Peters in his 4th season. Walker in his 5th season and also in his prime. How much time would you like to give this OL BrownBear? Lay it out! How many weeks to "gel" would you like to afford them? 8? 10? 45? What, how many?

Are we already there? IMO with seasoned linemen in their primes, and on well coached teams, half a season is all it should take max. So how long in your book?
Wow. You conveniently and consistently put words in my mouth; in an incredibly condescending and juvenile manner no less ("Hello, McFly?"). Please reread all of my earlier posts. You never asked, at least not to me, what I thought of the o-line. Our whole discussion has surrounded around our perceptions of Lynch's performance. The irony, despite your attempts to turn this into an argument in your typical quixotic fashion, is that we actually agree that Lynch is running hard to churn out the yards that he has. The only reason I even initially responded to one of your posts was because you seemed to be discounting what Lynch actually accomplished today by reverting to "what if" scenarios. What we know is that he ran for 153 yards--including the game clinching touchdown--and threw for the game winning score as well. Regardless of what he has done up until today, it's a damn fine performance that is hard to find fault with.

You want my opinion on the o-line? I think they've been above average in the passing game and slightly below average in the running game. My eyes tell me that Lynch is talented enough that he should be averaging 4+ ypc, so I have to assume there is a problem somewhere. I gave some guesses in my previous post (qb struggles, playcalling, o-line, etc.).

Wys, I will backtrack a bit and give you this much...I do see the value of removing the outliers (on both the high and low end) from a player's statistics to discern their consistency and "typical" output on the average play. A guy that brakes one 80 yard run a game but spends his other 25 carries in "1 yard and a cloud of dust" state, would be relatively useless since you'd be living in perpetual "3 and out" territory. I just think it's funny that we are using it when discussing Lynch, a guy who's biggest problem has been in making the big play. The truth is, most of his runs have been in that 2-6 yard territory....NOT multiple negative plays offset by occassional 20 yard runs.

Do you mind if I ask you a couple questions? Straight up, what is your evaluation and opinion of Lynch so far?; and What is your opinion on his potential? Thanks.

And I apologize if my first post bordered on a personal gibe in any way.

TheBrownBear

11-05-2007, 12:02 AM

I routinely subtract a RB's longest run, on ANY team, to see how he performed. Since apparently you've missed it, so do multiple very accomplished analysts on TV that have playing and/or coaching experience. So clearly yes, it is quite logical to separate out the "one-sy" occurrences from what routinely happens. You'd make a great front office staff member for our team running things as they currently are however.

Since, in your words, I've obviously missed this, please provide me with a few names and examples of the "multiple very accomplished analysts on TV" that routinely subtract a RB's longest run. I just want to make sure I don't miss this in the future and have the opportunity to expand my knowledge of Football 101.

Wys Guy

11-05-2007, 01:06 AM

Wow. You conveniently and consistently put words in my mouth; in an incredibly condescending and juvenile manner no less ("Hello, McFly?"). Please reread all of my earlier posts. You never asked, at least not to me, what I thought of the o-line. Our whole discussion has surrounded around our perceptions of Lynch's performance. The irony, despite your attempts to turn this into an argument in your typical quixotic fashion, is that we actually agree that Lynch is running hard to churn out the yards that he has. The only reason I even initially responded to one of your posts was because you seemed to be discounting what Lynch actually accomplished today by reverting to "what if" scenarios. What we know is that he ran for 153 yards--including the game clinching touchdown--and threw for the game winning score as well. Regardless of what he has done up until today, it's a damn fine performance that is hard to find fault with.

You want my opinion on the o-line? I think they've been above average in the passing game and slightly below average in the running game. My eyes tell me that Lynch is talented enough that he should be averaging 4+ ypc, so I have to assume there is a problem somewhere. I gave some guesses in my previous post (qb struggles, playcalling, o-line, etc.).

Wys, I will backtrack a bit and give you this much...I do see the value of removing the outliers (on both the high and low end) from a player's statistics to discern their consistency and "typical" output on the average play. A guy that brakes one 80 yard run a game but spends his other 25 carries in "1 yard and a cloud of dust" state, would be relatively useless since you'd be living in perpetual "3 and out" territory. I just think it's funny that we are using it when discussing Lynch, a guy who's biggest problem has been in making the big play. The truth is, most of his runs have been in that 2-6 yard territory....NOT multiple negative plays offset by occassional 20 yard runs.

Do you mind if I ask you a couple questions? Straight up, what is your evaluation and opinion of Lynch so far?; and What is your opinion on his potential? Thanks.

And I apologize if my first post bordered on a personal gibe in any way.

Yeah, your first post more or less set the tone. Talk about putting words in someone's (my) mouth. From what I can see that was the first interaction between us.

You challenged me first, not I you. So I don't expect to have to go back and read anything. I'm reacting to what you posted initially. If you want me to respond to something, take the time, and you so somewhat and more than most, to at least have the courtesy to provide whatever details are pertinent.

Some here get their thongs too far up their cracks at my "lengthy" posts when I decide to elaborate. But that's for the sake of the person I'm responding to and no one else. Frankly, I enjoy small forums with only a few posters.

The only reason I even initially responded to one of your posts was because you seemed to be discounting what Lynch actually accomplished today by reverting to "what if" scenarios. What we know is that he ran for 153 yards--including the game clinching touchdown--and threw for the game winning score as well. Regardless of what he has done up until today, it's a damn fine performance that is hard to find fault with.

Again, I didn't "discount" anything other than purely in attempts to challenge those that thought our OL somehow provided great play in this way as well as to those suggesting that Lynch had anything but a basically solid game but little else through nearly the entire game. If we can't agree that anything below 4.0 yards-per-carry generally speaking is poor, then there's no need to continue. That much should be a given.

I don't evaluate RBs on other teams by merely one run, so I'm not going to do it for RBs on my team either. It's called objectivity.

My perception of Lynch is different than yours. In at least several games he's had mostly runs in the 0-2 yard range with just enough runs for 8-15 to give him 3.6 ypc or so. I.e., he's incredibly inconsisten, although like yourself, I don't credit it to him, but then in turn since it must be credited to someone, I must lay it at the feet of the line. My eyes tell me that's a correct assertion.

In this particular game you were probably a little more correct. Anyway, here are his runs for this game:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 width=67 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD height=16>
56
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
12
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
10
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
10
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
8
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
7
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
7
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
6
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
6
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
5
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
5
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
4
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
4
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
3
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
3
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
1
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
1
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
0
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
0
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
-1
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
-1
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
-2
</TD></TR><TR><TD height=16>
-4
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Over half, 15 of 29 are outside of that 2-6 range. Outside of his 56-yarder, I'm just not seeing much impressive. His longs on the season aren't any better than McGahee's, worse in fact.

14 of 29 runs were for 2 yards or less.

You can't "remove the outliers" on the low end because he has many runs for losses. Again, line?

Do you mind if I ask you a couple questions? Straight up, what is your evaluation and opinion of Lynch so far?; and What is your opinion on his potential? Thanks.

And I apologize if my first post bordered on a personal gibe in any way.

No problem! That's how MBs are. I detest them generally speaking. I also love a good debate, so it's somewhat of a catch-22 for me, particularly since I rarely get a good debate. LOL

I never mind anyone asking me questions as long as they're serious. My evaluation and opinion of Lynch so far I've stated often. He reminds me of Roger Craig. Not sure how old you are, but if you may or may not remember, he was on the Montana Niners teams. He rans with his legs always running, was a very good but not superlative rusher.

Lynch keeps his feet moving and pumping, his shoulders square, and moves forward. He's the anti-McGahee in that way. IMO he's better. He's got soft hands and is an excellent receiver out of the backfield. IMO the team doesn't use him nearly enough out of the backfield, but hey, they said that they would just like they've said about the TEs before every season, so it shouldn't come as a surprise that the same coaching staff that hasn't used Evans, a WR that I predicted would/could set team records, underutilizes Lynch in that way too.

I think he has the potential to be a solid and consistent 1,200-1,400 yard rusher and good receiver out of the backfield on a team with a solid line. We don't have that. My preseason assessment was somewhat less. But it's all built on carries this year. I can see him perhaps hitting up to 1,500 on a stellar season in the future, but not on this team and not much more simply because he is not a home-run threat runner. It's tough for RBs that don't break long runs to post those types of numbers.

Our team isn't good in the red zone and Lynch struggles at the goal line too although I'm not sure if I fault him or our line more there. IMO Thomas would have fared better on occasion down there. I'm not big on Wright at all and don't think he'll be on the team after either this or next season.

My assessment of him prior to playing and from the draft has turned out to be reasonably accurate. You can read it here:

http://www.afceastreport.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=251&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

In my analysis I expected them to work him in a little more gradually and to not dispose of Thomas so quickly. Otherwise I think I did a decent job in evaluation.

As to this season, the team is overusing him now and I fully anticipate that he will wear down as the season goes on. If the team's not careful if he tires too drastically on the season they'll expose him to injury. He's not used to 16-game NFL seasons and play in cold and snow which are coming up.

Lynch is on pace for more than my prediction and for 354 carries. He's on pace for 1,380 yards rushing, 112 less w/o that long run today just to point out the ramifications on averages of that single run.

I'll still stick to my story of 1,200 yards and 300-320 carries. I just don't see a rookie RB having many more. Again, IMO the Bills are doing him and their team a disservice by not giving either Thomas and/or Wright more carries. They're averaging only 4 carries per game combined. That needs to jump to 8-10.

We'll see though. Perhaps Lynch is Superman.

Wys Guy

11-05-2007, 01:16 AM

Since, in your words, I've obviously missed this, please provide me with a few names and examples of the "multiple very accomplished analysts on TV" that routinely subtract a RB's longest run. I just want to make sure I don't miss this in the future and have the opportunity to expand my knowledge of Football 101.

Funny you ask, I'm not familiar with all the TV personalities since most are wooden-headed "made for TV" types, nor am I a fan of those shows, but on the Sports Reporters today one or two of them conducted exactly such an analysis. Jaws I believe was one. He's one of the few that I actually respect highly.

Either way, does it matter? Is the point "who else does it" or whether or not it makes sense in analysis?

If you're simply looking to inflate your opinion of your own team, have at it. Do anything you like. If you're truly evaluating RBs, WRs, and QBs, then breaking things down is wise.

Last season I ranted that Losman only had a deep game in which his 8 or 9 deep throws for TDs skewed his numbers. I took a lambasting for that, but ya know what, this year he doesn't have them and he's paying the price w/ y'all. I said last year that w/o those he's got zilch. Well, other than today, zilch is what he's pitched.

So in whose corner is the credibility in your assessment of me in this way?

Again, I'll pit my assessments an analyses on this team in terms of predictions against anyone that's covered them in recent seasons! Anyone!

You'll find that no one's been more accurate on the whole.

Devin

11-05-2007, 01:19 AM

Wys Guy

11-05-2007, 01:49 AM

Guys at the end of the day it is what it is. Wys is a great guy, he has a lot of football knowledge and generally hes pretty personable. However as long as ive been here his posts have all generally been the same.

"If it was snowing, and the bengals intercepted JP 3 more times and Marshawn got stopped on his big run and we hadnt gotten a few other calls we would have lost. So see we really arent that good" ok ok ok I get it already Wys. I do. Your opinion has been noted. Yes yesI know all of our QB's suck as well as our coaching, our OL, most of our Defense.....etc. Point made.

At the end of the day we beat a team we should have beaten. You can breakdown and analyze it anyway you want. No we arent a superbowl team yet. No its not likely we are a playoff team this year. And truth be told almost every stat you spew could probably be related to most teams in the NFL.

I am not a writer, I am not an analyst, I am a fan of the Buffalo Bills. I enjoy every win.

Give it a break already.

Have we ever met?

Actually, no, my posts haven't always been the same Devin. So I really don't know what to "give it a break to."

You guys always completely disregard anything positive that I do say, both when I used to write articles as well as here, and that was proven several times here again tonight.

I can't help it if you and others utterly ignore it when I do write positives. Hell, in the past when I have posted postives, if it's not "party line" I've taken heat for that too.

The reality is that this site is chock full of homers. Sure, some have now reacted to getting whacked across the forehead with a 2x10 by a gorilla so that they think they're not homers by admitting the obvious, but most are.

People here need to lighten up quite a bit and not go bananas on other posters simply because they're not responsive enough to the "mood du jour" or because they refuse to take data entirely out of the context of a 16-game schedule on an entire season and use it to extrapolate immediate future glory.

Honestly, sometimes I think that peoples' lives here are directly hinged to the outcome of Bills games in life. Don't most of y'all have families? Kids to interact with?

Some people actually enjoy discussing all the different aspects of the team, sadly over the years you've all chased many out of here permanently.

Regardless, these days there's a lot more negative to report than positive. I not only will suggest, I'll guarantee that in three or four more weeks whatever positive vibes are here now will be reduced to vibes bordering on the suicidal. Why is that? Sure, I say that partially facetiously, but seriously, it's bipolar city here. Can't ya all just realize the crud for what it is outside of wanting to burn down OBD when the team lays a deuce on the door mat?

Either way Devin, I'm at least consistent. And for someone that says I don't ever say anything positive, go check out my preseason predictions. Can you find anyone, just one other person in the media, that predicted Lee Evans setting team records this year?

Sure, may not happen, but that's not my fault that the team has its head so far up its own colon that that they resemble a bagel and haven't planned Lee in. I still think that Evans is easily a top-10 perhaps even a top-5-7 WR in this league. I don't know how much more damn positive it gets quite frankly.

Sorry, but I just can't call Langston Walker a phenom.

casdhf

11-05-2007, 05:34 AM

You spew the same trash regardless of what year it is.

Take away Lynch's long TD run, his TD pass, and all his runs over 10 yards, and he had he was worthless. It's hard not to agree with you here, Wys!

Dr. Lecter

11-05-2007, 06:09 AM

.

Three of our four wins were vs. the Jets (1-7) and Bengals (2-6). The Jets only win was vs. the Bengals for what that's worth.

:rolleyes:

The Jets beat Miami, not the Bengals.

Mitchy moo

11-05-2007, 06:31 AM

I don't know what to say Dan. I'm very sorry that you and others don't either A, actually read what I write, or B, simply can't.

Please don't hang that on me however.

I stated that this game was entertaining. The problem is yours, not mine after that. If you and others want to turn it into some gross statement that we've finally arrived, which is a notch below what's going on, then fine. I simply don't see it that way and have expressed as much.

When, if, we finish the last 8 games of the season then come back and tell me how FoS I was. Otherwise can we at least wait please before utterly invalidating my opinions on the meaning of this game for the future?

I'd wager you this, that by season's end, at least half of the people commenting on this game with undertones of future hope for this team will be ready to fire Jauron and some others by season's end. We'll see. But what would that say for the emotional stability of some of you here that seem to turn these forums into your personal attack venues?

Either way, reread what I wrote. If you have any issues with the factual stuff, let me know and we can discuss. Otherwise, wording it differently and given the backlash I've received already, I still think our team sucks hind teat and has merely benefitted from home games against the league's worst teams. So unless you think that the Jets and Cincy are anything but the league's worst teams, I'd suggest that one win otherwise is really meaningless on the grand scheme of things.

Either way, since no one can be gracious in return, I'll just quit couching things tactfully or even refuse to try.

WE STILL SUCK!

How's that suit ya?

:smashfrea

Mitchy moo

11-05-2007, 06:36 AM

The reality is that this site is chock full of homers. Sure, some have now reacted to getting whacked across the forehead with a 2x10 by a gorilla so that they think they're not homers by admitting the obvious, but most are.

Some people actually enjoy discussing all the different aspects of the team, sadly over the years you've all chased many out of here permanently.

Regardless, these days there's a lot more negative to report than positive. I not only will suggest, I'll guarantee that in three or four more weeks whatever positive vibes are here now will be reduced to vibes bordering on the suicidal. Why is that? Sure, I say that partially facetiously, but seriously, it's bipolar city here. Can't ya all just realize the crud for what it is outside of wanting to burn down OBD when the team lays a deuce on the door mat?

Either way Devin, I'm at least consistent. And for someone that says I don't ever say anything positive, go check out my preseason predictions. Can you find anyone, just one other person in the media, that predicted Lee Evans setting team records this year?

Sure, may not happen, but that's not my fault that the team has its head so far up its own colon that that they resemble a bagel and haven't planned Lee in. I still think that Evans is easily a top-10 perhaps even a top-5-7 WR in this league. I don't know how much more damn positive it gets quite frankly.

Sorry, but I just can't call Langston Walker a phenom.

Our Rookie franchise back just ran all over our opponent, we had our largest offensive performance of the year and we won by 12. If you want to break down Cinci as a weaker opponent, yeah that's true but our plan this season was to upgrade the O-line and to run and score. We did that yesterday for the first time this season and we can build from here. It takes time to get better and as I see it we are, be happy with all of those facts.

P.S. As per being Bills Homer's, where the heck do you think you are?

acehole

11-05-2007, 06:59 AM

HHURRICANE

11-05-2007, 07:59 AM

I disagree with you on the talent level of the team, HHurricane. They are certainly not in the same league as New England and Indianapolis in terms of their talent, but I think they're a little better than mediocre. They have some minor holes, but the gaping holes from past years have mostly been filled. The problem is much of their talent is so young it's hard to know what they have and a little scary to have to rely on it.

Look at all of the positions where the drop off is huge on this team.

1) After Evans there is no legit #2 receiver. WE NEED WRs in a BIG WAY!!!

2) The DT position should have speed in the Tampa 2 and it doesn't. Our guys would be slow in any defense. Kyle Williams missed several tackles becuase the guy just beat him on the first step.

3) No major sacks against some pretty crappy teams. DE needs some help.

4) Crowell, DiGorgio, and Ellison are good players, not great ones. I would be very disappointed if Poz was the only upgrade for years to come.

justasportsfan

11-05-2007, 09:34 AM

justasportsfan

11-05-2007, 10:14 AM

This is not a place for sensitivity. Please feel free to come back and say hi every now and then.

:snicker:

Philagape

11-05-2007, 10:18 AM

Please feel free to come back and say hi every now and then.

:snicker:

:huh:

Wys Guy

11-05-2007, 11:20 AM

Our Rookie franchise back just ran all over our opponent, we had our largest offensive performance of the year and we won by 12. If you want to break down Cinci as a weaker opponent, yeah that's true but our plan this season was to upgrade the O-line and to run and score. We did that yesterday for the first time this season and we can build from here. It takes time to get better and as I see it we are, be happy with all of those facts.

P.S. As per being Bills Homer's, where the heck do you think you are?

The whole thing seems like a lesser carbon copy of the '04 season to me.

As to the P.S., LOL, good point. It certainly isn't the ideal place to discuss the team objectively to be sure, which is what I enjoy doing.

Dr. Lecter

11-05-2007, 11:28 AM

The whole thing seems like a lesser carbon copy of the '04 season to me.

As to the P.S., LOL, good point. It certainly isn't the ideal place to discuss the team objectively to be sure, which is what I enjoy doing.

I think most people here like to talk objectively, but they also like to do so without being called stupid for disagreeing with people.

Meathead

11-05-2007, 11:29 AM

:lolpoint: haters