BBD: The Morning After-Bills v. Eagles

[DraftBoy]

http://www.buffalobillsdraft.com/2011/10/the-morning-after-bills-v-eagles/


Well we’ve had the comeback, we’ve had the dominating victory, so we suppose it was time have the heart attack win where we barely hold on. This was a tale of two halves, in the first half the Bills were dominant. They forced the issue both offensively and defensively and controlled the line of scrimmage.

In the second half we went into a shell offensively during a good chunk of the thrid quarter, our defense stopped blitzing and we were bleeding away points at every turn. Thankfully we held on for the victory and the bounces are still going our way.

[Mad Bomber]

Good read.

[mysticsoto]

I'd give Hairston a little more credit. For a rookie, drafted that late in the game to come in and play Left Tackle like he did was superb. His run blocking was great!!! Yeah, there are things he can work on. But still outstanding for his 1st performance.

[DraftBoy]

I'd give Hairston a little more credit. For a rookie, drafted that late in the game to come in and play Left Tackle like he did was superb. His run blocking was great!!! Yeah, there are things he can work on. But still outstanding for his 1st performance.

What did I short him credit on? There is no denying they schemed around very shot and very quick passing options because they had a rookie at LT. He got beat by Tapp's speed rush on multiple occasions though it rarely mattered because Fitz had already gotten rid of the ball.

The sack that he allowed wasn't really his fault and his run blocking was very good just as advertised.

Plenty to draw from, plenty to work on. A good game, what more do you want me to say other than going over board and drooling about a guy we had to scheme around for our own protection?

The coaching staff did exactly what it was supposed to do. They drew up a game plan that was almost all three step drops because they didnt think Hairston could handle Tapp on a 5 or 7 step drop. They were pretty dead on about that, correct?

[cookie G]

What did I short him credit on? There is no denying they schemed around very shot and very quick passing options because they had a rookie at LT. He got beat by Tapp's speed rush on multiple occasions though it rarely mattered because Fitz had already gotten rid of the ball.

The sack that he allowed wasn't really his fault and his run blocking was very good just as advertised.

Plenty to draw from, plenty to work on. A good game, what more do you want me to say other than going over board and drooling about a guy we had to scheme around for our own protection?

The coaching staff did exactly what it was supposed to do. They drew up a game plan that was almost all three step drops because they didnt think Hairston could handle Tapp on a 5 or 7 step drop. They were pretty dead on about that, correct?

They've scheming around things all year, well before yesterday.

Fitz rarely holds the ball more than 2 seconds, because they aren't a line that is going to provide 4 or more seconds or for him to go into 7 step drops.

It wasn't done just for Hairston.

And it is working.

[DraftBoy]

They've scheming around things all year, well before yesterday.

Fitz rarely holds the ball more than 2 seconds, because they aren't a line that is going to provide 4 or more seconds or for him to go into 7 step drops.

It wasn't done just for Hairston.

And it is working.

Disagree, when you watch the other games we ran deeper routes, we ran into the intermediate zone more, yesterday we did very little of that.

He was almost exclusively in 3 step drops, which has been his predominant drop but not anywhere near as much as yesterday.

Before Bell went down we had more flexibility in our passing game which is why it struggled some in the 2nd half yesterday.

As Hairston gets more comfortable and they trust him more they'll bring in deeper drops. Until that point they won't.

We will always be a quick hitting team, but yesterday near exclusivity on that was something we hadn't seen before. It was effective for a while, but when PHI loaded the box we had trouble getting through the traffic.

Hence my comment under Fitz about how much freedom (if any) does he have to check out of plays or go to his hot read. I was reading the defense on my TV and knew it was time to check out of what we were running. He didn't do that, but Im not sure if that's on him or Gailey.

[Mr. Miyagi]

DB you really need to have an editor to proof-read your grammar.

I'm on Nick Barnett and already found 4 errors.

[psubills62]

Also saw guys chipping Hairston's man to help him out. I personally hope Bell will be back soon. Hairston was good, but we're facing some good pass rushers in our next few opponents.

[DraftBoy]

DB you really need to have an editor to proof-read your grammar.

I'm on Nick Barnett and already found 4 errors.

If the site had the budget Id happily hire one. However not many editors work for free or take in the volume we produce for cheap.

Im well aware I have horrible grammar, I actually dont like writing this stuff at all. Its not what Im good at, that's why Im looking for writers to take over the Bills stuff. Have a few who are interested already.

[justasportsfan]

what worries me is that our deep ball game is starting to disappear . With jones sidelined looks like we're worse in that area.

[DraftBoy]

what worries me is that our deep ball game is starting to disappear . With jones sidelined looks like we're worse in that area.

Agreed though I do think that we had a lack of opportunity due to our game plan adjustments.

[Mr. Miyagi]

We didn't do it this game because of their big name CBs.

[mysticsoto]

What did I short him credit on? There is no denying they schemed around very shot and very quick passing options because they had a rookie at LT. He got beat by Tapp's speed rush on multiple occasions though it rarely mattered because Fitz had already gotten rid of the ball.

The sack that he allowed wasn't really his fault and his run blocking was very good just as advertised.

Plenty to draw from, plenty to work on. A good game, what more do you want me to say other than going over board and drooling about a guy we had to scheme around for our own protection?

The coaching staff did exactly what it was supposed to do. They drew up a game plan that was almost all three step drops because they didnt think Hairston could handle Tapp on a 5 or 7 step drop. They were pretty dead on about that, correct?

All I'm saying is that a 4th round rookie forced to play LT played pretty damn well. The negative things you point out could be said about the other linemen also. It seemed to take away from how well he did.

[cookie G]

Disagree, when you watch the other games we ran deeper routes, we ran into the intermediate zone more, yesterday we did very little of that.

He was almost exclusively in 3 step drops, which has been his predominant drop but not anywhere near as much as yesterday.

Before Bell went down we had more flexibility in our passing game which is why it struggled some in the 2nd half yesterday.

As Hairston gets more comfortable and they trust him more they'll bring in deeper drops. Until that point they won't.

We will always be a quick hitting team, but yesterday near exclusivity on that was something we hadn't seen before. It was effective for a while, but when PHI loaded the box we had trouble getting through the traffic.



Hence my comment under Fitz about how much freedom (if any) does he have to check out of plays or go to his hot read. I was reading the defense on my TV and knew it was time to check out of what we were running. He didn't do that, but Im not sure if that's on him or Gailey.

-show me how many times Fitz has held the ball 3 or more seconds this season. This wasn't due to Hairston, it was due to the line as a whole, or how they want to run their offense, or a combination of both.

-I'm not sure I would have been throwing many deep balls against Samuel and Asomugha (sp.) either. You might do one or two to keep them honest, but I'd rather attack their young, inexperienced linebackers.

-yeah, they're going to have to throw a few more deep balls to keep teams honest, but this wasn't the week for it.

-I'd be really surprised if Fitz didn't have the ability to change plays at the line.

[DraftBoy]

All I'm saying is that a 4th round rookie forced to play LT played pretty damn well. The negative things you point out could be said about the other linemen also. It seemed to take away from how well he did.

Maybe to you, but it was unbias anaylsis of his game, imo. Nothing I said was incorrect in any way. I was fair across the board I thought.

If you disagree than that's fine, and Ill keep it in mind for future games. Im always willing to hear critiques.

[cookie G]

If the site had the budget Id happily hire one. However not many editors work for free or take in the volume we produce for cheap.

Im well aware I have horrible grammar, I actually dont like writing this stuff at all. Its not what Im good at, that's why Im looking for writers to take over the Bills stuff. Have a few who are interested already.

Type your articles in Word. Go to Tools>spelling and grammar.

If you don't have MS Office, there is a site called OpenOffice.org where you can download a word processing program that will have one.

[DraftBoy]

-show me how many times Fitz has held the ball 3 or more seconds this season. This wasn't due to Hairston, it was due to the line as a whole, or how they want to run their offense, or a combination of both.

-I'm not sure I would have been throwing many deep balls against Samuel and Asomugha (sp.) either. You might do one or two to keep them honest, but I'd rather attack their young, inexperienced linebackers.

-yeah, they're going to have to throw a few more deep balls to keep teams honest, but this wasn't the week for it.

-I'd be really surprised if Fitz didn't have the ability to change plays at the line.

-Im not sure what you're getting at, I made no comment about the time he held the ball in his hand. Don't confuse 3 step drop for talking about 3-5 seconds.

-I would throw all day against Samuel. In fact we targeted him routinely.

-I dont agree, young S's, a aging CB, LB's who can't run. Their defense if you avoid Aso was primed to give up some yards. However with a rookie LT you dont risk that.

-I would be too, but I think we all saw times in the 3rd Q where the box has 8-9 guys on it and we all knew what they were keying on. If you and me knew it then why not check out? Its just something odd I noticed that Im curious to know.

[DraftBoy]

Type your articles in Word. Go to Tools>spelling and grammar.

If you don't have MS Office, there is a site called OpenOffice.org where you can download a word processing program that will have one.

Done that, Word picks up errors that aren't actually errors and misses things as well. Unfortunately it blows to say the least.

[mysticsoto]

Maybe to you, but it was unbias anaylsis of his game, imo. Nothing I said was incorrect in any way. I was fair across the board I thought.

If you disagree than that's fine, and Ill keep it in mind for future games. Im always willing to hear critiques.

No real BIG disagreement. Just think the way you phrased it all comes off taking away from his accomplishment. If you want to say, he's got things to work on and isn't perfect, fine, but most of what you said applied to the rest of the Olinemen also.

Maybe a line at the end of your "critique" saying..."But overall, a damn good performance for a rookie drafted in the 4th round" might have made it sound differently, as I think his performance trumped any things he has to work on.

[DraftBoy]

No real BIG disagreement. Just think the way you phrased it all comes off taking away from his accomplishment. If you want to say, he's got things to work on and isn't perfect, fine, but most of what you said applied to the rest of the Olinemen also.

Maybe a line at the end of your "critique" saying..."But overall, a damn good performance for a rookie drafted in the 4th round" might have made it sound differently, as I think his performance trumped any things he has to work on.

Yea but have you ever heard me say that about anybody?

I disagree with the final statement.

[mysticsoto]

Yea but have you ever heard me say that about anybody?

I disagree with the final statement.

Well, then we'll have to agree to disagree. LT is the hardest position on the line to fill and look how high $$$ are paid to top LTs in the league. For him to be drafted that low, come in and do that well is a significant accomplishment. I don't care if 3 step drops were all that were allowed for Fitz. This was his 1st start and lasted throughout the game and played damn well. I don't think there were any penalties on him (atleast none that I can remember) and his run blocking was obviously great as he opened some nice holes for FJ during the game.

The penalty at the end of the game was something I might expect from a rookie like Hairston. Instead, our Oline was disciplined and PHI's Oline fell to pieces...

And that's a compliment to Chan. I think he has this team well disciplined!!!

[cookie G]

-Im not sure what you're getting at, I made no comment about the time he held the ball in his hand. Don't confuse 3 step drop for talking about 3-5 seconds.

Not confusing anything. It's what they do..quick set up, quick release. If Fitz is under center, he's usually taking at most a 4 1/2 step drop, with the last step being a half step. Sometimes he takes 2 or 3 steps back when he's in the gun, but not always.

I think you may actually confusing the lack of 7 step drops with the lack of long and intermediate passing. The 2 aren't necessarily tied together.

Based on what I've seen of this offense for the last y and 5 games...this is how they are running it, and how they have been running it.



-I would throw all day against Samuel. In fact we targeted him routinely.

Well, we didn't. There was one deep throw against him in the 1st or 2nd Q.



-I dont agree, young S's, a aging CB, LB's who can't run. Their defense if you avoid Aso was primed to give up some yards. However with a rookie LT you dont risk that.

What they did do differently was try to run more, but as usual they ran to the left predominantly. But they were running first.

And their defense DID give up some yards. And points. They gave up 2 TD's in their first 6 possessions. (How long has it been since the Bills could score 3 TD's in 6 possessions? Love that!!).

I think there was more of a

-failure to adjust;
-sitting on the ball with a lead;
-not wanting to test the CB's deep.

rather than protecting the rookie LT (no more than they've protected the line all year.) Hell, if they were really worried about it, they just had to slide a TE or McIntyre over to help.



-I would be too, but I think we all saw times in the 3rd Q where the box has 8-9 guys on it and we all knew what they were keying on. If you and me knew it then why not check out? Its just something odd I noticed that Im curious to know.

A number of reasons cited above. This is a guy though, that not only was making the calls at the LOS, but has been making the line calls. Just a week or two ago, on of the receivers, Nelson, I think, was making comments that Fitz was drawing up routes in the dirt during the huddle. I'm pretty sure he's been given the green light to audible.

[cookie G]

Done that, Word picks up errors that aren't actually errors and misses things as well. Unfortunately it blows to say the least.

How would you know, you said your grammar sucks. :)

I run into it quite a bit when I'm writing a brief.

Here's what your typical legal citation looks like:

Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349-50. (1992)

If you really want to demonstrate a point to the court, you will string 2 or 3 of them together. When you cite a few dozen cases in a brief, grammar check goes off the charts.

But I'd just as soon click through everything than not do a grammar or spell check at all. For every day use, it just takes a minute or two.

[DraftBoy]

How would you know, you said your grammar sucks. :)

I run into it quite a bit when I'm writing a brief.

Here's what your typical legal citation looks like:

Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349-50. (1992)

If you really want to demonstrate a point to the court, you will string 2 or 3 of them together. When you cite a few dozen cases in a brief, grammar check goes off the charts.

But I'd just as soon click through everything than not do a grammar or spell check at all. For every day use, it just takes a minute or two.

Touche.

I do follow the grammar and spell check on Word, unfortunately the mistakes I make (using improper tense, common splices, and a few other issues Im not aware of) are not caught by Word.

Never wanted to become a journalist, there is no fun in that for me.

[DraftBoy]

Not confusing anything. It's what they do..quick set up, quick release. If Fitz is under center, he's usually taking at most a 4 1/2 step drop, with the last step being a half step. Sometimes he takes 2 or 3 steps back when he's in the gun, but not always.

I think you may actually confusing the lack of 7 step drops with the lack of long and intermediate passing. The 2 aren't necessarily tied together.

Based on what I've seen of this offense for the last y and 5 games...this is how they are running it, and how they have been running it.

I agree there was a clear lack of design to go into the intermediate and long zones yesterday and as we carry this one I dont see how we really disagree. My only point about the game plan change for Hairston was their quicker drops, and lack of longer developing routes because he was in. Was it a huge deviation? No, but its was noticeable.




Well, we didn't. There was one deep throw against him in the 1st or 2nd Q.

I can think of at least 3 other catches where he was targeted including the Nelson TD toss where he was stuck in no man's land in zone coverage. Could of missed it but Im pretty sure he got picked on more than a few times.




What they did do differently was try to run more, but as usual they ran to the left predominantly. But they were running first.

And their defense DID give up some yards. And points. They gave up 2 TD's in their first 6 possessions. (How long has it been since the Bills could score 3 TD's in 6 possessions? Love that!!).

I think there was more of a

-failure to adjust;
-sitting on the ball with a lead;
-not wanting to test the CB's deep.

rather than protecting the rookie LT (no more than they've protected the line all year.) Hell, if they were really worried about it, they just had to slide a TE or McIntyre over to help.

We've been a run first team all year long and its been way too long. We did slide the TE and chip on Hairston's side a few times. Mystic pointed that out as well earlier. Have I mentioned how much I hate sitting on the lead that early in a game?



A number of reasons cited above. This is a guy though, that not only was making the calls at the LOS, but has been making the line calls. Just a week or two ago, on of the receivers, Nelson, I think, was making comments that Fitz was drawing up routes in the dirt during the huddle. I'm pretty sure he's been given the green light to audible.

Which is fine and after speaking to three different people that all agree he has the green light I have to question what the hell was wrong then yesterday? You and I (as well most of the right of Bills Nation) saw that in third Q the defense was keying on Jackson and the screen passes. Yet our coach kept calling it and our QB wasn't checking out. Why that was, I dont know, but I can tell you I really don't like that.