Raiders

[Mad Bomber]

This is going to be our toughest test to date.

I'm impressed about the way our run D came together this past week. I do have some concerns, though...

Our pass D has some issues, especially if Watson is out there. Double it if Bostic is out there. We need to shut down 3rd down situations.

Our D has been dying in the 4th quarter - we don't seem to be able to stop anything. Is this a conditioning issue? I could see it in Denver, where the altitude is a definite advantage for the Broncos, but we did the same thing against the Bears. It would be great to take a 4th Quarter lead and actually keep it without having to go to OT!

We're gonna have to mount a pass rush if we want to beat the Raiders.

Our O can put up some points against the Raiders, especially if Drew throws to Eric, Peerless, Josh and Jay instead of Rod Woodson!

I think we have a very real possibility of beating these guys this week. It's going to be our biggest test so far (IMO even more than going to Denver). If we can beat these guys, look out NFL! WOOOOOHOOOO!

[Rebecky]

With this offense, the sky is the limit -- not even the Raiders can cover that may receivers and a hot qb.

Come on D -- the Raiders are OLD, you can wear them out! Eat your Wheaties!

[Mad Bomber]

Could be a 48-42 game...

As long as we get the 48 I'm happy!

[Romes]

IMO, The Raiders are better on paper then the Bills. Therefore the coaches will be a huge factor in how the scheme and decide to play against the Raiders. I trust that Gilbride and Bledsoe could pick apart almost any defense. Especially a Raider one missing Charles Woodson. The test for the coaches, GW and Gray, is how they decide to defend against the Raiders great ground attack vs their 2 future hall of fame recievers and efficient QB.

The Bills need to learn how to stop opposing teams in clutch 3rd down situations. If the bills can do that, I think they could win.

[venis2k1]

This is gonna be one of the most exciting games this season

[Cntrygal]

Have any of you seen a link about Woodson being out? The Raider site made no mention of it.

[Ebenezer]

Two words to describe why the Raiders will beat the Bills:

Chris Watson!

[Judge]

Originally posted by Rebecky
With this offense, the sky is the limit -- not even the Raiders can cover that may receivers and a hot qb.

Come on D -- the Raiders are OLD, you can wear them out! Eat your Wheaties!

Exactly- let's have a track meet. See who's standing last: the younger Bills or the old veteran Raiders?

Early prediction: Bills 59 Raiders 56!

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer
Two words to describe why the Raiders will beat the Bills:

Chris Watson!

Unfair.

Think back- how many of the penalties called on Watson have you thought were really ticky-tack marginal calls? I think at least 1 in each of the last 2 games was a bogus penalty.

On top of that- Watson is our #3 CB, and yet he's been forced into covering the #1 WR on the opposing team on a seemingly regular basis for at least the past 3 games. Considering he's gone up against Moss, Rod Smith, and Booker regularly, he has hung in there.

And he made a HUGE pass defense in OT Sunday- to lead to the WIN!

Stop singling out Watson as a scape goat.

I'm going to make this a separate thread, I think!

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Judge
Early prediction: Bills 59 Raiders 56!


although I would love to see a game like that...ain't goin' happin'....

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer



although I would love to see a game like that...ain't goin' happin'....

Why not sir?

:nana:

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Judge


Why not sir?

:nana:


115 points in an NFL game??? The Bills and SF had a game with no punts scored under 90 combined.

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer



115 points in an NFL game??? The Bills and SF had a game with no punts scored under 90 combined.

You never know!

Never say never!

[Ebenezer]

250 Zonebucks says they stay under 100 combined.

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer
250 Zonebucks says they stay under 100 combined.

Give me huge odds- I'd be the one taking the chance!

How about 70 over/under?!

[Ebenezer]

Ok...lets go for an over/under of 75? I'll take the under. 250?

[Herdwatcher]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
This is going to be our toughest test to date.

I'm impressed about the way our run D came together this past week. I do have some concerns, though...
Our D has been dying in the 4th quarter - we don't seem to be able to stop anything. Is this a conditioning issue? I could see it in Denver, where the altitude is a definite advantage for the Broncos, but we did the same thing against the Bears. It would be great to take a 4th Quarter lead and actually keep it without having to go to OT!



Could it be cronic burn out? Due to the fact that they just might be using up their resereved energy? The same thing the Raiders used to do, the same thing the Dullfans have done for years.
Too hyped up at the start of the game. By late in the second half the tank is running dry.
During the Levy days. He was able to get his team to keep it steady. like being on the freeway. Hold the pace, create distance, pass when you need to, keep pace. Then gun it in the home stretch.

[colin]

We seem to need to scheme against every team on D, but that leaves us being readable in the second half. The Raiders are a very well oiled machine, but lack any real big play ability. They are going to eat us up underneath, but one penalty and a mistake will end most of their drives. I am pretty sure we are gonna pass the ball a TON and run much less but for good yardage, and if we can make the Raiders play from behind we can win. Verry tough game, but the Home feild really helps.

[MissBuffalo]

This is one week I won't be wearing my Bills shirt to work after they win. LOL--I don't want to get jumped.

[Creemoredrinker]

Originally posted by MissBuffalo
This is one week I won't be wearing my Bills shirt to work after they win. LOL--I don't want to get jumped.

:whip:

Do you want Tony to send you an associate who will carry you into work like a bride on her honeymoon?:pray:

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer
Ok...lets go for an over/under of 75? I'll take the under. 250?

Nope- give me odds. I'll take the over and get 250 if I win. You take the under and I'll give you 25 if you win.

10-1 odds is fair!

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Judge


Nope- give me odds. I'll take the over and get 250 if I win. You take the under and I'll give you 25 if you win.

10-1 odds is fair!


Well, since only 2 games were over 75 last week, I guess I'll go with it...

Under 75 you give me 25
Over 75 I'll give you 250

[Judge]

Originally posted by Ebenezer



Well, since only 2 games were over 75 last week, I guess I'll go with it...

Under 75 you give me 25
Over 75 I'll give you 250

That's fair, I think- done. IN ZONE BUCKS ONLY, however- for entertainment purposes only!

:cheers:

[casdhf]

Originally posted by Ebenezer



Well, since only 2 games were over 75 last week, I guess I'll go with it...

Under 75 you give me 25
Over 75 I'll give you 250


why not make it 250 and 2500? Chickens :down:

[Judge]

Originally posted by casdhf



why not make it 250 and 2500? Chickens :down:

That'd be fine! I'll put up 250 against Eb's 2500!

[Ebenezer]

Originally posted by Judge


That'd be fine! I'll put up 250 against Eb's 2500!


we'll stick with the 25 vs. 250...thanks...

[Rebecky]

OK -- from our D standpoint -- the Raiders O is hurry up, often no huddle, and with a playbook the size of the Bible. They count on confusing even veteran D's. Our young D is ripe for the picking -- UNLESS we have a captain on the field who has been given, by our coaches, a viable scheme for reading the Raiders offense and making quick on-field adjustments.

Our D coaches are going to have to step up on gameday like they never have before and get in the chess match. They need to watch a LOT of Oakland game film this week -- a LOT.

Like others in this forum, I have faith in KG and DB to read the Oakland D and adjust and score -- even if the Oakland D is notorious for confusing offenses (from what I've been reading, on any given play the Oakland D may throw ANY known D-scheme at you -- they regularly mix 3-4, 4-3, 5-2, 4-6). I have faith in DB to keep his cool and NOT make the kind of dumb catastrophic mistake the Oakland D likes to force.

[Drewpac]

I think Oakland will play alot of 3 wideout sets for a couple of reasons:

1. Our front four has had problems stopping the run when we are in the nickel package. I expect to see Charlie Garner handle most of the running back duties as opposed to Wheatley. Garner is quick and he has great cutback ability. He's the type of back who has given us problems this year.

2. It will increase their odds of attacking Watson. It's kind of scary to think that Watson will probably draw the duty of covering Tim Brown when the Raiders go to three wideouts.

Gannon has been throwing a ton of short passes so far this season (another one of our weaknesses) ala Tom Brady, and the Raiders have been lighting up the scoreboard. I think this one might be painful to watch. I see the Raiders slowly picking us apart 6 yards at a time on Sunday. I think our only hope is if we get some turnovers or some big special teams plays.

[MissBuffalo]

Originally posted by Creemoredrinker
Do you want Tony to send you an associate who will carry you into work like a bride on her honeymoon?

Thank you Creemore!!!!!! That's a wonderful idea!!!!!! I think you saved me......LOL!!!!! :angel:

[TigerJ]

Upon reading a Bills article in the Buffalo News today, I have some thoughts. While it's likely that the Bills offence will be heavily weighted toward the pass this week, again, when the Bills do run they might want to consider running outside a lot of the time. This is just the opposite of what I've been saying the last two weeks vs. defenses with fast linebackers. The Raiders have a dominating interior line. Sam Adams and John Parella have been brutal to run agains. But the Raiders linebackers are older and don't have the range of linebackers from our last two opponents. Romanowski is a rough and tumble player but I don't think he'll be as effective chasing running backs to the sideline. With that in mind, I would let Bryson get some carries. This has nothing to do with Henry's fumbles. I've been of the opinion that the Bills have to let him play through the fumble problem because he is clearly the best running back for the Bills. But Bryson has more speed and we know he can run outside. Rod Woodson doesn't have speed at safety anymore either. I think the Raiders might be vulnerable to some big gainers outside.

In the passing game, I don't pretend to be able to give Gilbride any advice. He does just fine without me.

On defense the Raiders present a huge problem. Garner is a speedy running back and can go outside. He's not very big, but he's more effective inside than Shawn Bryson is. I almost think I'd try to have Coy Wire spy him. His job would be to go wherever Garner goes. Coy has good speed and tackling ability and he's a playmaker. While the Raiders OC likes to go deep occasionally, he runs a WCO. That means a majority of pass plays are going to be short routes. Rice is a master of the slant. To be honest, I wonder if the Bills ought to run a nickle package a lot of the time on defense, four linemen, two linebackers and 5 DBs, with coy Wire being one of them. The Bills would be sacrificing the ability to get extra pressure on Gannon, but we didn't do very well at that vs. Chicago anyway. Lincoln Kennedy is questionable and his effectiveness might be limited. Maybe the DE opposite Kennedy (I assume it's Chidi Ahanotu because I think Kennedy is more of a right tackle type) can benefit from that. In any case the Bills will probably give up a lot of points.