View Full Version : Only a know nothing would criticize Gilbride so far
Judge
11-07-2002, 12:06 PM
The Bills have been rejeuvenated on offense due to Gilbride's brilliant use of Bledsoe and his talented corps of wide receivers. We have gone from the bottom of the barrel to a top-rate offense that can score from anywhere.
And yet some people are dissatisfied. How can they be? What do they want?
Who cares- they don't seem to grasp what's right in front of them- that the Bills are vastly improved from last year. Any argument that the Bills are "predictable" is the epitome of stupidity- There are very few ways to be unpredictable in the NFL, and "unpredictability" can only give a short-term edge at most- what matters is preparation and execution of what you do.
This offense is set to be a top-flight, championship caliber unit. Gilbride's brilliant use of his talent must be acknowledged by anyone who understands football.
LtBillsFan66
11-07-2002, 12:13 PM
I agree. WTF! We had plenty of scoring opportunities against the Pats. 3 missed fgs. A questionable TD. A PUNT from the 32!!!
Our D puts us into 17-0 hole. When your down like that "sticking to a gameplan" isn't prudent/
mchurchfie
11-07-2002, 12:17 PM
I agree Judge. Many people will point out that it is all Drew and Co. but KG is the one that has masterfully tailored the passing game to Drew's strengths and has made him a very happy camper along the way. My only criticism is that he needs to start using the running game in certain situations a little more. But you have to admire a guy that goes for TDs instead of FGs in OT;)
I must be a know nothing who doesn't understand football. Gilbride week in and week out has just about put a nail in our coffin by not utilizing the running game. Going back two weeks we could have run the clock down on Detroit in the 4th and the play-by-play looks like: incomplete pass, imcomplete pass, incomplete pass, punt. Detroit gets put in a position to win the game. It's been a problem several weeks. Even if we get down a few points it's not time to panic at the rate we panic. I am not happy with a pass happy offense. It will never be consistenly effective like a balanced running attack will provide. I'm glad you know-it-alls are content to put the whole effectiveness of the team on Bledsoe's shoulders. We don't need no stinking running game in the NFL...no no we don't need that. Idiots.
Oh yeah, it was much better to abandon the run that was working so well against a very questionable run defense in favor of going to the pass which had barely put up 20 yards until that point and vs. one of the best secondaries and pass defenses in the league!
WoW! What Brilliance! Only a genoius would figure that out and curtail further drives resulting in EVEN MORE POINTS b/c we couldn't keep our O on the field for any significant amount of time!
Absolutely Brilliant!
That offensive performance against a so-so Miami D just lighting things up for a whole 16 points, 7 of which came on a defensive SNAFU, was simply outstanding.
Or perhaps that performance that had us simply light up Detroit for 24! WOOOOWEEEE!
WOW!
Incredible!!! That's all that can be said about that I guess...
:rolleyes:
Any O.C. that couldn't do what we're doing now shouldn't be an O.C. in this league, period!
What, most other O.C.'s wouldn't be putting up an average of 27.x points thus far?
I find that extremely hard to believe!
But then again Judge, I'm not sure that I have the wits to match you and BFSIW!
;)
Novacane
11-07-2002, 12:38 PM
"no nothing" "Idiots"
Come on guys. Lets have a big group hug now! :huddle:
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 12:38 PM
I agree to a point, but there's no reason to only run the Ball 12 times against the 29th ranked rush D in the league, especially when you're averaging 4.8 per carry. There's just no excuse for it!
However, Gilbride is a million times better than the rejects we've had in here the past few years.
"The Bills have been rejeuvenated on offense due to Gilbride's brilliant use of Bledsoe and his talented corps of wide receivers. We have gone from the bottom of the barrel to a top-rate offense that can score from anywhere."
Wrong. The Bills have been rejuvinated simply due to a vastly improved OL and the arrival of Bledsoe. Gilbride is barely contributing.
I can't believe that these statements are even being on the heels of Sunday's performance! I simply cannot believe it.
Great Job Kevin!!! Let's coach like that every week. The way you outcoached and out-witted Belichick, wooowheee! Man, if we can do that every single week, or play like we did vs. Miami by putting up 16 BIG points, we'll be right in this down to the AFC CG!
Oh yeah...
:D
12 carries against the 29th rush D in the league. Brilliance. I can't even begin to praise Gilbride to the extents I should...me know nothing. No have the words.
"However, Gilbride is a million times better than the rejects we've had in here the past few years."
Indeed. But he's not perfect and there's plenty of room for improvement. No NFL team can be successful enough to win their conference and then the SB unless they have a successful rushing game. What is his plan? To pass his way to the playoffs and then start Henry for 30 carries a game. I know we all don't believe that, eh.
Simply stated, we're just going to have to run the ball regularly in order to have the success that we want. If you look at Gilbride's track record, it's been pass first all throughout his career as long as he's been in charge. Regardless of who the QB is. That's an issue IMO. His offenses over the past decade are by far-and-away the passingest most offenses in the league on average. By a LONG shot! Why? B/c it sure isn't b/c he had the talent at QB and WR!
Since we often come right out throwing the ball, it's highly unlikely that will change. If throwing works, he'll say "stick w/ passing." If it doesn't, then likely we're down by too much to start running the ball. Especially w/ our D. And you know what, that's the exact pattern that has emerged here this season. Last game was the perfect example.
LMAO Typ0!!!
I could see that the words were failing you...
LOL
THATHURMANATOR
11-07-2002, 12:53 PM
Gilbride has done a good job IMO, but it is very clear that we need to run the ball more.
What has he done to suggest to you that he's done anything other than let Drew & Co. play and take advantage of talent mismatches. Ie., Moulds/Price v. the Lion DBs, etc. ???
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:04 PM
All I know is that we're scoring twice as much as we scored last year. I don't care whose fault it is.
I think we'd be doing this w/ Pendry as our O.C.
We've also slowed tremendously offensively speaking. Is this a coincidence considering that we just came off of two of the toughest games on our schedule defensively speaking?
What if Gilbride only continues to average around in the low 20s as he's done lately? What then? Would he still be doing a good job?
Or are the expectations greater considering the talent we have on O?
colin
11-07-2002, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
Gilbride has done a good job IMO, but it is very clear that we need to run the ball more.
Tru Dat Yo.
KG is a fine coordinator, he has a go for it all deep passing mentality and that should be reigned in by the HC. It is just like an always blitz creative DC, you want that rather than a sit on your hands sorta coordinator.
KG clearly wants to throw, and throw deep, way to much. That is simple to correct though, it is not like our run game sucks, it is very very good, we just don't mix it up correctly. NE had the same never run problem for a few weeks. I am sure we will make some improvements.
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
We've also slowed tremendously offensively speaking. Is this a coincidence considering that we just came off of two of the toughest games on our schedule defensively speaking?
It's not a coincidence. It's the beard.
The success is good. I'm not saying KB has not been successful in many areas. And he is better than we have had here in recent years. However, he is not making adjustments he clearly has to make to really achieve success at the levels we all want to see this team achieve. If you can't see that you are blind. The opportunities are there and he is ignoring them because of his pre-disposition. That is a bad thing. That alone tells the story why there are no half time adjustments that help us put teams away when we have the opportunities. If you want to settle for a team with "success in some areas" that is "pretty good" you go right ahead. Our best chances to win a superbowl could be right in front of us. Tell me Ralph does not want to win one at all costs right now. Tell me he is a lousy owner who doesn't know what he is doing. If the coaches do not perform on the levels needed to win in the NFL Wilson will bounce them out. Gilbride needs to make adjustments or get bounced. The opportunity is right in front of him. He better use it or he sucks.
colin,
Is it good to keep going deep when the coverage is excellent and when the success rate is low?
There is a time and a place for everything. We need to not be afraid to go deep. But at the same time, when it fails, we need to be very quick to change whatever isn't working and go to what is. But to abandon the run when it's the only successful component of the offense simply doesn't make any sense. Gilbride has done that several times so far.
Yes, we were down, but then going to the pass which was struggling, and then allowing N.E. even more opportunities for N.E. to score as a result and then putting us in even a bigger hole makes little sense.
34-17 is better than 38-7 even though they are both losses. But we simply can't live off of the long pass which is what we're trying to do this season. I don't see how that translates into Gilbride being anything other than an O.C. "who's not afraid to go deep."
Rude American
11-07-2002, 01:14 PM
Gilbride is an idiot. Plain and simple. Let me prove it.
OT vs the Vikings. 1st and 5 on the Minn 19!!! The 19!!! Gilbride calls pass. Bledsoe is sacked for a loss of 9, which eventually leads to a missed fg attempt. Brilliance. Sheer brilliance, Mr. Gilbride.
3rd quater vs. Lions. 2nd and 1 we throw. Incomplete. 3rd and 1 we throw again. Incomplete again. 4th and 1: He elects to call Drew's number for the keeper. Why not just run twice and get the first down? Oh, I know. Because he's an idiot.
Then, a 4th down on the 32 and he punts? The man is a MORON!!! I can't begin to express my disdain for his play calling.
Anyone who can't see he's done nothing more than ride the coat tails of a future hall of famer is a know-nothing themself.
THATHURMANATOR
11-07-2002, 01:14 PM
"What has he done to suggest to you that he's done anything other than let Drew & Co. play and take advantage of talent mismatches. Ie., Moulds/Price v. the Lion DBs, etc. ???"
Let me ask you WYS are you down on the field while Gilbride is calling the plays to have insight and make a comment like that? I have already stated that we need to run the ball more but he has done a good job in the passing game and calls.
It's gotta be the shoes...
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by Rude American
Then, a 4th down on the 32 and he punts? The man is a MORON!!! I can't begin to express my disdain for his play calling.
I think that was GW's call.
Rude American
11-07-2002, 01:16 PM
point taken. my bad
TT,
Your statement doesn't answer the question.
To answer yours, no! I sit in the stands like the rest of the fans. I also watch the games on TV w/ the luxury of replay. I also have my own set of eyes to watch the games and read the PBPs with as well.
So, what now? I have to be an NFL coach to know what Gilbride is doing isn't working?
Sorry. I thought that since he was the Offensive Coordinator that he had something to do w/ the overall running of the offense.
Apparently I am amiss!
Apologies! ;)
Rude American
11-07-2002, 01:17 PM
they suck together then.
mchurchfie
11-07-2002, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Typ0
The success is good. I'm not saying KB has not been successful in many areas. And he is better than we have had here in recent years. However, he is not making adjustments he clearly has to make to really achieve success at the levels we all want to see this team achieve. If you can't see that you are blind. The opportunities are there and he is ignoring them because of his pre-disposition. That is a bad thing. That alone tells the story why there are no half time adjustments that help us put teams away when we have the opportunities. If you want to settle for a team with "success in some areas" that is "pretty good" you go right ahead. Our best chances to win a superbowl could be right in front of us. Tell me Ralph does not want to win one at all costs right now. Tell me he is a lousy owner who doesn't know what he is doing. If the coaches do not perform on the levels needed to win in the NFL Wilson will bounce them out. Gilbride needs to make adjustments or get bounced. The opportunity is right in front of him. He better use it or he sucks.
Excellent points Typo:up:
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by Rude American
they suck together then.
there ya go ;)
GW has some serious issues as well. Our coaches won't be making the pro bowl this year.
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
GW has some serious issues as well. Our coaches won't be making the pro bowl this year.
They will if we go to the super bowl. :D
Just to think the alternative is GW taking over the play calling like Fassel did in NY. What a joke. GW clearly makes bonehead decisions. Maybe TD should call the plays. Or perhaps Ralph Wilson. Any idiot can say "go out there and throw the ball Drew".
Rude American
11-07-2002, 01:19 PM
The Bills are the most poorly coached team in the league.
TacklingDummy
11-07-2002, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by Typ0
I must be a know nothing who doesn't understand football. Gilbride week in and week out has just about put a nail in our coffin by not utilizing the running game. Going back two weeks we could have run the clock down on Detroit in the 4th and the play-by-play looks like
Didn't we try to run the ball late in the Detroit game and Henry fumbled allowing the Lions to almost tie it up. It took a defensive stand (OMG we did have 1) to end the game.
mchurchfie
11-07-2002, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by Rude American
The Bills are the most poorly coached team in the league.
I 100% agree Rude:up: GW pulled one of the biggest conjobs in convincing TD that he was HC material since the RJ "Ah wanna be a QB" caper.
lordofgun
11-07-2002, 01:25 PM
Bengals coaches are worse, but not by much.
Henry got the ball 9 times in the first half w/o fumbling while we put the ball to the air 31 times. That's well over 75% passing. That was all long before Henry fumbled.
There's no reason on earthy why we should have not been able to rush well against Detroit if our O is nearly as good as many of you here suggest. If we struggle against teams like Detroit, Minnesota, Oakland, and N.E., then how can we expect to run any more successfully against S.D., G.B., N.E. again?
Novacane
11-07-2002, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by Rude American
Gilbride is an idiot. ......................
\
Then, a 4th down on the 32 and he punts? The man is a
MORON!!!
That was not Gilbrides call! That was Greg Williams
THATHURMANATOR
11-07-2002, 01:28 PM
There you go again with your arrogance and talking down to me.
Why isn't it working? We have one of the highest scoring offenses in the league!!! Yes there is alway room for improvement. Running more would be a start.
The possession prior to Henry's fumble we should have taken at least another minute off the clock. That fumble would have happened inside the two minute warning...perhaps not at all.
TT,
Give it rest please. There was absolutely no arrogance in there. It's just like you to not answer the questions and then fire back under falty assumptions like KG has nothing to do w/ the play calling or whatever nonsensical statement you made.
Don't blame me. Organize your thoughts a little bit better. I get slammed after well thought out, well reasoned out, statements asking legitimate questions and the arrogance is on the side of those slamming me. Insinuations that I'm some sort of simpleton. At least have the grace and gumption to see that.
I was being facetious. But with the statement that you laid out, it could have been far worse. I could have ripped you to shreds, yet I didn't. ;)
Look, there's absolutely no way that you can slice the N.E. game. It was a coaching debacle from the get-go. Offensive, defensive, total! No ifs, ands, or buts!
We put up 7 points on only three visits to the red zone. Could not score from the 1 YL twice passing to try for the score! :rolleyes: If that was GW's call, then fine. But then KG is simply a figurehead. I refuse to believe that GW is already usurping KG's authority. If so, then time to get a new O.C. for that reason.
Otherwise it was KG's fault. But hey, we live by the pass, therefore we must die by the pass. The clock was certainly not an issue.
Rude American
11-07-2002, 01:39 PM
Originally posted by BledsoeTOreedfor6
That was not Gilbrides call! That was Greg Williams
I already admitted my bad. The other two examples are pretty good though, aren't they? The third serves to illustrate the stupidity we refer to as head coach.
Novacane
11-07-2002, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by Rude American
I already admitted my bad. The other two examples are pretty good though, aren't they? The third serves to illustrate the stupidity we refer to as head coach.
Yeah...I saw you had after I had posted. KG has made some mistakes, I agree. However, he is not the main problem on this team. Jerry Gray is a horrible DC!
Two good arguements out of three is pretty good for Rudemon.
I get slammed after well thought out, well reasoned out, statements asking legitimate questions
Sorry I just had to quote that.
Rude American
11-07-2002, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by Typ0
Two good arguements out of three is pretty good for Rudemon.
Gee, thanks. lol
:baghead:
THATHURMANATOR
11-07-2002, 02:15 PM
"I could have ripped you to shreds, yet I didn't. "
Well thanks for that!!! LOL
The_Philster
11-07-2002, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
I think we'd be doing this w/ Pendry as our O.C.
I don''t. Even though our running game hasn't been consistent, Gilbride has stuck with Henry and kept giving him the ball...when they actually decide to run. My point is, with Pendry, if Travis had a fumble or one or two negative plays, he'd bench him or platoon him in that ridiculous running back by commitee system. He'd also rarely, if ever, use him in pass patterns.
Originally posted by Wys Guy
We've also slowed tremendously offensively speaking. Is this a coincidence considering that we just came off of two of the toughest games on our schedule defensively speaking?
What if Gilbride only continues to average around in the low 20s as he's done lately? What then? Would he still be doing a good job?
Or are the expectations greater considering the talent we have on O?
Our expectations have to be greater. The offensive explosions the team put on in the first few weeks have spoiled us. The defense has yet to prove they can hold up their end of the bargain so we HAVE to put up points, or control the ball, on offense. In the colder weather, the passing game will go south and we'll need that consistent running game that we have yet to prove we have. That's the BIG thing they have to work on this BYE week....improve the running game.
What I don't understand is this team seems to constantly go for the juggler. They are trying to get out in front and put teams away and not quite getting the job done. They are close though. And they have played good teams well enough to get chances at wins. But if you are committed to being pass happy and going for the juggler why not 4th and 2 on the 32? I am so confused about that. It was an opportunity to vindicate a lot of things that didn't work and they didn't go for it. I lost a lot of respect for GW right there. And I lost as much respect for KG because he should have yelled into GW headset.
lunatic_bills_fan
11-07-2002, 07:39 PM
Well I bet all the Charlie Garner supporters were say "run the ball run the ball" and guess what??? Oakland did. That hurt them. Oakland is a passing team, much like I believe the Bills ar a passing team. With reference to the detroit game. If the pass marches you down the feild all game, why the hell abandon it in the 4th quarter. Clock managment is nice, but feild position and points are nicer. Go with the teams strong points. And like it or not, this team will continue to be based around the pass. If you dont think thats the way to go then why do so many of you post how imporant Price is??? I mean if all you wanna do is run the ball, then I guess there is no need to have 2 multi million dollar recievers out there. This may seem a little outspoken but Im reading so much about running the ball, I just dont understand why.
The very reason Oakland has failed to get to the next level because they do not have a running game. Look as good as they do throwing the ball with Gannon, Brown, Rice et. al. they just can't seem to get the job done and they aren't going to get it done this year. You don't hire people so everyone can be a star. I could care less if Moulds ever caught a ball if he was out there contributing to a winning offense by running his routes properly and tieing up defenders so others were in a position to make catches. If you consent to take the running game out of the picture you are taking way too many opportunities for competetive advantage out of the picture. We don't need to convert into a power running attack but not having a running attack is suicide especially when you have backs that can get the job done. Do you really think the Raiders have anywhere near the abilities we have in the offensive backfield? Come on man Price, Moulds and Bledsoe are not our only weapons.
helmetguy
11-07-2002, 08:21 PM
Oakland also has a defense as suspect as our own. More aptly, Oakland's defense is as non-existent as our own. Kinda strange, considering our "revered" head coach is supposed to be extremely organized, a teacher, and what else did he tout himself to be? He looked all of that Sunday, huh? You'd think he'd have figured out that the blitzes were getting scorched by screen passes-THE FIFTH TIME IT HAPPENED!!! Come to think of it, GW's idol and mentor sucked as a head coach, too. Can you say "Buddy Ryan?'
lunatic_bills_fan
11-07-2002, 08:26 PM
TYp0, Charlie Garner is an excellent back. And i tend to disagree with your statement of Moulds not catching any more balls. If you have one of the top 3 WR's in the game, you damn well should use him like a WR. Not a glorified TE out there blocking everything.
lunatic_bills_fan
11-07-2002, 08:28 PM
And I believe that Henry is still 6th in rush yards, that leads me to believe that we are using him pretty good as it is.
Earthquake Enyart
11-07-2002, 09:00 PM
Originally posted by Typ0
Maybe TD should call the plays. Or perhaps Ralph Wilson
Ralph should call the plays. Who the hell has seen more football than him?:monte:
colin
11-07-2002, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by lunatic_bills_fan
And I believe that Henry is still 6th in rush yards, that leads me to believe that we are using him pretty good as it is.
I agree with you, in that we are a passing team and a good one, but a little tweaking of the running game is required. Our giving up on the run too early on Sunday is a reflection of our mindset, and we do need to keep on running. Not everydown, but at least for 40% of our plays in the first 3 quarters.
No team that passes constantly and has no real rushing threat or D does well in the post season.
lunatic,
It's all about balance. You need both. But Gilbride seems to think that we can get by just by passing. He's sorely mistaken. That may work against the Detroits, the Houstons, the Jets, the Vikes, the Bears and a few other teams, but we aren't going to get away w/ it vs. the better teams.
BTW, the pass wasn't working well in the 2nd half of the Detroit game. We struggled all second half and were only able to put up 10 points. Our lone TD drive was 60 yards, 45 of which were rushing. Only 15 passing. That was Detroit, not San Diego's D.
lunatic_bills_fan
11-08-2002, 04:42 AM
I understand that some teams are gonna take he pass away from ya. IE when a defence drops 8 back, its probably not a good decision to pass. That being said, if Henry is 6h in rushing, only 100 yards or so to first, with 162 attempts, there are only a handfull of teams that run the ball more with their starting RB. So this puts me in a bigger state of confusion. We have the 6th leading rusher in yards and around the 7th-9th place runner (Both stats not just AFC, but NFL) and everyone wants to run more and more. I think I know where you guys are comin from, but I think we have to have some what of an established D before KG can come out and run the "TYPICAL" offense you guys speak of. Until then, IMO, Henry has good yards on good attempts, Bledsoe is on the top of his game, and we have a receiving core second to none in the NFL. If the pressure wasnt on them to score every drive, they may be even more successful.:feedback:
The_Philster
11-08-2002, 05:07 AM
Originally posted by Earthquake Enyart
Ralph should call the plays. Who the hell has seen more football than him?:monte:
Thank God he doesn't see it that way. Jerry Jones and Daniel Snyder are bad enough. Ralph is a class act but I shudder to think how he would be as a coach.
German
11-08-2002, 05:34 AM
lunatic,
your last post really confused me. I was under the impression that a good running game will take a lot of time of the clock.
With our defense being in a somewhat unstable state this would be exactly the time to run a more "Typical" offense. Keep the D off the field as much as possible.
With Henry averaging 4.5 yards per carry they need to keep running the ball more.
I do see where you're coming from but the defense as it is right now needs to be kept off the field as much as possible.
A fast scoring offense won't get us to the playoffs. A balanced one will.
Ralph as a coach...LOL. I was only kidding.
lunatic:
First, my point about moulds not catching the ball is in terms of the team, in effectiveness from the receiver position tell me the difference between these three scenarios:
1. total receiving yards 350. Price receiving 350. Moulds Receiving 0. Price TD 2.
2. Total receiving yards 350. Moulds receiving 350. Price Receiving 0. Moulds TD 2.
3 Total receiving yards 350. Moulds receiving 200. Price Receiving 150. Moulds TD 1. Price TD 1.
I think you can see these things all translate into the same thing. Who really cares where the yards are coming from? I don't. I am just looking at things saying, are we getting the production out of our receiver position we should be getting with the talent we have? If we are I can only surmise people are making the contributions they need to be making to get the job done. If Moulds is out there not able to get a ball because he is drawing 3 defenders and Price is streaking down the center of the field alone because of it I have a hard time understanding how we can go back to Moulds and tell him he isn't making the required contribution because he isn't catching any balls.
Second, myself I am more looking at a micro level on the rushing issue. Even though 12 carries against the 29th ranked rush D just confirms the micro arguement at the macro level. On the micro level, I just feel there are times running plays should be called in the game and KG is not calling them. They are calling running plays to keep the defense honest to the run so they can be succesfull passing, they are not calling them to be successful at the run. I don't think that has been fair to Henry because it is putting him in a position to fail on a lot of carries. Right now Henry is 8th in attempts, but he is the only person in the top 15 who has not had the bye week yet so he has played an extra game. Henry will be dropping down the line quite far in terms of attempts after this week and he'll be dropping a few spots in terms of yards. But if he's going to drop seven spots in attempts and only three in yards that is saying to me he is not getting near the attempts he should be getting, because his ypc is considerably higher than many others in the league (Bennett,Porter,MCCallister,Faulk), Henry is not getting the opportunities he should be getting. Then we can look at the game time decisions and there are long streaks of plays where there are no runs. There is rarely a run on first down or third and short. Well, we don't get a lot of third and shorts because we don't run the ball on first down. Then, and perhaps most importantly, we fail to control the game clock at critical junctures when we are winning. We need to commit to a running game more and use it to our advantage later in the game. I am not talking about abandoning the pass...we just need to do both better.
lunatic_bills_fan
11-08-2002, 07:04 AM
Well Typ0 I do agree with the point on situational running. Sometimes we have a habit of passing in running situations. Yes that point prob should be addressed. But overall Henry is gettin as many carries as anyone (except holmes) in the NFL. I think that aspect of the offence is working. Again (I sound like a broken record) its hard to stick with your running game when down by 17 points. IMO the running game will be established even greater when we can once in a while stop a team from marching down the feild on us,always resulting in points.
RedEyE
11-08-2002, 07:08 AM
My only question is this; Is it the level of offensive talent the reason the Bills have won games or is it the coaching. IMM, this seasons talent is the difference in the W column.
lunatic,
You have to break this down game by game. In 6 games, and not all games in which Henry was not running the ball effectively, he had the following numbers of carries: 12, 12, 12, 15, 19, 11
In the other three games he had 31, 28, and 22. That alone begs an explanation. All of our games have been close except for the Phin game and this N.E. game this past Sunday. So the arguments fo running the football seem great. This past Sunday, while many will argue that the D was responsible for the loss, you can easily argue that you just can't win many games with only 7 points on the boards. Unless you're Doug Flutie. :D
In any case, since running the ball very likely would have kept the N.E. O off the field, it would have been smart to do. Keep in mind that our passing game was struggling w/ only near 200 yards thru 58 minutes. There's nothing that we could have done to win that game looking back. The Pats were better prepared, playing w/ greater intensity, running the ball much better and therefore much more balanced, and were having tremendous success against our D which is no surprise.
Running the ball would not have won us the game, but it certainly would have kept the score down by the Pats and likely put some more points on the board for us. Other than that, the Pats are just a better team than we are and much of that derives itself from the coaching.
A Question for you or anyone else; why are we not running the ball more? Why do you think that is?
Red Eye,
I fully agree w/ you on this and that has been my position for weeks now. With the talent that we put on the field offensively, there is no reason as to why we shouldn't put up at least 20-some points each week on that notion alone. Yet lately, over the past three games we haven't even been able to do that.
You hit the nail right on the head here. We only had three trips inside the red zone last Sunday, and one of those was that final drive. That's only twice in 58 meaningful minutes. I would suggest that even w/o any coaches on the sidelines that w/ the talent we are fielding we could do that.
But, most people/fans seem to think Gilbride is doing an exceptional job. Just look at the title of this thread. :huh:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.