PDA

View Full Version : Teague played well


casdhf
09-13-2004, 10:00 AM
At least I thought so. :up:
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 10:02 AM
The whole O-line I thought did pretty well.
ryjam282
09-13-2004, 10:08 AM
I was very happy with the line the whole day. Big Mike had a few bad plays but nothing to say it was a bad game. It was nice to not have to see Drew picking hisself off the ground after every pass like last year.

I think we have a good thing going here, we are a work in progress. We will get everyone on the same page and the O line will live up to it's potential. I am not worried at all. Jax played a good game and won it at the end. What can we do? Nothing, except maybe tell EMoulds to hold the damn ball.
fabolouspaul
09-13-2004, 10:11 AM
The o-line played pretty good. I'm also impressed with Drew getting rid of the ball very quickly when the D blitzes.
casdhf
09-13-2004, 10:16 AM
They allowed 1 sack right? That was the play Bledsoe was smart and just ate it at the goal line. I was very impressed with pass protection.
Ebenezer
09-13-2004, 10:17 AM
They allowed 1 sack right? That was the play Bledsoe was smart and just ate it at the goal line. I was very impressed with pass protection.
No complaints...Jax DTs are walls...I would like to see how they fair against other teams...
The_Philster
09-13-2004, 02:44 PM
http://www.buffalobills.com/uploads/photo/7D33EE73B8A84136815630309C3D5661.jpg
Mr. Cynical
09-13-2004, 03:04 PM
95 yards total rushing with a 2.6 average. Run blocking was supposed to be the line's strength. :idunno:

We'll see next week. If they can't run on Oakland, whose D was ranked 30th last year, then we'll know where they stand.
G. Host
09-13-2004, 03:07 PM
The California Raisins defense line was helped a lot during offseason. I do not think judging according to last year's questionable defense ratings tells you much.
carybillsfan
09-13-2004, 03:13 PM
The California Raisins defense line was helped a lot during offseason. I do not think judging according to last year's questionable defense ratings tells you much.

I completely agree, with the additions of big ted and sapp at tackle it'll be tough for anyone to run against them
Mr. Cynical
09-13-2004, 03:18 PM
Against that new raisin line, Staley had 91 yards with a 3.8 avg, and Bettis had 3 rushing TDs. Guess we'll have to wait and see....
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 03:35 PM
95 yards total rushing with a 2.6 average. Run blocking was supposed to be the line's strength. :idunno:

We'll see next week. If they can't run on Oakland, whose D was ranked 30th last year, then we'll know where they stand.

I guess you added in the sack and the reverse that went for -7 yards.
John Doe
09-13-2004, 04:12 PM
At least I thought so. :up:

Cut 'em anyway - just for spite.
Luisito23
09-13-2004, 04:45 PM
The Raiders probably has a sorry line, but it doesn't stand good with Buffalo that Oakland had a bad game against the rushing and also lost....
Mr. Cynical
09-13-2004, 04:50 PM
I guess you added in the sack and the reverse that went for -7 yards.
:huh:

Sacks don't count against the run avg, and a reverse is a running play.
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 05:09 PM
:huh:

Sacks don't count against the run avg, and a reverse is a running play.

Unless nfl.com is wrong. We averaged 3.3 ypc not including the reverse. Not bad against the #1 run defense last year.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040912_JAC@BUF.shtml
Luisito23
09-13-2004, 05:16 PM
PEEWEEFORECAST.COM POWER RAKINGS 4 WEEK 1....

1.PATERSON "FOOTBALL" GIANTS
2.RIVERSIDE REBELS
3.GARFIELD WA WA'S
4.PASSAIC SALAMDERS
5...........
6.......
7....
8...
9..
10.
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 05:18 PM
PEEWEEFORECAST.COM POWER RAKINGS 4 WEEK 1....

1.PATERSON "FOOTBALL" GIANTS
2.RIVERSIDE REBELS
3.GARFIELD WA WA'S
4.PASSAIC SALAMDERS
5...........
6.......
7....
8...
9..
10.

What the hell are you doing posting this pee-wee ****?
HenryRules
09-13-2004, 05:52 PM
Unless nfl.com is wrong. We averaged 3.3 ypc not including the reverse. Not bad against the #1 run defense last year.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040912_JAC@BUF.shtml

How do you not count a running play in the rushing average?

It wasn't like Reed was past the tackles or anything ... he had just received the ball and got drilled.
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 05:57 PM
How do you not count a running play in the rushing average?

It wasn't like Reed was past the tackles or anything ... he had just received the ball and got drilled.

I didn't count it because most of the rushing is done by the RB's that's why. That's what we mostly look for isn't it?
HenryRules
09-13-2004, 05:58 PM
I didn't count it because most of the rushing is done by the RB's that's why. That's what we mostly look for isn't it?

When I talk about the RB's performance, I look at the RB's performance. When I talk about our rushing game and the OL's impact - I look at the rushing game as a whole (in addition to the passing game, but that wasn't what you mentioned).

The topic was our OL (Teague in particular) - not McGahee or Henry.
Mr. Cynical
09-13-2004, 06:17 PM
Unless nfl.com is wrong. We averaged 3.3 ypc not including the reverse. Not bad against the #1 run defense last year.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040912_JAC@BUF.shtml (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20040912_JAC@BUF.shtml)

Dude, you can't just take out a stat because it hurts the average. That is like wys saying "if you take out that one big run" in that article from a few weeks ago. A reverse is a run play and requires run blocking from the oline, which is the topic of the thread.

The run avg was 2.6 ypc, total yards was 95, and that is nothing to be proud of. The oline is not good, plain and simple.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=240912002
Philagape
09-13-2004, 06:49 PM
I want better than "not bad." It was not good enough, either. When the line is the key to the offense, it has to do better than "not bad" to win.

The pass blocking was good, but our running game got bogged down late in the third and early in the fourth quarter. Henderson had 5 tackles ... isn't that a lot for a DT?
The Spaz
09-13-2004, 07:06 PM
Dude, you can't just take out a stat because it hurts the average. That is like wys saying "if you take out that one big run" in that article from a few weeks ago. A reverse is a run play and requires run blocking from the oline, which is the topic of the thread.

The run avg was 2.6 ypc, total yards was 95, and that is nothing to be proud of. The oline is not good, plain and simple.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=240912002

I was looking at the average for the RB's sorry.:up: