What Wys does understand!

[WG]

:D

What Wys does understand that some are apparently having some difficulty with, is that a poor defense, while possibly costing games, is not responsible for the offense putting up a paltry amount of points.

It's no secret that our O has put up 17 or fewer points in the last bunch of games. It's also no secret that we haven't exactly dominated time-of-possession either.

For you skeptics, let's do this; provide us all, in all of your infinite collective wisdom, an example, a specific one, not some general vaguely phrased platitude, demonstrating how a poor defense contributes to the offense not scoring any points! And please do not use the field-position example b/c it simply has not been the case w/ us, so it hasn't been a large factor.

Sorry, had to make that part of it clear. B/c this debate hasn't been over whether or not the D is partially responsible for losing games. It's been over this ridiculous, at this point, notion that somehow our offense has been anything but shabby over the past 7 weeks overall. Again, putting up only more than 17 offensive points only twice during that span.

To be fair, I will demonstrate specifically how an offense that cannot control the clock and put points up significantly contributes to the D playing worse:

1. The longer the defense is on the field due to the offense's inability to do the same, the more time the opponent's offense is on the field, thereby increasing their chances of a) gaining yards, and b) scoring points.

2. The longer the defense is on the field due to the offense's inability to do the same, the more tired out the defense gets, thereby rendering it less effective as time goes on.

3. The longer the defense is on the field due to the offense's inability to do the same, the greater the chances that the opponent is allowed to run, something that the Bills are the most ill-equipped to stop this year.

What I'm not saying is that our D is good. It blows, make no mistake. One of the local sportswriters mentioned that it's poised to give up the most points since '84 I believe if I read it correctly. In any event, it's far from good and close to the worst in the league.

Nonetheless, in spite of people like Judge who argue that the Defense, apparently, is responsible for the offense not being able to properly play, drive, and put the ball into the endzone, I simply see little correlation except for perhaps situational ones. But again, such as having crappy field position, that really hasn't happened all that much over this stretch. FP has been OK at least usually. Besides, our woes have not been moving the ball down to the opponent's 20 or 30, they have been in the red zone.

Why the offense cannot score from within the redzone is not beyond me. With this cast it should be no problem. But the problem is that we pass when we should run. In any case, I think even the most hardened critic cannot reasonably truly believe that that is the fault of the defense under any circumstances.

Let's face it, and it's long overdue that those who have been arguing and belaboring this point do, but if our team scored 17 points each of the 16 weeks, We'd be lucky to win more than a game or two. So the entire reason for us not having won games over our last 5 is not entirely due to the defense. And if anything, the play of the defense has been more affected by the inability of the offense to A) control the clock, and B) put points on the boards thus allowing teams to run on us, which is our weakness this year on D. If the offense could have gone up in games, then we are more effective on D. Yet, that rarely happens. And it has nothing to do with the D. It has everything to do w/ the offense not being able to put points up early. That is not the D's fault!

Judge will argue. But he'll argue w/ me if I say that it's December. Right Judge! ;)

[the antichrist]

The real shiva2999 has asked me to repost this, as an imposter has assumed his identity rendering it impossible for him to post it here himself....

Bledsoe and Gilbride - the reason we're always behind...

Earlier this year, I was the first to point out we hadn't beat any good teams. I received the expected amount of abuse.

I then pointed out the disturbing fact that an inordinate number of our tds had come at the ends of halves and in O.T. Somehow most of you didn't get it that it meant our regular, bread and butter offense was highly inconsistent and ineffectual. The fact that we'd been so successful running the "everyone go downfield and Drew will whip it to someone" offense hid the fact it was the only thing we did well.

What this also means is that we are playing from behind a majority of the time.

So, I took a look at the game records and what I found was a game beginning record of futility that I doubt is matched by any other team in the league.

Here's what our unjustly adored offense did on it's first two possessions in every game so far this year.

The first two possessions of every game. Possessions that were brainstormed, designed, scripted and practiced all week.

Check it out....

Game poss.1 poss.2

1.NYJ- 3- 0
2.Minn- 0- 3
3.Den- 0- 0
4.Chi- 7- -7
5.Oak- 0- 0
6.Hou- 0- 3
7.Mia- 0- 0
8.Det- 0- 0
9.NE- 0- 0
10.KC- 0- 0
11.NYJ- 3- 0
12.Mia- 0- 3
13.NE- 0- 0

This is pathetic. Bledsoe and Gilbride and Gregg will assure this franchise of never being anything other than mediocre.

- shiva2999

and...

TMQ and Larry Centers identify the problem

I told you the whole year was ALL ABOUT DREW! Well, Tuesday Morning Quarterback starts to see what happens when a team dedicates it's whole season to one man's passing stats...

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/tmq/021210.html

'Tis Better to Have Rushed and Lost Than Never to Have Rushed at All No. 2:

At Kansas City last month, Buffalo lost by repeatedly passing on short-yardage downs. The Bills threw on a critical third-and-inches; incompletion, punt. Reaching first-and-goal at the Kansas City 5, the Bills threw three straight times, all incompletions, then settled for the field goal. They were defeated by one point.

On Sunday, Buffalo had second-and-goal at the New England 1-foot line, trailing by 17. Did the Bills pound, pound, pound for 99-percent-likely touchdown? A pass-wacky roll-out on which Drew Bledsoe sprinted backwards 15 yards -- 15 yards backward on goal-to-go from the one-foot line - interception, overall team collapse promptly follows. It's hard not to think the Buffalo sideline is more concerned about getting touchdown-pass stats for Bledsoe than about winning games.


READ THAT LAST LINE AGAIN!

It's hard not to think the Buffalo sideline is more concerned about getting touchdown-pass stats for Bledsoe than about winning games.


Why do I get the distinct impression there are Bledsoe fans, er, BILLS FANS who don't see anything wrong with that?


Now, here's what Larry Centers has to say...

http://www.gazettenet.com/12092002/sports/2577.htm

"It should never come down to it being solely on Drew's back," fullback Larry Centers said. "This is not the Buffalo Bledsoes. It's the Buffalo Bills."


Well, I called them the Bledsoe Bills, but close enough. Larry nails the problem out of thin air and then denies it to be politically correct.


IT"S ALL ABOUT DREW!!!!!!!!!!

- shiva2999

[TacklingDummy]

WYS, you have convinced me. Our offense sucks and our defense is one of the best units in the NFL. :drinker:

[Judge]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
:D


Nonetheless, in spite of people like Judge who argue that the Defense, apparently, is responsible for the offense not being able to properly play, drive, and put the ball into the endzone, I simply see little correlation except for perhaps situational ones. But again, such as having crappy field position, that really hasn't happened all that much over this stretch. FP has been OK at least usually. Besides, our woes have not been moving the ball down to the opponent's 20 or 30, they have been in the red zone.
...

Judge will argue. But he'll argue w/ me if I say that it's December. Right Judge! ;)

I've agreed with you at times- but the primary point of contention on this issue between us is that you see "little correlation except perhaps situational ones" between the defense and offense-

I see football as a sport of situations and the correlation between offense and defense that creates those situations that are decisive to a game. It appears that you choose not to watch football in that manner.

[WG]

Stop w/ the inane comments TD. If you can't comment intelligently, I would at least appreciate a stay on these. It makes perfect sense. And until someone ante's up and explains to all the good folks here at BillsZone how poor D is the reason why an offense can't score, then simply blaming the D doesn't hold water. Little tantrums, tiffs, and hussy fits don't change anything. :D

Perhaps if we didn't always have to play from a deficit, then the defense would not always be challenged with having to put up it's 31st and horrible rush D all the time and might have the opportunity to try to defend the pass. Granted, our pass D isn't grand and great, but it's a far cry better than our rush D which has as its foundation PW and three guys who, at least at this time, aren't starter material in the NFL. It's not like many of us didn't notice this at the beginning of the season. Instead, we were told not to worry now that Drew is here.

Well, "here" is now, and "Drew" ain't doin' much to help us win games by leading his offense to 13, 16 or 17 points. Heck, even w/ a 10th ranked D a team would be lucky to have 3 wins w/ an O that plays that "excellently."

I knew we weren't jumping out to early leads, but I never ran the stats. But if ac is correct, then we've scored 29 whopping points on our first two drives of each game this season!

Is that the defense's fault??

Never mind! I'm sure it is...

Silly me.

;)

[Judge]

The defense has been particularly bad this year- no debate possible there!

If the D had done just 1 thing better this year: create more takeaway opportunities to give the offense the ball more often and in better field position- the Bills would have won more games.

I don't have the time right now to check, but from my recollection the Bills have been pretty decent at time of possession this year in many if not all games, haven't they? If so, then according to Wys the only way we could have won was to eat up 40+ minutes per game, because

Kind of ridiculous to put that kind of burden on an offense that has piled up points and yards, isn't it?

[WG]

And OH, BTW, it would also appear that of those 29 points only 14 were TDs, and both of those occurred in one game, the Chicago. That means in the other 12 games, we've put up what, 15 points, 5 FGs, in 24 opening two drives?

And again, the defense is to blame why now?

Or then was it the offense for allowing teams to go up by 3, 4, or even 6 thus sending Gilbride into a panic and allowing this "pass at all costs" coach to use insignificant deficits to excuse his personal lust for the pass at the expense of team welfare?

In any case, the offense sure hasn't done it's part to ensure that we don't have to defend against the run. Sooner or later it'll hit ya like a ton of bricks. Probably after the next several games if Henry doesn't get plenty of carries and every sportswriter in the country is saying the same thing.

But then again, we have the #6 ranked offense based on yardage! WooHoo! Too bad we don't show up for games at the negotiating table and start whipping out offensive passing rankings, eh! Perhaps then we'd be 10-3. LOL

:D

[Judge]

You're proving my point by your own posts, Wys.

Whose fault was it that the opposition has scored point early in games? The defense generally allows a team to score, unless the offense turns the ball over and the opponent's D scores on the turnover.

I'll reverse the field on you to show the error in your logic: shouldn't the D have made some early stops in games so as to allow the offense the opportunity to NOT have to try to come from behind, which it has actually done extraordinarily well this season?

Look at last week- the Patriots struck early. A defensive stop would have shaken that whole game. It didn't happen. The D put the offense in an early bind.

See the correlation? I'm sure you don't, but I'm also sure others do on here- maybe everyone but you.

[WG]

Here's more from that same article as well:

"Fraidy-Cat Play of the Day No. 1: In the first Buffalo-New England contest, the tastefully named Gregg Williams waved the white flag in the third quarter on a play TMQ calls the Preposterous Punt: trailing by 10, facing fourth-and-2 on the Pats' 32, Williams punted. Pumped up by the Bills' mincing timidity, New England drove for a touchdown and never looked back.

In the third quarter Sunday, Buffalo trailed New England 20-0 and this time faced fourth-and-inches on the Pats' 8. Surely Williams learned from his mistake at this point the last time. You must, if you are anything but a disoriented former high-school coach who's in way over his head, go for it. In came the field-goal unit. TMQ thought, Got to be a fake. The figgie launched, TMQ lamented, "Aaaiiiiiiiiyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeee!". Only possible explanation: an onside kick would follow. Regular kickoff.

Thus the tastefully named Gregg Williams followed up the Preposterous Punt with the Fraidy-Cat Figgie. Both times Williams would have been better off going for it and failing -- but sending his team the message that he was challenging them to win. By kicking, he sent his team the message he expected to lose and was in too far over his head to do anything about it.

There are numerous examples of gentlemen who were solid assistant coaches -- Williams was a successful defensive coordinator at Tennessee -- but flops as head coaches because they lack leadership, game-day skills or ability to perform under pressure. Game-day skills are an especially overlooked factor. Head coaches aren't just standing there, they make the key decisions and are looked to by players for inspiration. Twice at critical times this season, Bills players looked to Williams and saw that, far from providing inspiration, he was signaling that he couldn't take the pressure. Before getting the Buffalo helm, Williams' sole head-coaching experience was in high school. Drew Bledsoe deserves better than a high-school coach."

So I don't want to blame Bledsoe for everything either. Especially since he's essentially cemented in stone here for the next two seasons as well. But GW shouldn't be taking all the heat either. If Gilbride gets a pass for what the O does, then he's a wooden head and should be replaced anyway. If he is, which reason would dictate is valid, then he needs to go anyway.

Drew, as many of us already know, doesn't step up in the biggest of games and never has. He performs well w/ a team around him and if he simply limits his game-changing mistakes in the playoffs and big games and otherwise throws a decent game, then he's fine.

Running Henry more, while not allowing Drew to become some sort of Bills passing icon, would certainly improve his overall TD production and otherwise overall effectiveness. The entire team would benefit. But it will cost him all of these yardage marks however. But then again, one of these days coaches, fans, and media will realize that yardage does not equal points. Especially when, as we are experiencing, most of our yards come between the 20s as we are simply not moving the ball once inside the red zone.

[WG]

Originally posted by Judge
You're proving my point by your own posts, Wys.

Whose fault was it that the opposition has scored point early in games? The defense generally allows a team to score, unless the offense turns the ball over and the opponent's D scores on the turnover.

I'll reverse the field on you to show the error in your logic: shouldn't the D have made some early stops in games so as to allow the offense the opportunity to NOT have to try to come from behind, which it has actually done extraordinarily well this season?

Look at last week- the Patriots struck early. A defensive stop would have shaken that whole game. It didn't happen. The D put the offense in an early bind.

See the correlation? I'm sure you don't, but I'm also sure others do on here- maybe everyone but you.

You make me laugh judge! An entire thread about how we, the Bills, cannot seem to score on our first two drives of games in 12 of 13 games, and here you are stating that the defense allows too many points in the first two drives when there's not a lick of data about that in this thread.

You truly leave me speechless there Judge....

;)

[The_Philster]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
You truly leave me speechless there Judge....

;)

:hail: Judge but I find that hard to believe, Wys ;)

[Judge]

Originally posted by Wys Guy


You make me laugh judge! An entire thread about how we, the Bills, cannot seem to score on our first two drives of games in 12 of 13 games, and here you are stating that the defense allows too many points in the first two drives when there's not a lick of data about that in this thread.

You truly leave me speechless there Judge....

;)

You leave me speechless- you can't handle having your own logic examined from another angle. That's always been your problem on here. It's hilarious how you cannot or refuse to accept the fact that there are ways to view things that are different than your's.

the fact is that the D HAS given up points early. Only a total idiot would deny that. I don't care what this thread is "about" according to you. Did the offense failed to score early at times? yes. Did the D stop the opposition early? Generally, no. Hence, the Bills were faced with early deficits as a result of defensive and offensive failures- the correlation again!

You refuse to acknowledge that.

[WG]

...error in my logic...

Just for you judge:

In 6 of our 7 losses, excluding the 2nd Pats game, our defense allowed the following number of offensive points in the entire 1st Qs of each of the other 6 losses:

Jets: 0
Denver: 0
Oakland: 7
Patriots: 7
K.C.: 7
Jets: 3

So again, if that is enough to send us into panic mode, then we have a problem!

And to correspond those to the # of points that our "high-powered offense" put up in the first Qs, not just the first two possessions, but the entire 1st Q in those games:

Jets: 3
Denver: 0
Oakland: 0
Patriots: 0
K.C.: 0
Jets: 3

So, who's the one struggling w/ the logic here Judge? I don't think it's me! ;)

[WG]

BTW, 24 points early in 6 games, an average of only 4 PPG and no more than 7 in any single game that were losses, and that's a lot?

OK Judge, OK, please, my sides are half splitting over here. You set yourself up like a volleyball on the corner and expect me to keep a straight face. I'm dyin' over here! PLEASE! Stop....

Please, I'm beggin' ya!

Judge:

Round!

Can you say "square!" LOL

You're killin' me man!

[WG]

Actually, after reviewing those incredible 1st Q performances by our wonderfully talent-laden offense which has just been lighting things up lately, I must admit, those 6 points in the first Qs of those games is quite impressive!

I didn't really see it from your point of view there Judge until I took the average and saw that 1.0 point-per-1st-quarter average in them! That's when it hit me!

"Wys! You know, Judge is right!"

:lol:

[WG]

I will say this Judge, I know you hate me, but you do really give me some good laughs. I really needed a good blitz of humor this morning and you've got me over here in stitches!

Really...

Thanks!

[TacklingDummy]

Originally posted by Wys Guy

But then again, we have the #6 ranked offense based on yardage! WooHoo!


We are also the #6 ranked team for points scored.

Raiders (9-4) 381
KC (7-6) 419
Saints (9-4) 382
GB (10-3) 351
Eagles (10-3) 347
Bills (6-7) 332

Why is it that the 5 teams ahead of us for points scores are on their way to the playoffs and the Bills are looking at the Draft already?

I think it may have to do with Takeaways: GB 38, NO:31, OAK:26, KC 26,EAGLES 27 , Bills 14 (Last in the NFL).

Being 6th in the NFL in scoring points is not bad considering we are dead last in takeaways.

[Dozerdog]

*whistle*
http://www.billsfanzone.com/images/awards/yellowcard.gif

Illegal use of posts. 3 in a row.


Donate $100 to BillsZone Moderator. :D

[WG]

Originally posted by Judge
The defense has been particularly bad this year- no debate possible there!

If the D had done just 1 thing better this year: create more takeaway opportunities to give the offense the ball more often and in better field position- the Bills would have won more games.

I don't have the time right now to check, but from my recollection the Bills have been pretty decent at time of possession this year in many if not all games, haven't they? If so, then according to Wys the only way we could have won was to eat up 40+ minutes per game, because

Kind of ridiculous to put that kind of burden on an offense that has piled up points and yards, isn't it?

Points? :lol:

13, 7, 16! Points! LOL

BTW, you check on things? :D

I suppose we're supposed to count on our marvelous D to hold teams to less than 14 points so that when we enter the 3rd Q, late, that's when our yardage and "points" supposedly go up!

Great strategy if that's the case. Make that opponent run more! We've had lots of luck stopping the run. :lol:

Let's see if we can hold Tomlinson to under 150 yards on Sunday, shall we!

Also, while we're at it, why don't we all, as a collective, together, watch how many points the Bills put up in the 1st Q and on the first two drives particularly to help out this pathetic O. Afterall, Drew is here and we have a "powerhouse offense" #6 ranked O, so putting up a handful of points against a team that boasts the 19th ranked scoring D, the 29th ranked yardage D, and the 31st ranked passing D. Should it now?!?

What would it mean if we struggled against a defense like that at home?

Frankly, I would think that an offense like ours wouldn't have any trouble at all putting up 34 against a team like that, at home to boot! Heck, even I picked the Bills on my pick sheets this week. That's probably silly, but if they can overcome the coaching and Gilbride's marvelous mental work, then winning this game should not be a problem and we should be heading to Lambeau on the heels of a 34-20 victory!

Let's see however!

***Point of note: As crappy as we were last season, at least we almost beat the Chargers on the road w/ perhaps a better team than they have this season.

[WG]

Originally posted by TacklingDummy


We are also the #6 ranked team for points scored.

Raiders (9-4) 381
KC (7-6) 419
Saints (9-4) 382
GB (10-3) 351
Eagles (10-3) 347
Bills (6-7) 332

Why is it that the 5 teams ahead of us for points scores are on their way to the playoffs and the Bills are looking at the Draft already?

I think it may have to do with Takeaways: GB 38, NO:31, OAK:26, KC 26,EAGLES 27 , Bills 14 (Last in the NFL).

Being 6th in the NFL in scoring points is not bad considering we are dead last in takeaways.

I know, I know. Last year it was sacks. This year TOs.

Or it could simply be that they have averaged more than 19.x PPG.

GB: 25.x
NO: 28
OAK: 26.x
KC: 30.x
Philly: 23

That could have something to do w/ it too, right?

NAHHHH!!! Who am I kidding! :rolleyes:

How come when our O only puts up 7, 13, 16, 17 points it continues to be the fault of the D?

Answer that and you'll have your answer! ;)

Why is this so tough for you and lots of others? Is everyone so enamored w/ Drew such that he's beyond reproach? Gilbride?

I just don't get it! They're like untouchable. Why? Are they perfect? Certainly not as Drew has been on a downhill slide since like week 5 or 6 and has yet to indicate any signs of recovery. Other than four big plays combined in both Miami games, Drew's performances have been pathetic. That is unless all you're looking at is yardage thrown for, which many are. If Drew continues to "improve" at this rate, he'll be worthless by the start of next season and we'll be begging for Van Pelt!

Perplexing for sure...

[the antichrist]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
I knew we weren't jumping out to early leads, but I never ran the stats. But if ac is correct, then we've scored 29 whopping points on our first two drives of each game this season!

Is that the defense's fault??

Never mind! I'm sure it is...

Silly me.

;)


It's worse than that. The figure for the second possession in the Bears game is actually -7 as the o fumbled and the recovery was run for a td.

So the o only scored 5 fg's and ONE td in 26 possessions.

Minus the td they cost us and the o is responsible for 15 net points in 26 possessions.

Woohoo! They're going to have to build a whole new wing on the HOF just for Drew and Gilbride!

[WG]

Well, one thing's for sure, if we don't put up some points against S.D. and G.B., this love affair w/ Bledsoe is gonna come to an abrupt halt. Furthermore, if we don't come out strong early next season, then that won't help matters.

Some will interpret that to mean that I hate Drew and hope he fails. But that cannot be further from the truth. But his best chances of doing well overall is for the Bills to run Henry. That's something that the "yardage guru's" will take issue with since they necessarily correlate yardage and yardage records w/ success.

As to next season, if Drew doesn't perform a little better towards the end of this year, he'd better hope for an easy schedule up front next season. If we start off w/ the Jets, or Pats, or some teams that he won't fare well against, it could spell trouble for the team.

The sad thing is that I don't expect Gilbride to figure all that out; that we are our best when Henry gets 25+ carries. If he does, he'll fight it tooth-and-nail until he's fired. The man simply likes to throw the ball. It was true when he was coaching at S.D. w/ Ryan Leaf, and it's true now.

[Captain gameboy]

I don't think it's all that complicated. Bledsoe is talented enough to get us to a Super Bowl. Gilbride is smart enough to handle the talent we have to do the same.
Our offensive line is not talented enough to take advantage of the above. Our defense is among the worst in the NFL, and needs five new starters.
Fix the defense; provide a marginal improvement in the offensive line, and we're on our way.

[WG]

Possibly. But that doesn't address why the offense has struggled for the better part of the season and most notably the most recent part.

Also, Drew has not played well in spite of getting some good OL play too. They said the same thing in N.E. He had a good run OL but not a good pass protection OL. Seems like the same is true here. Hmmm!

As well, while Bledsoe may be talented enough to get us to a superbowl, history suggests that he did nothing in each and every playoff game w/ the Pats to the point of being the offensive weak link in numerous games. So based on past performance, it remains to be seen whether or not he plays poorly in playoff games w/ us or whether he changes the way his performances have turned out in the 6 PO games that he has started.

But again, and this entire thing has stemmed from essentially one point, being, that the D is entirely to blame for our woes. It simply is not the case as long as your offense only puts up so few points in many games. Surely we can't expect the D, our crappy D, to hold opponents to less than 17 points. Yet they did and we lost. Can't be the D, at least not in that game.

Again, Bledsoe will be at his best as soon as, and if, the dust ever settles on this infatuation with all of Bledsoe's yardage stats and we start playing games to win. This team won't be any better next year except possibly on the OL. But next year we may not skate through the season w/o any injuries whatsoever either. That has been quite fortunate.

But to expect our WR play and our RB play to improve by a whole lot is unrealistic. Our RB play from a "wins perspective" will improve from the coaches end which is where the criticism of Gilbride takes root. But in terms of RB performance, it won't realistically get much better. Drew really has no excuse for playing so poorly over past weeks. If it doesn't turn around before the season ends, then it won't be a good sign.

[WG]

BTW, the D held the Pats to 20 points in the second game. 7 of their 27 came directly from Drew and 17 off of TOs. So to criticize the D is to slap them in the face when they pretty much shut down N.E. in the second half. If Drew hadn't thrown that first pick to Seymour to set up the Pats at our own 6 or so, then we wouldn't have been down by 20.

So if we were down, I have no idea why it's the D's fault. Why should we expect them to hold another team from our own 6 yard line on first down when the offense, laden w/ the talent they have, cannot consistently score in the red zone when they have the ball.

It's hypocritical reasoning. You can blame our last 3 losses primarily on the O.

In the K.C. game, our D held the Chiefs to 17 points and their D is a bottom tier D and all we could do was to put up 16.

In the last Pats game, the D would have held the Pats to 20 points which should have been plenty for our O to surpass. 17 points came directly off of Bledsoe TOs and he set up the Pats' second TD at our 6 YL.

In the Jets game, Drew also set up the Jets' first two TDs at about midfield. It is unrealistic to expect our D to overcome such TOs let alone play well for a full game which hasn't happened yet.

But if Drew doesn't make those errors, then likely we win those games and we're 9-4. Those were pretty good performances for a D that has about 1/10 th the amount of talent in names that the O does.

[LtBillsFan66]

What Wys does understand that some are apparently having some difficulty with, is that a poor defense, while possibly costing games, is not responsible for the offense putting up a paltry amount of points.

Yes it is! There is no doubt that giving up 5 turnovers was the cause of the last loss to the Pats, but getting none (in more than a few games) has not given the O any more opportunities. Our D has failed all season long to get any turnovers. We are second to last in the league in giveaway/takeaway.

I hope you understand that.

[Ð]

Gameboy is right. It's the relative inexperience and poor performance of the vets on our OL that puts us in a bind every game. Penalties & not having a clue on how to take advantage of a situation is something that experience should correct, but (and a big butt) that doesn't account for "proo bowl" Ruben Brown's poor performance.

Coaching can help...since the season is in the tank, they should work on run blocking for the remaining games...build that solid base for next year.

[WG]

Bledsoe's had plenty of time, especially on those two picks that he tossed in the second N.E. game. I've seen him make horrendous throws after he's had 10+ seconds in the pocket. Yes, the OL isn't perfect, but if that's what we need, then toss him now, b/c we simply aren't going to get a '92 HOGS OL in this day and age. He should be counting his lucky stars that he's had a healthy OL all season.

Meanwhile, RJ yields what will amount to be an additional 3/4 of a sack per game and everyone is talking about how our sack total is better when RJ didn't have 1/4 th the OL that Drew now has. Come on! If Drew can't play w/ this team and lead us to some points, then he never will.

Assuming that we're gonna force ourselves to rely on him.



Originally posted by BillsFanOne
What Wys does understand that some are apparently having some difficulty with, is that a poor defense, while possibly costing games, is not responsible for the offense putting up a paltry amount of points.

Yes it is! There is no doubt that giving up 5 turnovers was the cause of the last loss to the Pats, but getting none (in more than a few games) has not given the O any more opportunities. Our D has failed all season long to get any turnovers. We are second to last in the league in giveaway/takeaway.

I hope you understand that.

No, what do you mean... :rolleyes:

Here's the $25,000 question: Are you going to admit that the O has cost us a bunch of games, namely the last three games by putting the D in very, very difficult situations, A, and B, by not scoring any points???

Why is that so difficult to ante up? I just don't get it. You don't like me and my opinions, fine. But is it true or isn't it?

13 points scored in the Jets game; the offense was largely responsible for not winning that game by it's lack of putting points on the board and by setting up 14 of the Jets' 31 points at midfield? What, the O makes a mess and the D gets the negative credit when it can't clean it up??

Y or N?

Only 16 points scored against the K.C. D; the last ranked yardage defense and the 25th ranked scoring defense in the league? Was that the D's fault? If so, then what, the D should have held the #1 Offense in the league, on their home field, to what, 13 or less?

Y or N?

Only 17 points vs. the Patriots and the offense/Drew handing the ball to the Pats at our own 6 yard-line first and goal for their 2nd TD of the day. Is that the D's fault while otherwise allowing only 20 points and 10 more of those off of offensive TOs?

Y or N?

I really don't understand this denial approach to blaming the D and giving the O virtually a total pass.

Of course no one in their denial mentality will honestly answer those, but they speak to the fact that we lost 3 games when the D otherwise played OK. If you take away the points off TOs, the D only allowed 14.7 PPG. This is our D, the Bills D we're talking about here!

Jumpin' jellybeans! If we win those, then we're 9-4 and poised to take the East.

Here's the kicker! The D has improved immensely since the season began allowing well over 30 PPG in the first 6 games but allowing in the mid-20s over our last 7. Meanwhile, the offense which was positioned to break all kinds of records was way over 30 PPG, 34 if I'm not mistaken and has averaged only 19.7 over it's last 7 dropping production by almost half!

HELLO!!! Anyone home McFly!

This shouldn't be happening folks! Well, the D improving should be. But the O sliding backwards should not be happening. We should be a finely tuned offensive machine by now, not a struggling ill-coached, poorly executed and struggling O that we are barely able to hit 17 points and often then only w/ the help of garbage time or a snowstorm.

I really don't understand the argument. Is everyone not looking at reality, the numbers/scores from the games? Is everyone satisfied w/ the O right now over our last 7? Barring snowstorms, we can't generate enough electricity on O to give a carpet shock.

I sure hope we can put up 30+ in this game. B/c another game of 17, 16, or 13 points is really gonna start bringing out the criticism in the media about our offense.

[JJamezz]

I think we need to find Wys a hobby... Needlepoint? How about birdwatching?

Knit one, stitch two...

:jk:

[Tatonka]

piss and moan piss and moan..

[Tatonka]

i like making three posts in a row to up my count.

[Tatonka]

just like wys...

[WG]

Originally posted by Tatonka
piss and moan piss and moan..

Maybe I'll give seminars on explaining the obvious to people in denial. :D

BTW, I'd be a lot more economical w/ my words if my goal were post counts. ;)

Thanks for answering those three easy questions there Tatonka. BBTW, not pissing and moaning at all, but merely stating facts. So far not a single person here has disputed any single fact or group of facts that I've presented. Instead, they just talk against them as if they don't exist.


I'm curious to see how far we'll go before a lot of people on this board start blaming Bledsoe and Gilbride for at least some of what's going blatantly wrong w/ the team. B/c if we don't score more than 20 points this weekend, you can plan on reading plenty about it from all the sports media types this coming week.

Also, we'd better straighten this all out or we risk next season being a wash too. That's my fear.

[Akhippo]

[13 points scored in the Jets game; the offense was largely responsible for not winning that game by it's lack of putting points on the board


Is it the offenses fault that they lose? Is it their responsibility to score more than the D allows. And if they dont, their to blame? If the offense scores any points, shouldnt they win. If they score 7, isnt the blame now go to the D. Isnt it their responsibility to hold opponents to less than the O scores? So who should get the final glory. If youre the Ravens when you won the Superbowl, it was the D who help opponents to less the what the O scored. If your the Rams, it was the O scoring more than the D allowed. I have a life, so im not going to bore everybody on this board to death with tons of mind numbing numbers. Its all about perception.



and by setting up 14 of the Jets' 31 points at midfield? What, the O makes a mess and the D gets the negative credit when it can't clean it up??



Man, do turnovers have anything to do with winning? Obviously not with some people. who obviously cant see through all the numbers that they themselves post. Man, the Jets won because of turnovers and special teams. Around here thats like saying the world is round, not flat. There is more to a game than just one aspect of a team. Ill probably get filibustered with consecutive, multiple 1000 word replys, about how Im cracking someone up, Im not looking at the numbers, yadda yadda yadda. Whatever!:hamrhed: :hitself: :hammeru:

[Tatonka]

wys the reason no one has disputed your points are because they are all so valid.. you are correct in everything you say.. you make incredible points that arent obvious to the standard bills fans eyes..

basically what i am saying is that you are a genius and thank you for gracing us with your knowledge that only you can bring forth to the table... you are an invaluable resource here at the billszone and i dont think anyone would freqent this message board if you werent on here posting your endless pages of stats and facts that have enlightened us all and made us all better fans..

your the best man.. keep up the fantasic work... i cant wait to read your next 943593450 posts that you should have done by the end of the night..

you are just truely amazing..

/PUKE

[Tatonka]

Originally posted by Tatonka
wys the reason no one has disputed your points are because they are all so valid.. you are correct in everything you say.. you make incredible points that arent obvious to the standard bills fans eyes..

basically what i am saying is that you are a genius and thank you for gracing us with your knowledge that only you can bring forth to the table... you are an invaluable resource here at the billszone and i dont think anyone would frequent this message board if you werent on here posting your endless pages of stats and facts that have enlightened us all and made us all better fans..

your the best man.. keep up the fantasic work... i cant wait to read your next 943593450 posts that you should have done by the end of the night..

you are just truely amazing..

/PUKE

corrected some spelling.. :banme:

[Ð]

:rofl:

[WG]

Originally posted by Akhippo
[13 points scored in the Jets game; the offense was largely responsible for not winning that game by it's lack of putting points on the board


Is it the offenses fault that they lose? Is it their responsibility to score more than the D allows. And if they dont, their to blame? If the offense scores any points, shouldnt they win. If they score 7, isnt the blame now go to the D. Isnt it their responsibility to hold opponents to less than the O scores? So who should get the final glory. If youre the Ravens when you won the Superbowl, it was the D who help opponents to less the what the O scored. If your the Rams, it was the O scoring more than the D allowed. I have a life, so im not going to bore everybody on this board to death with tons of mind numbing numbers. Its all about perception.



and by setting up 14 of the Jets' 31 points at midfield? What, the O makes a mess and the D gets the negative credit when it can't clean it up??



Man, do turnovers have anything to do with winning? Obviously not with some people. who obviously cant see through all the numbers that they themselves post. Man, the Jets won because of turnovers and special teams. Around here thats like saying the world is round, not flat. There is more to a game than just one aspect of a team. Ill probably get filibustered with consecutive, multiple 1000 word replys, about how Im cracking someone up, Im not looking at the numbers, yadda yadda yadda. Whatever!:hamrhed: :hitself: :hammeru:

No! You're absolutely right! Even 3 points allowed by the D is totally unacceptible and shouldn't occur. Even the Super Bowl teams allow less than 3 PPG average...

:rolleyes:

[WG]

Originally posted by Tatonka
wys the reason no one has disputed your points are because they are all so valid.. you are correct in everything you say.. you make incredible points that arent obvious to the standard bills fans eyes..

basically what i am saying is that you are a genius and thank you for gracing us with your knowledge that only you can bring forth to the table... you are an invaluable resource here at the billszone and i dont think anyone would freqent this message board if you werent on here posting your endless pages of stats and facts that have enlightened us all and made us all better fans..

your the best man.. keep up the fantasic work... i cant wait to read your next 943593450 posts that you should have done by the end of the night..

you are just truely amazing..

/PUKE

Thanks T!!! Now you know how I feel.

I will say this, that usually when it resorts to facetiousness such as that that at minimum you are coming around to see the truth.

Funny thing is that you will keep saying that our O is doing fine when it cannot be more apparent that it's not. I guess sometimes the only thing that gets some people to see straight is a 2x4 upside the head, eh.

Speaking of puking, it's this blind loyalty to Bledsoe and Gilbride makes me wanna puke!

Yards, yards, yards, he's so great. LOL It cracks me up.

Anyway, I'll take that as a victory. As to being right, all I'm doing is seeing the facts and truth as they are. Seeing doesn't take a whole lot of sense now does it? Seeing red when something's blue, now there's your problem...

;)

But, I guess getting irritated that someone who's post you usually don't like are in fact true can be irritating, so I do understand the "itchiness!" :D

Try to enjoy your evening nonetheless and hope that the Bills can score more than 17 points tomorrow so that every single sports paper and internet site in the country doesn't repeat exactly what I have been saying on Monday to ruin the rest of your week and season. :D

LOL

[honey]

All I've got to say, and I must say I did NOT read every single word written here, nor do I have any statistics to back up what I say, but.....why can't we give Bledsoe the same chance/CHANCES we gave RJ to lead this team? This is his first year here, he is only about a year older than RJ (although he has been a much better QB in his several years in the NFL), let's let him get used to the team. I've read about "potential" until I was about to puke last year and the year before, but, golly, "let's give him a chance". Well, doggone it, give Bledsoe a year or two, too. Give HIM a chance. Sometimes it takes more than one year to bring a team altogether and make something of themselves, and I really think Henry, Moulds, Price, Riemersma, Bledsoe, etc., are starting to click. Give them a chance, why doncha, Wys? :)

[honey]

PS, Wys - I'm not trying to irritate you at all. I just would like you to give Bledsoe the chance/chances you allotted to RJ. OK? :)

[WG]

Oh, I know. Only Judge and one or two others try to irritate me even though they usually make me laugh my brains out instead. :D

There is a good answer to your questions. RJ was an unknown. He never had a good team, OL, or coaches around him and even many fans hated him in spite of the fact that he actually played well up until last season making his playing here virtually impossible. Sure, he had his issues.

Drew on the other hand, is a "seasoned veteran" who has started practically every single game of his career and has been pampered like no other QB besides Plummer. Never even a threat of not starting. We were all told that he was plug and play ready. You don't trade for a QB like Bledsoe and hope that he "develops." If he needs more than half a season to get used to his new environs, then he wasn't worth it.

Besides, he seemed to be playing well early on. Carr gets a few years. Harrington does. Even Vick or some other QBs. But Drew is established enough such that he should be doing what he's gonna be doing.

On the flip side, I should ask you, what if this is all we're gonna get? What if all we got in this deal, and I'm not saying it is yet, is the average QB that he was in N.E.? When are you and others going to start saying that he isn't the long-term answer and start indicating that perhaps this was only a short-term solution?

I'm all in favor of waiting. But if Drew needs any more time to develop than what he's had, then I'm sorry, he simply isn't nearly as good as we all thought.

Things that are the same as when he was in N.E. that there is absolutely no reason on earth at this point to suggest will change:

He plays poorly against the AFCE

He plays his worst in the biggest games

He's never had even one single good playoff performance in 6 complete games

He beats the crappiest teams on the schedule but struggles mightily against even teams slightly better than average.

He gets many accolades for attempts and yardage thrown for even though he is one of the least efficient QBs in the NFL; points accompanying all those yards (or lack thereof) don't seem to matter as long as he can light it up between the 20s

The next three games will tell us what is up. But things unchanged for the next three games, mostly the next two, and Bledsoe is an average QB

My big disgust is w/ our O.C. whom everyone seems to think is great. He has absolutely no idea when to use Henry and when he does it's usually far from optimally. If the choice is to run Henry and look respectable or continue to throw Drew and get whipped like a criminal in a Roman tribunal, he'll continue to pass Drew anyway. It's been his hallmark all throughout his coaching career. I'm really starting to understand why Buddy Ryan slapped his ass. The man's half dunce.

Instead, much of the media says he and Drew are good simply b/c I guess they're supposed to be or based on the first 6 games. B/c that surely isn't true over the last 7.

But to reiterate, Drew shouldn't need "a chance." He should be plug-n-play ready, now. He's had half a season and any QB who's been in the league as long as he has been should be playing the way they're gonna be playing by now. Funny thing is, and this is ironic, but if Gilbride ran Henry more, Drew would be far better. Sure, he wouldn't have all the yards. But it's almost like Gilbride is trying to ensure that he has some yardage records in order to try and boost ticket sales next season instead of simply trying to win games.

This team isn't about Drew, which Gilbride is making it! It's about winning and right now no one can argue, no one, that we're putting our best foot forward offensively. People argue that the reason we've lost is our D. That was true early on, but not now any longer. Now we're losing b/c our offense, this highly touted O, cannot seem to put any points on the board when it matters the most.

That is the source of my frustrations. People acting like our O is fine is merely a distraction. But the fact is that our O is and has been struggling. The big question is why? If you ask many of the fans, it has nothing to do w/ Drew or Gilbride. Oh noooo. So why not? On any other team the O.C. and QB take the heat. Why not here? Why is it that Gray is purely responsible for how horrible the D is, but it's Williams who's responsible for how poory the O plays? See some hypocrisy there? I sure do. And if in fact it is GW making the coaching calls regarding the O, then fine, that simply means that Gilbride isn't doing anything then. So why keep him around anyhow?

The simple answer to that all is that Gilbride and Drew have more to do w/ our offensive woes than many say. If we don't fix it, then we can kiss the Superbowl or any meaningful playoff experience good bye! Right out the window.

Again, Drew has never performed well in the playoffs, so to feature him makes no sense, yet we continue to do it anyway. And we keep losing as a result! No one can say, gee, look how marvelously Bledsoe's playing. In fact, the opposite is true. We've lost three games now, 4 if you want to count the first N.E. game simply b/c Drew couldn't lead the offense to do hardly anything in games against N.E. twice, the Jets, and K.C., none of whom has a great D and against all of whom we barely ran Henry and relied on "Drew's arm" costing us wins. And in Gilbride's 10+ years of H.C.ing and O.C.ing, he's never had any one of his teams advance past a divisional win in the playoffs.

Boy, I'm sure excited to let the Bills be the experiment to see if both of them can break this trend.

My solution, can Gilbride since he seems to think that a good passing game is what wins championships in spite of all logic and NFL wisdom that speaks entirely to the contrary. Then hire an O.C. who believes in using Henry more, first and foremost, and then uses him to make Bledsoe feed off of the running game. Drew's gonna be here thru the '04 season whether we all like it or not. We'll have to take our chances w/ him rain or shine, playoffs or not. Gilbride doesn't have to be.

Hope that helps.

[RedEyE]

WTF?
I finished War and Peace in less time.:abe:

[WG]

Still alive I see. That's a good sign...

:D

[Tatonka]

funny thing is wys.. i never said i have blind loyalty to drew.. i do definately see a HUGE problem with the fact that we dont run henry more (plus he is on my fantasy team, and i traded drew and peerless)..

and i think drew throws clutch picks too much..

i just dont like the way you phrase your posts.. i guess your knowledge and insight are so great, that i see it as condesending

[honey]

Wys - I actually read that post. You have some pretty good points there, but a question I would like to bring up is - "Who do you want to QB the Buffalo Bills". If Bledsoe isn't good enuf, then who? If he isn't leader enuf, than who? Do you want Rob Johnson (he has "potential"), Brad Johnson (proven), Doug Flutie (he proved himself in Buffalo), who do you propose would do a better job? I would submit - NO ONE! Bledsoe tries and tries and does the best he can and the players all think they can win with him - no controversy, no "potential" crap, just plain football! :)

[WG]

Originally posted by Tatonka
funny thing is wys.. i never said i have blind loyalty to drew.. i do definately see a HUGE problem with the fact that we dont run henry more (plus he is on my fantasy team, and i traded drew and peerless)..

and i think drew throws clutch picks too much..

i just dont like the way you phrase your posts.. i guess your knowledge and insight are so great, that i see it as condesending

Well sorry. I can't change that. I've tried, it doesn't work. No matter how I "phrase things", it makes no difference. Sometimes when people argue against truth, when it finally hits them between the eyes, that's the perception. But to argue the facts and truth doesn't make much sense to me, yet many do it. Doesn't sound like there's a whole lot that I can do about it. Have you ever seen an "I told you so" post from me other than about Flutie? I'm very gracious when people see the truth whenever that happens to be. Likewise, when I'm incorrect such as I was about Henry, then I'm the first to post that I was. No problems here. So if I can do that, then you should be able to do the same.

I have a beef w/ people who never do an inkling of their own thinking but only repeat what the media party-line is. I'm not saying that's you by any stretch. Ie., polls by people who haven't even seen us play telling us how good we are based on a few highlights. When people like that argue w/ me, I take it as an afront to my intelligence and my desire to talk team issues with anyone who likes to discuss this stuff.

Then people cite them as if they really know about the Bills based on 2 minutes of highlight reel coverage. This year's Bills team is so complex in so many ways that the only way to understand it is to watch it often and completely. I've forced myself thru several games even though I wanted to turn the set off and go home, simply b/c I feel that writing a weekly piece would be hypocritical if I didn't watch the entire game.

As to my knowledge, I think there are plenty of people on these boards w/ more football knowledge than I have. As to insight, I read what I read, I see what I see, and I hear what I hear. My brain, eyes, and ears don't deceive me and I'm not easily fooled by my personal hopes, wishes, or statements made to me by so-called 'professionals.' I deal in facts and truth. Sometimes those change such as the way that Henry has stepped up this season. He's really, really turned around his fumbling and been far, far more consistent in his runs on the whole.

As to being condescending, I can only tell you that it's the furthest thing that I am trying to be. Actually, and in fact, I try to go out of my way to not be condescending. Truly. So that notion is pure perception on your and others' parts, b/c I can only assure you that I'm not that way. Barring a few exceptions when I post in response to posts that essentially say, "yeah, the first number is 2, and the second is 4, and together they add up to -3!" LOL And w/ Judge of course. He loves me so I love him back! ;) Right Judge! :D

[WG]

Originally posted by honey
Wys - I actually read that post. You have some pretty good points there, but a question I would like to bring up is - "Who do you want to QB the Buffalo Bills". If Bledsoe isn't good enuf, then who? If he isn't leader enuf, than who? Do you want Rob Johnson (he has "potential"), Brad Johnson (proven), Doug Flutie (he proved himself in Buffalo), who do you propose would do a better job? I would submit - NO ONE! Bledsoe tries and tries and does the best he can and the players all think they can win with him - no controversy, no "potential" crap, just plain football! :)

Thanks!! Reading it is more than most people do before going on an all-out assault.

Good question. No, forget all those other guys. I used to think that Rob had potential to be great, but I'm glad he's gone now. Although, he wasn't nearly as bad as fans here say he was. He had more good solid games than not. Last year was really his only horrible outting and he had a second string OL, a rookie RB, and unrealistic fan expectations. Nevertheless, it was time for him to go.

On Bledsoe, I wouldn't have traded for him and I'm on record saying that. I would have grabbed Chandler or some other QB for a year and gotten two outstanding DTs in stead. I really think we would have won more games w/ a better D. The facts support me on that. Bledsoe's best performances have resulted in losses due to poor D. There were two or three of them.

As to Bledsoe, the way he's playing right now, we didn't have to trade our first round draft pick for and pay $5M/yr. We could have gotten the kind of QB play that we're now getting for far less and had our draft pick for this season's draft on top of it. I would have been willing to risk Brown or some other QB, Chandler even in exchange for a good, solid D. I don't think we be any worse, and possibly better, if Brees were our QB and we had a solid DL. Look at what the Chargers are doing. Henry would have gotten run more and we would have been fine.

But now we have Drew and he's here for 2 more seasons whether we like that fact or not. I would say this however, if he doesn't pull himself out of this slump now, beginning tomorrow, then I will say that w/o any hesitation whatsoever, that we got robbed. Again, if all we're gonna get is a QB who tosses 25 TDs w/ this unit and Henry running the way that he is, then we could have done better, and more, some average QB would have yielded the exact same results w/ a better DL. Possibly even better results.

Make no mistake. This Bledsoe trade was a gamble. We all knew that in order for this trade to make sense, Drew had to revive his career and at least match his best two seasons, 27/15 and 28/15, in N.E. He's dangerously close to missing both of them w/ fewer TDs and more INTs than both. To me, that would be a travesty and a sign that it was a poor deal. Nonetheless, I am reserving judgement until the end of the season in fairness to Drew. But I can tell you that if we lose the remaining three games b/c our O is struggling again, then it won't be pretty.

Having said that though, I really believe that if we made this a Henry/rushing based offense w/ the passing game in support instead of a Bledsoe/passing based offense, that we'd be far better off and have several more wins behind us. The facts support me on that as well as mentioned above in this thread I believe. We have a better record when Henry gets 19 or more carries. 4-2 when he does, vice 2-5 when he doesn't. Also, in one of those 2 losses, it was the first Jets game where neither Drew nor the STs played well together costing us the game.

At some point TD is gonna have to stand behind his moves and the cap issues that he's had will quit being his scapegoat. In fact, it would seem to me that since we were so scarce on cap dollars, that those we did spend weren't shrouded in risk like this Bledsoe deal. This is a boom or bust decision for the FO for this season. If Drew ends up being only average, IMO it doesn't say much for TD. Throw in all the Titan and Steeler rejects that we've tried in the name of "I'm familiar w/ these players", it has become tedious.

If you want a copy of the Bledsoe trade piece from ealier this spring, let me know. I'd be happy to e-mail you a copy.

[lunatic_bills_fan]

know, I know. Last year it was sacks. This year TOs.
Wys if you think about it for a second, do you not believe that more takaways = more points? If we had big TO numbers like some of them teams, I bet once in a while they turn into 3 or 7 points, hence giving this team a larger ppg number.

[WG]

Yeah, of course they do. But you can't tell me that you believe that an offense such as ours, on paper, should only put up 7-17 points barring such takeaways, do you? Even so, takeaways, if we had another 10 we'd be in the middle of the stack and surely some of those would have come during our first bunch of games. Let's say we had 6 in the last 7 games more.

If our O can't score on a drive begun at our own 45, then why on earth does it stand to reason that a takeaway at our own 25 for example would lead to points?

Takeaways only lead to points if your offense is adept. Otherwise, the chances of scoring on a takeaway are merely the chances that you would score on any normal drive. We haven't been scoring, so to assume that that would be a significant number of points is inaccurate. It's not like we're talking 60 takeaways here. Like I said, 10, on the season would put us easily in normal range. Most of those we wouldn't score on w/ the O that we've had on the field for the last 7 weeks.

[WG]

Do you agree that in the last N.E. game, that the Pats would only have scored 20 points if Drew hadn't thrown that first INT to Seymour who returned it to our 6 yard line?

Also, wouldn't you say that it was Drew's fault, and not the Ds, for putting us down by 17 points since it was his own INT that gave the Pats that lead essentially?

If so, then how is the D to blame for us being down by 20?

As I see it, they aren't. Bledsoe is. In addition to tossing that INT, he also was unable to lead our O to any points at all in the first half. On 4 drives from an average starting FP of our own 24, Bledsoe was unable to lead the Bills into the endzone once.

Is that the D's fault?

You can only blame the D entirely if the O does it's part. Well, it hasn't in 5 of the last 7 games.

[Butch]

You win and lose games with turnovers. If someone told me at the begining of the year that we would be 6-7 and dead last in turnovers I would be surprised. I would have though 4-9 or 3-10 would be more realistic.

Obviously Bledsoe and the offense haven't helped the turnover battle in the last month and a half but Bledose has been worth a whole lot more than the 1st round pick we gave up. Would we have gotten 4,000 yards and 30 TDs from a mid round pick in round 1? No way. Of couse Bledsoe has had some bad games, but so do all QBs. Favre had 6 INTS in the playoffs against the Rams last year.

The reason we are 6-7 and not 3-10 is because of Bledose. We have a defense that can't stop anyone, can't cause any turnovers, and can't get any sacks. WE all knew coming into this season, that a .500 record was the most likely. Even though Jerry Gray and Gregg Williams suck in my opinion, I think if Donahoe can't get us some serious DL help this offseason in free agency we will be in good shape for a serious playoff push.

Also, don't be surprised if we get our 1st round pick back. I wouldn't be surprised if we franchise Peerless and let a team like Atlanta pick him up in FA.

[The Natrix]

This is a great debate.

IMO, it is hard to tell "how" much our D has to do with the points (or lack there of) that the O puts up.

The D's performance definitely has an impact on what the O does, but I am not going to sit here and pretend I know how.

some random thoughts:

1. The D sucks, so the O has to try and increase time of possession, therefore leading to less points. But does it really lead to less points? I'm not sure, although I do think that this O has had some trouble putting together nice long drives

2. On the other hand, since our D sucks, we get to an early deficit and the O has to score more points quicker. But does this really lead to more points? If that was true, why wouldn't the O just always play with the mentality that they are down by a couple touchdowns? Why, because it doesn't work that way. A football team needs balance, and right now we don't have any.

I don't know to what extent our D has hindered the offensive production, but I do know one thing....The D sucks and I hate to blame the offense for anything.

Defense wins championships.

If the Dolts can drastically improve their D in one season, I think the Bills can as well.

[WG]

Natrix,

I guess one of my main points however is that the reason we were down in the N.E. game was not due to the D. It was due to the O. I can get specific if you want, and have. It was Drew's stupid, stupid INT to Seymour in our own red zone virtually assuring the Pats of a TD.

So why does everyone keep saying our D does that?

Sure, it has, especially early on. What about the first Dolphins game? You think Drew is responsible for that win, the only one v. a decent team?

He tossed a what, 184 yard game w/ only one decent toss all day to Moulds for only 1 TD all day long?

Was that victory attributable to Drew?

I think not. Yet, everyone keeps arguing exactly what you just did, that Drew's responsible for winning games!

Really! Well, I say it was the D that held Miami to only 10 points in that game and scored another TD for us. And BTW, just as many TDs as the O had on that day. Surely if the D had played anywhere close to what it had all throughout the rest of the season, the offense's paltry 16 points wouldn't have won that game.

Why is that so difficult for everyone to understand?

In our second Miami game, I'll credit Henry again and give at least some credit to the D for holding Miami to only 21, what, our 3rd best defensive performance all day. Sure, Drew had three good, two lucky throws, in that game, but w/o Henry's 151 yards rushing, it's unlikely we would have won. Drew wasn't, once again, playing well enough otherwise.

After that, we've only beaten 4 teams that we could have beaten last season w/ a fraction of the team that we have now. To say that you didn't expect any more wins when we have an OL that incredibly more talented than what we fielded last season, a RB entering his second season, and a WR that came into his prime is to suggest that we're only marginally better than last season.

What is better?

Jennings, Brown, Teague, Sullivan, and Williams all healthy?

Or...

Carman, Brown, Conaty, Early, Hicks, etc.?

Come on now. You're not being either realistic or fair. This current team, other than Drew, is worlds above where it was last season. As usual however, Drew won't be criticized for anything. In the fans' minds, he's perfect! If deemed otherwise, non of our teams' woes will reflect on him. Naturally...

[Judge]

Originally posted by Akhippo
[I have a life, so im not going to bore everybody on this board to death with tons of mind numbing numbers. Its all about perception.


Man, do turnovers have anything to do with winning? Obviously not with some people. who obviously cant see through all the numbers that they themselves post. Man, the Jets won because of turnovers and special teams. Around here thats like saying the world is round, not flat. There is more to a game than just one aspect of a team. Ill probably get filibustered with consecutive, multiple 1000 word replys, about how Im cracking someone up, Im not looking at the numbers, yadda yadda yadda. Whatever!:hamrhed: :hitself: :hammeru:

This is a brilliant post. He's 100% right.

Football is a sport of situations. Akhippo's post describes that well.

Wys- I don't hate you. I feel bad for you. It's clear that you can spout off statistics, but it doesn't appear that you have a grasp of football that would help you understand what you're watching. And that you resort to insults and "laughing" at those who challenge you in an ugly defense mechanism.

[Judge]

Originally posted by Wys Guy
Natrix,

I guess one of my main points however is that the reason we were down in the N.E. game was not due to the D. It was due to the O. I can get specific if you want, and have. It was Drew's stupid, stupid INT to Seymour in our own red zone virtually assuring the Pats of a TD.

So why does everyone keep saying our D does that?

Sure, it has, especially early on. What about the first Dolphins game? You think Drew is responsible for that win, the only one v. a decent team?

He tossed a what, 184 yard game w/ only one decent toss all day to Moulds for only 1 TD all day long?

Was that victory attributable to Drew?

I think not. Yet, everyone keeps arguing exactly what you just did, that Drew's responsible for winning games!

Really! Well, I say it was the D that held Miami to only 10 points in that game and scored another TD for us. And BTW, just as many TDs as the O had on that day. Surely if the D had played anywhere close to what it had all throughout the rest of the season, the offense's paltry 16 points wouldn't have won that game.

Why is that so difficult for everyone to understand?

In our second Miami game, I'll credit Henry again and give at least some credit to the D for holding Miami to only 21, what, our 3rd best defensive performance all day. Sure, Drew had three good, two lucky throws, in that game, but w/o Henry's 151 yards rushing, it's unlikely we would have won. Drew wasn't, once again, playing well enough otherwise.

After that, we've only beaten 4 teams that we could have beaten last season w/ a fraction of the team that we have now. To say that you didn't expect any more wins when we have an OL that incredibly more talented than what we fielded last season, a RB entering his second season, and a WR that came into his prime is to suggest that we're only marginally better than last season.

What is better?

Jennings, Brown, Teague, Sullivan, and Williams all healthy?

Or...

Carman, Brown, Conaty, Early, Hicks, etc.?

Come on now. You're not being either realistic or fair. This current team, other than Drew, is worlds above where it was last season. As usual however, Drew won't be criticized for anything. In the fans' minds, he's perfect! If deemed otherwise, non of our teams' woes will reflect on him. Naturally...

What was the score in the New England game when Drew threw that costly interception? To my recollection, the Bills were already behind and were so after the Patriots' opening drive.

Did the defense do anything in the first half to make a big stop to keep the game even remotely close?

The Miami games show how a D can help score points by either scoring themselves or by creating opportunities for the Bills' offense to produce.

Thank you for proving my points by your own rantings, Wys.

[TacklingDummy]

Originally posted by Judge

Did the defense do anything in the first half to make a big stop to keep the game even remotely close?

NE never even punted in the 1st half.

[the antichrist]

Originally posted by Judge


This is a brilliant post. He's 100% right.

Football is a sport of situations. Akhippo's post describes that well.

Wys- I don't hate you. I feel bad for you. It's clear that you can spout off statistics, but it doesn't appear that you have a grasp of football that would help you understand what you're watching. And that you resort to insults and "laughing" at those who challenge you in an ugly defense mechanism.


"First thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
--Shakespeare, King Henry VI, Part II, IV, ii


LOL!

Another prime piece of nastiness from the board's acknowledged ambulance chaser.

Wys may have some issues stemming from his Germanic roots but in general has a good heart and certainly doesn't indulge in this kind of poisonous innuendo.

You, on the other hand Judge, are my kinda guy!

I've had the pleasure of dealing with lawyers of one sort or another throughout the 6000 years or so I've been working down here since God decided to create this little operation.

And I look forward to the day I get to meet you in person after the rapture. That is, of course, if you don't happen to join the rest of your former colleagues down here with us first.

Turnovers affect the outcomes of games?

Woohoo! Did you figure that one out all by yourself?

A crappy defense makes it hard to win games?

Stop the presses!

Welcome to the Drew Effect.

Who cares about the defense? We've got Drew!

Who cares about Special Teams? We've got Drew!

Who cares that Gregg, Gilbride and Gray are morons? We've got Drew!

Drew throws for BIG YARDS!

Drew's going to the HALL OF FAME!

Drew's going to BREAK SOME RECORDS!

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!

Too bad it's not DREW GETS BETTER AS SEASON GOES ON!

Or, DREW ROLLS OUT, DOESN'T THROW PICK!

Or, DREW RUNS FOR FIRST DOWN!

Or, DREW DOESN'T CHOKE IN BIG GAMES!

Or, BELECHICK DOESN'T OWN DREW!

Or, DREW CAN LEAD TEAM TO MORE THAN ONE TD IN 26 POSSESSIONS!

Or, DREW CAN DO SOMETHING ELSE OTHER THAN SIT IN THE POCKET AND WING IT DOWN FIELD!


This team has sucked all year. We haven't beaten anyone good and we've required a whole bunch of good breaks to do it.

We haven't played one game good enough to dominate anyone.

And we're getting our asses handed to us by teams we played tough last year.

Gregg, Kevin, Jerry and Drew.

The four horsemen of the apocalypse.

Let me give you guys a little hint. If you want to win a Superbowl before Armaggedon, send those guys back to the fiery pit.