View Full Version : Bledsoe: Are our chances of winning better when we put the ball in his hands??
Not according to the statistics!
He's had 40+ attempts in 5 games.
We're 1-4 in those games.
He's had more than 36 attempts in 6 games.
We're 1-5 in those games.
He's had 35 or fewer attempts also in 5 games.
We're 4-1 in those games!
In the other 4 games he's had 36 attempts (W), 36 (W), 36 (L), and 39 (L).
Soooo! HELLO!
It would appear, at least according to hard data, that in fact, our chances lessen as Drew gets more opportunities, eh!
In the meantime, in those 5 games that we lost when Drew's had the most attempts, Henry never had more than 15 carries in any single game! Interesting I think. Seems to me that the real impetus in us winning is Henry!
In the 7 games in which Henry's had the most carries, we're 5-2 w/ the 2 losses being the Jets early on when Henry had a HUGE game and Bledsoe Sh the bed w/ 2 INTs and 4 sacks, and in the K.C. game where Henry only had 24 carries for 5.3 YPC avg. while Drew could only amass 225 gross passing yards, 211 net, on 36 attempts. And don't forget, there was plenty of criticism in that game indicating that we should have run Henry more. That criticism came from just about every source that covers the Bills.
So it's pretty safe to say that we play our best ball when Drew doesn't throw, and Henry gets more carries.
Let allll the excuses start flying...
This ought to be entertaining!
But Wys, it was cloudy, and at all the inopportune times, Drews eyes were in the sun...
:D
Oh yeah, in recap, the more that Drew puts the ball in the air, the LESS our chances of winning are!
Did I happen to mention that!
:D
RedEyE
12-17-2002, 08:42 PM
Your stats make sense but contain no content. Here is some more fuel for your fire: Bledsoe is actually 1-5 when he's attempted 40+ times.
NE twice / first game 45x / second 51x
Vikes 49
Denver 41
Raiders 53
Using your own stats, consider this - Wouldn't it make sense that Drew would be throwing more when trailing? Wouldn't it make more sense that his accuracy rating would deplete the more he throws? I don't think that there is a QB in the league that wouldn't expereince the same issues if put in similar situations.
However, to put things into Wys perspective..................................
Bledsoe vs the Pats #1 : 1 TD / 1 INT
Bills D vs the Pats #1 : -38 pts
Bledsoe vs the Vikes: 3TD / 0 INT
Bills D vs the Vikes: -39pts
Bledsoe vs the Broncos: 2 TD / 0 INT
Bills D vs the Broncos: -28 pts
Bledsoe vs the Raiders: 2 TD / 2 INT
Bills D vs the Raiders: -42 pts (I even subtracted the Drew INT for a TD)
Bledsoe vs the Pats #2: 2 TD / 4 INT
Bills D vs the Pats #2: -27 pts
Bledsoe average in the above 5 games: 2TD/ 1.5 INT @ 358.6 yds. avg. a game
Bills D average for the above 5 games: -34.5 pts a game/ 1.8 sacks / 0 INTs avg. a game
Now Wys, tell me again who is more at fault?
colin
12-17-2002, 09:01 PM
You are the wost analyst ever Wys.
Where in your so-called effective analysis does it take into consideration other variables that are correlated with the ones you are trying to make assertions about? How about the one where when the other team can score at will the QB throws more balls to try and stay in the game? You have to be responsible when you make claims about "hard data". It's harder to win games when you are playing from behind Wys which is the real reason behind the 4-1 and 1-4 record you speak about. Granted the games could have been handled differently but this arguement is bunk.
BillsMan80
12-17-2002, 09:24 PM
Wys, that pretty much goes for any elite QB in the NFL. I'll post starting QB Records when the QB has to throw 40+ times. In general, no QB will be better than 1 game over .500 most likely.
AFC
Drew Bledsoe: 1-4
Tom Brady: 3-2
Jay Fiedler: 0-1
Chad Pennington: 0-0
Tommy Maddox: 1-1-1
Jeff Blake: 0-1
Tim Couch: 2-1
Jon Kitna: 0-4
Peyton Manning: 2-4
Steve McNair: 1-2
Mark Brunell: 0-2
David Carr: 0-0
Rich Gannon: 4-3
Drew Brees: 3-2
Brian Griese: 1-3
Trent Green: 0-1
NFC
Donovan McNabb: 1-2
Kerry Collins: 1-2
Chad Hutchinson: 0-1
Washington QBs: 1-2
Brett Favre: 2-2
Daunte Culpepper: 0-4
Joey Harrington: 0-5
Jim Miller/Chris Chandler: 0-2
Brad Johnson: 2-2
Aaron Brooks: 1-2
Michael Vick: 0-0-1
Rodney Peete: 0-1
Jeff Garcia: 1-2
Marc Bulger/Kurt Warner: 3-4
Jake Plummer: 3-0
Matt Hasselbeck/Trent Dilfer:0-4
So Wys, goes to show you that not many QBs are sucessful when they do indeed throw that much. There are a few exceptions, and not to mention, our defense didn't help the fact that it was awful to start the year.
RedEyE
12-17-2002, 09:27 PM
Originally posted by BillsMan80
Wys, that pretty much goes for any elite QB in the NFL. I'll post starting QB Records when the QB has to throw 40+ times. In general, no QB will be better than 1 game over .500 most likely.
AFC
Drew Bledsoe: 1-4
Tom Brady: 3-2
Jay Fiedler: 0-1
Chad Pennington: 0-0
Tommy Maddox: 1-1-1
Jeff Blake: 0-1
Tim Couch: 2-1
Jon Kitna: 0-4
Peyton Manning: 2-4
Steve McNair: 1-2
Mark Brunell: 0-2
David Carr: 0-0
Rich Gannon: 4-3
Drew Brees: 3-2
Brian Griese: 1-3
Trent Green: 0-1
NFC
Donovan McNabb: 1-2
Kerry Collins: 1-2
Chad Hutchinson: 0-1
Washington QBs: 1-2
Brett Favre: 2-2
Daunte Culpepper: 0-4
Joey Harrington: 0-5
Jim Miller/Chris Chandler: 0-2
Brad Johnson: 2-2
Aaron Brooks: 1-2
Michael Vick: 0-0-1
Rodney Peete: 0-1
Jeff Garcia: 1-2
Marc Bulger/Kurt Warner: 3-4
Jake Plummer: 3-0
Matt Hasselbeck/Trent Dilfer:0-4
So Wys, goes to show you that not many QBs are sucessful when they do indeed throw that much. There are a few exceptions, and not to mention, our defense didn't help the fact that it was awful to start the year.
:up: Nice Billsman80 .
BillsMan80
12-17-2002, 09:33 PM
Thanks RE, I figured that those stats would bring up some bottom lines, and they sure did. That only 1 QB in the NFL is more than 1 game over .500 throwing that much, and who is that? Jake Plummer, LOL.
Oh you silly antagonists! :D
More facts!
In the Jets game, the only reason our O did anything was b/c Henry had a huge day.
The first Jet TD was set up by a Bledsoe INT leaving the Jets w/ a 1st and 10 at our own 19 YL.
Early in the 4th Q, on 3rd-and-2, we let Drew throw the ball for an incompletion setting up a blocked punt putting the Jets 1st-and-10 at our own 24 for another FG.
Up by 1, midway through the 4th, our second to last drive stalled b/c we let Drew drop back to pass 4 times resulting in 1 recpt., 2 incompletes, and a sack. Henry had only 2 carries during that time. We were leading!
*****
In the Viking game, we led after the 1st Q! It was tied at the half! Midway thru the 3rd Q, we were up by 3! At 14 min. of the 4th Q, we led by 4! Again at just over 3 minutes, we led by 4!
Henry had 5 carries in the first half, 12 total! No! I don't think that being behind had anything at all to do with it in that one! Sorry, nice try though.
*****
From midway thru the second half we only trailed by 7 pts. 10 minutes into the 3rd Q, we trailed by only 4!
Yet, on the next drive, Henry ran once on 1/15 while Drew went 0-2 resulting in 1 incpl. and 1 sack. Punt!
Henry had 8 carries in the first half. Drew, 11 of 17 for 108 gross, 86 net w/ 3 sacks for 22 yds. in the half.
*****
In the Oakland game, we never trailed by more than 7 points until the 8:00 mark of the 4th Q when Bledsoe tossed an INT for a TD!
The game was tied at:
The beginning of the game;
At 9:48 of the 2nd Q;
6:42 of the 2nd Q;
at the half;
The Bills LED at:
10:10 of the 3rd Q
3:19 of the 3rd Q
Why it got to more than 3, 4, or 7...!!!
Bledsoe tossed an INT for TD at 8:02 of the 4th and then AGAIN at 2:29 in the red zone to effectively end the game for us!
Henry had 5 carries in the first half, 15 total.
*****
In the first N.E. game, Henry had 8 carries in the first half and averaged 5.8 YPC on them!
We were only down by 10 at the half, not a reason to panic! Unless you're KG that is. Perhaps the reason we were down that much was b/c Drew was sacked 4 times in one half and Henry only ran the ball ~ 25% of the time while Drew threw it 75%.
At any rate, Drew only had 64 yards passing thru the first 28 minutes of the second half!!!
On the very last drive from the 4, 1st-and-goal, Drew went incomplete. Then 1st-and-1, incomplete! Then, again, 1st-and-1, incomplete!
The reason we lost that game was exactly b/c we didn't run. We can tag Gilbride for that one!
*****
In the second N.E. game, the reason we went down by more than 10 points to begin with was because Drew threw an INT setting up the Pats 2nd TD at our own 6 YL!
The very next points that N.E. put up came off of another Bledsoe INT, this time on 2nd-and-goal at N.E.'s 1 YL.
In the 3rd Q, we were only down by 10 at 4:15.
*****
So you see, this "we were down and had to throw" bit may be true slightly, but all in all it's crock of crap! And in the few instances where it was in fact true, it was largely b/c of Drew and his own mistakes, NOT b/c the D put us there!
Time for a new "party line!"
;)
Originally posted by BillsMan80
Wys, that pretty much goes for any elite QB in the NFL. I'll post starting QB Records when the QB has to throw 40+ times. In general, no QB will be better than 1 game over .500 most likely.
AFC
Drew Bledsoe: 1-4
Tom Brady: 3-2
Jay Fiedler: 0-1
Chad Pennington: 0-0
Tommy Maddox: 1-1-1
Jeff Blake: 0-1
Tim Couch: 2-1
Jon Kitna: 0-4
Peyton Manning: 2-4
Steve McNair: 1-2
Mark Brunell: 0-2
David Carr: 0-0
Rich Gannon: 4-3
Drew Brees: 3-2
Brian Griese: 1-3
Trent Green: 0-1
NFC
Donovan McNabb: 1-2
Kerry Collins: 1-2
Chad Hutchinson: 0-1
Washington QBs: 1-2
Brett Favre: 2-2
Daunte Culpepper: 0-4
Joey Harrington: 0-5
Jim Miller/Chris Chandler: 0-2
Brad Johnson: 2-2
Aaron Brooks: 1-2
Michael Vick: 0-0-1
Rodney Peete: 0-1
Jeff Garcia: 1-2
Marc Bulger/Kurt Warner: 3-4
Jake Plummer: 3-0
Matt Hasselbeck/Trent Dilfer:0-4
So Wys, goes to show you that not many QBs are sucessful when they do indeed throw that much. There are a few exceptions, and not to mention, our defense didn't help the fact that it was awful to start the year.
Yeah, but probably the difference between those teams and us, they were probably really behind and not "make-believe" behind. Also, do please keep in mind that we've thrown Drew voluntarily! I'm sure in most of those situations they truly do it out of necessity b/c they can't possibly win unless they do.
Clearly, based on the info provided in response to the "We had to throw argument", that was clearly not the case for us. When teams are behind by enough that they have to throw, then it makes sense that they usually are going to lose, eh!
But in our case, in spite of how many times its said, it simply isn't true. I've detailed all of that above! So there's a HUGE difference there unless you can prove thru analysis for each one of those QBs that it isn't the case as I did w/ Drew. But I'd wager you a lot that if you did that, you'd see that it was the case, that in 80%+ of those instances, those teams were really down by 14 or more and that those passes had to be made and weren't made by choice when down by 3 or in fact even up!
Keep tryin' though. Nice of you to provide some in-depth analysis for that! :D
BillsMan80
12-17-2002, 10:18 PM
I am not defending our strategy to throw the ball so much, but I am just saying that all the elite QBs will struggle to win throwing 40+ times a game consistently. Heck, Peyton Manning is only 2-4.
Originally posted by RedEyE
Your stats make sense but contain no content. Here is some more fuel for your fire: Bledsoe is actually 1-5 when he's attempted 40+ times.
NE twice / first game 45x / second 51x
Vikes 49
Denver 41
Raiders 53
Using your own stats, consider this - Wouldn't it make sense that Drew would be throwing more when trailing? Wouldn't it make more sense that his accuracy rating would deplete the more he throws? I don't think that there is a QB in the league that wouldn't expereince the same issues if put in similar situations.
However, to put things into Wys perspective..................................
Bledsoe vs the Pats #1 : 1 TD / 1 INT
Bills D vs the Pats #1 : -38 pts
Bledsoe vs the Vikes: 3TD / 0 INT
Bills D vs the Vikes: -39pts
Bledsoe vs the Broncos: 2 TD / 0 INT
Bills D vs the Broncos: -28 pts
Bledsoe vs the Raiders: 2 TD / 2 INT
Bills D vs the Raiders: -42 pts (I even subtracted the Drew INT for a TD)
Bledsoe vs the Pats #2: 2 TD / 4 INT
Bills D vs the Pats #2: -27 pts
Bledsoe average in the above 5 games: 2TD/ 1.5 INT @ 358.6 yds. avg. a game
Bills D average for the above 5 games: -34.5 pts a game/ 1.8 sacks / 0 INTs avg. a game
Now Wys, tell me again who is more at fault?
Red Eye,
My mind is perfectly in tact! Thanks for checking me though. ;)
This is going nowhere b/c you, and others, can't be honest enough to see that Bledsoe is responsible for some of that. I just painstakingly laid it all out how in several cases we were even ahead when Bledsoe's INTs put us behind and you still deny that! So there's not much more to say. If he's perfect in your eyes, then fine.
Yes, the D wasn't great early on, but Drew's INTs have set the D up horribly at times and he's, personally, the reason why we were behind to begin with at times. That's a FACT! Deny as you will, but it's the truth.
"Bledsoe vs the Broncos: 2 TD / 0 INT
Bills D vs the Broncos: -28 pts"[/b]
28 pts. huh? Did you forget to subtract the 7 that the Broncos returned b/c of Henry's fumble? That's 21! Not too shabby v. Denver.
"Bledsoe vs the Raiders: 2 TD / 2 INT
Bills D vs the Raiders: -42 pts (I even subtracted the Drew INT for a TD)"
That's mighty white of you, but did you figure in that the ENTIRE REASON we were down was b/c of Drew's pick at 8:02 of the 4th returned 81 yards for a TD to put the Raider lead at 11 when it was a perfectly winnable game up until that point? Seems like you conveniently ignored that one!
And oh, but wait, there's more! On the very next drive Drew's "passing prowess, experience, and savvy", was sacked twice for 12 yards and then overthrew Moulds to give the ball right back to Oakland to personally put the nails in our coffin for good at 6:32 of the 4th!
So how again is that the D's fault? You can't expect them to play out of their heads while all we do is pass when Drew throws 3 INTs and gets sacked 5 times.
But, ingore what you will. Drew can be your hero! I'll let you know if the Drew Bledsoe action figures become available. Especially if they come w/ the "Pass-Action Arm!" I'll send ya one for Christmas. :D
I'm through w/ this argument. It's pretty clear that some of you are simply going to see what you want to see and nothing else. Which is fine, but just don't throw up bogus stats, figures, and info w/o doing some initial research first.
Besides, isn't Drew supposed to be better than all of those QBs?
In any event, it should kill the statement that "our chances for winning go up when Drew throws more." That's all. B/c no matte how you slice that, it simply isn't true. Right! :)
RedEyE
12-17-2002, 10:33 PM
Wys :bowl:, if your going to make the arguement that Henry should be used more in the offense then Drew, DON"T! Because I agree with that 100%. This team should be built around Henry, not Drew.
However, if you are going to make the arguement that Drew makes no positive impact on this team, DON'T! You can post as many stats as you like and you will never change my mind on the fact that Drew Bledsoe made an immediate impact in Buffalo. Being a life long fan, I never want to go back to the days of QBs like Rob Johnson, and Todd Collins. Bledsoe has a winning arm and will one day even make a believer out of you, just as Travis Henry has.
I remember a time when you preached, and threw up errored filled stats about TH (much like your doing now with Drew). You wanted him out and Bryson to lead the pack. Just as much as you wanted RJ to go out and prove your endless pages of mindless dribble for you. News flash, that never occured. Leave Drew alone.
Whether you tend to believe it or not, without Drew, Henry would not have the same room to run and proabably would have been kept to less then 1000 yards again this season. Gilbride admits to the fact (not to my liking) that he uses the pass to open the run. Without Drew, the Bills would have won less games regardless of how many sack/int/yardage crap stats you list.
In short, rest the keys of your computer and save the your endless typing for a rainy day. You've been wrong a lot this exciting and much improved Bills season, and your chances of being right are not improving. Give it a rest man.
Well, what I've been wrong about was things that hadn't materialized yet. Henry, Price. Neither was stellar last year. Both had half of their yards in 3 or 4 games and didn't do much on the whole. I acquiesced when Henry came thru. It was simply MO that he wouldn't. Boy howdy, I'm sure glad I'm wrong however. He's a force. I stated that I would be happy if I was wrong. I am! :) See!
We can agree then, that Henry should be the focus of this team. When you put up arguments like the ones you have, it makes it seem like you are happy w/ the Pass Drew at all costs offense that we run.
As to Bledsoe opening up for Henry, I don't really see that. Bledsoe has his best games when Henry rushes for lots of yards generally speaking. Not the other way around. Look at the last bunch of games. Bledsoe has shat the bed several times that the running game won for us. If it is as you say, then Bledsoe's numbers would be fine.
See, the problem is, and few will acknowledge this, but Drew makes a lot of errors. He's a "big play" type of QB. The problem w/ that is that he makes big plays both ways. For us and against us which he's proven. Unfortunately, his record in N.E., as many who watched a ton of games of his there will attest to, shows that he makes a lot of mistakes against the better teams and in the playoffs.
As to Henry being the focus of this O, if that's what you believe as I do, then we need to start pushing for a different O.C. Gilbride believes strongly in the passing game. He did even when Leaf was his QB and Stewart as well. I think we can agree that those two QBs both suck.
Anyway, check the QB attempts of the teams that Gilbride has HC'd and OC'd. You may be surprised. He's got the most QB attempts of any HC/OC coach combo in the league over the past decade. He's not the O.C. for this team if we want Henry to be highlighted each week. So he'll need to go otherwise we'll be subject to more of the same next season. We won't be able to throw even a game or two in the dumper next year while Gilbride reverts to his passing ways. It has cost us a PO appearance this year and IMO a division championship.
If there's one off-season move that we make this year besides players, I'd let Gilbride go. Robinson too for players.
Certain things are obvious:
-Bledsoe has made the Bills a team to be respected, and that will be even more evident next year when the defense is addressed
-Bledsoe throwing 40+ times a game is NOT a good thing because it means the Bills' defense isn't doing jack
-Gilbride has failed to make proper adjustments during and between games to ensure that what worked one time will not work again
Sorry Wys but the $5M the Bills spent on Bledsoe was the best use of that chunk of change.
Possibly. But the fact of the matter is that this team wouldn't be 7-7 w/o Henry's running. If Henry weren't here, we'd be 3-11 or 4-10.
W/o Henry we would clearly have lost the Charger game. Both Miami games, at least one, the last one. The Houston game.
Henry's stepping it up has been more monumental than Bledsoe's yardage. If it weren't so, then some of those games where we lost and Henry wasn't run and Bledsoe tossed 40+ passes, we would have won.
Also, count the games that Bledsoe's poor play lost the games for us! BOTH Pats games. The K.C. game. One Jets game and the other he was instrumental in the loss. The Oakland game he threw away. NOT the D.
That's 6 games right there, 4 that he lost for us and 2 more in which his shoddy play strongly contributed to the loss in spite of Henry's running well and solid D in some cases.
Bledsoe's image has benefitted from good play by Henry and good defensive play over our last 8 games!
Clearly!
Sorry doc, but as to the $5M, I think it would have gone further had we used it to spend on some DL-men. Nonetheless, Drew will be fine as long as Henry becomes the heart-and-soul of this offense. If not, then his performances will continue to nosedive.
P.S. Welcome to the Zone!!! Great to have ya on board.
lordofgun
12-18-2002, 12:17 AM
Without Bledsoe as a reason for opponents to respect the pass, Henry doesn't come close to having the type of year he's currently having. Pretty simple.
demonkilla
12-18-2002, 12:53 AM
Sounds like you're singing a different tune now, oh great analytical mind.
http://www.billsfanzone.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3628
I got a good laugh out of that thread :snicker:
It just makes no sense. We're said to have a good running OL and a poor pass protecting OL. Frankly I think that's merely an excuse for Drew. The same was said in N.E. for a decade.
Nonetheless, if that's the case, then it stands to reason that the opposite is true. No matter though, we simply haven't won games based on the number of passes Drew's thrown.
We have won games based on the number of carries that Henry's had. There has to be something hard to back up that opinion, yet there isn't other than simply that, pure opinion.
If it were true, then in most games for which Drew's thrown for lots of yardage, we would have won a majority of them, yet not so. It really is that simple. Otherwise why would we have lost that many games when he's passed for yards?
If the answer is the D, which it isn't as I've already more than amply demonstrated, then another issue is howcome that doesn't seem to affect game outcomes when Henry gets the ball 19+ times? It just doesn't make sense.
Maybe the reason why the D hasn't played well when we've only passed Drew and haven't run Henry is b/c Drew can't sustain drives, and put up points to keep up w/ the opponent! That makes a lot more sense. Especially since he's proven to throw games away like the K.C. game, the two Pats games, the Raiders game, both Jets games.
You can't just take 2 or 3 games out of 14 and b/c they happen to match the criteria, then say that it applies as a rule throughout the season. Yet that's exactly what's happening here. I know there's a large fan favoratism here for Drew. But I still think that's b/c of the immense over emphasis on yardage and yardage alone apart from other measures that bear more directly on the outcomes of games. Measures such as TDs, lack of INTs, sacks, and red zone performance. Drew is horrible in those. Who cares if he can move the ball up and down between the 20s. Who also cares if he puts up 5,000 yards but only has 28 TDs. I'd rather have him put up 3,500 and 35 TDs. It's far more efficient.
All I know is that just like in N.E., if we don't build our O around Henry, Drew will play just as poorly as he did there. His numbers were very average over there contrary to popular belief. He averaged less than 20 TDs/season over there.
Butch
12-18-2002, 11:40 AM
We've won games because if teams don't respect our passing game, we'll beat them (See Minnesota and second Miami game) and if they don't respect our running game Travis Henry will beat them (S.D., Houston, etc.). That is what you call a balanced offense. It's not because someone sucks or someone screwed up, it's called balance and I am glad we have it on offense.
Now if we only got a balanced defense we'd be 10-4 and not 7-7.
LuvDaBills11
12-18-2002, 07:11 PM
wys is partly right this team is successful because of Henry. but I think even wys can see that drew has made an impact too. almost everyone on this offense is importnat i think only the tes can be replaced and upgraded. maybe the fb position too.
TigerJ
12-18-2002, 09:18 PM
Without trying to analyze stats too deeply, my sense is that Buffalo needs to cultivate a balanced offence. They also need to tighten up their defence and cut down on offensive mistakes early in ball games. In a number of those high passing attempts games, Buffalo gave up an early lead and KG rightly or wrongly felt pressured to go to a passing offence. (Sometimes I think he gave up on the run too soon.) When that happened against teams with sharp DCs and good defences those teams made Buffalo pay. I think if one were to go back and look at all the games this season he/she would find that Buffalo got outscored in the first quarter by a wide margin, at least in the games Buffalo lost. That might show us where Buffalo needs to work.
Wys: Thanks for the welcome. I'm always open to a good forum no matter whose it is, and I've been to, and still post on, most of them.
As for the Bills' offense, Henry benefits from the threat that Bledsoe, Moulds, Price, and Reed bring. Now Henry is a great RB, but if teams were able to concentrate on stopping him, they would be able to do so. It's a "who made who" kind of thing.
WRT where would the Bills be without Bledsoe, I doubt the Bills could have picked up enough DL players with that $5M to make an impact enough to improve the defense to the degree that the offense would have suffered WITHOUT having a guy like Bledsoe. I don't believe he lost the 1st Jets game (the defense couldn't stop them, the ST's gave up 2 TD's and a blocked punt, and Henry fumbled in scoring range), the Raiders game (Bledsoe's 2nd INT should NOT have been returned 80 yards for a TD and the defense couldn't stop anything), the Chiefs game per se (Gilbride should have been calling running plays only on that last drive, Warfield made a great play on the INT, and the Bills got screwed royally by the zebras), or the first Pats game (horrible defense, gameplan, and luck). I think he didn't play well in the 2nd Jets and Pats games but then again, neither did the rest of the team and defense again.
So in conclusion, I think the Bills are fine with Bledsoe, but I'm starting to have my doubts about Gilbride. He's done little to correct the things other teams have been doing to have success against the Bills' offense, and his refusal to stick with the running game worries me. I think you'll see a different Bledsoe next year when the Bills have money, and I mean a LOT of money, to spend on defense which will allow Bledsoe to NOT have to carry the team on his shoulders (he's prone to mistakes when he feels he has to do that), and hopefully Gilbride will get a clue and truly unleash Travis Henry on the NFL!
In the first Jets game Drew threw 2 INTs from which the Jets scored TDs on their subsequent drives. You just can't set them up like that. Henry had what, 149 yards on almost 5 YPC and 3 TDs? 1 fumble is excusable with a performance like that. Drew had 1 TD, 2 INTs that both led to Jet TDs.
As to Bledsoe, the Bills actually fare better when they do not put things on Bledsoe's shoulders. I'll post some interesting numbers later. The team does more poorly the more Drew throws, the statistics back that up.
We'll get a lot more production w/ Drew feeding off of a solid rushing game instead of visa versa. This thing about Drew opening up the running game is a myth. It's rarely happened.
The more we throw, the greater the chances are that we lose. Again, it really is that simple. No one cares to look at the truth of the matter however.
I fully agree with you however that as soon as we get rid of Gilbride, we'll do better. We need someone who will make Henry the focus of this offense.
Bledsoe's presence and his ability to get the ball to threats like Moulds, Price, and Reed opens up the running game Wys. Now I agree with you that the Bills should NOT put the game on Bledsoe's shoulders, but that's what he's had to do with the defense and ST's playing the way they have.
Butch
12-20-2002, 10:21 AM
Drew helps open up the running game. Saying he doesn't is ridiculous. Any threat of a passing game helps set up the run. This isn't Alex Van Pelt we are talking about.
justasportsfan
12-20-2002, 06:48 PM
When your recievers are arguably considered by the a lot of people as being the best wr tandem in the legue and both have over 1,000 yds. catching, a lot of that success has to do w/ the qb.
In the 90's the 1-2 punch of Kelly and Thurman took us to 4 straight SB's. How long did it take Kelly and co. to get there? How long has Drew played for the bills? Geez guys, it hasn't been a year yet. Some people on this board wanted Rob to stay despite having a losing record. Drew has done a lot better. Give the dude some slack for crying out loud.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.