Who's turnovers cost us more this season? [Archive] - BillsZone.com

Patrick76777

01-15-2003, 01:24 PM

It’s impossible to measure what “cost” a team a game. Countless numbers of intangibles go into that. One or two turnovers play a role but are usually not the sole reason for a loss. Even if they come at the end of a game, a million other things happened leading up to that turnover to cause a team to lose a game. I guess an example of a player losing a game for a team would be Lucas in the first Miami game, just for the sheer amount of turnovers. And even still, one could find other reasons why Miami lost.

As to the idea of comparing which player’s turnover’s were more costly, I think it’s impossible to compare the two positions. The risk of a QB’s passes being intercepted are much higher then that of a running back fumbling. It’s not unheard of for a RB to go an entire season without fumbling once. But if a QB were to go a whole season without an INT, it would be the talk of the town. I’m going to pull numbers out of the top of my head here, but I’d say that it’s unacceptable for a running back to fumble more then three times during a season. Whereas one could expect a QB to throw AT LEAST 7 or 8 ints and it’s usually up in the double digits.

My point is that it’s impossible to compare the two because QB’s should always have more Int’s then a RB. And thus it would always seem like they cost the team more games.

01-15-2003, 01:24 PM

Fair enough. Let's find a Doc to prescribe Ridlin for BZ! ;)

Q: What's the capital of Nigeria!

BFO: 6

TT: Maybe

:biggrin:

01-15-2003, 01:25 PM

76777: Yeah, but she did it too!

Patrick76777

01-15-2003, 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Wys Guy
76777: Yeah, but she did it too!

I think I have a very good and astute point here!

THATHURMANATOR

01-15-2003, 01:39 PM

I like WYS's new short posting style!!!

lordofgun

01-15-2003, 01:39 PM

I want to look forward to next season.

LtBillsFan66

01-15-2003, 01:42 PM

I wasn't off track. The question was "Who's turnovers cost us more wins this season?"

I answered that our d's lack of them cost us more wins than Henry or Drew...

I think we were #32 in takeaways!

THATHURMANATOR

01-15-2003, 01:43 PM

And thats why I agreed with you BF1...

HenryRules

01-15-2003, 01:43 PM

I say Henry's because his turnovers affected the way our offense was run. Bledsoe's turnovers occured at a respectably low rate, so the frequency with which we passed didn't need to be changed to compensate for the increased rate of turnovers.

Conversely, Henry's turnovers occured so frequent that Gilbride justifiably lost faith in giving him the ball in short yardage situations and other key times in the game.

All in all though, I must agree with BF1, our defenses lack of turnovers are what caused most of our turnovers to be key turnovers ... our D was never able to make the big play to make up for a mistake on offense.

THATHURMANATOR

01-15-2003, 01:46 PM

Thats a good point about TH's fumbles changing how KG called plays. I never even thought of that.

LtBillsFan66

01-15-2003, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
And thats why I agreed with you BF1...

I know. Wys doesn't get it...

Patrick76777

01-15-2003, 01:50 PM

Excellent point Henry……But I would rephrase the question to who’s turnovers had more of an adverse affect on our offense.

Patrick76777

01-15-2003, 01:55 PM

Hey wys, I’ll speak your language for a minute. STATS. Did you know that Drew finished 5th in the NFL in INT% at 2.5 behind only Pennington 1.5, Gannon 1.6, Brunell 1.7 and Brady 2.3.

01-15-2003, 09:55 PM

Fair enough. Now figure how many QBs put up 610 attempts. Then ask yourself out of all of the other QBs' INTs, how many ended up, either directly or indirectly, costing their team 7 or assisting the other team to 7.

Besides, it's TDs that go in for you that matter as well.

While your speaking my language, did you know that Drew finished 21st in the league in TD% after such QBs as Blake, Miller, Couch, Ramsey, and Peete?

Interesting, eh!

I'll post some TO stats later after a few more people answer this poll. I did a TO analysis and if I were us, I'd be shocked and very concerned heading into next season.

mackey789

01-16-2003, 01:16 AM

Why doesnt WYS just come out and tell everyone that he hates drew bledsoe because he isnt superman? Maybe he would like him if he threw for 5,000 yds with 47 td's and 0 int's.....anything less is unacceptable. Yes, we ALL know you hate him....lets sign jeff blake.

01-16-2003, 11:43 AM

I don't hate him there Mackey. For someone who thinks they know my position, you sure haven't read much of what I've said in the past. I actually like Drew a lot. I think he's one of the top decent guys in the league. Great guy as a person and someone who is a definite asset to the community.

But I've held this position that I now hold long before he ever came to Buffalo. What is so hard to understand about that? 5, 6 years prior maybe. I remember starting threads about him before he came to Buffalo and how so many people supported me in that he was way overrated. I guess all those people sold out on their true beliefs b/c they sure aren't saying the same thing now that he's in Buffalo.

Meanwhile, I've held to the same position that I've always had and simply not let my affinity and fandom for the Bills overrule it! As a result I'm a lot truer than many who simply think he's great now b/c he's a Bill.

As to his performances, if he hadn't thrown INTs giving up points and/or costing us points in 6 losses and hadn't played poorly in the other N.E. game, then I'd have been happy. But see, it's difficult for me to get all googly and excited like you b/c that's the way Drew has always played. Indeed! Meanwhile, you and others state that we couldn't have beaten teams like Chicago, Minnesota, Detroit, Cincy, and Houston w/o him which is a total laugh as many worse teams than us have beaten those exact teams completey disproving it.

I've tried to prove it w/ some of you but you'd rather stick your fingers in your ears and go running away making noises so as not to hear as if knowing the truth of his past seasons is going to change as a result. I gave him the benefit of the doubt early on and thought for a moment that I was completely wrong and that a change of team/venue, etc. had caused changes in his play. However, as the season went on, that plainly was not true.

What's funny is that you and others don't assail me on the facts and points. Instead, you ignore them and make excuses that weren't allowed for RJ or any other problems that the team had last year and even worse. You lambaste me simply b/c I'm not towing the party line. Well, I can't help it if you and everyone else are too lazy to engage me in taking a specific look at some games this season to see where we really lost them instead of spouting out the same unintelligent and ignorant drivel that comes out of ESPN as if they have anyone there covering the Bills in nearly as much depth as I and others do.

So unless you want to do that, you'll always think Drew's a god and I'll always hold my view on this. Unless it changes of course. But it hasn't in 10 seasons from start to present.

Here's a puzzler: If I mentioned another QB who had only put up more than 20 TDs in 10 seasons, while putting up only 13, 15, 16, 17, and 19 in 5 others, and one of the 20+ that he put up was 25 TDs/27 INTs, and told you that that QB was great, you'd absolutely laugh at me. Same if I compare Drew to similar QBs who only post a 20+ TD season twice every 5 years.

Wouldn't you! You know you would. So why then is Drew as good as you say he is? Also, consider that he's thrown far more balls than many of those QBs to whom I'd compare him. For most QBs, you'd expect that the # of TDs goes up w/ the # of attempts. Not Drew though. He's exempt from all the standard criticism that gets levied on other QBs.

Yes, I'd have rather had Sam Adams at DT and Blake at QB and a first round selection this year. I think w/ that we'd be FAR greater positioned to reach a Super Bowl this coming season. Far. I also think we would have made the playoffs this season as well. Drew wouldn't have been here to cost us 4-6 games v. the best teams we played. That alone would have helped us win games!

GO BILLS!!!

01-16-2003, 11:47 AM

BTW, I haven't voted in this poll...

justasportsfan

01-16-2003, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
I like WYS's new short posting style!!!

I guess you spoke too soon.

What's the point to this thread? I get it ......zonebucks:snicker:

HenryRules

01-16-2003, 11:59 AM

Wys, you're completely ignoring the effect that Henry's fumbles have on games.

The reason Drew's INTs came at key times is because every team in the league, and every fan of the Bills, knew that at key points in the game, the ball would be in Bledsoe's hands ... all the defense had to do was sit back on it and wait. Was this Gilbride's fault because he never trusts his RB's?? Most definitely not ... those that feel this way conveniently ignore Gilbride's work in Pitt where he completely relied on the running game. Nope, the reason Gilbride refused to put the ball in Henry's hands is because he couldn't trust him to hold on to the ball. How can you so easily dismiss this fact? Just because a guy doesn't fumble at a crucial time does not mean that his fumbles do not affect plays at crucial times.

LtBillsFan66

01-16-2003, 12:10 PM

Wys - you make everyone else but you out to be Drew Believer drones.

Face it, your points are always "backed up" by twisted and bend stats. You lost your credibility in the QB judging department a long time ago. Are stats the only “facts and points” you accept? Most others actually watch the games and base our assessment on what we SEE. So we post sans any #s or links.

You, out of all other posters anywhere, have the biggest yearning for or against certain players. 99% of others aren’t so adamant about our love or hate.

Your obsessions are beginning to become unhealthy. And I’m concerned.

Mr. Miyagi

01-16-2003, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by Wys Guy
While your speaking my language, did you know that Drew finished 21st in the league in TD% after such QBs as Blake, Miller, Couch, Ramsey, and Peete?
Wys you are showing a stat that does not fairly represent the whole picture, thus intentionally incorrectly influencing and manipulating others with your propaganda.

TD% means nothing. Look at KC's backup QB Todd Collins. He threw 6 passes, completed 5, and had 1 TD. His QB rating is 156.9. Holy crap his TD% is waaaaaaay up there!!! Let's get him to Buffalo to replace Drew!!!

With QB who played all 16 games, Drew is the 7th highest rated QB. How can that be bad????????

justasportsfan

01-16-2003, 01:01 PM

Here's an example of what a stat can do:

29-19 in 3 years Wade Philipps record as HC for the Bills,

That stat/record is better than Marv Levy's, Jimmy Johnson and Parcells record in their first 3 years as HC.

Based on this stat, Wade is one of the best coaches that ever coached in the NFL. He's better than them other 3 coaches too. :up:

SABURZFAN

01-16-2003, 01:11 PM

:rofl: at this thread.

Halbert

01-16-2003, 01:53 PM

Depends on your definition, but to me there's no doubt Drew's TO's had a much more negative impact than Travis'. That really doesn't mean much because RB's don't throw the ball and int's are just part of passing - especially when a team has a seive for a defense and the QB is the only guy that chucks it downfield.

As far as I recall, Travis' fumbles didn't really hurt us a lot. They could have, but we recovered from most of them. Drew's TO's came at times where they were killers. Again, that doesn't really mean much. I still think he's one of the best in the league and will be much more careful with the ball when he has a defense he can be conservative with.

THATHURMANATOR

01-16-2003, 03:31 PM

WYS who are all these Drew Bledsoe Clones you speak of??? Are you speaking about people you know that don't post here or are you speaking about posters on this board. If it is the latter please list who they are. I am interested to see where you feel I would be classified.

Patrick76777

01-16-2003, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
WYS who are all these Drew Bledsoe Clones you speak of??? Are you speaking about people you know that don't post here or are you speaking about posters on this board. If it is the latter please list who they are. I am interested to see where you feel I would be classified.

here here!!!!

THATHURMANATOR

01-16-2003, 05:03 PM

WYS hello.........

01-16-2003, 09:43 PM

Originally posted by BillsFanStuckInWisc

Wys you are showing a stat that does not fairly represent the whole picture, thus intentionally incorrectly influencing and manipulating others with your propaganda.

TD% means nothing. Look at KC's backup QB Todd Collins. He threw 6 passes, completed 5, and had 1 TD. His QB rating is 156.9. Holy crap his TD% is waaaaaaay up there!!! Let's get him to Buffalo to replace Drew!!!

With QB who played all 16 games, Drew is the 7th highest rated QB. How can that be bad????????

Aha, I see, but the argument by 76777 about INT % was supposed to put an end to the argument, eh? That's what I'm talking about. 76777, puts up a single stat totally out of context w/ the rest of the season, and it's supposed to have meaning while he himself, TT, and others berate me for doing that when I never do. I always look at the bigger picture. Again, however, the point of the game is to score points. You all rave and hoot and holler over all of Drew's yards, but that TD%, if nothing else, shows how often he puts the ball in the endzone based on the number of passes he throws.

Using your logic then, we should ensure that Drew gets as close to 100 attempts/game so that the ball will go into the endzone more!

Originally posted by Halbert
Depends on your definition, but to me there's no doubt Drew's TO's had a much more negative impact than Travis'. That really doesn't mean much because RB's don't throw the ball and int's are just part of passing - especially when a team has a seive for a defense and the QB is the only guy that chucks it downfield.

As far as I recall, Travis' fumbles didn't really hurt us a lot. They could have, but we recovered from most of them. Drew's TO's came at times where they were killers. Again, that doesn't really mean much. I still think he's one of the best in the league and will be much more careful with the ball when he has a defense he can be conservative with.

I agree w/ you in just about everything Halbert except...

"Drew's TO's came at times where they were killers. Again, that doesn't really mean much."

I think it does. When your QB tosses an INT to give the other team an 11 point lead when you may have scored and won the game, and then takes two straight sacks and then overthrows his star receiver on the very next series, I think it means a lot.

When you QB is responsible for 4 TOs in a game when the rest of the team plays more than well enough to win, I think it means a lot if you lose.

When your QB, who is supposed to "win games" for you, throws one away on 1st-and-10 on an INT to lose the game, when there is no reason why you shouldn't have scored otherwise, particularly when your RB was having a flawless game, I think that means a lot.

When your QB throws 2 INTs both leading to TDs for the other team off of those while keeping the ball out of the endzone for yourself for a 28 point swing in an 18 pt. loss, I think it means a lot.

When your QB throws an INT to give the other team a 17-0 lead to demoralize your entire team and toss another on an "and-goal at the 1" to cost your team 7 as well for a 14 pt. swing and you lose by 10, I think it means a lot.

5 losses! I think those meant a lot! I fail to see how anyone can say that that is meaningless.

Call me crazy...

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy

Aha, I see, but the argument by 76777 about INT % was supposed to put an end to the argument, eh? That's what I'm talking about. 76777, puts up a single stat totally out of context w/ the rest of the season, and it's supposed to have meaning while he himself, TT, and others berate me for doing that when I never do. I always look at the bigger picture. Again, however, the point of the game is to score points. You all rave and hoot and holler over all of Drew's yards, but that TD%, if nothing else, shows how often he puts the ball in the endzone based on the number of passes he throws.

Using your logic then, we should ensure that Drew gets as close to 100 attempts/game so that the ball will go into the endzone more!

I agree w/ you in just about everything Halbert except...

"Drew's TO's came at times where they were killers. Again, that doesn't really mean much."

I think it does. When your QB tosses an INT to give the other team an 11 point lead when you may have scored and won the game, and then takes two straight sacks and then overthrows his star receiver on the very next series, I think it means a lot.

When you QB is responsible for 4 TOs in a game when the rest of the team plays more than well enough to win, I think it means a lot if you lose.

When your QB, who is supposed to "win games" for you, throws one away on 1st-and-10 on an INT to lose the game, when there is no reason why you shouldn't have scored otherwise, particularly when your RB was having a flawless game, I think that means a lot.

When your QB throws 2 INTs both leading to TDs for the other team off of those while keeping the ball out of the endzone for yourself for a 28 point swing in an 18 pt. loss, I think it means a lot.

When your QB throws an INT to give the other team a 17-0 lead to demoralize your entire team and toss another on an "and-goal at the 1" to cost your team 7 as well for a 14 pt. swing and you lose by 10, I think it means a lot.

5 losses! I think those meant a lot! I fail to see how anyone can say that that is meaningless.

Call me crazy...

The INT% thing was more of an after thought. You know, after I thoroughly shot down the theory you were trying to get us to see.

It hit me that even though you talk about all these INT’s, he really didn’t have many. And compared to the amount passes in threw in total, it really didn’t match up.

But again, the crux of my argument is in my first post.

I guess I need to explain everything to you.

BLAME THE QB! Unless he’s RJ!

HenryRules

01-17-2003, 07:52 AM

An INT is likely to happen at any point in the field ... the defense doesn't have a huge advantage to get an INT if you're on your own 30 or on their 10, if you're throwing they can get it. So INT% does have meaning. Also, regardless of your running game/defense, when you air the ball out, the D can get it.

Conversely, if you're starting with the ball on your 20 versus starting at midfield, that's 2 or 3 extra completions you have to make just to get the ball to where a team with better field position would start ... thus TD% is a number that is too greatly influenced by starting field position (read defense and special teams). Finally, any team with an RB they can rely on will run the ball in the red zone ... its a fact. So QB's with solid RB's are likely to make the majority of their passes before the red zone, thus decreasing their shot at getting TD's and decreasing their TD%.

Honestly, I have never heard of a more useless stat than TD%. Think of it this way ... for the following fictional halves of a hypothetical QB, which was better:

1st Half: 10 for 20 for 150 yards and 1 TD.
2nd Half: 10 for 10 for 150 yards and 0 TD.

You'd have to be crazy to say the first half was better.

Now, if interceptions were swapped in.
1st Half: 10 for 20 for 150 yards and 0 INT.
2nd Half: 10 for 11 for 150 yards and 1 INT (had to add an incompletion for the INT).

The second half is still probably better, but there could reasonably be some doubt.

justasportsfan

01-17-2003, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy

Aha, I see, but the argument by 76777 about INT % was supposed to put an end to the argument, eh? That's what I'm talking about. 76777, puts up a single stat totally out of context w/ the rest of the season, and it's supposed to have meaning while he himself, TT, and others berate me for doing that when I never do. I always look at the bigger picture. Again, however, the point of the game is to score points. You all rave and hoot and holler over all of Drew's yards, but that TD%, if nothing else, shows how often he puts the ball in the endzone based on the number of passes he throws.

Using your logic then, we should ensure that Drew gets as close to 100 attempts/game so that the ball will go into the endzone more!

I agree w/ you in just about everything Halbert except...

"Drew's TO's came at times where they were killers. Again, that doesn't really mean much."

I think it does. When your QB tosses an INT to give the other team an 11 point lead when you may have scored and won the game, and then takes two straight sacks and then overthrows his star receiver on the very next series, I think it means a lot.

When you QB is responsible for 4 TOs in a game when the rest of the team plays more than well enough to win, I think it means a lot if you lose.

When your QB, who is supposed to "win games" for you, throws one away on 1st-and-10 on an INT to lose the game, when there is no reason why you shouldn't have scored otherwise, particularly when your RB was having a flawless game, I think that means a lot.

When your QB throws 2 INTs both leading to TDs for the other team off of those while keeping the ball out of the endzone for yourself for a 28 point swing in an 18 pt. loss, I think it means a lot.

When your QB throws an INT to give the other team a 17-0 lead to demoralize your entire team and toss another on an "and-goal at the 1" to cost your team 7 as well for a 14 pt. swing and you lose by 10, I think it means a lot.

5 losses! I think those meant a lot! I fail to see how anyone can say that that is meaningless.

Call me crazy...

This sums it all up. I think wys just used Henry's fumbles so it isn't obvious that he really wanted to say something negative about Drew. We all know Drew's mistakes, but why keep bringing it up?

Wys, we know that you really want Rob back now that his contract with Tampa is now about to end. Admit it.:music:

TedMock

01-17-2003, 08:45 AM

You can't measure who's turnovers were worse, it's impossible because there's not a correct answer. Turnovers suck period. Bledsoe and Henry have both turned it over when they were driving. What about Price's costly fumbles or Reimersmas drops? Sometime the turnover early in the first quarter proved to be the most costly of all. People just forget about those by the fourth quarter. It's not just turnovers or one or two players. There's always 4 or 5 PLAYS that can turn a game. Sometimes it's a turnover, sometimes it's a route cut short, a drop, a missed block etc... These things at times, result in the turnover. In all the years I played from little league through college, I can't remember one time our offense turned the ball over that was more important than any of the others. They were all crucial and all costly in some way. It's not just points scored off of turnovers that matter. Sometimes the momentum just disappears instead which could be even worse.

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 08:48 AM

Once again, I agree 100%

01-17-2003, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by Patrick76777
BLAME THE QB! Unless he’s RJ!

Actually, you've got it backwards there 76777!

Last year RJ took the heat for the D and STs not putting up in the S.D. game, for the D overall, for the OL, STs, not having a decent RB, just about everything.

This year, nothing at all is Drew's fault!! Nothing!

Weather (beginning in October and running through the entire rest of the season), poor OL play in spite of Drew holding onto the ball WAY too long, dropped passes w/o considering the many over/under throws & key INTs to often cost us 20-point swings, the defense, STs, coaching or lack thereof, Henry's fumbles (only one of which was consequential), and a whole slew of other stuff is used to vindicate Drew!

Nice try though...

01-17-2003, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by TedMock
You can't measure who's turnovers were worse, it's impossible because there's not a correct answer. Turnovers suck period. Bledsoe and Henry have both turned it over when they were driving. What about Price's costly fumbles or Reimersmas drops? Sometime the turnover early in the first quarter proved to be the most costly of all. People just forget about those by the fourth quarter. It's not just turnovers or one or two players. There's always 4 or 5 PLAYS that can turn a game. Sometimes it's a turnover, sometimes it's a route cut short, a drop, a missed block etc... These things at times, result in the turnover. In all the years I played from little league through college, I can't remember one time our offense turned the ball over that was more important than any of the others. They were all crucial and all costly in some way. It's not just points scored off of turnovers that matter. Sometimes the momentum just disappears instead which could be even worse.

You don't think so TM?

Let me ask you this:

Suppose a QB tosses an INT near scoring position or in the red zone that gets returned for a TD and we lose the game as a result.

Then you have a fumble by another player on a drive on which we get the ball back on a 3-and-out at near the same field position that you say, and I agree, is so critical.

So what you are saying is that a TO is a TO, right?

That's as silly as silly can be!

01-17-2003, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by HenryRules
An INT is likely to happen at any point in the field ... the defense doesn't have a huge advantage to get an INT if you're on your own 30 or on their 10, if you're throwing they can get it. So INT% does have meaning.

Conversely, if you're starting with the ball on your 20 versus starting at midfield, that's 2 or 3 extra completions you have to make just to get the ball to where a team with better field position would start ...

1st Half: 10 for 20 for 150 yards and 1 TD.
2nd Half: 10 for 10 for 150 yards and 0 TD.

You'd have to be crazy to say the first half was better.

Now, if interceptions were swapped in.
1st Half: 10 for 20 for 150 yards and 0 INT.
2nd Half: 10 for 11 for 150 yards and 1 INT (had to add an incompletion for the INT).

The second half is still probably better, but there could reasonably be some doubt.

Exactly HR. I may post this when I throw up the TO stats. I agree w/ you wholeheartedly!!!

As to your halfs, you are forgetting one thing; [b]Points[/i]

Who cares about comp. %, yards, INTs, etc.

What matters is points and more importantly point differential.

As well, if a 4 INT performance can be overcome w/ 5 TDs, then great. If not, then the INTs outweigh the TDs or lack thereof. If a QB throws for 800 yards but it's all between the 20s or he cannot get the ball into the endzone or throws INTs down in the redzone, then who cares. Other than Bills fans of course. :D

Yards and compl.%, compls., attempts, are all meaningless unless somewhere, somehow points result.

If a QB goes 5 for 30 for 210 yards for 3 TDs and a win, then I'd rather have that than 450 yards, 1 TD, 3 INTs and a 87% compl. % and a loss.

An INT, as well as a fumble, can be almost inconsequential as long as the team is not down and they get the ball back on 3-and-out and/or near the same FP that they had.

Remember that when I post the stats. I hope you maintain the exact same position and integrity then! ;)

01-17-2003, 09:32 AM

HR,

Why are you and everyone else so afraid of going through our losses and looking at why/where and which plays cost us the game?

I don't get it! Are you and everyone else afraid of having to alter your views slightly due to knowing the truth, or what? Lazy? Would rather just maintain your points w/o taking up the challenge? What? Help me out here...

If you aren't, then let's pick 5 or 6 games that we lost and go through the play-by-play to see where and why the team lost!

We have plenty of time. There's nothing else going on football wise until the FAcy period opens up in what, 6 weeks or so...

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 09:32 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy

Actually, you've got it backwards there 76777!

Last year RJ took the heat for the D and STs not putting up in the S.D. game, for the D overall, for the OL, STs, not having a decent RB, just about everything.

This year, nothing at all is Drew's fault!! Nothing!

Weather (beginning in October and running through the entire rest of the season), poor OL play in spite of Drew holding onto the ball WAY too long, dropped passes w/o considering the many over/under throws & key INTs to often cost us 20-point swings, the defense, STs, coaching or lack thereof, Henry's fumbles (only one of which was consequential), and a whole slew of other stuff is used to vindicate Drew!

Nice try though...

I’m talking about you. Last year, RJ was your boy and you made excuses for him (granted I only caught the tail end because I joined just after the superbowl, but I got enough of it.) But this year, it’s all the QB’s fault. So you’re just as guilty as everyone else that you seem to be blaming. You just did it opposite of everyone else.

And on that subject, whom are you talking about? Who are these people that refuse to criticize Drew? Just because people don’t blame Drew for everything, doesn’t mean that they’re giving him a free pass. The fact is that we had an offense that broke many records. It’s hard for most people to criticize such a prolific unit. An example of that would be Travis Henry who could have been a whipping boy for all of his Turnovers. And sure he did take some hits, but for the most part, most of the posters credited him with a good season.

But it’s all about the QB. Those other 21 guys on the field just play around him.

01-17-2003, 09:37 AM

Come on 76777!

You can't be serious! I'm not standing up for RJ here now but if you're saying that last year's OL was even a shadow of what we had this year then you're lying through your teeth.

Price wasn't anything, Henry was a rookie behind that same OL and only had 2 or 3 good games all year long. Our D was worse by a long shot than this year too. STs sucked.

Come on...

I'm not even gonna take that seriously. Why don't you strap some cojones on and take up my last challenge there?

What's the matter? Afraid you're gonna have to come to some conclusions that will confront your emotional mindset? ;)

P.S. I'm runnin' out shortly for the weekend. So if you don't hear from me until late Sunday after the games, that's why. I'll promptly be back then or online if I have access while away at the inlaws. ;) Have a great weekend if we don't talk 'til then!

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy
HR,

Why are you and everyone else so afraid of going through our losses and looking at why/where and which plays cost us the game?

I don't get it! Are you and everyone else afraid of having to alter your views slightly due to knowing the truth, or what? Lazy? Would rather just maintain your points w/o taking up the challenge? What? Help me out here...

If you aren't, then let's pick 5 or 6 games that we lost and go through the play-by-play to see where and why the team lost!

We have plenty of time. There's nothing else going on football wise until the FAcy period opens up in what, 6 weeks or so...

BECAUSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE! GET IT THRU YOUR THICK SKULL. YOU’RE OUT OF YOUR MIND IF YOU THINK THAT ONE PLAY DETERMINES THE OUTCOME OF THE WHOLE GAME. TEAMS PLAY FOR 60 MINUTES,

You’re telling me that Team A allows Team B to score 45 points thru 3 quarters. At the same time Team A has 28 points. In the 4th quarter, Team A’s QB throws 2 TDs to make the score 45 to 42. Now the QB is leading Team A on another nice drive, but with 15 seconds left, at Team B’s 6 yard line, QB A throws and INT which Team B returns for a TD. Team B wins the game 52-42. Team A’s qb goes 35-42 for 456 yards 4 TD’s and throw that one INT. Your argument suggests that the QB cost Team A the game! And that’s just NONSENSE!

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy
Come on 76777!

You can't be serious! I'm not standing up for RJ here now but if you're saying that last year's OL was even a shadow of what we had this year then you're lying through your teeth.

Price wasn't anything, Henry was a rookie behind that same OL and only had 2 or 3 good games all year long. Our D was worse by a long shot than this year too. STs sucked.

Come on...

I'm not even gonna take that seriously. Why don't you strap some cojones on and take up my last challenge there?

What's the matter? Afraid you're gonna have to come to some conclusions that will confront your emotional mindset? ;)

P.S. I'm runnin' out shortly for the weekend. So if you don't hear from me until late Sunday after the games, that's why. I'll promptly be back then or online if I have access while away at the inlaws. ;) Have a great weekend if we don't talk 'til then!

You’re making excuses….that’s the exact thing you’re bashing everyone else for. What part of that Irony don’t you understand?

And if you remember, I took your stupid challenge and shot it full of holes. You asked terrible subjective questions and I still answered them for you. Of course I didn’t give you the answers you wanted so it didn’t count. I bet if I would have answered 1. Drew, 2. Drew, 3. Drew, 4. Drew, I would have answered your BS Challenge.

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 09:54 AM

Wys buddy, if this were a heavyweight fight, the ref would be calling it………Throw the towel Rocky, Throw the towel!

Patrick76777

01-17-2003, 09:56 AM

BTW, I didn’t vote either…..because like I said before, I think it’s a BS question that CANNOT be answered.

HenryRules

01-17-2003, 09:58 AM

Wys, why are you so afraid to admit that the reason Bledsoe was throwing the ball in all key situations is because Henry couldn't be trusted by the offensive co-ordinator to hold onto the ball?

TedMock

01-17-2003, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy

You don't think so TM?

Let me ask you this:

Suppose a QB tosses an INT near scoring position or in the red zone that gets returned for a TD and we lose the game as a result.

Then you have a fumble by another player on a drive on which we get the ball back on a 3-and-out at near the same field position that you say, and I agree, is so critical.

So what you are saying is that a TO is a TO, right?

That's as silly as silly can be!

Silly as silly can be?
Yes, I still stand by my position because I've seen it happen time and again. It may be a fumble that led to nothing more than a 3 and out to most people but to the players it's totally different. It may have been during a nice drive, it may have killed the offense's momentum leading to the next several drives being poor, it may have been that one series that broke the defense down by the time the fourth quarter rolls around. There are sooo many other factors that aren't in the stat book or in plain view of the fans. I do appreciate you bringing these things up though because it does provoke some thought and debate by everyone which is good for the board. I would however also appreciate it if you refrain from the demeaning "silly" comments at the end of your posts.

THATHURMANATOR

01-17-2003, 04:39 PM

I love how WYS claims no one ever answers his questions, but then turns around and avoids the simple question I have asked him........

01-19-2003, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by Patrick76777

BECAUSE IT’S IMPOSSIBLE! GET IT THRU YOUR THICK SKULL. YOU’RE OUT OF YOUR MIND IF YOU THINK THAT ONE PLAY DETERMINES THE OUTCOME OF THE WHOLE GAME. TEAMS PLAY FOR 60 MINUTES,

You’re telling me that Team A allows Team B to score 45 points thru 3 quarters. At the same time Team A has 28 points. In the 4th quarter, Team A’s QB throws 2 TDs to make the score 45 to 42. Now the QB is leading Team A on another nice drive, but with 15 seconds left, at Team B’s 6 yard line, QB A throws and INT which Team B returns for a TD. Team B wins the game 52-42. Team A’s qb goes 35-42 for 456 yards 4 TD’s and throw that one INT. Your argument suggests that the QB cost Team A the game! And that’s just NONSENSE!

No 76777,

I'm more talking about one play on which on a 1st-and-10 from our own 40 w/ plenty of time left on the clock v. a team that has the #1 offense in the league, and w/ the score at 17-16 them, an INT to essentially end the game!

Where does all the convuluted nonsense come from. An you accuse me of straying from the points.

TT, you wanna stick in your comments about "thick skulls" here...

;)

Also 76777,

I'm talking about a game in which a QB took us out of scoring twice in the red zone and then tossed anothe INT in a 10-0 loss!

Or, another game in which our QB had 4 INTs to pave the way for a 27-17 loss by almost giving the opponent 7 of those 27 and setting up another 3.

Or, a game in which 14 of 31 opponent points were set up by 2, yes TWO single plays taking us out of good field position and setting up two opponent TDs.

That's what I'm talking about partner!

You can can the "what if, but, only then, but you have to consider the temperature of the seats, etc." nonsense for someone who was born yesterday please. ;)

We can end this now. You'll just have to live with the fact that I don't react emotionally to Drew only and/or foremost and simply will have to accept that there are people who don't think he can get the job done vs. the toughest opponents just as he, not me, has proven for 10 seasons now.

Sorry...!

Let me know how many boxes of Kleenex I should send out and to whom...

:cry:

:D

01-19-2003, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
I love how WYS claims no one ever answers his questions, but then turns around and avoids the simple question I have asked him........

TT,

If you're so honest and forthright, then how 'bout you accepting this challenge I've had laid out for months now?

Here's what we do: we take a look at several of our losses and go thru the PBP and come to agreement as to why the team scored points or did not, and whether the D did it's job during that Q. Then we simply come to an agreement as to why the game was won or lost. It's easy as long as you actually read the PBP assuming that you can read. It's really a snap bro!

What say ye?

Somehow I suspect the answer will be an insult laced tirade to cover up your unwillingness to take on such a simple task in order to reveal the truth. Just a hunch however... :lol:

THATHURMANATOR

01-19-2003, 07:33 PM

You still didn't answer my question WYS GUY..... :D

THATHURMANATOR

01-19-2003, 07:35 PM

oops you stuck in the answer right before I wrote the last comment..

THATHURMANATOR

01-19-2003, 07:37 PM

Who ever said I was honest and forthright?

THATHURMANATOR

01-19-2003, 07:41 PM

I just don't know what you want me to say about the season. Drew throw some bad interceptions throughout the season that may have cost us a few games. I have said this the entire time. What else do you want me to say. I have better things to do then go through every play of every game. So to some things up I feel Bledsoe did play poorly at times but I am still confident he can get the job done for us. Also after reading your last post you still havent answered my question.

The_Philster

01-19-2003, 07:44 PM

It wasn't me, THURM ;)

THATHURMANATOR

01-19-2003, 07:45 PM

"Somehow I suspect the answer will be an insult laced tirade to cover up your unwillingness to take on such a simple task in order to reveal the truth. Just a hunch however... "

Yo dude I try to answer your little "challenge" but I am not sure what you want from me so I give up. I don't really go on insult tirades either unless LOG won't shut his trap...

01-19-2003, 10:59 PM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
Who ever said I was honest and forthright?

Touche`!!!

:D

01-19-2003, 11:10 PM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
"Somehow I suspect the answer will be an insult laced tirade to cover up your unwillingness to take on such a simple task in order to reveal the truth. Just a hunch however... "

Yo dude I try to answer your little "challenge" but I am not sure what you want from me so I give up. I don't really go on insult tirades either unless LOG won't shut his trap...

"I give up" is quitting!

"...want from you..."?

It's not so much what I "want from you", but you hammer on me when I make statements about how many games Drew's poor play has cost us this past season. You say he didn't. All I "want" is for you to back up your attacks and statements w/ something other than pure opinion.

I posted a thread about Drew's TOs and how they cost us this season. Apart from the fact that this season was like any other season for him in that he simply can't play good teams w/o sh***ing the bed, he proved that more this year than ever with all 15 of his INTs vs. 7 of the 8 toughest games we played.

So I don't mind if you don't answer at all. All I would ask in that case is that you and others at least cut me the benefit of the doubt about whether or not I am correct unless you or another wishes to prove me incorrect by going thru the games and proving where I'm wrong. I'll put up 6 games and it stops as soon as I'm proven wrong. But this adolescent name calling simply b/c I'm not in love w/ Drew for very good reasons I'm growing tired of. Being called pessimistic for no reason other than that when I'm extremely optimistic otherwise. Just b/c I don't drop my drawers and bend over at the mention of Drew's name or b/c I have hopes for much more solid play at our QB position shouldn't make me a lesser fan. Yet it does here!

So I would suggest that you, and/or others, would either back up your position by engaging me, or acquiese the notion that Bledsoe did in fact cost us several, 5 (with help in the other 2) losses, games!

That's all. Simple, eh. Afterall, if you're correct that he didn't cost us those 5 games almost entirely by himself and his TOs and poor play, then it should be a piece of cake to prove that way, right?

;)

01-19-2003, 11:12 PM

P.S. If he did, then what does that say about his play and how good he really is? Especially since it's been the hallmark of his career.

THATHURMANATOR

01-20-2003, 03:20 AM

"You say he didn't. All I "want" is for you to back up your attacks and statements w/ something other than pure opinion."

Listen man. I have never "attacked" you except for the fact that I at times don't agree with your opinions. I have already told you that I agree that he cost us some games with bad interceptions. Isn't that somewhat agreeing with you?

"But this adolescent name calling simply b/c I'm not in love w/ Drew for very good reasons I'm growing tired of."

What names have I called you besides pessimistic??? Grow tired of it all you want man I don't really care. All I have ever said is I like Bledsoe (not love, or not think of as a god) but like him as our QB. Maybe you are right and he can't win us the big game. Then you can sit there and say "You told us so" and be all happy. Like I have said the entire time if we are running a balanced offense I think he can be effective. I mean really man this crusade you are on is just a waste of time. He is our QB and will be for at least 2 more seasons if not 3 or 4 so why even bother. Why not just sit back root for the guy and hope he turns it around? I don't question your loyalty as a fan either. I can see that you love the Bills just as much as the next guy so why don't we leave it at that? I don't even think its the fact that we don't agree with you to some degree, I think its just that its seems like you don't listen to what we post. Patrick seemed to have answered your questions (and seemed to agree with some of the things you say)but since you don't agree with what he posted it he is wrong in your mind.

Also you still haven't answered my question :D

BillsMan80

01-20-2003, 09:56 AM

Wys, turnovers have a universal impact on a game, no matter who commits them. Whether it be Henry or Bledsoe, it doesn't matter. Talk about some the games Henry could have cost us with his fumbles.

Chicago-We were up 7-0, and driving, and then boom, Henry fumbles, Mike Brown returns it for a TD. That game ends up in OT because of the fumble.

Detroit-We're up 24-17, and Henry fumbles the ball in the closing minutes giving Detroit field position with a chance to tie and force OT. Fletcher comes up with a huge stop to preserve the win.

I would talk about others, but I just don't recall the time and situation of his other fumbles.

Also, if you remember, the Oakland, 2nd Jets, and 2 Patriot games, we were playing from behind for most of the day, and so therefore, we resigned to throwing the ball in the 2nd half. In addition, against the Raiders, one pick was thrown in garbage time, and against the Jets, the first INT was not his fault as Riemersma tipped/dropped the ball, which was picked off. Shows that these "stats" are skewed.

BillsMan80

01-20-2003, 09:57 AM

I never realized, but Wys should teach a Math Statistics course. Considering I take it in school, Wys would be perfect for the section on Abuse of Statistics.

Patrick76777

01-21-2003, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy

TT,

If you're so honest and forthright, then how 'bout you accepting this challenge I've had laid out for months now?

Here's what we do: we take a look at several of our losses and go thru the PBP and come to agreement as to why the team scored points or did not, and whether the D did it's job during that Q. Then we simply come to an agreement as to why the game was won or lost. It's easy as long as you actually read the PBP assuming that you can read. It's really a snap bro!

What say ye?

Somehow I suspect the answer will be an insult laced tirade to cover up your unwillingness to take on such a simple task in order to reveal the truth. Just a hunch however... :lol:

I answered your questions…..what’s wrong with you….do you only listen to people that agree with you?

THATHURMANATOR

01-21-2003, 09:54 AM

"Somehow I suspect the answer will be an insult laced tirade to cover up your unwillingness to take on such a simple task in order to reveal the truth. Just a hunch however... "

Seriously look at that line... Do you ever remember me going of on a insult laced tirade?? COME ON....

Patrick76777

01-21-2003, 09:56 AM

01-21-2003, 10:29 AM

Originally posted by BillsMan80
Wys, turnovers have a universal impact on a game, no matter who commits them. Whether it be Henry or Bledsoe, it doesn't matter. Talk about some the games Henry could have cost us with his fumbles.

Chicago-We were up 7-0, and driving, and then boom, Henry fumbles, Mike Brown returns it for a TD. That game ends up in OT because of the fumble.

Detroit-We're up 24-17, and Henry fumbles the ball in the closing minutes giving Detroit field position with a chance to tie and force OT. Fletcher comes up with a huge stop to preserve the win.

I would talk about others, but I just don't recall the time and situation of his other fumbles.

Also, if you remember, the Oakland, 2nd Jets, and 2 Patriot games, we were playing from behind for most of the day, and so therefore, we resigned to throwing the ball in the 2nd half. In addition, against the Raiders, one pick was thrown in garbage time, and against the Jets, the first INT was not his fault as Riemersma tipped/dropped the ball, which was picked off. Shows that these "stats" are skewed.

80,

You still don't get it, do you?

Some TOs are overcome, some are not. It's obviously, for most people, easier to see how a fumble at midfield or in opponents' territory is more easily overcome than one that sets the opponents up inside the red zone or near it. It's also easy, again for some, to see how multiple TOs in single games or even more specifically TOs on back-to-back drives are far more detrimental to the team.

Henry is young and who knows what he'll do in the future re: his fumbling problems. I don't care if he fumbles 25 times in a season if we only lose 2 of them. On the other hand, if he only fumbles 5 times and we lose all 5, then it matters a mountain. Notwithstanding, his fumbles simple stated, did not impact the outcomes of games this season other than the Denver fumble.

Fumbles and INTs are a part of the game. When you have one or two, they can be overcome. If you have 4 or more then that task is much, much more difficult.

Now, and please read this carefully:

Whether or not you care to admit it, Drew has both this season as well as the other 9 seasons of his career demonstrated a very bad pattern of his INTs. Is it my fault? No, hardly. I only recognize it and mention it when critically talking about Drew and his play. Everyone else mentions similar things and talks critically about other players. So why does Drew seem to be exempt?

In any case, that pattern has been one of completely choking in the biggest of games and throwing them away w/ INTs. If this year didn't epitomize that, then I simply don't know what will. In the 8 toughest games, he played horribly in most of them and cost us the games in most of them as well. Why? B/c we relied too much on him and not enough on Henry b/c that's what the coaches and FO wanted probably b/c that's what they thought the fans wanted to see.

He's always choked in playoff games other than in half a drive last year if you want to look at it that way. But unfortunately you don't win a game on half a drive. Now in spite of all of Henry's fumbling woes, he hung onto the ball in the biggest games and at the most critical of times for the most part and by far and away more than Drew did. And BTW, don't forget to add Drew's fumbles in there too which were also extremely detrimental.

That's about as simply as I can paint the picture for you. I don't hate Drew although I have little confidence, based on what he's shown me both this season and throughout his career. If you want to look at yards and attempts and completions, then by all means, be my guest! But again, and I don't know how many times I can say this, until they start awarding victories based on yards thrown for, yards are absolutely meaningless unless part of those yards include actually crossing the goal line. A 98 yard drive begun at our 1 YL and ending up in a no-score or INT don't matter a hill of beans.

01-21-2003, 10:47 AM

TT,

First of all, 76777 didn't answer my questions w/ much of any substance at all as I even took the time to point out. Again, this entire thing can be easily settled if anyone of you wants to go over say a game a week and look at the PBP and decide where the team went wrong in losing 6 of 8 games. Yet, none of you will do that. I'll even set it up and all you have to do is take a quick glance and discuss it w/ me.

As to "name-calling" TT, don't get too excited. I was speaking generally although I do certainly remember hearing some negativity originating from you towards me. I would simply ask you to consider why that is, that you think I'm negative. First of all I'm simply discussing this stuff objectively. I am totally not negative at all about next season, very optimistic actually. I certainly think I have a reason to be skeptical about Drew's ability to win the big games since he didn't win a single big game this year at all and since in his past his record against teams 11-5 or better absolutely SUCKS. Is that my fault for some reason? If not, then why shoot the messenger?

How about defending my right to hold an opinion then instead of heaping on the pile when I'm called "pessimistic" simply for what? For thinking Drew is what he is; a QB who throws for bookoo yards, has lots of attempts/compls., but one who has never had a single good playoff game in 6 tries, and one who simply cannot play the better teams of playoff caliber w/o tossing up INTs to throw the game. That's whay I'm labeled negative.

As to my ever saying "nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah...
see I told you so...", have I ever done that? Others may have on my behalf, but I don't believe I ever have. So that notion is absurd.

Anyway, relax, it's just football and this is the offseason. I'm just hoping that Drew has good games next year vs. the AFC East and v. teams like Philly, K.C., and Tenn. If he plays in them the way he played vs. similar teams this year then there'll be no playoff appearance for us next season either. Much of that depends on our fearless offensive leader KG who is in bed w/ Bledsoe in apparently trying to allow him to set all kinds of yardage records and attempt and completion records before he tries to win games.

If I see a single pass on 2nd or 3rd and 1 next year in the red zone I'm gonna scream! Anyway, next year will bear itself out although I'm not so sure the excuse isn't going to be that "Price is not here" and that's the reasons for Drew's playing poorly.

Anyway, we'll see. But the only reason, the only reason, that I have been so adamant on some of this was b/c I got tagged w/ this "pessimist" label and I figured "hey, since the tag is on me anyway, why not play the role", eh! So I did. I've started very few threads about Drew if you go back and look. Most were started by others that I simply chimed in on.

I realize that there is much too much fan support for Drew that he is not going anywhere for the next two seasons. I'm not at all hopeful that he's leaving. That's why I'm curious to see how next season unfolds. Would I love it if he steps up and plays his brains out vs. the teams I mentioned above? Absolutely! I'd be insanely happy. But why is that gonna happen when it never has before? And more importantly, if it doesn't, then wouldn't you say that it may not be wise after next season to keep a QB who simply can't win the big games? I would. Who cares if we make the playoffs only to get crushed by a team that typifies the exact type of team that Drew plays poorly against? I'd like to win the big dance, not simply make the playoffs each year. You were a fan in the early '90s! Did reaching the AFC CG make you happy every year or did it leave you itching for a SB win? I think there's no doubt we're in agreement there! ;)

Anyway, I prefer engaging in a civilized fashion which hasn't been possible w/ all of the labeling and heat thrown my way simply for taking a position. Don't want the discussion, then quit calling me pessimistic when in fact I was one of the most optimistic people there was about certain elements of our team down the stretch; Henry, the D, Gray, K.Thomas, Reed, the OL!!! If everyone keeps calling me pessimistic, then why shouldn't I at least get what I've paid for, eh? If I'm gettin' tagged, then I'm gonna get my pound of flesh for it. I'm not gonna get taken to the cleaners!

lordofgun

01-21-2003, 10:49 AM

I'm proud to say I have not read one post in this thread. :snicker:

01-21-2003, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by BillsMan80
I never realized, but Wys should teach a Math Statistics course. Considering I take it in school, Wys would be perfect for the section on Abuse of Statistics.

Funny you mention that 80!

I've tutored Stats in college and since then for H.S. kids even now. I have one tonight in fact. I've taken quite a few high level courses in stats and have plenty of insight into them.

You are correct, that you can take a set of stats and often use it to prove one way or another. Where you err is that you are the one using them by implying that yards=wins, or attempts=wins, or completions=wins, or that TOs don't matter if you're Drew but matter more for fewer w/ another player, or that a TO in which we get the ball back has the same price as an INT that sets up a TD, etc.

A TO either leads to points or it doesn't! If it does, then it was costly. If it does not, then it wasn't unless there was a drastic change of field position or the like. In fact, Drew's TOs did those things yet you try to spin it so that they appear meaningless! I see it for what it was. I did not criticize Drew for INTs/FUMs that did not lead to opponent points or take us out of scoring range. I only dwelt on those that did which was most of them. So again, who's the one "twisting" things here? ;)

01-21-2003, 10:53 AM

P.S. I'll end this thread if you guys will...

01-21-2003, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by lordofgun
I'm proud to say I have not read one post in this thread. :snicker:

I'd be proud to say that too...

:)

THATHURMANATOR

01-21-2003, 10:57 AM

"But unfortunately you don't win a game on half a drive."

But you lose a game on one bad throw??? That sounds like contradiction to me. WYS I get what you are saying but you don't seem to be listening to us.

ONE LAST TIME:

Q:Has Bledsoe thrown some costly INTS?

A:Yes, we agree with you

Q:Is Bledsoe exempt from criticism?

A:No

Q:Can Bledsoe be effective in a balanced offense that doesn't require him to shoulder the entire load?

A:I feel Yes, as do many others, but if you don't agree that is fine and your opinion.

Q: Does one play determine the entire outcome of a game?

A:No

Q: Has our defenses lack of turnovers hurt us?

A:Yes

Q: Did Henry's fumbling problems influence Gilbride to throw too often?

A: A tough answer but I think it did and in turn defenses knew this and could focus on the pass.

All in all WYS I am not sure what you are arguing about. It seems like we have given you your answers and you are just not listening.

Patrick76777

01-21-2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Wys Guy
TT,

First of all, 76777 didn't answer my questions w/ much of any substance at all as I even took the time to point out. Again, this entire thing can be easily settled if anyone of you wants to go over say a game a week and look at the PBP and decide where the team went wrong in losing 6 of 8 games. Yet, none of you will do that. I'll even set it up and all you have to do is take a quick glance and discuss it w/ me.

After reading this, I’m done with you also……Anybody can read that thread. I answered every single question and I did a good job at it. The only problem is that I didn’t agree with you. Your personal vendetta against Drew is negatively affecting your posts.

Patrick76777

01-21-2003, 11:00 AM

THATHURMANATOR

01-21-2003, 11:11 AM

"Anyway, relax, it's just football and this is the offseason. I'm just hoping that Drew has good games next year vs. the AFC East and v. teams like Philly, K.C., and Tenn."

I can drink to that!!! :cheers:

01-21-2003, 11:33 AM

Originally posted by THATHURMANATOR
"But unfortunately you don't win a game on half a drive."

But you lose a game on one bad throw??? That sounds like contradiction to me. WYS I get what you are saying but you don't seem to be listening to us.

ONE LAST TIME:

Q:Has Bledsoe thrown some costly INTS?

A:Yes, we agree with you

Q:Is Bledsoe exempt from criticism?

A:No

Q:Can Bledsoe be effective in a balanced offense that doesn't require him to shoulder the entire load?

A:I feel Yes, as do many others, but if you don't agree that is fine and your opinion.

Q: Does one play determine the entire outcome of a game?

A:No

Q: Has our defenses lack of turnovers hurt us?

A:Yes

Q: Did Henry's fumbling problems influence Gilbride to throw too often?

A: A tough answer but I think it did and in turn defenses knew this and could focus on the pass.

All in all WYS I am not sure what you are arguing about. It seems like we have given you your answers and you are just not listening.

Then please explain to me how and why Henry got all the blame for the loss to Denver while Drew skates, at least according to you apparently, for games v. G.B., K.C., Oak., Jets, and N.E.? It seems to me that one or two individual plays beat us just as Henry's single play determined the outcome of the Denver game.

I cannot disagree more heartily and maybe that's where we'll have to leave it. But when a player is responsible for all of the errors that team makes, then yes, I would say that those errors and the person causing them often are the reasons for losses. Since those errors occur on single individual plays, I would then correspondingly suggest that it was in fact a handful of plays if not even only a play or two that make such differences.

Agree to disagree then. ;)