jad1
-
Posts
1,345 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by jad1
-
-
i don't see this "thinly vieled attack" your ranting about.......
he was comparing cincy's situation to ours because obviously their are parallels between palmer and losman.........he then connected the LT's (the most important position on the line) to the appropriate QB because that is a key factor when guaging level of success at the position -- palmer has jones, losman has gandy........jones is good, gandy is not......
would it have been some kind of "thinly vield attack" if he compared losman's situation to boller's situation a few years back? something like:
"Losman has the chance to be a great quarterback, but he's in the same position as Boller two years ago. He has to learn on the job. Too bad Losman doesn't have Johnathan Ogden at left tackle. The Bills are patching that vital spot with journeyman guard Mike Gandy."
i think your reading way to much into an observation.......
You'll have to admit though that there is a difference in QBing a team with a good defense, like Buffalo, and QBing a team with a poor defense, like Cinci.
It's an oversimplification, but it's easier on the QB when your defense only gives up 17 yards to Cleveland, as opposed to giving up almost 50 points to Cleveland.
That's why Cinci has a greater need right now for a strong LT, because they're going to need Palmer to light it up to win games. I seriously doubt that's the Bills gameplan for Losman. That's why they feel comfortable that Gandy, a "journeyman" can man the position.
And if Losman sucks as bad as Boller, the best LT in the game isn't going to be able to help him. As good as Ogden is, he can't turn Boller into Peyton Manning (or even into Carson Palmer).
So that's why the comparison is off. As a football writer, Clayton should understand this.
-
I don't know, the Bengals had nearly five yards per carry as a team and Rudi Johnson had nearly six. Willis barely had over two and as a team we had only 1.5 with only 43 total rushing yards. We had the 2nd ranked defense, they had the 19th.
Doesn't sound too impressive to me. Other than Evans no one did a thing in that game offensively and we should have had 400 yards.
Spikes had a INT/TD in that game, Peters blocked a punt for a TD, and the Cinci defense committed a cardinal sin and bit on a flea-flicker that went for a TD.
3 big plays, ball game.
That game was a pretty good example of how good defense and special teams can give an offense a lot of leaway to make mistakes. Even with Willis being injured during the game, and Bledsoe being Bledsoe, the Bills won pretty handily.
I thought the game was impressive. A coach that can get production out of his offensive, defense, and special teams is a pretty good one, if you ask me.
-
I'll defend the B'gals here. Through job circumstances, I've been here
since 1990.
What a decade for that club.
Last year, they ended up with 18 on the IR, including key starters early on. Their draft class of '04 stepped in and did quite well. Palmer went 1 and 5 and then went on fire, but was knocked out of action the game before Bflo, along with the starting center.
Take away the loss of a starting WR, starting MLB, his rookie back-up, a starting CB they traded for who played only 10 games, a starting center that managed 10 game or so, a starting safety that played 2 games, a starting DT who got cut and out by the Broncos and that club qualifies for playoff competition.
Keep a sense of perspective...
They gave up over 80 points to the Browns in two games last season. That's all the perspective you need on the quality of their defense.
Every team has injuries. Williams and Gilbride weren't able to save their jobs because Moulds, Henry, and Jennings missed games in 2003.
Cinci is building a solid offense, agreed, but Williams is not making progress with the defense. There is no way that Cinci's defense was playoff-caliber last season.
If the trend continues, and if the rookies don't come up big it probably will, the offense will feel more pressure to produce. That's not a good situation for a developing QB.
-
i think pencil-neck's comments about the bills are pretty much spot on, actually. those questions are the same ones that have been raised in here. losman is green. the LT is a castoff from another team.
it is true, however, that he (and a lot of other media whores) have some sort of bengal lovefest going on right now.
I agree that some concern is valid. But we all know the Bills aren't going to throw the ball 40 times a game. Mularkey is going to protect Losman and Gandy by running the ball.
So how does the running game look? Anderson is a huge upgrade at guard. Williams, hopefully, will have a better start this season without last season's drama. And McGahee will be the starter from day 1.
Looks like the running game is in good shape. The defense will remain strong, and the special teams will be improved by adding Parrish as a returner.
So strong running game, strong defense, strong special teams. But everyone is freaking out because Donahoe isn't chasing after every 2-bit LT that gets cut from the worst franchises in the league.
And by the way, the Bengals better have a strong LT, because since Lewis has failed to improve their defense, the offense is going to have to score 30+ points to win games.
-
They could hire a jug band and re-record the Houston Oiler's fight song, like the Dolphins did.
-
I've 12 young nephews and nieces...OK it they tear up your lawn, being free and naturally rambunctious youth? What damage I, or you would do to their delicate psyches if we throttled their natural exuberance?
BTW, stop being an infant. Stop your pithy and childish female intimations. So sad - the classic sign of weak argument.
The fact is that a parent's prime responsibliliy is to inculcate a child to deal in civilized society.
Something for reasons unkown, you can't quite get. Get your mind out of a groove, pal.
See, there you go again. I say you yell at kids to get off your lawn, you assume that they're tearing up the lawn. It's always assume the worst with you.
You seem to want parents to "inculcate" their children in civilized society by removing them from society. Doesn't make much sense.
And I have 6 nieces and nephews all under 4. I have 8 cousins, all under the age of 17. I grew up baby-sitting, changing diapers, and leading field trips to museums, movies, and (gasp) restaurants.
I am certainly aware that kids, through their "naturally rambunctious youth" sometimes misbehave at inappropriate times. I also know, and this is the part your seem to have a problem with, that just because a kid misbaves, it doesn't mean they're a bad kid, or in your case, a "whelp."
And by the way, most of these kids I mention have been to Disney World. In fact, my 17 year old godson (cousin) is coming down next week on my dime. And it hasn't spoiled them, as you ridiculously claim.
You claim I make a weak argument, but you're the one who's applying the story of one obviously disturbed teenager with everything you abhor about today's parenting.
But that's your "groove," right? Making wide-sweeping generalization from a specific event?
No matter how many big words you couch it in, that's an incrediably small minded view of the world.
-
-
-
Yeah, take it from Mother Superior: Parents who take their kids to nice restaurants on vacation can expect them to beat up bus drivers when they become teenagers.
-
I predict that the game will be called on account of lightning.
-
Maybe the Bears are making a mistake. After all, they haven't made too many good decisions over the last few years.
Let's remember that the Bills aren't planning to drop Losman back 50 times a game. I doubt Mularkey is going to hang either Gandy or Losman out to dry.
Gandy might be a very good fit for a run-oriented offense with a controlled passing game.
-
I'm not sure what Losman would have to do to surpass Kelly.
How about he starts by QBing the Bills to a win against the Texans, and then we'll figure it out from there.
-
You're a homer.
Whats a bigger question mark, having a young inexperienced QB or having "new" coordinators step in? (Eric Mangini has been with the Pats organization forever so nothing is new to him)
I'm not saying you cant be upbeat, you never know what will happen and Losman could be the next Brady for all we know.
Having a young QB is a legitimate concern, and the Bills acknowledged it by bring in Holcomb. They've also improved the run blocking on the oline and drafted a big back, which shows that they are planning on building the offense around the run.
And the Pats handling of their coordinators is also a concern. Crennel had good control over the defense, which allowed Belichick to do things like mentor Brady in 2001. Will Mangini be able to seemlessly take over? There are dozens of examples of NFL coaches who struggle to take the next step up, from asst. coach to coordinator, from coodinator to HC.
And since Belichick is assuming the role of the OC, Mangini is going to be on his own if he struggles. Any time that Belichick has to spend on the defense could hurt the offense, because of his reluctance to hire an OC.
Most coaches who hold dual responsiblity of HC and coordinator see a falloff in production of the unit they aren't coaching. Martz, Holmgrem, Shannahan, Vermeil, and even Sherman focus on their offenses to the detriment of their defenses.
So there are pitfalls that the Pats will have to avoid with their new coaching arrangement.
I know all the Pats homers will say that this is different, this is Belichick. But consider that Chuck Noll, Bill Parcells, and Mike Shannahan were all considered geniuses after they won their last super bowl, and haven't been back to it since.
-
Yeah, Spielberg must be loving this. Cruise is supposed to be working to promote his movie at these interviews, and instead Cruise is alienating everyone who has ever gone to a shrink. I'll bet he can't wait until some talking head asks Cruise if he thinks scientology is better than Christianity. Can you say box-office poison?
-
what is really really really funny,.....is this line:
TOM CRUISE:
No, you see. Here's the problem. You don't know the history of psychiatry. I do.
How much do you want to bet that the next person with any intelligence that interviews Cruise is going to bone up on the study of the history of psychiatry and make this moron look like a complete monkey.
Yeah, hopefully the next guy to interview him will be Pat O'Brien!
-
Wow Lauer vs. Cruise on the issue of mental health. This debate should have been transcribed in crayon.
-
I think that the Gibbs and Portis are a bad fit. I would counter-offer Portis and a 4th or 5th rounder though. A 2nd is too high.
-
I'de say unless we get some young breakthrough stars this year, our defense probably has a 2 year span. I feel our offense needs at least this year, but maybe 2 years to get to where they need to be at. To me it seems like bad planning, but at the same time if Losman ends up being great then we could be looking at advancing far into the playoffs. I think it's a huge risk with Losman, almost like betting all your money in one hand, and this could definitely cost Donahoe his job if Losman doesn't turn out as we are hoping. Let me know if you agree or disagree.
Yeah it's all on Losman. Too bad Donahoe never drafted a stud running back to carry the load while Losman is learning the ropes. You know what I'm talking about, a guy with top 5 talent who could rush for 15-20 TDs a season. It's a shame the Bills don't have a RB like that.
-
-
-
-
I could look at that and say that even though Bledsoe was sacked that many times, he still managed to throw for 4,000 yards and 24 TDs.
And while the sacks decreased in '04 from '02, so did his performance.
So less sacks in '04, but also fewer yards and TDs. More proof that Bledsoe was in decline.
-
Didn't Bledsoe break the franchise passing record with Henry in the backfield back in 2002? Didn't he throw 24 TDs with Henry in the backfield? But in 2004, Bledsoe played like Joe Dufek when Henry's in the game?
If you look at three crucial Bledsoe turnovers last season, against the Ravens, Pats, and Steelers, Henry was on the field for one of them, while McGahee was on the field for two.
So much for the theory that Drew only needed Willis on the field to avoid making game-killing mistakes.
The bottom line is that with Bledsoe at QB, the Bills were good enough to beat 75% of the teams in the league. Donahoe and Mularkey could have been happy with another 8 or 9 win season, but they wanted more and took the gamble on Losman. I like the decision, as Bledsoe has shown that he is unable to raise his game against the better defenses in the league, regardless of who is in at RB.
-
BINGO!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Bills were a team trying to play "smashmouth" with a rookie coach, a weak OL, and Travis Henry sliding on his ass (untouched), missing blocks and running wrong routes.
Sacks were cut in half as soon as he left, and the team started winning.
Nah, makes no difference. Let's blame Drew.
And at the same time, Bledsoe turnovers were returned for TDs in games against the Pats, Ravens, and Steelers. All were critical plays in the losses.
The problem was that even though McGahee (and Evans) elevated the offense last season, Bledsoe was unable to do the same against the better teams in the conference.
No matter how good an O-line is, you can't expect them to keep pressure off the QB in all situations. And when the QB is pressured, you hope he can buy himself some time. And when he's hit, you want him to hold onto the ball.
Against the better teams, Bledsoe could do neither, and in this way he limited the offense and the team.
JETS: Pennington and his surgery
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Delhomme is a better investment than McNabb? Delhomme has made it to the playoffs once, while McNabb has carried the Eagles to 4 NFC championship games.
There is no rule when trying to find a SB winning QB. 6th round picks have won it, as well as 1st picks overall. The thing that matters most, in the 1st or last round is to draft a good player.
Keep in mind that's it's a hell of a lot easier to draft a starting-quality QB in the 1st round than the 6th.