Mikie2times

Excellent point. I mean, so obvious. It couldn't have been missed and you know the Refs are looking at Suh on that play as he has a history for losing his cool. I was worried he would go incredible hulk on that play and he did, thankfully he pissed the refs off so much they stuck it to him Grey area on the play, clearly. Some feel Suh could have done his damage but we all know Tyrod is not easy to bring down. Either way I will say props to Tyrod. No fear and an excellent play getting rid of the ball.

The rules in this situation prevented a player from making a tackle. Not a horse collar tackle but a legal tackle that likely would have been deemed a personal foul because in order to execute a tackle in this positioning he would have had to slam him to the ground with a lot of force. Something I have no doubt Suh could have accomplished with half his left hand. Taylor likely doesn't get up if Suh actually does what he is capable of. So you could argue the rules worked as they protected a player or you could argue they didn't because they prevented a player from performing a basic requirement of the job. I don't know what the right answer is. Either way, fairly moot point as Suh got completely jobbed on the following play. If those two plays happened consecutively to the same Bills player and led to this outcome the board would probably overload.

Does anybody have any clue how strong a man Suh is? This is a player that required 3 blockers at Nebraska. It's easy to forgot how powerful he is with the way he takes plays off. Following the "no sack" call, I said to myself Suh is going to get his sack on the next play. When the man is truly inspired little is capable of stopping him. It nearly took our line to jump on his back to prevent him from getting a sack on the TD pass. Suh let up, it was obvious he let up. He let up because to finish that play the way he would have liked to finish that play would have resulted in a personal foul. Which is basically what he said in so many words. Does anybody really think Suh wouldn't have finished that play off if he had no threat of a fine or personal foul?

The test he was doing on the sidelines when he had his palms down, trainer was applying pressure down and he had to lift his hands up. If it was speared or a broken collarbone he wouldn't have been able to do anything with that test. Shoulder strains can be very painful.

McCoy ok says announcers. Thank you!

All I care is McCoy isn't hurt again. Karlos seems to deliver the knockout blows and is even more effective when defenses are used to chasing McCoy

Seperate shoulder. Would bet a kidney.

Just to be clear, Mario is still a very gifted player. In no way am I taking that away. The fact that you could even look at him at OLB is ridiculous. I'm simply stating he is the most gifted player as a 4-3 DE and he is being paid a lot of money. The really sad thing is, we face the exact same thing with Dareus. Dareus is not a 3-4 NT. If anything he is a 3-4 End. Neither Mario or Dareus fit this system in it's current state and in the commonly looked at way regarding the defense itself. The two highest paid players on the team and two best defensive players we have. Just doesn't make sense.

They do drop into coverage unless they play a 5 technique at which point you basically have a 4 man front. While this might sound irrational to you I assure you it is more rational than using ones own memory as a source of rationalism.

Mario would be the largest outside linebacker in the NFL if that is where you slotted him, which is a place Wade Phillips slotted him in the year you're referencing. If he's playing 3-4 OLB, he will drop into coverage. He can't rush every play, if he did you're destroying the foundation of what makes the 3-4 effective which is confusion. Mario has already complained about dropping into coverage once this year, so that would indicate to me what I'm saying is playing out. The other option is a 3-4 DE, which is not a pass rushing position. It is the DE equivalent of a NT, meant to clog lanes and free linebackers. That sure as heck isn't Mario. As a 3-4 OLB he will likely get us 10 sacks a year. His impact won't be felt much beyond that. You will see a few plays a game in which he makes a considerable impact on the game. The rest of the time he will be in limbo, outside of what his best skill set is. He's on the wrong side of 30 and comes with over a 20 million dollar cap hit. If we ran a 4-3 I wouldn't be having this discussion. If I didn't think Rex was completely married to this system I wouldn't be having this discussion. If I thought Rex could be a one and done coach we wouldn't be having this discussion. Unfortunately all of the mentioned variables seem pretty etched in stone from my shoes. Which means if we do keep Mario, he won't be in the best position to be successful and in doing so he prohibits the team from upgrading in other areas. I didn't expect this thread to be favorable, Mario is physical freak of nature and will perform well in just about any position within reason. But that's not why you spend 20 million a year on a player. You only do that if he is elite and in a position to have his talents completely maxed out. This is not that situation.

Mario does not seem to be the right fit in the 3-4. You want power at that position and while Mario certainly has power, he isn't built like a typical 3-4 end would be in Rex Ryan's schemes. Further he is not lightning quick off the edge, nor do you pay him for pass coverage, so as a 3-4 OLB he isn't the perfect fit either. Mario is a great 4-3 DE, but that's not what we run. His cap savings in 2016 would be 12.9 million dollars. I just don't see us retaining him past this season.

When you open one door, 100 more open. Fouls occur on every play and the current replay system is built with a lot of consideration to that. If anything was possible regarding intent based calls, PI, Holding, etc, a separate but similar process as current replay should be in effect. Coaches can challenge 1 intent based call per game. If they get it correct they get another challenge. If you allow all things to be challenged the game would just get so boring and slowed down.

Unless it was ruled uncatchable it was PI. Contact was certainly made prior to the balls arrival. Who knows. The phantom PI could have been a make up call, a keep the game going for London call, or just a bad call...

Agreed

I did not see who was open, just the weird reverse boot action, twice. Would have liked easier execution, but if he was open, hey....that's all you can do as a coach..

Certainly the 4th down call on offense. But who knows who we put that on. It's interesting how we perceive the dynamic. I don't even think about Rex when that happened and I don't think many here do. I thought Roman as if the HC had no accountability. Sort of weird.

Dear god people. I'm not putting this loss on Rex. The defense performed well. I also expect an uptick in the 2nd half of the season. This thread isn't about why we lost to the Jaguars, it's about if our coach should be a coach. Can he inspire people? Is his style something that can last over a length of time? I don't see it. Again, not about today. Rex will be here next year, so get ready Buffalo, you're going to the playoffs! How will you respond the next time? That's just a small example of how I see this getting old fast unless he figures something out that is not obvious to me. His behavior says I want to be a trend setter but his performance since 2011 is 29-42. I liken the situation in a roundabout way to Chip Kelly. He's basically the polar opposite of Ryan, but like Ryan he wants to different. System offense, willing to cut or trade high value players, total control, bordering on difficult to play for, not proven to be effective. Ryan is system defense, very little control, bordering on being to easy to play for, and certainly for a long time now, not proven to be effective. At which point are the Gurus no longer Gurus and just coaches deviating from the norm and not succeeding in doing so?

Not blaming the loss on Rex, but the season? Sure. He has responsibility. If 100 people do something one way and it works and 1 person does something a completely different way, and it works better, that man is a guru. If it works worse he's an idiot. What category is Rex more likely to fit in taking into account all the behavior he displays, player relationship methods, personal conduct, 3-4 marriage etc. The man looks, talks, acts, and like an idiot. His performance over a very prolonged stretch of time makes him look like an idiot. When does he go from a guru to an idiot when just about everything that exists, subjective or objective appears like he's an idiot?

Agree on some accounts. I do believe in the bell curve way, but Rex also demands to be outside the norm and when you do things differently than everybody else I do think it's fair to evaluate that approach, especially since it's been a very long time since he has accomplished anything. Moving forward for us to fit his system, which comes with the package, we will need to make some roster adjustments. Potentially some major decisions. I'm not OK doing that for a middle of the road coach. Nor do I think it was our expectation we would be getting a middle of the road guy and we could just let our talent take over. But again, on my end, I'm sort of turning this back into a performance discussion which wasn't my goal. Leadership is linked to performance on your bell curve, I just see nothing in this mans history to show me he can excel in that area. It's sort of disheartening as far as thinking about things moving forward.

Again, don't disagree. I will ask you the same thing as Big Cat, what has Rex done to show you that he is a good leader? This thread isn't about why we lost today.

I agree with you. On the other hand, do you think Rex embodies the characteristics of a good leader? If so, what behavior has he displayed or history does he have that woud make you feel this way?

He wasn't run out of town. People felt neutral on him. Some didn't like him and some did. He was considered a micromanage type, which isn't a great leadership style either but better than the friends with everybody model. Marrone tuned into the worst coach in NFL history after he bailed on us, not before. In reality I consider him to be a better HC than Ryan. Which is something you would have been tared and feathered for saying 5 months ago.

I know this probably sounds like another bitter Rex Ryan thread following a loss, but I had these thoughts conflicting with a half full attitude from the start. Is leadership in football that different than leadership in other walks of life? As fans why can't we draw on our own experiences to evaluate leadership? We watch this leadership style and it just seems so outside the norm. Jets fans watched it for years thinking the same thing. Now ask yourself what leaders have you ever known that got the best out of you? Did they let you say anything to anyone? Did they not hold you accountable? Did they say anything they wanted to anyone? Did they try and impose jobs on you that fit company verse your skills? Did they try and be your best friend? Looking at football, give me one other HC that Ryan reminds you of that is also successful? The only one I can think of is his father and Rex is pillow soft compared to Buddy. If Jerry Hughes told Ryan to "F off" in a game, I don't know what would happen. I have a problem with that. (sorry for using you as my hypothetical Jerry, I'm sure you would never swear)

Sound like Ron provided him a free and open environment. I imagine he colored a lot.