Wraith
-
Posts
765 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Wraith
-
-
So you prefer a government that "pays lip service" to issues that are important to you and then instead focuses on issues that you either do not care about or are against (the religious topics, for example: stem cell research, gay marriage, and abortion)?
-
Perhaps you missed the fact that I voted "none of the above".
I *used* to be a republican, back in the days when they actually believed in cutting government and lowering taxes.
W is no conservative. I *did* vote for him last election because I saw him as the lesser of two evils. Kerry just flat-out scares me.
Alright, so if you are neither a Republican nor a Democrat, what argument are you trying to make with this thread? Isn't this a lateral move in your mind?
Or is it that you think the Republicans were the lesser of two evils in this election as well?
-
-
Sour Play of the Week No. 3: Game tied at 10 in the fourth, Buffalo faced a second-and-20 on the Green Bay 43. Lee Evans went deep against Packers corner Al Harris -- who made no attempt at all to cover his man, but rather stood there committing the high school mistake of "looking into the backfield" to guess the play. Evans caught the touchdown pass that proved to be the game's winning points. This play was double sour because not only was Harris taking the lazy man's way out by looking into the backfield, Buffalo quarterback J. P. Losman was staring at Evans the entire time.
This is an incredibly amateurish piece of writing, even for Easterbrook. Talk about an over simplification. He completely misses the double move by Evans (gives Evans no credit...) and the fact that Harris was supposed to have safety help over the top (calls Harris lazy of all things). I didn't know he could see Harris and Losman's eyes from the video feed.
So the fact that he thinks Losman stared down Evans means absolutely nothing to me.
-
You know, I forgot that play to Shelton. They beat a blitz on that play, because the linebacker who would normally cover Shelton on that FB flat was blitzing, and the play picked up a decent amount of yardage. Thanks for pointing that out to me.
Part of the problem with us fans, and our 'analysis', I guess, is that we really don't have a clue. That WAS a 3-step drop, but what I don't know is: Was the play a designed 3-step, or is that a hot read on JP's part? Offenses have become so sophisitcated that it wouldn't surprise me if he cuts his drop short to make that play... I honestly have no idea, and I can never really know, because, obviously, I don't have the game plan. That's what makes thinking about these things particularly frustrating! Thanks for pointing out the Shelton play to me, though, I had forgotten about that one.
Wells said. That's why you have to trust the coaches opinion more than some other posters, even more than your own, and a hell of a lot more than the media. They know what was supposed to happen and they know what did happen. Not just the result, but all the intermediate steps. They know the context. Everyone else, no matter how much they think they saw on a play, is just guessing. Some guesses are more educated than others, but are still guesses.
-
I am 31 and I agree with the above. My brother has been calling for Nall, and I have questioned why he thinks Nall is so good, and I referred to Green Bay's handling of him. Nall said he wanted a chance to start, so he leaves a team where they didn't know if the starter was returning and only a green rookie as the other QB, and comes to Buffalo where they have a 3rd-year 1st round pick with starter experience, and a veteran backup. Seemed strange.
I am all for JP, but I also need to see more out of him. These last eight games will be a good opportunity for him. Four home, four away...Some good defenses (SD, Jax) some bad defenses (Hou, Ten), two divisional games, and a few cold weather home games. He has the chance to show what he's capable of, let's hope he does it.
25 and a Losman supporter. I will take a game like Sunday all the time if he can mix in a few games like the Vikings every now and then.
-
-
Please tell me this is sarcasm.
EDIT: Guess it wasn't, as the post was deleted...
-
You started out this thread calling me and a lot of my friends a fukking liar, so I think the retort was quite in line. I was at the game and saw Losman talking to his teammates on the sidelines a lot, talking to Nall a lot, I saw a couple plays where he slammed the ball down and was screaming after a sack but since i was in the stands I don't know if he was pissed at his teammates or himself. Guys lead different ways. He's playing like crap but your thread thesis is asinine.
I liken the author of this topic to the people who were attributing the Bills problems in the late 90s to Wade Phillips not wearing a head set.
At various times I saw Losman standing with Holcomb, Nall, Evans, and the WR Coach Studesville. I also saw him in an animated conversation with Mike Gandy and Terrence Pennington (although it seemed more like they were joking and smiling). So what?
-
You don't need a microphone or a camera to see the way the a good QB takes command of the huddle and the team. Since camp broke, have you heard much support from any of his teammates?
He doesn't have to show people up to be a leader, but he has to make them accountable.
Now I'll go back to being a "fukking moron" and you can continue being a dick head.
Gee, just this very morning Lee Evans was quoted praising Losman for not giving in and hitting that TD, while saying the coaches have made the right decision keeping Losman in.
-
You didn't leave anyone out but you certainly left out some of the context. It is "lying" through omission. Harrington completed the same % of his passes for almost the exact same yards per attempt. Lienart completed a much lower percentage of his passes with a much lower yards per attempt. Both had turnovers. Both were sacked four times. The rest of the QBs are some of the best performers in the league this year.
I didn't mean it as a personal attack (that is why I put lying in quotation marks) but you cherry picked some stats that certainly do not paint the whole picture about Green Bay's pass defense.
-
Craig Nall,Kelly Holcomb,Jeff George,Doug Flutie,Rob Johnson,to name a few.Jps regressing, from the beginning of the season.Anyone of those qbs would have progressed through their reads and hit the check down in the flat.Against the 32nd rated pass defense in the league we muster 8 completions,absolutlly putrid.
First of all, you're not answering the question.
Second of all, what check down? The Bills almost exclusively used two wide receivers while keeping the TE and back in to block. It was the most conservative play calling to date.
-
I think that being discouraged due to the fact the Bills continued to look offensively inept against one of the worst defenses in the league, coming off a bye in good weather is acceptable.
QB's vs. GB
Grossman- 262 1 Td/ 1 int
Brees - 353 2 Td / 1 int
Kitna- 342 2 TD/1 Int
McNabb 288 2 TD
Bulger 220 2 TD
Harrington 414 2 TD / 3 Int
Leinart 157 1TD / 1 Int
Losman 102 1TD
I've can not remember ever having been so frustrated with team that won by 1, much less 14.
You have four of the hottest QBs in the NFL this season on that list (Grossman, Brees, McNabb, and Bulger) and a guy who passed 63 times to get 414 yards (Harrington).
63 TIMES!!
Hell, McNabb (#1), Bulger (#2), Brees (#4), and Kitna (#5) are 4/5ths of the top five leaders in passing yardage.
Lienart completed 14 of 35 passes (40%) against this defense. That's about 4 yards an attempt. He was also sacked four times.
The passing game yesterday was bad, but these stats are totally skewed.
-
One more time: What about his play yesterday, STELLAR or not, has anything to do with the topic of this thread?
Work on your reading comprehension. Work on your spelling. Work on your math.
-
Show me where the thread starter says Losman played well? Show me where the author said he played adequately? All he did was mention ONE POSITIVE.
You walk in and mangle the spelling in one sarcastic off-topic comment just like you have in three other topics in the last 15 minutes. I repeat: Learn to read, learn to spell, and try thinking once in a while.
-
-
To a degree our perception is skewed; the OL is bad...and has been for years, but they should be using 3 step drops and have him toss quick throws, but look at how many QBs we've been through, who hold the ball too long, take coverage sacks, etc...
I know this is comparing Apples to Oranges...but look at what Peyton Manning did yesterday...The guy was had pressure all game long and he threw for over 300 yds...
There is no way JP can play anywhere near that level...right now...
In last night's game, the Colts ability to hit quick slants and adjust to hot routes was what was working so well against the pressure. The problem the Bills had yesterday was they usually only had two receivers going out for a pass, so quick passes and hot routes were non-existant.
-
On one of the (many) sacks yesterday, I thought to myself: "Damn JP, get rid of the ball!" Then I watched the slo-mo replay, and started counting... During the replay, I counted from the moment JP received the snap: 'One-one-thousand, two-one-thousand, three-oneSACK'. In the slo-mo replay.
This got me to thinking: Do we, as Bills fans, have any idea what it means to 'hold on to the ball too long'? Have we been so disposed to bad offensive line play that we assume that anytime the QB can actually get to his fifth step on a five step drop that equals 'time to throw'? The game just looks completely different when you watch a decent team play football. The quarterback gets into his drop, sets up scans for a second and throws. Almost ALWAYS they get to three-one-thousand before the ball is out (unless it is a designed three-step drop), and most of the time, they even have a quarter or half beat longer.
I ask you: Is our perception skewed?
Great thread topic. I would say our perception is almost certainly skewed, but how does one quantify it? It would be amazing if the league actually tracked time to sack, instead of the woefully useless "sacks." It would take a pretty good effort by an amateur to do the same thing....
-
It won't work very often though. For having so much max protction you figure he would throw it away more knowing only 2 guys are running a pattern as well. All I know is JP is all we got and I hope he eventually gets it cause I sure as hell don't want Holbum in there. As for Nall, nobody has a clue whatsoever what he can do but I doubt it would get me hard.
I don't understand your logic. If you have max protection and two receivers, by default you have to wait longer for them to get open and should feel more comfortable doing so, seeing as how you have max protection. In addition, two of the sacks on Losman occurred after his own man was thrown into his legs.
My only complaint with Losman today was what seemed to be a large amount of tipped passes in the second half. Not sure what the deal there was.
-
Did any of you actually watch the game? I was at the game and had a great view of the field. The Bills were INCREDIBLY conservative on offense, going max protect about 2/3rds of the time. There were only two receivers going out for passes during that time. The Packers had no trouble defending those two wide receivers because they were generating plenty of pass rush with their front four. Most of the time there wasn't even a RB as a safety valve because they were pass blocking. I saw three times where they triple teamed Kampan (LT, TE, RB).
Losman only threw 15 passes, and only twice were the receivers actually open (Evans both time, one was underthrown, one was the TD). He had no turnovers and hit the game winning TD from 43 yards out while getting CRUSHED by a defender. In addition, twice he put the offense in a 3rd and <1 position and the running game failed.
Be reasonable. The Bills gameplan on both sides of the ball was incredibly conservative, not making any mistakes, not giving the Packers good field position, making them go the length of the field and waiting for Favre to make a mistake.
It seemed to work pretty well....
-
So I'm flying in to Rochester cause I couldn't get reward seats into Buffalo. Arriving tomorrow at 4:15pm and driving over to Tonawanda.
Anyone have any idea what kind of driving conditions I'm going to encounter? The weather report doesn't sound good, but I know that rain/snow bands can be very narrow.
This wimp has been living in the South too long and is a little scared.
I'm making the drive from Rochester to Buffalo on the Thruway tomorrow evening also. The forecast doesn't seem too ominous. Mix of rain and light snow. It will probably be spotty, like you said.
The good news is it was 70 degrees here on Tuesday so the roads are still pretty warm. We had a short burst of snow here this evening, got about a half inch on the ground, but the roads remained clear.
-
On the radio, Murph said Evans lost a fumble on the last play of the first half. It does not show up on NFL.com's stats however. Very weird.
-
I have mixed feelings about suggestion 1. Consider two FG drives, one of which goes 20 yards; the other of which goes 70 yards. In both drives, the QB's sole contribution was to complete a 12 yard pass on 3rd and 10. Is it nobler for a QB to benefit from good field position (the 20 yard drive) than from a good running game (the 70 yard drive)?
Suggestion 2 is interesting. You point out that a QB shouldn't be punished because his defense can't get off the field, and I agree with that. But what about the QB who engineers long, clock-killing drives? A guy like that will have fewer drives because he's helping to kill the clock. So if you look at points per game, the clock killer QB will seem worse than he is. Your modification to points per drive would end this problem, and would judge the clock killer QB fairly.
At first glance, your adjusted points per drive system seems like a clear improvement over adjusted points per game. The key is in implementation. You'd have to weed out kneel down drives, or drives where there was only enough time for two or three plays before time expired. You'd also have to eliminate drives which consisted only of running plays. At the margin you'll end up making judgement calls, "Was 53 seconds of game time, and no time outs, really a realistic opportunity for the QB to have led the offense to points?" I don't see these judgement calls as an intrinsic obstacle to the system's legitimacy, though they may lead a few contentious and unreasonable people to question its results.
Your third paragraph is true and interesting. I'll think about it.
Did you get my response to your question in PM? My messaging doesn't seem to be working right and I'm not sure if the response went through.
-
Two improvements immediately jump to mind:
1) Make the threshold a fixed percentage of drive length instead of a fixed number. Something like 12.5% (1/8th - 10 yards of an 80 yard drive or 5 yards of a 40 yard drive). Thus, a very short but very crucial yardage on a short drive could be included.
2) Normalize your results by number of drives or possession time. I would use drives. This would eliminate the possibility of the quarterback being punished because the defense cannot get off the field.
Congratulations, America.
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
No, I'm not surprised, you pretty much repeated what I wrote in my post.
I'm just curious why you'd prefer a party that claims to support an issue you care about (limited government), ignores that issue, and then instead wastes enormous amount of time, money, and political capital on issues you are either against or ambivalent to.