Billz4ever

OR it could be Bills homers not being able to accept any criticisms of the team, which is the far more likely answer, especially when we're talking about this board.

Because they have no faith in their WRs? Do you live under a rock? Have you not seen Rodgers public displeasure with their offense? Do you not know this is Rodgers worst statistical season by a mile? So you're a huge fan of the prevent defense as long as they don't give up points. Gotcha.

Umm, maybe the fact that the running game had over 200 yds and had a 6.7 ypc avg, while Rodgers has a weak receiving corp to work with?

Considering they weren't even really trying to pass, saying the Bills were really good in Nickel is a stretch. And the times they did, they burned the nickel. So, it's probably not as great as you're saying it is.

So you're saying the Nickel didn't stop them and also allowed them to run the ball. Gotcha. Sounds like they should've switched it up.

So if Rodgers could still beat the Nickel anyway (like you said) AND they are gashing the D on the run, why are you running Nickel again? And if GB actually thought they were beating the Nickel with the pass, why did they stop? You just said they could beat it anyway. And what does it say about our nickel D if they were still getting beat by the pass (your words) anyway when GB's weakness is their receivers?

You replied to me homie, and don't forget it. Another one for the ignore bucket.

No,actually the Packers weak receiving corps is what has made their HOF MVP QB irrelevant in the passing game. They are 3-5 for a reason and Rodgers displeasure with the offense has been quite public. You have to be living under a rock to not know this. But yes, keep thinking it was because of the Bills D that they couldn't throw the ball. The Packers knew they couldn't throw the ball before the game even started and instead of forcing them to, the Bills decide letting them gash the D on the ground was the better option.

Nah, you aren't calling anyone out because anyone with two eyes could plainly see the Bills played a terrible 2nd half of football against a bad team and the Bills failure to adapt to what the offense was doing made what should've been a blowout, barely a 10 pt win. You wasted a lot of keystrokes there since I stopped reading after you once again think you're calling me out for something.

my point where you expose the other team's weakness and force them to beat you? Yeah, it's only been a standing philosophy in football for how many decades? But yeah, the much better option is to play scared and play nickel and let your D get gashed rather than force those receivers to beat you.

You clearly missed the point, but OK. What the Bills did last night was the equivalent of stacking 8 in the box every play against KC, but obviously you don't get that.

Play like that against KC and let me know how it works out.

Considering you're a fan of a team that allowed a team to march downfield and tie a game with 13 seconds left? You're really asking that question? And you're so clueless you keep posting to them. LMAO

You've already been told this, but keep posting to me. This is how (not) smart you are.

Missed FG and a weak OPI was the only difference from the game being a nailbiter to the very end. I don't remember the same comfortable win you apparently do.

You aren't calling anyone out considering in the postgame, Von even said they didn't play as well as they would've hoped for on the D. Think the defensive scheme that allowed them to gash the D on the ground had anything to do with that? Nah, couldn't have been. You force the other team to beat you. Not play like you're scared of the weakest part of their offense.

You go right ahead and be happy with the way they played the second half. I'm not. And it should've been by at least 20, but we decided GBs offense was the Curt Warner Rams and decided we needed to play nickel to stop the passes they weren't doing anyway.

When was this? GB was doing what worked since their receivers are their weak link. Frazier was playing like we were playing the Curt Warner Rams.

We all saw the plays the Bills were making the second half. Can we please stop sugar coating the fact that the Bills played a lousy second half of football and instead of putting them away with our D, we let them gash our D instead of making them beat us with the weakest part of their team, their receivers. The Packers are a bad football team right now and we made them look better than they are.

The Bills played a terrible second half and instead of making the other team beat us with the weakest part of their offense, we somehow decided letting them gash our D on the ground was the better option. Makes zero sense.

Instead of making them beat us with their weak receivers, we allowed them to gash our D on the ground. Makes no sense at all.

If the OPI is not called (and plays like that are not at least 50% of the time) and Crosby makes that FG, there's no need for an onside kick. The game would've been tied on the FG. We were not comfortably ahead and the people here claiming we were, were just like everyone else in that Stadium...it wasn't until Crosby missed that FG, did people breathe a sigh of relief.

You mean ripping off 10, 20 yard runs at a time? Those are a good as a pass. This game was a Crosby missed FG and fairly weak OPI call from being tied.

And there it is. Playing scared against a team whose receivers are their weakness instead of making them beat you with them.

Handing us the game? GB was doing what they knew they had to do because they knew their receiving corp is trash. Frazier was acting like their receivers were "the greatest show on turf" reborn.