krazykat

Couple that with notions that the pressure will only increase this year in addition to DCs not backing off. Just like under Johnson, it won't ease up until Edwards can prove that he can overcome that. IMO that's not gonna happen if what he delivered last year is the gauge.

It all comes down to time produced by protection and blocking.

Your assessments of the O going forward are guesses at best. Who would have thought that Fairchild's O would have been so pathetic, certainly not me. I knew it wouldn't be good for reasons, but as bad as it was rivalling a franchise worst was unforeseen. It may not be hard to not be the worst in the NFL, but it's no given that we will rise from say the worst half dozen teams or so. There's no more reason to believe that Schonert is ripe for the job than there was that Fairchild was, perhaps even less. In fact Schonert's already made remarks that should cause us to wonder about what's going on. As to the HC taking blame, particularly a defensive minded one such as Jauron, while he may not be able to formulate the offense, he should at least pressure the OC to make changes and to alter the overall play of the offense regardless of which methods he should choose and apart from the HC's interference. There's little evidence to suggest that Jauron even did that. The O may be better but even with the talent that everyone seems to think we have, even if the ball was snapped and the linemen leaned forward this team should have done better than it did. I wouldn't say easily by any stretch though. Schonert could very well be a similar disaster. He has no credentials or experience to suggest any thing more.

OK, fine then, but then given those strengths, which are impressive for a rookie, why was the team statistically the worst in the league last year at ball movement, 3rd down conversions, scoring, etc.? And maybe more importantly, why did the team perform better with Losman, who doesn't appear to have even that much in terms of strength associated with him? I mean in the past guys like Flutie got credit for moving the O simply by being on the field in spite of perhaps lack of passing production otherwise, but JP doesn't get that credit, at least not over Edwards, and the offense under Edwards was downright pathetic. Again, as I see it if all those things are truly present, then the offense while perhaps not good would at least not be the worst in the entire league and even worse than a bunch of teams with no talent on O.

A quick release is somewhat objective actually. It can be measured. I don't know if it's quick or not, but I guess my follow up question would be the same, how does or did his quick release manifest itself in terms of an offense doing what it's supposed to be doing? Because so far in this thread we've made the given that he's "poised." Then we've added that he has a quick release. Yet, we still under him were a franchise worst or very close to it, offense last year in terms of both scoring and yards.

LOL Well, no doubt. But hey, comes with the territory I guess. At least it discredits anyone that would say it.

The offense is more than still a question. It wasn't just bad last year under Edwards, it was a franchise worst.

And what in the history of Bills football would make you think that Wilson would run out and grab a coach like that? Seriously. I agree by the way, but still.

You're right, let's wait three months.

Who will be available? Here's a suggestion though, how about an assistant from a team with a habit of winning and one that has made the playoffs, presumably as a direct result of that coordinator's coaching, instead of another assistant with no real or no altogether experience in coordinating much less head coaching. Call me crazy. Instead we always reach and then make excuses for our stupid decisions and get pissed afterwards as if it wasn't entirely predictable. Why? Shouldn't we as fans insist on more. Suppose that happens, what reason is there to believe that it will be any different this time around anyway? Isn't it Wilson that runs the show from there. He has only proven to us that he doesn't care, and with record season ticket sales this year, why should he if that happens? He knows he can go on the cheap and it won't matter to anyone.

From what I can tell the going phrase is that "he's poised." As I see it that's all fine and dandy, but how does that manifest itself on the field? I mean the goal is to move the ball and score points, but the Bills were the worst at those two things combined last year easily. So if the choices were having a QB that lacked poise, but could put up yards and points, wouldn't that be better? What does this "poise" get for us on the field? What has it gotten for us on the field? I sincerely do not understand this overemphasis on some extremely soft indicator that doesn't reflect in the team's offensive stats. And please, don't read into this, I am not suggesting that JP is the answer in the least although the team, as a team, has put up more points on average with him under center and has generally been marginally more effective otherwise from an offensive standpoint. It's like someone said that Edwards is poised last year and that all of a sudden "poise" is the final indicator of a QB in this league. You read it in just about every preview about this team meaning that it's clearly driven by the media and yet it is never accompanied by the fact that under Edwards, with all of that poise, and with Lynch in the backfield and a revamped line, the team's offense was the worst that the franchise has ever seen. And on a side note, last year's yardage D ranking was the worst that this franchise has ever seen. Yet Jauron has defenders.

Oh, you're quick. And what was the primary difference from '06 to '07? I'll help you out. Evans had one TD pass over 30 yards for a TD last year from Edwards. In '06 he had many. Five or six. Edwards didn't have another one 10 yards or more otherwise. Hell, 7 of JP's 8 TD passes to Evans were 21 or longer. At least it was fun to watch rather than the slow bleed offense rotting throughout the game.

I dunno, I'm thinking that that role sets both Evans and therefore the team back, not ahead. We'll see what happens. It's all gonna come down to what Hardy and maybe Johnson are capable of. If one shows that they are a Derrick Bowes type in their rookie season, then the options open up for us. But if Johnson plays like a 7th round pick and Hardy struggles and needs to be coddled, then it really won't matter because little else will have changed, eh.

And since you got the nod from VOR on this, what particularly am I good about taking sides on? Please don't say the QB issue. As to complaining, yes, as a fan when my team sucks, I complain unlike you who make excuses for the people that suck. So who's the bigger fan, the one of us that is dissatisfied and insists on corrective action, real corrective action not just "because they say so" corrective action, or you who only makes excuses and defends the pieces of this organization that have absolutely no proven track record of success before or during when they are here?

I have been paying attention. You haven't. First of all you say will. It might. If Hardy sucks it won't do anything now will it. Second of all, to what extent? What will be the overall TD production increase for our offense, which hasn't changed otherwise VOR? Go ahead, wager a guess all the way around.

See, here's where things break down for you Bill, and in spades. The original discussion was about Ostroski, no? I never said anything about where the yards were coming from particularly. BUT, does it even matter? My point, was that with a crap line outside of Brown, Fina, and Ostroski, which no doubt you would not argue that today's is better as would most outside of the Cs, even if you discount Flutie's rushing yards, the team still would have ranked 20th in yardage. Now perhaps my knowledge of math is somehow a little twisted, but isn't even 20 a higher ranking than 30? I don't know, perhaps you in your superior knowledge can inform all the people here how last year's offense with Fowler at C, and clearly Peters as being better than any linemen we had in '99, and Dockery close to that, how our performance last year in any way, shape or form, particularly given that it had about 400 less yards AFTER Flutie's rushing yards are discounted, was better than that of '99 although it ranked 30th and put up fewer yards than either the '99 or '00 Os did. But then you convenienlty don't even address the '00 offense where Ostroski was a year older and Flutie barely played and had an insignificant amount of rushing yards. Yet, we impproved offensively to 9th in yardage. So perhaps you could then either apply the same logic to that season or come up with a different argument. And you tell me I don't know what I'm talking about. The numbers don't lie Bill. Perhaps doing your homework would help, huh. To give Ostroski credit for these meaningless stats and label him as an above average OC proves that you really don't know anything about football. You are good at complaining and taking sides. You are a JP Fanboy because you like his stats (or perhaps in this one instance there are other reasons). You dislike Jauron because you don't like his stats. You blast Edwards because of his rookie stats. Now, Jerry O is above average because of yardage compiled by Flutie. Oh, and the Bills stout defense stopping their opponents and giving Flutie the ball again and again means nothing in you clouded statistical world either, right? Gotcha! This is where your argument begins to break down and fall into a tantrum category. I'm not giving Ostroski credit, necessarily, for "those meaningless stats," which frankly aren't so meaningless except to you because you're getting your a$$ kicked in this debate. So what, they're meaningless because you say so. LOL What I'm doing is attempting to find out why the team then outperformed the team now given the contrast between Ostroski and Fowler. Nevertheless, there has to be a reason why the offense performed better, under Flutie one year, and then even better under Johnson the next. Right? Or is this simply because Jupiter had a slight glitch in it's orbit that year now. I mean really, talk about picking and choosing your arguments in a vacuum otherwise simply to illustrate your point, and then to turn on me in this way. So which component of the offense, which ranked about average that year with or without Flutie's rushing total, and 9th overall, 15th without Flutie's 161 yards rushing, do you say was the reason why we weren't ranked 30th like we were last year and also couldn't get any 3rd down conversions or 1st downs in general? I'll give you a multiple choice: A. Rob Johnson B. The RBBC of Antowain Smith, Sammy Morris, and Shaun Bryson C. Marcus Spriggs, Jamie Nails, Robert Hicks, and John Fina D. Joe Pendry And look, I'm not saying that Ostroski had a great year, not at all. In fact I do remember him struggling in his last season. But the team performed better offensively, both under Flutie and Johnson. But Fowler sucks. I just find it hilarious that anyone would think that an OL that "led" us to the NFL's worst offensive production was actually good or that the worst lineman on it, or maybe second to worst, was actually a decent player. As to Ostroski, I know he didn't play well in '00, but in '99 he got a very big contract up to that point. I remember that I thought it was too big, but still, obviously the team thought that he played well enough at G in '98 to justify it, and while he did begin to turn down, I doubt it was by as much as you say all at once. Meanwhile, the team that year besides Brown and Fina had nothing but one year signees pretty much to man the line otherwise. As to my "being a JP fan boy," hardly. I don't think he's any good either. But the fact remains, that the team scored more points with him in there on average last year and he didn't even play with the same team the year prior and a much worse one. So since when here does something other than the points scored in games mean more? I'm no JP fan, believe me. As to "disliking Jauron," I think he's an awful coach. You will maybe lecture me/us on why he is a good coach but it will include all soft type of stuff because his record as a coach suggests that he sucks and in no small way. And of course I "blast Edwards because of his rookie stats!" WTF am I supposed to use, his stats from high school? I also use the stats of the team, which paint in no unclear manner, that the Bills, under Edwards, were horrible at scoring and the worst in the league. That's worse than teams like the Raiders with no RB and Jamarcus Russell, worse than Brodie Coyle and Damon Huard in KC with no RB, worse than Cleo Lemon in Miami, and any team that you care to mention. On a per game basis we scored fewer points as a team than any of the other 31 teams with Edwards in there. We were also the worst at 3rd down conversions under him by a LONG shot over the 31st ranked team too and in ball movement in general. So what particularly is it that intrigues people about Edwards amidst all of these DFL statistical indicators? It can only be "the way in which he does things," ala "poise." But hey, if a player looks good but produces little, and you're satisfied with that, why are you upset when I challenge that? Now, you'll lecture us on how good Lynch is, so then Einstein, how come we were the worst team in the league last year in offensive scoring then and worse under Edwards than under Losman on average? This should be interesting.

That might make sense. I don't see that changing what's been right is a good thing however. Evans needs to be the X guy. Some were hard on Evans last year, but it's not like we went to him nearly as often as we did the year prior. I don't know what Hardy played in college, but as we all know what happened in college can usually be thrown out the window upon moving to the NFL. Hardy doesn't have the prototypical traits of a #1 WR in the NFL at this point. He may have caught some deep balls last year, but I've already shown that he didn't play any great passing defenses. But another fact is that just about all of his TD catches were in the 7-10 yard range which to me suggests that first of all like everyone says he will be a great Red Zone target, but that he also will have the greatest use within 5-15 yards of the line. He's probably not going t be a good slot, but who cares. Both Reed and Parrish are very good slots so we don't need him for that. With all of this talk about Hardy, the team really needs to make far greater use of Evans. We should be viewing Hardy as nothing more than making sure that happens. Anything more right now for this season is too optimistic. If Evans leaves, which seems all but certain now, then we can begin talking about what Hardy or Johnson can do next year in the #1 or X if there's even any basis for that kind of discussion. If Hardy's presence doesn't help Evans get back to the kind of numbers he posted in '06 w/ Losman throwing to him and Anthony Thomas at RB and a weaker OL, then Hardy sure isn't going to make up the yardage and scoring deficit on offense.

If I were Schonert I would implement the simplest thing that this team is suited for and the WCO isn't it. We more or less proved that last year. Fairchild was supposedly going to try some variant of the WCO too, what the Rams ran, and we all know how that ended. That's pretty much what we had last year in one form or another. Lots of 3 and 5 step drops and quick passes to receivers. That pretty much defines the WCO. Oddly, having said that, you need to be able to do 7-step drops too in a WCO, and often simply for shorter passes too, but our pass protection broke down often on those last year. Either way, you need a deep component to the WCO or it won't work well either. Some teams run the WCO off of a 7-step drop often as well. Neither Hardy nor Johnson are known for their crisp route running, but if you're going to run a WCO you absolutely need that because the passes are thrown with the notion that a WR will be in a certain spot. It's not necessarily a timing pattern, but it is sort of. So that doesn't really seem like a match. Hardy needs to be used 10 yards downfield either in front of the DBs or matched up with a LB where his size can best be used to shield and "out physical" the defense. That can be in any system really, but since Hardy's about the biggest difference that this team has we should seek to use him most effectively, and in a system where route running is key, that's not his strength. The Bills should stick with a standard pro set until they prove that they have the talent to man up across the board. I'll be happy if our linemen can just prove that they can move the pile when necessary. We don't have a receiving FB on the team and Schouman isn't good as a blocker so count him out. So if this team were smart, they would use a two RB set with a blocking FB, and try to just play ball control with Lynch being the focal point of the offense taking the heat off of Edwards who is going to struggle again. We could still use 3 WRs with 5 linemen, but eventually the line will have to be able to block without all kinds of help. We're also going to have to have a bunch of plays where we don't always get rid of the ball in three seconds. We need some ball movement and an ability to sustain drives this year. It all still comes down to talent yet many talk as if somehow "the system" as if it's magical, will overcome a host of talent related issues. Obviously that's not true. You can tweak things here and there in any system, but if your talent just isn't there it's unlikely that it will line up favorably for you across the board regardless of which one you use. I'm starting to get the feeling that Schonert really doesn't know WTF he's doing.

Only officially. In the media and on fan boards he's absolved.

Outstanding!!

1. Completely false. When I say front, I mean 6 or 7 on the line, just like they did to us with Bledsoe. You're going to see the same exact thing this year and Edwards doesn't scare any DC nearly as much as Bledsoe did. So we could very well be in a world of hurt there. Otherwise, many 4-3 teams line up four on the line throughout most of the game. I think you've been watching to much Bills defense. 2. I would challenge that too. Dockery is noted for not being good in space. He's our second best lineman. I don't think that anyone is going to rant about Butler or Fowler's play in space. Besides, how often do our guys have the option of playing in space? That typically happens when an offense can spread the D out some which we haven't proven to be able to do. If anything teams stunt us, making "space" a luxury, and are very effective at it. Regardless, Dockery clearly has his space play as an issue and otherwise I'm sure we can sit here and discuss how many plays the OL men were in space or not, but that's a waste of our time. In fact however, Dockery is ill suited to zone blocking, which is what we're going to do. Fowler's more "suited" to it as are most Cs due to their smaller size, but he's just not that good. Butler's a msytery. But I would say this, you're not going to be very effective at zone blocking if your Gs suck at it. 3. Correct. A catching FB. Have we got one on the roster? No, we don't. So yes, a purely blocking FB ain't a fixture in the WCO. A FB in the WCO absolutely must be able to catch. Is Barnes a good receiver? Nope. In six seasons Barnes has fewer catches than you have fingers and toes, unless you lost some. Jonathon Evans is your other choice. You want to rely on Evans to run our WCO? Regardless, the problem with all of this is that Schonert spoke of using a FB in a traditiona sense, block for Lynch, not to be used in the passing game. Clearly the team hasn't prepared for that either. We have no one that is even a tenth of what Rathman, for example, was in the passing game. 4. We are in agreement then. 5. I haven't seen evidence that Edwards is particularly good at either reading a defense or seeing the entire field. We all saw numerous instances last year where Edwards went for the primary off the short step drop with much better options open that would have resulted in big plays. At least bigger plays. Call it rookie issues. But I didn't see enough to suggest that he will all of a sudden be great at reading Ds or finding the best options. I also don't think he's gonna have the time to evaluate them often.

I agree with this so called conversion to the WCO. Schonert has said/implied the opposite. We will have to get away from what we ran last year. It was good to let Edwards get his feet wet, but we couldn't move the ball or score, and that had more to do with simply missing a WR. He's going to have to do some 7-step drops and do some pocket sitting here and there if we're going to be productive. Having all of these three step drops and 2/3 yard completions is death by papercut.

Camp starts in a week. We'll be hearing something in a few weeks. Of course everyone will look like they're going to make the Pro Bowl in camp, especially if you read and trust Chris Brown. Hardy's play during the season will be moot if Edwards doesn't kick it up a bunch of notches.

So in essence then, if say the Fins or Jets had drafted him, then he would suck, be unable to separate, avoid the jam, etc. But since we drafted him, not everything is black and white, what the scouts that do this for a living saw is meaningless and means they don't know what they're talking about, and then of course, yes, of course the "intangibles" and the "many shades," ... LOL We'll see how much his pure size, which seems by far and away to be his primary asset, does for him in the NFL. Personally I wouldn't have relied so much on simply that, but hey, I'm not an "expert." LOL

VOR is like that dog you know that keeps chasing his tail actually believing that at some point he's gonna catch it. LOL About as quick in wit too.