The Big Cat

Ha. I'll give you one more try because I'm convinced you still don't want to understand. What was my point?

You're smarter than EVERYONE! But not smart enough to miss the irony of accusing me of cherry picking stats. Precisely what was your point again?

And it's my hope that last year's defense was a short term setback in favor of long term stability. I've said it, and I'll continue to say it: something happened in week two wherein the wheels came off BIG TIME. Granted, the Colts didn't exactly pan out as world beaters, but the defense that showed up week one was never to be seen from again. I don't know why.

I'd like to believe it doesn't. Which is why I don't get my panties in a bunch when Rex blows hot air into the mic (like he's doing with this Ed Reed quote). But their head space was so completely out of whack heading into week two last year, that I don't know what to believe. I suppose that's partly Rex's fault for not knowing his players couldn't handle the hype. **BUT TO ME it's far more disappointing that the players couldn't handle the hype.

I freely admit that. Me and 95% of Bills Nation thought the defense would lay waste to opponents. I expected to see 10-12 bloodbaths last year. My pre-2015 expectations were clear. I thought we'd dominate the majority of games but--because of Rex Ryan--be good for a stinker or two or three. I never in a 1,000,000 years expected a mediocre defense. I also didn't expect the team to be ravaged by injuries like it was in contrast to the spoils of 2014. What does that have to do with anything? FURTHER: if they finish 31st in 3 and out percentage again, and if those three and outs come in bunches against teams with good offenses again, then yeah, I'd say it's highly improbable that we have a top two defense. That's not even the 100th most absurd thing said on this board today.

And there you go. The Harvard Business Review was to show that the offense had a greater impact on losses than the defense. It had nothing to do with justifying anything about the defense.

Your hit rate on repeating it back is what leads me to believe you don't understand.

At this point you're either entirely incapable of grasping the point which has been fleshed out and explained, accompanied by all available data. OR you'd rather not understand and it's willful ignorance. Either way. I'm looking forward to the season. I love our team. I'm excited to TT play and I'm hopeful for what Rex can do with some new pieces on defense. Everything else is a hopeless pissing contest into the wind.

When you make analogies do you just line up a row of Barbie dolls with index cards taped to their foreheads and throw rocks until one of them topples over?

For me it was when he complained about getting "torched" by: Eli Manning 20/32 for 212 (51 of which came after a missed tackle for a loss) Blake Bortles 13/29 for 182 (84 of which came on the final drive) Sam Bradford 23/32 for 247 (53 of which came on a blown play by our safeties (shocking, I know)) Alex Smith 19/30 for 255

No it doesn't. It refutes arguments that nobody has been making.

Bolded represents the reality most in this argument won't accept. As for three and outs, the global percentage does tell part of the story. And alone, it was good for 31st in the NFL. But the impact of those three and outs is best measured when you look at how they came: often in bunches. This has been my point now for about two months. It doesn't excuse the defense for not being able to get off the field. And nobody is suggesting they weren't better at getting off the field in 2014. But that doesn't invalidate the impact that three and outs DID have on the defense, and thus on the OUTCOMES of games. This has been my contention and the numbers bear it out.

He single-handedly saved them from utter demise. Then threw them into the pit week 17.

RR defense being excellent in 2014? There was no RR defense in 2014 Nobody has ever referred to the RR defense of 2015 as excellent, especially not me. Does RR stand for something I don't know about? Or are you confused as to what my assertions have been? FURTHER: I might argue that TT's 2015 performance would be prohibitive to having a top-2 defense. They'd be on the field too much if he played like he did in 2015.

Your self-congratulations is not congruent with what you call "destroying." And honestly, you're exhausting, and nobody--particularly me--cares. So, if it helps you sleep at night, go for it. Otherwise, I'm done with you.

Resistance to this truth is baffling.

Go for it. Find all three.

You found a single example. I'm sorta not.

Well, nobody's saying that.

The argument is that the offense in 2015 had long stretches of games that were more detrimental to losses than the defense ever was. FireChan says it was no worse than in 2014, I guess? I don't believe it's true. I also understand the assertion that the 2014 was more capable of overcoming a poor offense is a foregone conclusion. But I don't believe the 2014 offense ever demanded as much. That's the discrepancy in numbers that a side by side will show, I think.

If I am the numbers will show it.

Be still my heart. At first blush the severity of these droughts don't seem comparable. I'll do a side by side. We'll see.

He was not a feature. This is objective. As a team the Bills finished 31st in pass attempts per game and 2nd in rush attempts per game. If you read and understood the many posts here and elsewhere from many different people, then TT's limitations shouldn't be "beyond" you. He could be a top 15 may be top 10 QB but he simply is not yet. At least I actually talk about football.

It's my fault I guess. Sorry to be the barrier between you and your first attempt at analyzing something other than the posters here.

Pick away. Why are you waiting for me?