Is this the reason Gailey stopped running the ball?

[Bob in STL]

That might be a good reason not to throw into said wind. The proper play would've been to run it. They were having success using delayed handoffs late in the game and there was no reason to abandon it. At the very least, you keep Freddy in the backfield to give a run look (and for extra blocking). The use of the spread at that point in the game was insane.

 

 

The proper decision was to mix the run with the pass.

 

KC should have never even had the final drive in the game. They had no timeouts and we had the ball on their 42 (in very long FG territory (~59 yards). He needed at least one first down to run the clock down and then let Lindell try a kick. Two first downs would be much better but really, we were within a few yards of a taking shot, especially if we drain the clock. A mix of run and pass made sense. We were in the drivers seat and we panicked.

 

Fitz threw three straight incomplete passes, the third one was called intentional grounding. The clock barely ticked at all and we were looking at 4th and forever. That was followed by a 26 yard punt. KC, with no timeouts, had the ball with plenty of time run the ball down our throats ... and they did.

 

The Bills do not yet know how to win and it showed once again.

[Nervous Guy]

The proper decision was to mix the run with the pass.

 

KC should have never even had the final drive in the game. They had no timeouts and we had the ball on their 42 (in very long FG territory (~59 yards). He needed at least one first down to run the clock down and then let Lindell try a kick. Two first downs would be much better but really, we were within a few yards of a taking shot, especially if we drain the clock. A mix of run and pass made sense. We were in the drivers seat and we panicked.

 

Fitz threw three straight incomplete passes, the third one was called intentional grounding. The clock barely ticked at all and we were looking at 4th and forever. That was followed by a 26 yard punt. KC, with no timeouts, had the ball with plenty of time run the ball down our throats ... and they did.

 

The Bills do not yet know how to win and it showed once again.

And I quote 34-78-83...."Gailey states yesterday that they did have a couple runs called at the end of the "FG drives" that they failed on. He states that the coverage/ alignment dictated that Fitz opt out to a pass play. This was in his post game interview."

[Buftex]

They had a few decent runs, call me crazy but if you have the 2nd rated passer in the NFL you'd expect better results in the passing game...Fitz was off yesterday.

 

 

I underdstand what you are saying, but, c'mon...they are trying to win a football game. Not to take anything away from Ryan Fitzpatrick, but I seriously doubt that he, Chan Gailey, or nearly anyone else believes he is that good, that they should abadon part of their offense. And seriously, the whole "people crucified Jauron for running against Cleveland, are crucifying Gailey for passing" argument doesn't hold any weight. Every game is different. I have nothing against passing most of the time, but a run here or there might loosen things up. The Bills did actually get some decent run sustaining drives in the second half. Granted, the most effective were from Fitzgerald...

 

Either way, all in all, I like the way Gaily has called the game the last two weeks. Fitzpatrick was just off, most of the day yesterday...not a terrible effort, but sometimes he just throws some crazy looking passes...

[Dan]

You really think Chan Gailey was operating from a position of arrogance? 0-6, cut his choice for starting qb 2 weeks into the season, on record as saying we lack talent

in on the line, trying to tinker with the offense week in, week out----arrogance? I'd bet he made choices based on what he thought would win us the game, taking into consideration the likelihood our running game would be succesful at that point in the game. Looked to me that with all the warts on this team he's running, both the Raven's loss and the Chief's loss came down to execution. Fumble by Nelson (and unsportsmanlike conduct call) v. the Ravens, bad int by Fitzy and missed kick by Lindell against the Chiefs, Fitz missing Spiller in OT. Now, obviously, there are other issues---the Chief's playcalling and execution, defense v. offense and so on, and I ry not to oversimplify, but arrogance? You could make as strong an argument that he was right as that he was wrong.

OK.. maybe he wasn't being arrogant. But will you settle for.. being stupid? Because the odds of something bad happening on each of the plays you mentioned are higher than if you just hand the ball off to Jackson and let him grind out a few yards.

 

The Nelson fumble in the Ravens game, was the first time we had an OT situation, with plenty of time on the clock, and Gailey went with a spread offense. That put the ball in the hands of Nelson. Even if he doesn't fumble, he would have gained 3-4 yards on second down. Why not give it to a more sure-handed Jackson and let him get those same 3-4 yards on the ground.

 

The 53 yard FG that Lindell missed is by no means at all a gimme. Again, going spread for 3 consecutive plays tips your hand and makes getting any additional yardage that much harder. Why not get a few surer yards on the ground, first; then spread them out and take a shot at something more? IMO, Gailey put Lindell in a bad situation.

 

Calling the Spiller play is an all or nothing play. We didn't need it all, we just needed a little. Why go with a play you haven't run once all season when you can dial up something a little more sure?

 

Again, I'm not against taking some shots. But, even Peyton doesn't line up with no RBs, every snap and succeed very often. There's a reason NFL teams don't rely on the all out 5 WR spread offense. Gailey sold out with the spread and it failed. He's done it more than once. So either he's arrogant or stupid. I'm not really sure which at this point in time.

[John from Riverside]

No. The reason he passed was to get Lindell closer for the kick. You do know the winds were crazy and a long kick was no gimme. Basically Gailey was playing to win, not tie. You want conservative? Dick(less) Jauron would have taken the knee and made Lindell kick it from 58 yards.

 

0-6, 0-7, what's the flippn' difference at this point?

 

PTR

 

 

I am with Promo here....the grass is always greener folks

 

- Last year people were complaining about how predictable our offense was....how we dont take shots down the field, etc etc

 

- Now that we are scoring points (I know we didn't in the last game but) and taking those shots...people are complaining that we are not lineing up and pounding the rock on every play?

 

Which is it guys

[ganesh]

I thought they were actually running the ball pretty effectively in the second half...it seemed CG would have called a run or two somewhere along the line, on those final possessions. I don't buy any "trying to prove a point" theories, I just think Gailey likes to pass the ball...it seemed like the passing game, eventually, opened up the run for the Bills. Not sure why they were so reluctant to take advantage.

 

I thought the Cheifs play calling was worse...they were running the ball effectively all game, but abandoned it at the most peculiar of times. I realize the wind played a factor in some of the play calling, but a run is a run...no matter how strong the wind...

 

Agreed...Two straight games, we have lost because we stopped running the ball in the 4th quarter and our Run defense couldn't stop them.

[daveydanceswithwolves]

Note that this was filed BEFORE the game. If this is why Gailey was throwing at the end of regulation, shame on him. His attempt to prove a point blew up in his face.

 

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/NFP-Sunday-Blitz-8268.html

 

When the Kansas City offense sputtered in preseason, Gailey, then Haley’s offensive coordinator, wanted to use more of the spread offense he ran at Georgia Tech. He is sure to try to show Haley how effective it can be today. But Haley wanted nothing to do with it. He decided to make a change and become his own offensive coordinator for a year.

 

hindsight is 20 20

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I thought they were actually running the ball pretty effectively in the second half...it seemed CG would have called a run or two somewhere along the line, on those final possessions.

 

They were running pretty effectively in the second half.

They also got more yards per attempt (not completion) running than passing in OT.

Fitz was running 50% completion all game - Cassel only slightly better and for less yards.

 

In his post-game presser, Gailey said those were calls in hindsight he wished he had back, to mix a couple runs in there

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

OK.. maybe he wasn't being arrogant. But will you settle for.. being stupid? Because the odds of something bad happening on each of the plays you mentioned are higher than if you just hand the ball off to Jackson and let him grind out a few yards.

 

The Nelson fumble in the Ravens game, was the first time we had an OT situation, with plenty of time on the clock, and Gailey went with a spread offense. That put the ball in the hands of Nelson. Even if he doesn't fumble, he would have gained 3-4 yards on second down. Why not give it to a more sure-handed Jackson and let him get those same 3-4 yards on the ground.

 

The 53 yard FG that Lindell missed is by no means at all a gimme. Again, going spread for 3 consecutive plays tips your hand and makes getting any additional yardage that much harder. Why not get a few surer yards on the ground, first; then spread them out and take a shot at something more? IMO, Gailey put Lindell in a bad situation.

 

Calling the Spiller play is an all or nothing play. We didn't need it all, we just needed a little. Why go with a play you haven't run once all season when you can dial up something a little more sure?

 

Again, I'm not against taking some shots. But, even Peyton doesn't line up with no RBs, every snap and succeed very often. There's a reason NFL teams don't rely on the all out 5 WR spread offense. Gailey sold out with the spread and it failed. He's done it more than once. So either he's arrogant or stupid. I'm not really sure which at this point in time.

 

 

i appreciate the offer to meet halfway, if indeed halfway to arrogance is stupid.

 

Dan. no hard feelings, but I'm going to have to pass (get it?). I've been thoroughly disgusted with the bills this year. I went to the Miami game, the Jags game, and i'm at the point in my life where losing doesn't hurt the way it used to, but incompetence feels like an errant dart shot to the testes. i'm not a football guy from an x's and o's perspective, have a decent feel for the flow of the games---and i actually felt better after these last two weeks. don't get me wrong, false starts killing drives are irritating, the fitz int was horrible, and nelson fumbling blew too. but, it seems to me they are improving from where we were earlier in the season. i figure a bad team is going to get bad breaks and make bad mistakes---but i think we have a real football coach leading the team. so, i'm going to assume that he saw something he didn't like on the run (defensive schemes problems with the line etc) and went with what he thought was the higher statistical probability play (in his opinion). still seems to me if they were a better team, they win those games, but they blow up at unfortunate times in little ways. 0-7 is 0-7 and always will be.

[Dan]

i appreciate the offer to meet halfway, if indeed halfway to arrogance is stupid.

 

Dan. no hard feelings, but I'm going to have to pass (get it?). I've been thoroughly disgusted with the bills this year. I went to the Miami game, the Jags game, and i'm at the point in my life where losing doesn't hurt the way it used to, but incompetence feels like an errant dart shot to the testes. i'm not a football guy from an x's and o's perspective, have a decent feel for the flow of the games---and i actually felt better after these last two weeks. don't get me wrong, false starts killing drives are irritating, the fitz int was horrible, and nelson fumbling blew too. but, it seems to me they are improving from where we were earlier in the season. i figure a bad team is going to get bad breaks and make bad mistakes---but i think we have a real football coach leading the team. so, i'm going to assume that he saw something he didn't like on the run (defensive schemes problems with the line etc) and went with what he thought was the higher statistical probability play (in his opinion). still seems to me if they were a better team, they win those games, but they blow up at unfortunate times in little ways. 0-7 is 0-7 and always will be.

No hard feelings at all. Just some good, spirited football discussion.

 

I just really thought they were in a position to win yesterday had they called just a couple of plays differently. We may disagree on those play calls. But we can certainly agree that the team does seem to be making some progress.