C.Biscuit97 Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 I love how people try to knock everything. It's the freaking NFL. He was dominant and it's a great sign, no matter who he's playing against. And never underestimate how important confidence is. Hopefully this is a step to big things. But man, give the guy credit for a good game since a lot of you love to knock him for a bad one.
stinky finger Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 There's no kool-aid drinking here, I'm just pointing out a solid game and I said I know its against a bad OL. Let me ask you this, how many of you thought he was going to manhandle that Jet's OL and he didnt? So he was supposed to but he didnt in that game, he was supposed to and was dominant in this game. I think that marks good progress... You have low expectations.
BillsBytheBay Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Kelsay had a better game than him. That should tell you something. it does. They didn't run at Mario. They ran at what they thought was a weakness. That weakness compiled six solo tackles. Not bad for a dude fans wanted railroaded.
ricojes Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) I've been a Bills fan for 20+ years, not quite 30 but quite a long time. I still hold faith and still understand that a W is a W is a W. I'm trying to give props to a player for playing well and they all want to shoot it down. I've said for years, if the Bills ever win a SB, there will be a "The Bills won the SB, BUT..." post on this site. Some people are never happy. To me a W is a W and it's a much happier Monday. Mario did dominate a weaker opponent and he did have a good game. Does he need to do this on a consistent basis, regardless of the opponent? YES! Edited October 15, 2012 by ricojes
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 I've said for years, if the Bills ever will a SB, there will be a "The Bills won the SB, BUT..." post on this site. Some people are never happy. To me a W is a W and it's a much happier Monday. Mario did dominate a weaker opponent and he did have a good game. Does he need to do this on a consistent basis, regardless of the opponent? YES! It's funny because it's true.
BillsFanM.D. Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Mario played very well. I look forward to him turning it up further next week against the Titans at home. Moore was a very, very pleasant surprise. He had great burst around the corner and looked better than Anderson had in pass rushing situations. He looked as though he could be a legit pass rusher. Time will tell.
BuffBill Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) Yes, Mario played well. Now, let's see him play well against a line that doesn't have the 2 worst tackles in the league. I agree, it was his best game as a Bill by a country mile, but they were playing the two tackles who have given up the most sacks in the NFL by a large margin. Edited October 15, 2012 by BuffBill
mattsox Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but I don't see much talk about the game Mario had. He was disruptive as heck yesterday. Yes, he got 2 sacks, but he was in the backfield constantly yesterday. I remember listening to the John Murhpy show last week, or the week prior, and he had a guest come on saying that Mario was just a sacker and would not really get pressures. Well last night, he got pressures and caused some errant throws. I was impressed, albeit against a pourous line, its still an NFL line. He seemed to be playing with urgency, along with Kyle Williams of whom we've come to expect these types of games. Marcel was in the backfield more often too. I also would like to shout out to our first round pick, Gilmore, he played a heck of a game IMO. Go Bills!!! Umm... Where was he against the Pats and 49ers???
DrDawkinstein Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Maybe I'm just not seeing it, but I don't see much talk about the game Mario had. He was disruptive as heck yesterday. Yes, he got 2 sacks, but he was in the backfield constantly yesterday. I remember listening to the John Murhpy show last week, or the week prior, and he had a guest come on saying that Mario was just a sacker and would not really get pressures. Well last night, he got pressures and caused some errant throws. I was impressed, albeit against a pourous line, its still an NFL line. He seemed to be playing with urgency, along with Kyle Williams of whom we've come to expect these types of games. Marcel was in the backfield more often too. I also would like to shout out to our first round pick, Gilmore, he played a heck of a game IMO. Go Bills!!! Sorry, we're Bills fans. We only complain. And declare players as busts 5 games into a 6 year contract...
kickedface Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 he had a good game, he needs to have more. i will be happy if he manages to do this in a divisional game.
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Author Posted October 15, 2012 Sorry, we're Bills fans. We only complain. And declare players as busts 5 games into a 6 year contract... Yeah, I'm starting to realize this is just like any other Bills message board. I didn't expect much, but was hoping for a little more postivitiy. That's what almost a decade and a half of futility will do though. I'm seeing the sliver lining but they're seeing all the gloom around it.
MDH Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Yes, Mario played well. Now, let's see him play well against a line that doesn't have the 2 worst tackles in the league. Man, no matter what the Bills or their players do we always have to hear lines like this. The Bills win and it's, "yeah, but they can't beat good teams." Their players do well and it's, "yeah, but the opponent sucked." I swear some of you just can't give any credit to anybody.
DrDawkinstein Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Yeah, I'm starting to realize this is just like any other Bills message board. I didn't expect much, but was hoping for a little more postivitiy. That's what almost a decade and a half of futility will do though. I'm seeing the sliver lining but they're seeing all the gloom around it. Yep. Im not defending the horrible performances against the Pats and Jets, but I think the offseason had everyone expecting a 19-0 team that dominates in every game. That just isnt going to happen in the NFL. Heck the Pats lost to the Seahawks yesterday, and the Texans got blown out and self destructed in embarrassing fashion. We just need a bit more consistency, and to get the fire back.
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Author Posted October 15, 2012 Yep. Im not defending the horrible performances against the Pats and Jets, but I think the offseason had everyone expecting a 19-0 team that dominates in every game. That just isnt going to happen in the NFL. Heck the Pats lost to the Seahawks yesterday, and the Texans got blown out and self destructed in embarrassing fashion. We just need a bit more consistency, and to get the fire back. Agreed. There's so much parity in this league, the "Any Given Sunday" mantra takes on a new meaning...
BillsBytheBay Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 When he plays bad we come at him like he stole money. When he plays well, well its not his fault...
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Author Posted October 15, 2012 When he plays bad we come at him like he stole money. When he plays well, well its not his fault... I don't quite get what you're saying here. Are you saying we say "its not his fault" he stole the money, or its not his "fault" he had a good game, or am I completely missing the point. Either way, if you're trying to dig at me, I haven't talked about Mario on this board until this thread. My first thread on this board BTW. I think its gone pretty well.
BuffOrange Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 I put the disclaimer "albeit against a pourous line", so lets try and get past that and try and see his quality play. This could be a turn around game for him, but he was dominant. He was less than dominant against other back up OTs. This is a good sign. Including the disclaimer doesn't mean we have to get past it or pretend like this thread is warranted. This is not hindsight. Everyone from Aaron Schatz to John Clayton said we're in big trouble if we can't pressure that OL, the worst protection team in the league. It was basically Spurrier's Redskins from 2003. Or heck the Redskins game last year. We didn't need $100mill to pressure those teams. We need it for the Jets & Pats (oops).
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Author Posted October 15, 2012 Including the disclaimer doesn't mean we have to get past it or pretend like this thread is warranted. This is not hindsight. Everyone from Aaron Schatz to John Clayton said we're in big trouble if we can't pressure that OL, the worst protection team in the league. It was basically Spurrier's Redskins from 2003. Or heck the Redskins game last year. We didn't need $100mill to pressure those teams. We need it for the Jets & Pats (oops). How about the idea that teams can continue to get better throughout the year. Any thought to that? Teams get hot and rattle of W's in a row, but I supposed the Bils would NEVER be able to do that. Why can't this be a starting point? I bet I know how you're going to respond. It'll be interesting to see if I'm right...
macaroni Posted October 15, 2012 Posted October 15, 2012 Two weeks ago the Cards gave up 8 sacks to the Dolphins ... last week they gave up 9 sacks to the Rams ..... of course our pass rush looked good.
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Author Posted October 15, 2012 Two weeks ago the Cards gave up 8 sacks to the Dolphins ... last week they gave up 9 sacks to the Rams ..... of course our pass rush looked good. Nobody is arguing that the Cards have a horrible OL. Thanks for regurgitating this again. Cool story bro
Recommended Posts