l< j Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Not only was the relatively new and innovative 4-3 defense perfected here by Joel Collier, but he even implemented the earliest 3-4 schemes ever seen in football. The offense wasn't too shabby, either. If the 4-3 was new and it was early for the 3-4, what came before the 4-3 and 3-4?
nucci Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 "64, '80, and '88 were great teams mostly because of the defense. I would say '80 was the most fun with the best chance at a SB. Agree also about '99 defense, eball.
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Let's discuss. 1990 has to be the clubhouse leader but I'm going to put on a 53 team tournament of every Bills team to find out for sure. http://www.thekickisgood.com/?p=4883 The games start Sunday. Who is your pick? Thanks, Two Bills Drivers. This is clearly the best Bills message board out there. 90 Bills
dwight in philly Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 (edited) "64, '80, and '88 were great teams mostly because of the defense. I would say '80 was the most fun with the best chance at a SB. Agree also about '99 defense, eball. would loved to have seen cookie against the browns, i believe were the nfl champsin 64 , or the pack.., but he was gone when the pack were champs obviously. .. it is all just a pipedream, but something that you always wondered about back then. Edited February 8, 2013 by dwight in philly
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 (edited) Feel free to stop spamming your site everytime you want to have a discussion. Who cares, so he wants traffic to his sight, isn't that what the internet is for. Edited February 8, 2013 by Buffalo Barbarian
Shoutbox Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 i agree differences in training etc have to be considered...but i think the 64 team with Billy Shaw,george saimes,McDole,sestak,Dunaway,Gilchrist Deuby etc would beat the 012 team,even though half of these people had to have second jobs in the offseason working construction etc--and didnt start getting into shape until training camp. That's a whole new topic altogether, so I'll just say that I disagree and will point to the born differences in size/speed of the OL/DL as one of many examples.
JPS Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Feel free to stop spamming your site everytime you want to have a discussion. I'm with you. And as far as best teams? It's literally impossible to compare teams. I'd take the 99 Bills at this point.
Damian Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 i am partial to the 80-81 team.. still believe they could have won it all.. bad luck, fergy injury.. loved that team.. and i have been around for them all. Now I have the "Talkin' Proud" song stuck in my head!
Shoutbox Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 If the 4-3 was new and it was early for the 3-4, what came before the 4-3 and 3-4? The 5-2. As the vertical passing game grew in popularity, defenses needed an extra linebacker to counter.
KOKBILLS Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 The 90 Team was a rocket-ship...If the kick goes in is this really even a discussion? I do think the 99 Team was nasty...That D was awesome...But I'm going 90 FTW...
BobbyC81 Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 The 1964 Bills were arguably the most dominant pro football team ever assembled from the 1960's. Their defense was simply unrivaled and set records for rushing defense and sacks. The seeds of the modern-day NFL defense were planted in Buffalo in 1964. Not only was the relatively new and innovative 4-3 defense perfected here by Joel Collier, but he even implemented the earliest 3-4 schemes ever seen in football. The offense wasn't too shabby, either. The Kemp/Gilchrist/Dubenion triplet (with Hall of Fame lineman, Billy Shaw, plus Lamonica as an awesome change-of-pace backup QB) could stack up well with any other offense that the AFL or NFL offered back then. So, what did teams play before the 4-3??
dwight in philly Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Now I have the "Talkin' Proud" song stuck in my head! Lmao! yessir!
l< j Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 The 5-2. As the vertical passing game grew in popularity, defenses needed an extra linebacker to counter. Thanks!
BillsFanM.D. Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 Anyways, I think the two finalists would be the 90 team versus the 91 team. Winner, 91 90 over 91...simply because of Bruce's health/knee problems. He was a monster in 90 leading up to SB XXV. The following year he was missing games and played SB XXVI on one leg. Both great teams and the core is the same. I just think Bruce was that important and the 'difference maker' in deciding between those two.
thewildrabbit Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 The 90 Team was a rocket-ship...If the kick goes in is this really even a discussion? I do think the 99 Team was nasty...That D was awesome...But I'm going 90 FTW... 90 over 91...simply because of Bruce's health/knee problems. He was a monster in 90 leading up to SB XXV. The following year he was missing games and played SB XXVI on one leg. Both great teams and the core is the same. I just think Bruce was that important and the 'difference maker' in deciding between those two. 1990, I look back at that 90 team that were 19 point favorites to win, 9 pro bowlers on the roster. More then just the kick...its as if the Bills coaches didn't watch the NFC games or Championship game. If they had they would have most certainly run the ball more in the first half instead of trying to throw all over. The Giants were in a 4-1-6 defense most of the game to mitigate Kelly's passing, and it worked. (An older Lawrence Taylor was the singular LBer spying on Thurman Thomas, 15 rushes for 135 yard. So that didn't work) The Giants had managed to hold Joe Montana, and the 49ers to 13 points in that Championship game, but apparently the Bills coaches missed that. I dunno, perhaps it was over confidence in the fact that the Bills beat the Giants that year in NY in week 15. In which Kelly hurt his knee and left the game. Then Frank Reich came in to fill in and the Bills won 17-13. I feel bad for Scott Norwood for even being put in position to attempt a 47 yard FG, and he became the scapegoat forever with "wide right". When it should have been Kelly / Levy for not running the ball more.
Best Player Available Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 64 no doubt. 66 could have been if they had beat KC for superbowl I. Somewhere we have 2 tickets for superbowl I the Packers vs. Bills. The NFL had printed all combinations because things kind of moved at a different pace back then. The tix are very cool. What it could have been.
BringBackFergy Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 i am partial to the 80-81 team.. still believe they could have won it all.. bad luck, fergy injury.. loved that team.. and i have been around for them all. I could have played better on my injured ankle if I had some of that deer antler stuff...thanks for the vote. Respectfully submitted, Fergy #12
dwight in philly Posted February 8, 2013 Posted February 8, 2013 I could have played better on my injured ankle if I had some of that deer antler stuff...thanks for the vote. Respectfully submitted, Fergy #12
Tcali Posted February 9, 2013 Posted February 9, 2013 Think 2000 Ravens. The '99 Bills' D was nasty, and whether it be Johnson or Flutie, they were moving the ball and scoring when they needed to. the 99 bills werent in baltis league d wise-exc at DT.Bruce was already way past it altho still a force. And I just think Flutie coulda done it cuz he was better than the balt QB im spacing his name.RJ was a disaster waiting to happen. That's a whole new topic altogether, so I'll just say that I disagree and will point to the born differences in size/speed of the OL/DL as one of many examples. yes a whole new topic......just that the 64 bills--while undersized--werent THAT undersized. and they had all-time greats like shaw and sestak and mcdole on the line--vs the bigger/stronger but LESS talented 012 bills. Who knows though??? you may be right--but i dont think the 012 team knew a thing a bout winning against any team.
Recommended Posts