ofiba Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 How much would Willis have helped the games he didn't start?
Like A Mofo Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 Bills would have won the Jags game with Willis. 10-6
Bill from NYC Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 11-5, perhaps better and the Bills would be in the playoffs no doubt.
Grant Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 It's tough to say. If he had started all season, things wouldn't have turned out the same way. Maybe Willis wouldn't have gone the extra mile that he did, knowing the starting job was his from the start? I don't believe that, though. I think if Willis had started all year, things would have still turned out pretty similar to the end results. However, I think he could have been a big difference in the first two games where all we did was hand the ball off to Henry. With Willis in, I think we could've won both of them. 11-5.
Gavin in Va Beach Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 He would have gotten that touchdown against Oakland, instead of tripping over the hashmark...
Bill from NYC Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 He would have gotten that touchdown against Oakland, instead of tripping over the hashmark... 197736[/snapback] Did you HAVE to remind me?
mary owen Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 He would have gotten that touchdown against Oakland, instead of tripping over the hashmark... 197736[/snapback] Henry got the TD in Oakland, the zebra's never raised their arms. As I recall, it was TH tripping over the hashmark, on a third and short carry against NE at home that led to bad things. Bad things like Bledsoe handing the ball off to Seymor. Seymor didn't stumble. I say 10-6 with Willis.
BillsGuyInMalta Posted January 7, 2005 Posted January 7, 2005 I'd go with 10-6...we definitely would have won at least the Jags game or the Raiders game.
PromoTheRobot Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 With Willis, we win JAX, OAK, and the JETS in NYC. Remember we had 1st and goal and failed to score? 11-5 for sure. 12-4 maybe. PTR
justnzane Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 alright, this is my theory here. in two of the games willis didn't start (jags and raidas) we would have won. consequnetly, the bills would have had momentumgoing into the JEts game and won that one. Possibly later on in the season the Bills would have played the Steelers better and potentially earned a bye
Oneida Lake Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 With Willis, we win JAX, OAK, and the JETS in NYC. Remember we had 1st and goal and failed to score? 11-5 for sure. 12-4 maybe. PTR 198031[/snapback] Wait a minute. That's 12-4 with Bledsoe at quarterback? Some of you Bledsoe bashers need to rethink your numbers. I"ll give y'all another shot. Try again.
Bill from NYC Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 Wait a minute. That's 12-4 with Bledsoe at quarterback? Some of you Bledsoe bashers need to rethink your numbers. I"ll give y'all another shot. Try again. 198644[/snapback] LOL, I was thinking the same thing. Expect to get hit with a "big game" post. The "cant win on the road" thing seems to be gone.
Fezmid Posted January 8, 2005 Posted January 8, 2005 To the people who say we would've won the Jags game -- Willis DID play a lot against the Jags. In fact, he was the one grinding out the yards late in the game before the CV holding penalty. I don't think that game changes any. CW
Recommended Posts