johnwalter Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 cleveland now regretting not waiting for quinn?
ALF Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Emotional , fired up defense by Ray Lewis and Sherman can rattle the more exacting offense. If you can't protect the best franchise qb and run the ball, looks like a good OL is needed. View of a Denver fan http://fromthesheds....r-synopsis.html Who ever is drafting and making trades for Seattle is doing a great job. Edited February 3, 2014 by ALF
Prickly Pete Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Coaching is one of the keys here. The Bills have 3 young QBs with no experience. They have a D loaded with talent that should be the backbone of the team. So what do they do? Run a no huddle attack that maximizes possessions for both them and their opponent. Just idiotic. Unless your have the better offense on the field by a decent margin, running an up tempo offense makes zero sense. yep. I posted that very early in the season (maybe even before it started). That was this silliest game plan they could have come up with under the circumstances.
machine gun kelly Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Funny how the last time the #1 scoring offense faced the #1 scoring defense was us vs. the Giants. What did Parcells do but run the ball right down our throat. Sounds familiar to last night. Regarding some of these other comments, we need a healthy consistent QB, and the running game along with the defense will continue to improve. At the end of the night, what a boring superbowl. This was the worst in 15 years. I know no one cares on the board, but I did feel bad for Manning. He's a role model for a lot of young boys including my sons. He had one bad game last night. It also made me think how much stronger San Fran and Arizona are than Denver as they either beat or kept up with Seattle. Mark my words, Arizona will contend next year. What I would have given to have Arians as our coach. Not that I don't like Marrone, but Arians is a winner.
papazoid Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Seattle could use a TE......and a RT that team is going to be good for a while.
RK_BillsFan Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 So, i'm pretty glad this post was already made because I wanted to discuss Seattle's performance. First of all, idk how everyone else feels but, I really wanted Seattle to win. The seahawks have been, for the most part of their history, the loveable losers. The last 4 years, the entire culture of that franchise has changed rewarding their fans. Now onto the team itself. I feel that this team is not just built as "A Team That Wins Championships with Defense". This team feels different, it's not the 2000 Ravens, or the Bucs' Superbowl team. They have an amazing Defence, and a dynamic Offence that is run by an extremely efficient QB. Are WIlson's numbers eye popping? nope. Do they need to be? Wilson is in his second year. His numbers are good, not great, but not pedestrian. He has less weapons than Tom Brady, and a monster of a RB to change the pace of the game. His ability to be an effective scrambler as well as his pocket awareness which was entirely on display last night, makes him a very dangerous weapon. That being said. I was trying to find anyway to say that the broncos did well last night. Unfortunately I can't justify anything. They never got the run game going. Mannings are looked like garbage. And the Dink and Dunk passes all game never got them anything. Manning had 8.2 yards per pass. Wilson had 11.4 The broncos had 26 yds rushing The seahawks had 86 Even if you take away the pick 6, and the kickoff return, and the terrible fumble trying to get more yards, the Broncos were simply not going to win last night. They were outplayed, in every part of the game. Not to mention, that at the start of the game, their D did a fantastic job of keeping the game respectable at least in the first quarter. Now of course only time will tell, but i feel as though, Unlike the 2000 Ravens, and the Bucs, the Seahawks who are extremely young as a team, will probably be in superbowl contention for the next few years.
MDH Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Now of course only time will tell, but i feel as though, Unlike the 2000 Ravens, and the Bucs, the Seahawks who are extremely young as a team, will probably be in superbowl contention for the next few years. As you said, they are a complete team. They will be in contention until the price tags of their players pushes them to make tough decisions. They won't be able to keep everybody but fortunately for them they have a good sized window and won't have to make too many of those decisions for a few years.
Doc Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 2011 giants vs pats? 2007 giants vs pats? 2010 and 2009 seems to me team with best D won 2000, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2006...
NoSaint Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 I don't think Wilson's play has been above average at all. He was very pedestrian the last 6 weeks. Tonight he did everything he was asked and we saw the result. The last 3 games before tonight he certainly struggled at times and Seattle lost one, had the niners throwing into the endzone to potentially take the lead and if not for the saints gaffe would've had the saints with 1-2 shots at the endzone from the 30 to possibly win. So, I'll stick with great teams win championships and qb is by far the most important position on those teams.
thewildrabbit Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Coaching is one of the keys here. The Bills have 3 young QBs with no experience. They have a D loaded with talent that should be the backbone of the team. So what do they do? Run a no huddle attack that maximizes possessions for both them and their opponent. Just idiotic. Unless your have the better offense on the field by a decent margin, running an up tempo offense makes zero sense. If the Bills did what the Hawks did - run the ball, keep the opposing team's offense off the field and allow your D to dominate they'd have a few more wins to show for it, I fully believe that. No, they wouldn't suddenly be the Seahawks but they'd have given themselves a better chance to win. It's the old saying, if I play Michael Jordan one on one to 30 I have zero chance of winning. But if I play him one on one to 1 I have a chance. Minimize possessions and the teams become more equal. Maximize them and the divide gets wider and wider. It's not rocket science What they did made perfect sense to me. I admire what they tried to do on offense, and just not the way they went about it. First, what they tried to do! What the Bills offense tried to do was run the old "K-gun hurry up offense" along with a "read option" for several reasons. That same K-gun with a 2-3 WR slightly spread offense is what worked so well for Kelly, Thurman Thomas back in 1990. Now, the read option part went right down the ceramic convenience when the rookie QB hurt his wheels, (knee) as the "read option" with the QB running was no longer viable. The hurry up, up tempo offense was brought in mostly because the Bills rookie QB's were so raw that the coaches didn't want them to have to read constantly changing complex 3rd down defenses. So by instilling the hurry up it kept the opposing defenses from bring in complex blitz packages in passing situations, AND it also allowed the offense to wear out the starting defense by limiting defensive substitutions. Which is exactly what worked for that 1990 Buffalo Bills highest scoring offensive team in the league that year. The Bills were so good at running that offense it took years for the NFL defenses to learn how to overcome it. Now, the way the Bills went about setting up that offense is the HUGE difference between the Seahawks and the Buffalo Bills this year. Lets not forget that the Bills had the #2 rushing offense right behind the Eagles #1 rushing offense, and Seattle was #4 in the NFL. The disparity between the teams starts and ends with the quality of the offensive lines ability to control the line of scrimmage by either passing or running. To begin with, both the Bills starting RT & RG were pulled off the waiver wire, as cast offs from other teams. So both players weren't even viewed as adequate backups for other teams. Yet they both found a home in Buffalo. While not as bad as Colin Brown bad, you wouldn't want them on a playoff team. Then with the poor play at LG all season it was very difficult for the Bills to protect the young QB's on the road, and were #25 in run blocking. What does it mean to you that while the Bills lead the NFL in rushing attempts, and were the #2 team in rushing. Yet graded as the #25 team in run blocking! Think back to the Bills 2013 off season, and letting LG Andy Levitre got to Tennessee, and then replacing him with two of the very worst players in the NFL last year in LG Colin Brown & backup David Snow. Both players were cut and gone from the team by week six. Then the guy who was brought in to be the back up center ultimately became the starting LG after week six. Now, because of the Colin Brown / Sam Young situation it tells me here is where the great disparity is on this team compared to other teams. It appears that there is nobody on the Bills coaching staff or FO who can discern the difference between a top O line player and a bad player. The Bills were exceedingly lucky to have not suffered injuries to that O line after week six. So the Bills did do exactly what the Seahawks did last season with a top 10 defense, and #4 team against the pass. They also were better in terms of rushing yardage with the Bills @ #2, and the Seahawks @# 4. The biggest difference between the teams came with that Bills offense, passing-rushing attack not being able to control the clock or line of scrimmage. The Bills were one of the worst teams in the NFL in three downs and out. The Bills defense spent way to much time on the field, and were wore down by the fourth quarter. JMO Edited February 3, 2014 by FeartheLosing
papazoid Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 the play of Seattles LB's and SS really stood out.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Complete teams win championships. The biggest position being qb, as it's one of the only position of 22 that will immediately knock you out without above average play. This! That old defense wins clich has been debunked many times over. There are a lot of different ways to build a championship team, and enough defense is one of them. Just like enough offense. Enough of a running game, enough of etc.. I expect to hear all the oversimplification of building a winner now that the Super Bowl is over. THE FORMULA is.......blah blah blah. Leave that to the media please. Edited February 3, 2014 by 75Bills
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Hmmm. Top defense and top running game against the most pass happy dominant offense in the history of the league and the biggest game in the biggest stage was one of the biggest blowouts in Super Bowl history. If you recall what I have said many times, NO QB that has lead the NFL in passing yards (and possibly scoring) has ever won a SB. Offense fills the seats in the regular season, but Defense wins Championships. Kurt Warner was the closest top ranked passing leader to win one. He ranked #2 in passing yards in 1999 in his victory against the Home Run Throw Forward Tennessee Titans. http://www.pro-footb...ear_by_year.htm Edited February 3, 2014 by BillsFan-4-Ever
section122 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 This! That old defense wins clich has been debunked many times over. There are a lot of different ways to build a championship team, and enough defense is one of them. Just like enough offense. Enough of a running game, enough of etc.. I expect to hear all the oversimplification of building a winner now that the Super Bowl is over. THE FORMULA is.......blah blah blah. Leave that to the media please. I just simply disagree with this. An excellent defense can win a championship with an okay offense. It seems to be much more difficult for an excellent offense to win with an okay defense. Yes there are many ways to skin a cat but having a really good defense has proven to be much more important than a really good offense. Nobody is playing in the super bowl without a pretty good team but one that favors defense to offense has been very successful recently. Some stats I found: Since 1990, teams ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense are 10-2 in the Super Bowl. Both losses (2010 Packers over Steelers, 2004 Patriots over Eagles) came to a team that was also ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense. Overall, teams ranked 1st or 2nd in scoring defense are 22-11. (after last night that can be updated to 11-2 and 23-11. - 31 of 46 Super Bowl winners had a top 5 scoring defense. 23 of 46 Super Bowl losers had a top 5 scoring defense. 30 Super Bowl winners had a top 5 total defense. 18 losers were top 5 in total defense. (This is now 32 of 48 and 31 winners having a top 5 total defense) So 67% of Super Bowl winners have had top 5 scoring defenses that is certainly a trend.
NoSaint Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 If you recall what I have said many times, NO QB that has lead the NFL in passing yards (and possibly scoring) has ever won a SB. Offense fills the seats in the regular season, but Defense wins Championships. Right, because while leading the league in passing yards takes a good to great qb typically it says more about a defense that is giving up points and a running game that isn't fully functional. Obviously not always true, but you normally don't see the attempts required if you a operating on all cylinders.
DallasBillsFan1 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Maybe Buffalo doesn't need a prolific offense. Seattle's offense certainly wasn't anything special, but good enough to get job done (with our old RB no less). Right now Buffalo's defense is really good (except for run D) so why not "super size" it by doing the following: 1 - pay Byrd ..keep him! 2 - draft the best no risk LB to help top the run 3 - use FA to strengthen bench ad safety position In other words, crate our own Legion of Boom in Buffalo.
BuffaloRebound Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 49ers would've done the same thing to the Broncos. Reminds me of the NFC East in the 90's. Harbaugh and Carroll are great coaches and their dislike for each other raises the stakes. Their teams play with a violence and intensity unmatched by rest of the NFL.
Mr. WEO Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) No, he really believes that. 2011 giants vs pats? 2007 giants vs pats? 2010 and 2009 seems to me team with best D won The topic being discussed is whether great/dominating D's win championships (irrespective of the offense, according to some), not whether a SB team's D played well enough on one day to win a SB. The Giants D's in 2007 and 2011 were pretty bad. The team went on a run in the playoffs both years. In those 2 years, the pats D gave up fewer than 17 ppg in the playoffs--in fact, only 1 point more than the Giants D on average. In 2010, the Packers had a top D, but also a top 10 O. The 2009 Saints had a bad defense, especially against the pass--but they had the best O in the league. Even the once great Baltimore D was mediocre when they entered the playoffs last year. They had a top 10 O, though. They made it to (and won) the SB because their offense (mainly Flacco) played well. The Colts in 2006 came into the playoffs with a bad defense that perked up (except for the AFCC game). The Steelers had a top 5 D in 2006, but also needed a top 10 O to win. The pats had Top 5 (points) defense and offense in 2004. Top 5 D (top 12 O) in 2003. In 2001, both O and D were ranked 6th. In their 3 SB wins, the pats D gave up over 22 ppg on average. In their 2 SB losses, they gave up only 15.5 PPG. There is no questioning that the dominance of the Seattle D won that game yesterday. Therefore, the inevitable "who said defense doesn't win championships" is immediately whipped out. But it's my contention that the combination (or disparity) of dominating (season long) defense and mediocre Offense rarely produces a SB winner. Seattle, Tampa, Baltimore in the last decade in a half. Edited February 3, 2014 by Mr. WEO
atlbillsfan1975 Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Give a good D two weeks to get ready for Manning or Brady or Brees and they can beat them. Now Denver shot itself in the foot many times over...But Seattles D was ready for everything. Edited February 3, 2014 by atlbillsfan1975
chris heff Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Defense wins every 14-15 years.. Giants twice, Ravens and Seahawks, that's four times in the last ten years.
Recommended Posts