26CornerBlitz Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Upon Further Review: Bills at Texans By Joe Buscaglia After they marched out to a 2-0 record to start the season, the Buffalo Bills matched that with a two-game losing streak to even out the first quarter of the 2014 regular season. The Bills lost to the Houston Texans 23-17, and found enough reason to change the course of one of their most high profile players because of it. The Bills will be on the road once again in Week Five with a new starting player, but before they do that, the page must be turned on last week’s loss to the Texans. With the help of NFL.com’s Game Rewind package and the All-22 film available with it, ‘Upon Further Review’ brings you a detailed review at how each player on the Bills fared in that specific game. Every week, WGR will provide you with the standouts, the duds and everything in between. For each player that appeared in the game on offense or defense, you'll see their name in bold, with a set of numbers after it. Example: Ashton Youboty (54, -2, 2.7). The first number (54) represents the snap count of that game, the second (-2) represents the individual player’s plus-minus of positive plays to negative plays in that game. The third number (2.7) represents the weighted Grade Point Average assigned to that player by the author.
PearlHowardman Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 How did Texans JJ Watt get a touchdown after he intercepted Manuel? He's a big, bulky defensive player. Why couldn't EJ Manuel have caught Watt and tackled him? "I think he ruined EJ Manuel in that game," King said. "EJ Manuel is not a very confident guy anyway but, I mean, I think he sent EJ Manuel to the bench. That’s the impact he had. He hit EJ Manuel nine times in that game. He had the incredible leaping interception and he outruns a running back AND a quarterback 80 yards for a touchdown." Peter King
The Big Cat Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 I don't like his reviews and his little grading system. I much prefer Jeremy White's. Just MO.
bowery4 Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 I don't like his reviews and his little grading system. I much prefer Jeremy White's. Just MO. I kind of agree
26CornerBlitz Posted October 1, 2014 Author Posted October 1, 2014 I don't like his reviews and his little grading system. I much prefer Jeremy White's. Just MO. I kind of agree It's not visual at all. A picture is worth a thousand words as they say.
The Big Cat Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 It's not visual at all. A picture is worth a thousand words as they say. Try explaining that to radio guys. ;-) But to take it further: these are like rambling 2000 word opportunities to say "here's what I think." Problem is, Buscalia doesn't seem to know football from foosball. So I don't really find value in what he thinks. Kelso really took him down a peg or two on the pregame Sunday and deservedly so.
26CornerBlitz Posted October 1, 2014 Author Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) Try explaining that to radio guys. ;-) But to take it further: these are like rambling 2000 word opportunities to say "here's what I think." Problem is, Buscalia doesn't seem to know football from foosball. So I don't really find value in what he thinks. Kelso really took him down a peg or two on the pregame Sunday and deservedly so. Hard to compare a layman like Joe B in with Kelso who knows the game intimately as a former player. Remember that Jeremy also falls into the layman category. Edited October 1, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz
The Big Cat Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Hard to compare a layman like Joe B in comparison to Kelso who knows the game intimately as a former player. Remember that Jeremy also falls into the layman category. And Jeremy and I had a little back and forth yesterday on Twitter about some questionable analysis. But at least his reviews SHOW you his reference points in a way that's objective enough for you to make your own opinion.
l< j Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 I'd be curious to hear what people here who know OL play (not me!) thought of our rookie guard. Obviously (channeling St. Doug) there were struggles individually and breakdowns as a unit. But is he showing promise? Showing technical deficiencies? kj
BuffOrange Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 And Jeremy and I had a little back and forth yesterday on Twitter about some questionable analysis. But at least his reviews SHOW you his reference points in a way that's objective enough for you to make your own opinion. And he recalled the Cowboys-Eagles game last December on Sunday Night as meaningless. Which is impossible to do if you follow football at all.
fridge Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 (edited) I don't like his reviews and his little grading system. I much prefer Jeremy White's. Just MO. Joe B just is too vague. He sometimes mentions one player's big play, then just gives a game grade. It's like...yeah man, I know CJ got a kick return for a touchdown, I'm freaking reading an article about the game on a Wednesday, it would be incredible if I didn't. Why don't you explain your little grade before you push submit and put on another $100 suit. Edited October 1, 2014 by fridge
The Big Cat Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 Joe B just is too vague. He sometimes mentions one player's big play, then just gives a game grade. It's like...yeah man, I know CJ got a kick return for a touchdown, I'm freaking reading an article about the game on a Wednesday, it would be incredible if I didn't. Why don't you explain your little grade before you push submit and put on another $100 suit. I also don't understand his system. If it's positive v negative plays, why are scores always so close to zero? To players really have approximately the same number positive plays and negative? I don't understand.
Cash Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 I also don't understand his system. If it's positive v negative plays, why are scores always so close to zero? To players really have approximately the same number positive plays and negative? I don't understand. My guess is that most plays are neutral - maybe the range from C- to B or something? B+ or above would be positive, and D+ or lower would be negative? Just a guess. And if that's the case, it doesn't surprise me that most of the scores are pretty close to zero. Most guys on most plays are pretty much "doing their job" - not screwing up, but also not making a great play. I like his methodology in principle, but I agree that it could use some more explanation. It would be nice if he had a reference post he could link back to every week, where he maybe gave examples of what constitutes a positive or negative play, and roughly what kind of play earns what kind of grade. I do like that he keeps a running tally year-long. Whatever his system is, it at least approximates how guys actually played, and it's nice having a an aggregate score for the year.
The Big Cat Posted October 1, 2014 Posted October 1, 2014 My guess is that most plays are neutral - maybe the range from C- to B or something? B+ or above would be positive, and D+ or lower would be negative? Just a guess. And if that's the case, it doesn't surprise me that most of the scores are pretty close to zero. Most guys on most plays are pretty much "doing their job" - not screwing up, but also not making a great play. I like his methodology in principle, but I agree that it could use some more explanation. It would be nice if he had a reference post he could link back to every week, where he maybe gave examples of what constitutes a positive or negative play, and roughly what kind of play earns what kind of grade. I do like that he keeps a running tally year-long. Whatever his system is, it at least approximates how guys actually played, and it's nice having a an aggregate score for the year. And that's all well and good. I take issue with anyone trying to quantify a very qualitative game. It seems that all efforts to do so are either way to simplistic (Buscalia) or way to complex (Football Outsiders). And in both cases, they fail to account for a LOT of key factors that thwart the numbers in either direction. 'A' for effort, I suppose. But, again, what JWhite provides is a lot more interesting/enriching to the fan experience, IMO.
Recommended Posts