RuntheDamnBall Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 mistakes happen and there are rarely perfect games in the NFL but we are down 8 with 7 minutes left so regardless of how many turnovers the pats had we were in the game . But even the pick did not lead directly to a score as the pats started from their own 39 and the penalty by the defense is what moved them 30 yards to the 1 . You are talking as if the pick setup a walk in score I'm saying that if you give the Patriots extra chances with the ball, regardless of what they do with it, it is not a good thing for your team. That should be painfully obvious. Mistakes do happen and that's why we lose. The Patriots keep mistakes to a minimum.
A Dog Named Kelso Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 I'm saying that if you give the Patriots extra chances with the ball, regardless of what they do with it, it is not a good thing for your team. That should be painfully obvious. Mistakes do happen and that's why we lose. The Patriots keep mistakes to a minimum. They were only up by 6 point after the last turnover those were not the cause of the loss at half time. The failure of the defense to stop the Pats in the second half is what cause the loss. The Straw-man argument of Orton beginning bad distracts from the actually issues that are causing the problems.
mdk Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Who cares, Orton is still the best option right now. This offense is moving better with Orton and you don't see the frustration in the receivers like you did when EJ was in. And with a high, mid, or low 1st round draft pick to Cleveland, you've got to play your best QB... which right now is clearly Orton.
mdk Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Who cares, Orton is still the best option right now. This offense is moving better with Orton and you don't see the frustration in the receivers like you did when EJ was in. Orton has 8 years experience EJ 14 games same for EJ. You've got to give the guy some time to develop. Like now with the next 7 soft opponents The future is now and this is no time to develop a QB (EJ) who was clearly suffering learning pains or worse, simply didn't have 'it'. With a mid to high #1 draft pick to Cleveland we need to win as many games as possible, NOW.
Rob's House Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 I don't know that you can say a guy played well when he committed two turnovers and couldn't sense the rush coming for beans. He made some good plays. But I only would have said he played well if they got the victory despite these errors. He made some plays, and he certainly made some that he'd like to have back. I thought the good outweighed the bad.
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 I thought the good outweighed the bad. I guess just being there I saw the same things that have plagued the offense all year -- and the lack of mobility on his part made the line's deficiencies worse. I didn't see much throwing Watkins open, or hitting him when he was open downfield (and he was). I did see a lot of taking what they were giving in terms of getting the ball to Chandler. Orton did an OK job of executing a game plan that just wasn't going to work against the Patriots. They are too explosive. But you can't lay that all at his feet, and again, the running game did nothing for us.
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 So no one cares that our running game has basically died since we switched Qbs? A qb who is a threat to run the ball helps create lanes. I don't hate Orton at all. I think he is one of the better backups in the NFL. But I know what he is as a starter. I would guess that his career average for points/ start is probably right around 20. Just like it is right now. This is Fitz/ Holcomb all over again.
Mr. WEO Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 The D was bad, but if you think that committing 2 of 3 turnovers that led directly to points wasn't, um, also bad, then I am very surprised to say the least. How about two? In a game where the other side committed none? Well, one of those turnovers led to a TD only because Duke Williams, instead of making an easy end zone int, inexplicably shoved the WR in the dumbest PI committed in the history of the NFL. And despite those 2 turnovers, the Bills went into halftime only down by 6 points. Then in the second half, the D laid down.
FireChan Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 (edited) So no one cares that our running game has basically died since we switched Qbs? A qb who is a threat to run the ball helps create lanes. I don't hate Orton at all. I think he is one of the better backups in the NFL. But I know what he is as a starter. I would guess that his career average for points/ start is probably right around 20. Just like it is right now. This is Fitz/ Holcomb all over again. Hahahahahaha. This is priceless. You're arguing that EJ, who throws 70% of his passes behind the line of scrimmage, actually helped our run game? I'm sure the fact we've played Detroit, who has a top 5 DT and defense, and the Pats, who again, have a great DT, has nothing to do with it. Look at our red zone percentage with Orton and EJ. Look at our 3rd down completion percentage. Look at our TOP. Look at our average number of plays run. Look at our passing yards per game. Most importantly, be honest with yourself. Edited October 14, 2014 by FireChan
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Hahahahahaha. This is priceless. You're arguing that EJ, who throws 70% of his passes behind the line of scrimmage, actually helped our run game? I'm sure the fact we've played Detroit, who has a top 5 DT and defense, and the Pats, who again, have a great DT, has nothing to do with it. Look at our red zone percentage with Orton and EJ. Look at our 3rd down completion percentage. Look at our TOP. Look at our average number of plays run. Look at our passing yards per game. Most importantly, be honest with yourself. The Pats got shredded by Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. And the threat of a running qb does help a running game.
Rob's House Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Hahahahahaha. This is priceless. You're arguing that EJ, who throws 70% of his passes behind the line of scrimmage, actually helped our run game? I'm sure the fact we've played Detroit, who has a top 5 DT and defense, and the Pats, who again, have a great DT, has nothing to do with it. Look at our red zone percentage with Orton and EJ. Look at our 3rd down completion percentage. Look at our TOP. Look at our average number of plays run. Look at our passing yards per game. Most importantly, be honest with yourself. The biggest difference for me is that when it's 1st and 20 I feel like we might make the first down. In fact I think Orton picked up the first after getting backed up to 1st and 30 by penalties. Also, if we're down 2 scores I don't feel like the game is over. The Pats got shredded by Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. And the threat of a running qb does help a running game. Manuel was averaging 13 yards per game on the ground. He's no longer a running QB (which is the main reason for his ineffectiveness IMO). I don't think teams were shitting their pants with fear of him taking off.
FireChan Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 (edited) The Pats got shredded by Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. And the threat of a running qb does help a running game. The Pats team of weeks 1-4 are no more. Haven't you noticed? And EJ's a running QB? Since when? Even Peyton has 1 or two rushing TD's. Apparently, the criteria for running QB's is actually having legs. Edited October 14, 2014 by FireChan
Mr. WEO Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 The Pats got shredded by Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. And the threat of a running qb does help a running game. Except EJ is no running threat. He ran an average of 4 times a game. Avg 3.3 yes. Longest 8 yards. He may run a lot, but it's sometimes backwards and almost always all behind the line of scrimmage.
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 The biggest difference for me is that when it's 1st and 20 I feel like we might make the first down. In fact I think Orton picked up the first after getting backed up to 1st and 30 by penalties. Also, if we're down 2 scores I don't feel like the game is over. Manuel was averaging 13 yards per game on the ground. He's no longer a running QB (which is the main reason for his ineffectiveness IMO). I don't think teams were shitting their pants with fear of him taking off. Agreed and I think he needs to run more. But the read option was part of the gameplan. You have to honor the threat as a defense and it's gone now.
Mr. WEO Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Agreed and I think he needs to run more. But the read option was part of the gameplan. You have to honor the threat as a defense and it's gone now. You're making this up. He hasn't been a "read option" QB in Buffalo, nor has it been a part of the game plan. His career rushing numbers suck here.
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Agreed and I think he needs to run more. But the read option was part of the gameplan. You have to honor the threat as a defense and it's gone now. He barely ever runs it on those options, and whe he does he doesn't do it well.
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 You're making this up. He hasn't been a "read option" QB in Buffalo, nor has it been a part of the game plan. His career rushing numbers suck here. You are delusional. What do you call his td run against the Bears? He barely ever runs it on those options, and whe he does he doesn't do it well. He does need to improve but I think Hackett is a joke. Let's run Spiller up the middle. Let's have Hackett be both the OC and qb coach. They mangle Manuel's development from The start.
dave mcbride Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 (edited) You are delusional. What do you call his td run against the Bears? He runs far less frequently on those designed plays than wilson and kaepernick (he has a choice, you know), and he's not nearly as effective when he does. Bottom line: he's not an instinctive football player. Edited October 14, 2014 by dave mcbride
FireChan Posted October 14, 2014 Posted October 14, 2014 Biscuit would blame Lombardi himself for Manuel's ineptitude.
Recommended Posts