Jeremy White All-22

[GG]

Sorry deleted that post as I've now read the article.

 

http://www.buffalone...-in-ej-20141210

 

He's mincing words quite a bit. And I think Coach T said "they" lamented the game plan, which Woods just said he wishes they were more aggressive, there was no quote from Sammy. So that's not entirely true.

 

Woods said the Bills needed to take more shots down the field. Asked why he hadn’t been targeted in the first half, he said it was in the game plan. On Wednesday, Sammy Watkins was asked why the wideouts hadn’t been featured more early, he also mentioned the game plan.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Sorry deleted that post as I've now read the article.

 

http://www.buffalonews.com/columns/jerry-sullivan/staying-with-orton-means-marrone-has-little-faith-in-ej-20141210

 

He's mincing words quite a bit. And I think Coach T said "they" lamented the game plan, which Woods just said he wishes they were more aggressive, there was no quote from Sammy. So that's not entirely true.

 

thanks for linking - always nice for claims like this, so we can judge for ourselves.

[Wayne Cubed]

 

Yea thanks I read that... and again

 

So now Sullivan reports that both Watkins and Woods said the coaches' gameplan featured short dump offs in the first half, and they lament that the plan wasn't aggressive enough. Sounds like more evidence that it's the coaching...

 

He said "they" there is no they. Sammy didn't lament the game plan at all, He's not quoted in the article but he supposedly has said the wideouts weren't featured early because of the game plan. That's not a complaint.

[GG]

Yea thanks I read that... and again

 

 

 

He said "they" there is no they. Sammy didn't lament the game plan at all, He's not quoted in the article but he supposedly has said the wideouts weren't featured early because of the game plan. That's not a complaint.

 

OTOH, they weren't jumping for joy either. Whether Coach Tuesday took liberties with Woods' & Marrone's responses is immaterial to the main point of an offense that features Hogan & Chandler.

[26CornerBlitz]

So now Sullivan reports that both Watkins and Woods said the coaches' gameplan featured short dump offs in the first half, and they lament that the plan wasn't aggressive enough. Sounds like more evidence that it's the coaching...

 

Woods' comments were pointed out to Marrone during his presser yesterday. He said he's going to speak to Woods about it. Look out Robert, you might get the Stevie and Mike Williams treatment.

Edited December 11, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz

[NoSaint]

 

 

Woods' comments were pointed out to Marrone during his presser yesterday. He said he's going to speak to Woods about it. Look out Robert, you might get the Stevie and Mike Williams treatment.

 

so far hes only hit woods during camp.

[Coach Tuesday]

OTOH, they weren't jumping for joy either. Whether Coach Tuesday took liberties with Woods' & Marrone's responses is immaterial to the main point of an offense that features Hogan & Chandler.

 

Did I really take liberties? I thought I summed it up pretty well, but I apologize if I didn't. To me it seems obvious, but I guess there are other interpretations out there, somehow.

[GG]

Did I really take liberties? I thought I summed it up pretty well, but I apologize if I didn't. To me it seems obvious, but I guess there are other interpretations out there, somehow.

 

You did. But maybe people are awaiting another Mike Williams eruption to believe that the WRs aren't happy with the game plans.

[Wayne Cubed]

Did I really take liberties? I thought I summed it up pretty well, but I apologize if I didn't. To me it seems obvious, but I guess there are other interpretations out there, somehow.

 

You did in the fact that Sammy didn't "lament" the game plan. Woods certainly did.

[NoSaint]

 

 

You did in the fact that Sammy didn't "lament" the game plan. Woods certainly did.

 

i think that the tone of the piece implies it a little - though that could be sully taking some liberties too, im guessing he was reflecting his own reading between the lines. when a WR answers why he wasnt involved more and doesnt say "we saw an opportunity to do...." and instead says something closer to "wasnt the plan" the normal takeaway would be unhappiness. the way he wrote it, we dont know if thats how it went down, the tone sammy used, etc.... but thats the feeling i got. if sully is presenting it right, i am not sure, and could be a case of your earlier comment of not being able to totally trust him.

 

the woods one seems pretty clear though. and putting them together, again furthers the implication.

Edited December 11, 2014 by NoSaint

[Wayne Cubed]

i think that the tone of the piece implies it a little - though that could be sully taking some liberties too, im guessing he was reflecting his own reading between the lines. when a WR answers why he wasnt involved more and doesnt say "we saw an opportunity to do...." and instead says something closer to "wasnt the plan" the normal takeaway would be unhappiness. the way he wrote it, we dont know if thats how it went down, the tone sammy used, etc.... but thats the feeling i got. if sully is presenting it right, i am not sure, and could be a case of your earlier comment of not being able to totally trust him.

 

the woods one seems pretty clear though.

 

Yea I think it's Sully, I mean he slyly didn't provide the direct quote and did the same for when Woods responded.

[section122]

i think that the tone of the piece implies it a little - though that could be sully taking some liberties too, im guessing he was reflecting his own reading between the lines. when a WR answers why he wasnt involved more and doesnt say "we saw an opportunity to do...." and instead says something closer to "wasnt the plan" the normal takeaway would be unhappiness. the way he wrote it, we dont know if thats how it went down, the tone sammy used, etc.... but thats the feeling i got. if sully is presenting it right, i am not sure, and could be a case of your earlier comment of not being able to totally trust him.

 

the woods one seems pretty clear though. and putting them together, again furthers the implication.

 

Without intonation it is impossible to know. Sort of like text messaging and having no idea how the comment was meant.

 

The game plan didn't call for it though as a statement - with as many people lamenting that there should have been more run plays called wouldn't that fall in line with wrs not being targeted? It seemed that short pass plays designed to churn yards and running plays to keep the clock moving was the game plan in the first half. Freddy got an awful lot of looks in the first half.

 

So which is it? Are we mad that the game plan should have been more focused on getting the wrs the ball early or are we mad that they didn't run enough early? It can't be both.

Edited December 11, 2014 by section122

[NoSaint]

 

 

Without intonation it is impossible to know. Sort of like text messaging and having no idea how the comment was meant.

 

The game plan didn't call for it though as a statement - with as many people lamenting that there should have been more run plays called wouldn't that fall in line with wrs not being targeted? It seemed that short pass plays designed to churn yards and running plays to keep the clock moving was the game plan in the first half. Freddy got an awful lot of looks in the first half.

 

So which is it? Are we mad that the game plan should have been more focused on getting the wrs the ball early or are we mad that they didn't run enough early? It can't be both.

 

 

it can be both. lots of good offenses are well balanced.

 

i liked that we used misdirection and creativity in the run game finally, and some more screens -- i kind of assumed the lack of downfield shots was more QB/game situation/coverage than a dictated game plan. this is an offense that realistically should be heavy in the underneath and in the backfield stuff, and you have to be creative creating mismatches, and misdirection for that to work consistently, and then exploiting the misdirection down field and to the edges with our speed to make defenders have to spread horizontally and vertically - get a misstep and get 7.

 

Edited December 11, 2014 by NoSaint

[section122]

it can be both. lots of good offenses are well balanced.

 

i liked that we used misdirection and creativity in the run game finally, and some more screens -- i kind of assumed the lack of downfield shots was more QB/game situation/coverage than a dictated game plan. this is an offense that realistically should be heavy in the underneath and in the backfield stuff, and you have to be creative creating mismatches, and misdirection for that to work consistently, and then exploiting the misdirection down field and to the edges with our speed to make defenders have to spread horizontally and vertically - get a misstep and get 7.

 

I too like he direction this offense is moving. It seems that there is more creativity lately. Certainly there have been more screen plays.

 

The rest of your response is why I won't get up in arms or even let the Sully article move the meter for me. Just because it wasn't in the game plan to have these designed shots doesn't make it a bad strategy. Also just because they aren't designed doesn't mean they can't happen organically. This could all certainly be tied to my opinion of Sully though. He is going to attempt to spin everything negatively. Maybe Woods/Watkins really were upset but I would be more accepting if it came from JW if that makes sense.

[Kelly the Dog]

All WRs want te ball thrown downfield more every game, want more balls thrown to them every game, especially after losses.

 

But this surely add fuel to fire that the coaches are not getting the ball to our best players, often by design.

[NoSaint]

 

would be more accepting if it came from JW if that makes sense.

 

makes total sense, especially without a direct quotes and such.

 

i used a similar comment to YOLO in the marrone/orton thread -- i think its a spot where the history, coupled with the current content getting out there makes you raise an eyebrow. The WRs havent been shy about being unhappy, so it wouldnt surprise me if they made some comments that are on the fringe of what youd like to hear. but also know that some guys will cherry pick quotes, and piece things together to change sentiment. not outrage with the coaches, but a red flag.

 

Id be curious Wawrows take on the mood around the offense. there seems to be a lot more of the questioning of roles/expectations there than the other side. id guess theres a leadership vacuum of sorts without a probowl veteran or proven coach on that side of the ball.

Edited December 11, 2014 by NoSaint

[The Big Cat]

All WRs want te ball thrown downfield more every game, want more balls thrown to them every game, especially after losses.

 

But this surely add fuel to fire that the coaches are not getting the ball to our best players, often by design.

 

Or the coaches determined we were bound to lose a game, in Denver, where the Broncos are superb, that comes down to our QB and his receivers exchanging haymakers with Peyton Manning and his (who have already been identified in this thread as far FAR more experienced than ours).

[Kelly the Dog]

Or the coaches determined we were bound to lose a game, in Denver, where the Broncos are superb, that comes down to our QB and his receivers exchanging haymakers with Peyton Manning and his (who have already been identified in this thread as far FAR more experienced than ours).

There is an enormous difference, as big as the Rockies, between "trying the get the ball downfield to your playmakers" and "exchanging haymakers with Peyton Manning"

 

The Bills were never going to win scoring 20 points.

[The Big Cat]

There is an enormous difference, as big as the Rockies, between "trying the get the ball downfield to your playmakers" and "exchanging haymakers with Peyton Manning"

 

The Bills were never going to win scoring 20 points.

 

I'm responding to the outrage that the game plan was focused more on possessing and moving the ball vs. looking to make the big play.

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm responding to the outrage that the game plan was focused more on possessing and moving the ball vs. looking to make the big play.

Every game plan focuses on possessing and moving the ball and taking your shots to make the big play. Every team, every game. There are a few different ways to do it. Apparently, we forget Part C.