FireChan Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Maybe, but you're making all these declarations with the benefit of hindsight. Before the ball was snapped, the game was not in doubt. Roman is pretty good but he's not prescient. It wasn't as if it was an overly aggressive play call. It was a calculated risk, as you said. It was a risk having Karlos out there in pass pro, as you said. And it was a risk that potentially could have changed the game. And nearly did. If Karlos picks up his block, there's little chance that they get a pick six there.
Deranged Rhino Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 It was a calculated risk, as you said. It was a risk having Karlos out there in pass pro, as you said. And it was a risk that potentially could have changed the game. And nearly did. If Karlos picks up his block, there's little chance that they get a pick six there. The calculated risk I was referring to was cutting Fred in favor of getting Williams more meaningful snaps. It wasn't a calculated risk to have Williams in the game at that point in the game.
Rob's House Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Maybe, but you're making all these declarations with the benefit of hindsight. Before the ball was snapped, the game was not in doubt. Roman is pretty good but he's not prescient. It wasn't as if it was an overly aggressive play call. The game was in doubt up until the last few minutes of the game. Having been a Bills fan for so long you know that; you've lived it.
Alaska Darin Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 If you want to think I don't know what I'm talking about that's fine. But I have plenty of experience with the game. You're arm-chair coaching scared by even suggesting the game was in doubt BEFORE that play was snapped. It wasn't. /irony If youre a BILLS' fan with experience, there's no way you correlate those statements.
FireChan Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 (edited) The calculated risk I was referring to was cutting Fred in favor of getting Williams more meaningful snaps. It wasn't a calculated risk to have Williams in the game at that point in the game. The risk inherent with cutting Fred is weaker pass protection. That is the whole point. With Karlos and Fred both active, Fred is out there in a designed pass pro situation. IMO. Edited September 15, 2015 by FireChan
Deranged Rhino Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 /irony Are you suggesting Roman should deploy his backfield using prescience? What happened on that play could (and will) happen a few times during the season. Before the ball was snapped, the team is comfortably ahead and DOMINATING physically at home. The game was not in doubt UNLESS there was a pick six... which there wasn't. The risk inherent with cutting Fred is weaker pass protection. That is the whole point. With Karlos and Fred both active, Fred is out there in a designed pass pro situation. IMO. Sure. But let's not kid ourselves and rewrite history by saying the game was in doubt and this was a risky in-game call. It wasn't.
FireChan Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Are you suggesting Roman should deploy his backfield using prescience? What happened on that play could (and will) happen a few times during the season. Before the ball was snapped, the team is comfortably ahead and DOMINATING physically at home. The game was not in doubt UNLESS there was a pick six... which there wasn't. Sure. But let's not kid ourselves and rewrite history by saying the game was in doubt and this was a risky in-game call. It wasn't. I don't blame Roman. Someone has to pass protect. Not his fault we don't have an RB good at it.
Deranged Rhino Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 I don't blame Roman. Someone has to pass protect. Not his fault we don't have an RB good at it. We have several. Shady and Boobie are both good at it. And like I said, Williams isn't a bad blocker. He's physical and has good hands. He just needs consistency and technique -- both of which can be learned.
FireChan Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 We have several. Shady and Boobie are both good at it. And like I said, Williams isn't a bad blocker. He's physical and has good hands. He just needs consistency and technique -- both of which can be learned. Let's hope he learns it fast or isn't on the field.
Alaska Darin Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 We have several. Shady and Boobie are both good at it. And like I said, Williams isn't a bad blocker. He's physical and has good hands. He just needs consistency and technique -- both of which can be learned. Dixon is not a good pass blocker and he's about zero threat in the open field on third down. The fact that you've sunk to asking ridiculous questions about prescience shows how specious your argument is. The BILLS should have kept Jackson for the exact situation they found themselves in yesterday. Its that simple, no matter how much you try to muck it up with your special lahjik and inability to reconcile how quickly football games change.
Buffaloed in Pa Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Dixon is not a good pass blocker and he's about zero threat in the open field on third down. The fact that you've sunk to asking ridiculous questions about prescience shows how specious your argument is. The BILLS should have kept Jackson for the exact situation they found themselves in yesterday. Its that simple, no matter how much you try to muck it up with your special lahjik and inability to reconcile how quickly football games change. Moldy`s gone. Deal with it.
John from Riverside Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 I don't blame Roman. Someone has to pass protect. Not his fault we don't have an RB good at it. Im confused...I thought the pass protection was pretty good overall in the game
Buffaloed in Pa Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Im confused...I thought the pass protection was pretty good overall in the game Same here. Whiners.
Deranged Rhino Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Dixon is not a good pass blocker and he's about zero threat in the open field on third down. The fact that you've sunk to asking ridiculous questions about prescience shows how specious your argument is. The BILLS should have kept Jackson for the exact situation they found themselves in yesterday. Its that simple, no matter how much you try to muck it up with your special lahjik and inability to reconcile how quickly football games change. Specious? You're the one speculating that the game would have turned on a play that didn't happen. It's okay to disagree. I'm not arguing Fred isn't valuable, I love Fred. Williams is just better at everything else but pass protection. Having Fred in there on that play wouldn't have changed the outcome of the game. If you want to coach scared and plan for the absolute worst case scenario happening before every play, that's your prerogative. It's just not the way I'd want my football team run. Frankly, I think you're making a stink over nothing. There will be plenty of other times this season where Williams misses an assignment, I'm sure. It happens. Save your indignation for those moments. You'll have a better case. This team is good enough to overcome mistakes, even worst case scenario ones -- especially when they're up 2 scores with only a quarter to play.
Nanker Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Great as he was, Fred never chipped JJ Watt on the infamous EJM Pick 6. He and Chandler didn't even look at Watt on that play - they both just ran right by him. Watt blew by Henderson - who was stupidly double teaming the DT - in about half a second, and the rest is history. Pass protection is important folks.
Wayne Cubed Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Haha, these past couple of pages gave me a good little laugh. It's turned to arguing about hypothetical situations as to why Freddie should still be on the team. The Bills did not need Fred Jackson to beat the Colts, that's a fact.
atlbillsfan1975 Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 wow, people...seriously.... For sure.You posters still talking about Fred is interesting. I see why he was so beloved and missed now, but it isn't because of what he is able to do on the field NOW. You guys living in the past need to let it go and move on. Fred has.
Rob's House Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 Moldy`s gone. Deal with it. I'm sure you still get a stiffy every time you think about it.
Best Player Available Posted September 15, 2015 Posted September 15, 2015 The risk inherent with cutting Fred is weaker pass protection. That is the whole point Good point. This is lost on a lot of fans. it's one thing too "lose a step" and all the cliches thrown at the oldest back in the league. Point is, name a back today better than picking up the blitz than Fred? i am certain there is not one on the Bills. maybe in the league. His paltry 2,5 M salary had nothing to do with resigning Dareus. This is a huge mistake on Whaley's part one that TT at some point will wish Fred was back there if just for protection. IMO this revamped O-line is still evovling ata pace way too slow for some..............
Recommended Posts