Coach Tuesday Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 You know what's wild? Our defense had the exact same record!
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 You know what's wild? Our defense had the exact same record! I'm not sure why you're resisting the point. Perhaps you've lost track of it?
FireChan Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 If ifs and buts were nickels and nuts every day would be Christmas. Solid analysis. AFC playoff teams allowing 30+ points. Houston 0-1 NE 0-1 Miami 1-4 Pitt 0-3 Oak 3-1 KC 0-1 We went 0-6. Allowed 30 points or more in 6 games. Just stop. You're incorrect.
Coach Tuesday Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 I'm not sure why you're resisting the point. Perhaps you've lost track of it? The offense was good enough last year, and had nothing to do with THE OTHER TEAMS' OFFENSES. That's the point Cat.
GG Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Oh, the likelihood of the offense taking a step back is stupendously high, mostly because of uncertainty at QB. But make no mistake, said step back will be seriously overstated because it will be coming from the assumption that the 2016 was good enough to win. 1-8 when your opponent scores 20 points or more suggests that they were not. 0-4 when the opponent score more than 30 1-3 when the opponent scored between 20 and 30 So again, clinging to those rankings and waving them as evidence that the offense was good in 2016 is dishonest. And even though it won't matter, people will be PISSED that we don't match those rankings next year. Providing these stats aren't helping your point. If your offense puts up about 24 points per game, you should be well north of 500 of you have a competent defense.
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Providing these stats aren't helping your point. If your offense puts up about 24 points per game, you should be well north of 500 of you have a competent defense. Then you're missing the point. The point was that the offense wasn't good enough to win. You have to keep pace in the NFL nowadays and ours wasn't built nor called to do so. It was meant to complement a good defense. Without that it failed. 9 times we allowed 20+ points. Look at the rest of the AFC playoff teams: KC: 6 MIA: 12 HOU: 11 PIT: 9 NE: 5 OAK: 13 The difference between our team and those teams was we couldn't keep pace.
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Providing these stats aren't helping your point. If your offense puts up about 24 points per game, you should be well north of 500 of you have a competent defense. You're correct. The Bills lead the league in losses at 6 or 7 ? when scoring 24+ pts. End of story. If the rest of the team was up to snuff you win a few of those games.
GG Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Then you're missing the point. The point was that the offense wasn't good enough to win. You have to keep pace in the NFL nowadays and ours wasn't built nor called to do so. It was meant to complement a good defense. Without that it failed. 9 times we allowed 20+ points. Look at the rest of the AFC playoff teams: KC: 6 MIA: 12 HOU: 11 PIT: 9 NE: 5 OAK: 13 The difference between our team and those teams was we couldn't keep pace. This team wasn't built to keep pace. It was built to keep opponents under 20 pts. It failed
PolishDave Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Then you're missing the point. The point was that the offense wasn't good enough to win. You have to keep pace in the NFL nowadays and ours wasn't built nor called to do so. It was meant to complement a good defense. Without that it failed. By your train of thought, what is the point of assembling and playing defense at all? Your explanation seems to overlook the fact that defense does in fact matter. You seem to be blaming the offense for every time the team doesn't win. And you are giving the Bills defense a pass for sucking when 9 out of ten fans can see the obvious point that the Bills' defense wasn't anywhere near as good relative to other defenses as their offense was to other offenses.
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 By your train of thought, what is the point of assembling and playing defense at all? Your explanation seems to overlook the fact that defense does in fact matter. You seem to be blaming the offense for every time the team doesn't win. And you are giving the Bills defense a pass for sucking when 9 out of ten fans can see the obvious point that the Bills' defense wasn't anywhere near as good relative to other defenses as their offense was to other offenses. I'm not doing either of those things.
PolishDave Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 I'm not doing either of those things. It sure seems like you are, at least that is the impression. If the Bills' defense had played better and done their job of stopping other teams from scoring those high point games, isn't it more likely that this very same offense would have scored even more points in those games than they already did? Would the offense had been considered "good enough" then?
Boatdrinks Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Going around and around on this argument. Bottom line is you have to outscore your opponent. The Bills need to either improve the Defense or get a better Quarterback to achieve this goal. Improvement on D seems like it would be easier to attain .
Kelly the Dog Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 It sure seems like you are, at least that is the impression. He's sneaky like that. I don't even think that is a real cat in his avatar.
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 It sure seems like you are, at least that is the impression. If the Bills' defense had played better and done their job of stopping other teams from scoring those high point games, isn't it more likely that this very same offense would have scored even more points in those games than they already did? Would the offense had been considered "good enough" then? Your impression is wrong. BAL: offense's fault NYJ1: defense's fault MIA1: offense's fault SEA/NE2: nobody's fault, just out played (though we were 8 yards from the endzone to win at the end of SEA...) OAK: shared blame. defense let them back in, offense couldn't protect the lead and keep Carr off the field PIT: they both sucked MIA: defense's fault NYJ2: not going there I've defended each of these stances countless times. IMO, when games were on the line and we needed the offense to come up big, they consistently failed (and have with TT as the QB for two seasons now).
BADOLBILZ Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) He's sneaky like that. I don't even think that is a real cat in his avatar. So the Bills finish 7-1 when allowing less than 27 points..... Let's go to The Big Cat for analysis: "Clearly, the offense just can't keep up" Edited January 17, 2017 by #BADOL
FireChan Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Solid analysis. AFC playoff teams allowing 30+ points. Houston 0-1 NE 0-1 Miami 1-4 Pitt 0-3 Oak 3-1 KC 0-1 We went 0-6. Allowed 30 points or more in 6 games. Just stop. You're incorrect. Then you're missing the point. The point was that the offense wasn't good enough to win. You have to keep pace in the NFL nowadays and ours wasn't built nor called to do so. It was meant to complement a good defense. Without that it failed. 9 times we allowed 20+ points. Look at the rest of the AFC playoff teams: KC: 6 MIA: 12 HOU: 11 PIT: 9 NE: 5 OAK: 13 The difference between our team and those teams was we couldn't keep pace. No. The difference was we allowed 30+ points more than any playoff team. 5 more times than a team like Houston. Looks like their offense was "good enough" in your wacko world.
PolishDave Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) Your impression is wrong. BAL: offense's fault NYJ1: defense's fault MIA1: offense's fault SEA/NE2: nobody's fault, just out played (though we were 8 yards from the endzone to win at the end of SEA...) OAK: shared blame. defense let them back in, offense couldn't protect the lead and keep Carr off the field PIT: they both sucked MIA: defense's fault NYJ2: not going there I've defended each of these stances countless times. IMO, when games were on the line and we needed the offense to come up big, they consistently failed (and have with TT as the QB for two seasons now). I forgot you were one of the guys that thinks it is the offense's job to play defense. I now remember having a similar conversation (I think with you) after that first Miami game. Yeah, we are never going to agree on that. Offense job is to score points. Defense job is to stop the other team from scoring. You are assigning both jobs to the offense. Yeah, not gonna agree on that. To me it is a luxury when your offense bails the defense out or vice versa. It is not something you expect them to do every game. You expect both sides of the ball to do their job reasonably well. The offense did it's job reasonably well this season based on points scored. The defense did not. Would it have been nice if the offense scored more - Yes of course. Every Bills fan wants the offense to be the number 1 most dominant offense in the league. But you don't hang blame on the offense for losing games when they were already playing better than average compared to other offenses. Edited January 17, 2017 by PolishDave
D. L. Hot-Flamethrower Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Your impression is wrong. BAL: offense's fault NYJ1: defense's fault MIA1: offense's fault SEA/NE2: nobody's fault, just out played (though we were 8 yards from the endzone to win at the end of SEA...) OAK: shared blame. defense let them back in, offense couldn't protect the lead and keep Carr off the field PIT: they both sucked MIA: defense's fault NYJ2: not going there I've defended each of these stances countless times. IMO, when games were on the line and we needed the offense to come up big, they consistently failed (and have with TT as the QB for two seasons now). I disagree with you placement of blame. Miami 1 is on the defense as much if not more than the offense, they gave up 454 yds and 28 FD and Ajayi ran all over them, the offense puit up 25 pts Sea is on the defense, the offense had 425 yds and 30 FDs and 28 pts against the number 1 scoring D, should be good enough Oak is more on the defense, should be able to protect a 24-9 lead in the 3rd QTR There is 3 games that should have been wins with competent defense.
The Big Cat Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) I forgot you were one of the guys that thinks it is the offense's job to play defense. I now remember having a similar conversation (I think with you) after that first Miami game. Yeah, we are never going to agree on that. Offense job is to score points. Defense job is to stop the other team from scoring. You are assigning both jobs to the offense. Yeah, not gonna agree on that. Right, it's the offense's job to score points, so when it scores 7 points in 28 minutes of football, having only run 25 plays during that time over 7 drives, then you'd agree that it didn't do its job, like it didn't during the entire second half against Miami: Or like when it completely disappeared for the last 24 minutes of the Oakland game: I'm glad that we agree in both these cases the offense did not do its job. I disagree with you placement of blame. Miami 1 is on the defense as much if not more than the offense, they gave up 454 yds and 28 FD and Ajayi ran all over them, the offense puit up 25 pts Sea is on the defense, the offense had 425 yds and 30 FDs and 28 pts against the number 1 scoring D, should be good enough Oak is more on the defense, should be able to protect a 24-9 lead in the 3rd QTR There is 3 games that should have been wins with competent defense. You won't convince me otherwise. Save your strength for arguments that matter. Edited January 17, 2017 by The Big Cat
BADOLBILZ Posted January 17, 2017 Posted January 17, 2017 Your impression is wrong. BAL: offense's fault NYJ1: defense's fault MIA1: offense's fault SEA/NE2: nobody's fault, just out played (though we were 8 yards from the endzone to win at the end of SEA...) OAK: shared blame. defense let them back in, offense couldn't protect the lead and keep Carr off the field PIT: they both sucked MIA: defense's fault NYJ2: not going there I've defended each of these stances countless times. IMO, when games were on the line and we needed the offense to come up big, they consistently failed (and have with TT as the QB for two seasons now). You are definitely confusing the offense not providing OPTIMAL results with not providing GOOD results. Yeah, there is room for the offense to improve. The defense by contrast you hold to a ridiculously low level of accountability. It's like you drawing a line at "20 points allowed" because it fits your narrative........when 20 points is not a high offensive output AND the Bills defense was giving up a lot more than 20 points in these losses.
Recommended Posts