Fezmid Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 Tell me then Fezzy, why teams were knocking down the door to get DB? Those kneepads are a bit worn out, huh? 294859[/snapback] Dallas knocked pretty hard. There were even rumors that they were going to trade for him, until they realized they could get him for free. But that's not what I was saying to you. My comment was that you're wearing blinders if you think DB was the only problem on the team. And your response to it was proof positive that you are indeed wearing blinders, you terrible human being you. CW
BILLEAFAN Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 Interesting stuff however I am curious to see how Greg Williams will "game plan" Drew and his new crew( the Cowgirls) since they will meet twice this upcoming season
justnzane Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 Interesting thought, but I don't think it's fully examined. I'm not certain of the makeup of the 10 games against 3-4 teams, but 3 of them are NE, Baltimore and Pittsburgh, which makes up 6 of the games. Those are pretty good teams. If you looked at how Bledsoe did against teams above .500 you'd probably see the same thing. 2004 Jack - L NE - L NYJ - L Balt - L NYJ - W NE - L Sea - W Pitt - L 2-6 against teams over .500 7-1 against teams at or under .500 2003 NE - W Mia - L Phil - L KC - L Dal - L Ind - L Ten - L Mia - L NE - L 1-8 against teams over .500 5-2 against teams at or under .500 2004/2003 total 3-14 against teams over .500 12-3 against teams at or under .500 Bledsoe struggled against teams using a 3-4, but he struggled against good teams regardless of their scheme. The teams using a 3-4 are pretty good to start with (unless you argue that they're good because they use the 3-4). 294645[/snapback] well duh... most teams will have a losing record against teams w/ winning records or else the bills would be 15-1. those teams have winning records partially because they beat us, and partially because they were good teams. at least 75% of the teams have losing records vs. winning record teamson any given year
IBTG81 Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 Dallas knocked pretty hard. There were even rumors that they were going to trade for him, until they realized they could get him for free. But that's not what I was saying to you. My comment was that you're wearing blinders if you think DB was the only problem on the team. And your response to it was proof positive that you are indeed wearing blinders, you terrible human being you. CW 294865[/snapback] One team? Dallas also knocked pretty hard for Eddie George, and Drew Hensen, as of late. Good track record. I'm wearing blinders? You're the one who still can't let go of DB.
Fezmid Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 One team? Dallas also knocked pretty hard for Eddie George, and Drew Hensen, as of late. Good track record. I'm wearing blinders? You're the one who still can't let go of DB. 294913[/snapback] Once again you prove you have no reading comprehension. I'd say the OL and WRs struggled with blitz recognition/pickup as well. On numerous occasions, DB tried to throw to the "hot" receiver, only the receiver was going 20 yards downfield. rolleyes.gif The whole team pretty much sucked at that. Where did I say it wasn't Drew's fault? I said it wasn't *entirely* his fault. Big difference. Learn how to read. It'll serve you well for a lifetime. http://www.hookedonphonics.com/ I stick up for facts and will call people out on it when they blame the entire '04 season DB. For example, DB was sacked on average LESS than Brady was, once we benched TH. Yet you still read everyone saying, "He gets sacked every other play." False. "Even my grandmother couldn't do any worse than Bledsoe did." We went 9-7. Again, false. Same thing with the blitzes; yes, he held the ball too long from time to time, but OL forgot to block just as much, and receivers didn't shorten their routes just as much. If I have rose colored glasses, then you obviously have blinders. I guess we average out in that case. Dallas knocked pretty hard. There were even rumors that they were going to trade for him, until they realized they could get him for free. But that's not what I was saying to you. My comment was that you're wearing blinders if you think DB was the only problem on the team. And your response to it was proof positive that you are indeed wearing blinders, you terrible human being you. So tell me, where in any of these posts I've made in this thread are you getting the "you can't let go of Bledsoe" crap? Are you disagreeing with anything I said here? Ed, learn to frick'n READ posts before spewing crap. CW
Crows57 Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 well duh... most teams will have a losing record against teams w/ winning records or else the bills would be 15-1. those teams have winning records partially because they beat us, and partially because they were good teams. at least 75% of the teams have losing records vs. winning record teamson any given year 294869[/snapback] You missed the point. This thread is about an article that says Bledsoe struggled against teams with a 3-4 defense. My point was that the scheme didn't matter - those were good teams. Said another way, if the Pats, Ravens or Steelers played a 4-3 I don't think Bledsoe's record would be any better in those games.
Bill from NYC Posted April 4, 2005 Posted April 4, 2005 >>>>For example, DB was sacked on average LESS than Brady was, once we benched TH. Yet you still read everyone saying, "He gets sacked every other play." False.<<<< Ah.....the fact that oh so few want to read, hear nor acknowledge.
Recommended Posts