Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

If Steelers defense plays like this against Buffalo it will be a long day 

 

Sure, but we'll beat them 6-3

Posted
1 minute ago, CaptnCoke11 said:

If Steelers defense plays like this against Buffalo it will be a long day 

It’s a long way off, and could be very meaningful for the Bills ( or not) but just because Ben is out doesn’t mean it’ll be a cakewalk. That franchise has a ton of pride, and I can only recall the Bills winning at PIT once as a franchise. 

Posted

I love  BUF but they are not an elite team and doesn’t surprise me if they struggle with inferior teams like Cinci.  The Bills have a mediocre to poor offense with no explosiveness.  Great D though.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I'm a bit troubled watching 0-3 Pittsburgh pound the snot out of a team we barely squeaked by last week.

Maybe the Steelers are just better than the Bills in all areas. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Big C said:

 

Gore just carved up the league's #1 rush D and Yeldon proved rather effective in the pass game. Singletary so far has looked stellar too. I don't think they are the reason Allen isn't checking down.

 

 

 

I'm of the opinion that the Pats let Gore run wild because they knew he wasn't a threat to take it to the house and that he wasn't a threat to carry the ball 20 - 25 times for 150 - 200 yards.  Against a lot of other NFL teams yesterday's Pats defensive scheme would have been shredded by a relentless ground game. 

 

But we don't have the ability to run the ball effectively.  Sure we got a couple of big plays but the Pats were willing to pay that price in order to keep Allen in the pocket and to blitz the hell out of him. 

 

As for Yeldon he's not done anything of note in the passing game.  In a league where RB's routinely catch 7 - 8 passes per game a couple of flair passes out of the backfield is underwhelming.

 

I'm as high as you are on Singleterry's POTENTIAL.  But he's missed the last two games and all we've seen is a flash of brilliance.   

 

And running screen plays are called plays NOT check downs.  Yesterday, in spite of playing a Pat's D which blitzed on almost every other play, the Bills only attempted one screen pass.  Football 101 demands that you throw screen passes to defeat the blitz.  Why didn't we?  I believe that in part we don't throw screens because with Singleterry out of the line-up Gore & Yeldon just aren't very good at it.

 

And while we're on the subject of checking down to your RB's how the hell is Allen supposed to do that if his RB's are NOT in the backfield but lined up in the spread?  They ran empty backfield sets all game. Pittsburgh makes it easy to check down to the RB because that's what they want to do.  For some reason Dabold thought we could slice the Pat's secondary up with intermediate & deep routes. 

 

 

Posted
3 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Bengals still had some fight in BUF at 0-2. They look like they’ve packed it in at this point.

 

This is more of a myth than anything. The majority of coaches and players never “pack it in.”

 

If Zac Taylor “packs it in,” he’s likely a one and done and there’s no guarantee he gets another shot at a head coaching gig. Most of the players on an NFL team aren’t superstars who can stay in the league based off name recognition or reputation. They need tape of effort, potential, and performance. Guys are always playing hard for the future.

 

The Bengals just aren’t very good. They weren’t last week, either.

Posted
5 minutes ago, zow2 said:

I love  BUF but they are not an elite team and doesn’t surprise me if they struggle with inferior teams like Cinci.  The Bills have a mediocre to poor offense with no explosiveness.  Great D though.

 

So far this year, they are tied for 8th in the NFL for yards/play.

 

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Rob's House said:

I'm a bit troubled watching 0-3 Pittsburgh pound the snot out of a team we barely squeaked by last week.

 

Living down here in Cincy I'm not surprised by this.  Pittsburgh has the Bengal's number big time. 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, zow2 said:

I love  BUF but they are not an elite team and doesn’t surprise me if they struggle with inferior teams like Cinci.  The Bills have a mediocre to poor offense with no explosiveness.  Great D though.

This is a fair statement. They are a newly overhauled offensive team that has 4 new OL out of 5, 2 new WRs and two rookie TE’s. The QB has 15 starts ( most of which were behind an inferior OL with few good WR targets. They still lack an elite WR. The offense is a work in progress at best, and many players are in their first year of it. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Maybe the Steelers are just better than the Bills in all areas. 

 

Maybe they are but going off week to week performances isn't going to tell you that.  I mean the Bengals only lost by ONE POINT in their game AT Seattle.  And in that game Cincy had twice as many yards and twice the TOP!  So that would mean that based on tonight's result when Pittsburgh plays the Seahawks they're going to kick ass becasue they obviously have way more talent! 

 

Wait, they did play two weeks ago and Seattle won.  Never mind! 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, eanyills said:

 

This is more of a myth than anything. The majority of coaches and players never “pack it in.”

 

If Zac Taylor “packs it in,” he’s likely a one and done and there’s no guarantee he gets another shot at a head coaching gig. Most of the players on an NFL team aren’t superstars who can stay in the league based off name recognition or reputation. They need tape of effort, potential, and performance. Guys are always playing hard for the future.

 

The Bengals just aren’t very good. They weren’t last week, either.

The Bengals aren’t very good, but lots of teams have “ packed it in “ over the years. Their HC seems like he’s in over his head, and players probably know it. The NFL is a pretty closed society and all p,Ayers want to hit FA and possibly cash in. All teams have pro personnel depts and they know who everyone is. Most rosters have lots of lower priced players who can play. It’s not just superstars that change teams. These players all want to be like NBA players and call all the shots. Teams run for the bus every year. Look at Miami. 

2 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Maybe they are but going off week to week performances isn't going to tell you that.  I mean the Bengals only lost by ONE POINT in their game AT Seattle.  And in that game Cincy had twice as many yards and twice the TOP!  So that would mean that based on tonight's result when Pittsburgh plays the Seahawks they're going to kick ass becasue they obviously have way more talent! 

 

Wait, they did play two weeks ago and Seattle won.  Never mind! 

Obviously it doesn’t work like that. The Bills could beat the Bengals and then the Bengals could win at SEA. Fans just love  to overreact, and think that if you lose a game then  the other team is X amount of points better than you. 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

The Bengals aren’t very good, but lots of teams have “ packed it in “ over the years. Their HC seems like he’s in over his head, and players probably know it. The NFL is a pretty closed society and all p,Ayers want to hit FA and possibly cash in. All teams have pro personnel depts and they know who everyone is. Most rosters have lots of lower priced players who can play. It’s not just superstars that change teams. These players all want to be like NBA players and call all the shots. Teams run for the bus every year. Look at Miami. 

Obviously it doesn’t work like that. The Bills could beat the Bengals and then the Bengals could win at SEA. Fans just love  to overreact, and think that if you lose a game then  the other team is X amount of points better than you. 

 

I thought your original  response may have been sarcastic but I wasn't sure - my bad. 

Posted
21 minutes ago, Big C said:

Booger is actually right about how lackadaisical the Bengals look. 

 

A tell tale sign of bad coaching.  The Dalton experiment needs to end as well.  The Bengals should be in the QB market after this season.

Posted
20 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

I'm of the opinion that the Pats let Gore run wild because they knew he wasn't a threat to take it to the house and that he wasn't a threat to carry the ball 20 - 25 times for 150 - 200 yards.  Against a lot of other NFL teams yesterday's Pats defensive scheme would have been shredded by a relentless ground game. 

 

But we don't have the ability to run the ball effectively.  Sure we got a couple of big plays but the Pats were willing to pay that price in order to keep Allen in the pocket and to blitz the hell out of him. 

 

As for Yeldon he's not done anything of note in the passing game.  In a league where RB's routinely catch 7 - 8 passes per game a couple of flair passes out of the backfield is underwhelming.

 

I'm as high as you are on Singleterry's POTENTIAL.  But he's missed the last two games and all we've seen is a flash of brilliance.   

 

And running screen plays are called plays NOT check downs.  Yesterday, in spite of playing a Pat's D which blitzed on almost every other play, the Bills only attempted one screen pass.  Football 101 demands that you throw screen passes to defeat the blitz.  Why didn't we?  I believe that in part we don't throw screens because with Singleterry out of the line-up Gore & Yeldon just aren't very good at it.

 

And while we're on the subject of checking down to your RB's how the hell is Allen supposed to do that if his RB's are NOT in the backfield but lined up in the spread?  They ran empty backfield sets all game. Pittsburgh makes it easy to check down to the RB because that's what they want to do.  For some reason Dabold thought we could slice the Pat's secondary up with intermediate & deep routes. 

 

 

I am sure you are referring to the Pats game and not in general when you say we "cant run the ball effectively"

 

Devin S. would have really changed the scope of that game.

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

A tell tale sign of bad coaching.  The Dalton experiment needs to end as well.  The Bengals should be in the QB market after this season.

 

Agreed.  Dalton is a bottom tier QB.  He had great weapons and an excellent O-Line for most of his career in Cincy.  Now he doesn’t and he’s gone from mediocre to bad.  Keeping Dalton at this point is like keeping Marvin Lewis

Edited by BuffaloRebound
Posted
Just now, John from Riverside said:

I am sure you are referring to the Pats game and not in general when you say we "cant run the ball effectively"

 

Devin S. would have really changed the scope of that game.

 

No I'm speaking about in general with the caveat that Gore & Yeldon are in the backfield.  I agree that Singleterry likely would have made a huge difference.  And when he's played the early returns are promising that he'll be a difference maker in our run game.  But Singleterry just hasn't played enough for us to see how big a difference he'll truly be.  But with Yeldon & Gore in the backfield we don't run the ball well; we don't get good production from the RB's in the passing game and for some reason we don't run screen passes with them.

 

I think it's a combination of Gore & Yeldon not being among the upper half of RB's in the league and a scheme which puts our RB's in the spread far to often. 

 

 

 

×
×
  • Create New...