Fezmid Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 I don't recall us playing bad in either of those games. 364359[/snapback] Exactly -- we played well in those games, but some people dismiss them because "the Rams and Seahawks aren't that good... Even though they made the playoffs." So if you take out the games where we played well (and we DID win 9 games last year...), and look at only the 7 games we lost, we really suck! That's the argument that's made here all the time. CW
Fezmid Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 I know they are. Doesn't change the basic point or make you or Bill's little crusade to defend the very mediocre play of the chronically overhyped Drew Bledsoe. 364357[/snapback] Actually, it DOES change the basic point -- I posted the following: Then how do you explain the points explosion once WM was put in for TH? If you're looking for common denominator, it appears that TH is the most obvious choice. And your rebuttle was the stats from every game played against winning teams and teams that made the playoffs. That has absolutely nothing to do with the comment you were responding to, and made it look like the stats you quoted were from games with WM in there. The points explosion came when WM was put in. Don't cloud what I was saying. And my "crusade" as you put it, is simply that we CAN be MUCH worse with JPL in there, despite what 99% of people here are saying. Whether you think the move was right or wrong, we can go much lower than the 9-7 we were last year (and we were 9-7). I hope that doesn't happen, but you just can't tell. CW
Alaska Darin Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Last season against Playoff Teams: 199 Attempts 116 Completions 58.3% 1552 Yards 8 TDs 10 Ints 18 sacks 6 fumbles 75.6 rating
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Last season against Playoff Teams: 199 Attempts 116 Completions 58.3% 1552 Yards 8 TDs 10 Ints 18 sacks 6 fumbles 75.6 rating 364371[/snapback] AD could you please do on more. How about last season, against playoff teams, without Travis Henry. I would appreciate it.
Fezmid Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Last season against Playoff Teams: 199 Attempts 116 Completions 58.3% 1552 Yards 8 TDs 10 Ints 18 sacks 6 fumbles 75.6 rating 364371[/snapback] Again, I belive that you're counting games with TH as the starter... You should include how many games as well. CW
Alaska Darin Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Actually, it DOES change the basic point -- I posted the following:And your rebuttle was the stats from every game played against winning teams and teams that made the playoffs. That has absolutely nothing to do with the comment you were responding to, and made it look like the stats you quoted were from games with WM in there. The points explosion came when WM was put in. Don't cloud what I was saying. And my "crusade" as you put it, is simply that we CAN be MUCH worse with JPL in there, despite what 99% of people here are saying. Whether you think the move was right or wrong, we can go much lower than the 9-7 we were last year (and we were 9-7). I hope that doesn't happen, but you just can't tell. CW 364368[/snapback] Of course we can. We could go 0-16 but it's not likely that worse quarterback play will be the sole reason because it's not likely that Mularkey won't use Holcomb (who looks like friggin' Einstien to Bledsoe's Frankenstein) if Losman plays even worse than Bledsoe did. At least I won't have to watch a 12 year veteran make the same glaring mistakes week after week while calling himself the team leader Monday thru Saturday.
Alaska Darin Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Again, I belive that you're counting games with TH as the starter... You should include how many games as well. CW 364375[/snapback] Seven games. So your argument is now that poor play from the running back position has an impact but poor play from the quarterback position doesn't? Oh, ok. Maybe we could surround Drew with Hall of Famers in the other 10 spots and he will eventually learn to progress off his security blanket, throw to the correct shoulder, put the proper touch on passes under 10 yards, look off the safety, stop making poor red zone decisions, etc.
jad1 Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Again, I belive that you're counting games with TH as the starter... You should include how many games as well. CW 364375[/snapback] Didn't Bledsoe break the franchise passing record with Henry in the backfield back in 2002? Didn't he throw 24 TDs with Henry in the backfield? But in 2004, Bledsoe played like Joe Dufek when Henry's in the game? If you look at three crucial Bledsoe turnovers last season, against the Ravens, Pats, and Steelers, Henry was on the field for one of them, while McGahee was on the field for two. So much for the theory that Drew only needed Willis on the field to avoid making game-killing mistakes. The bottom line is that with Bledsoe at QB, the Bills were good enough to beat 75% of the teams in the league. Donahoe and Mularkey could have been happy with another 8 or 9 win season, but they wanted more and took the gamble on Losman. I like the decision, as Bledsoe has shown that he is unable to raise his game against the better defenses in the league, regardless of who is in at RB.
ganesh Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 The Bills don't even believe this 100%. If they thought JP would be at least as good as Bledsoe was last year, Kelly Holcomb would not be on the roster. 364263[/snapback] Kelly Holocomb was brought in as an insurance against JP getting injured.. KH is not going to compete for the starting job. He is a backup who is expected to play in case JP is injured.
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Didn't Bledsoe break the franchise passing record with Henry in the backfield back in 2002? Didn't he throw 24 TDs with Henry in the backfield? But in 2004, Bledsoe played like Joe Dufek when Henry's in the game? If you look at three crucial Bledsoe turnovers last season, against the Ravens, Pats, and Steelers, Henry was on the field for one of them, while McGahee was on the field for two. So much for the theory that Drew only needed Willis on the field to avoid making game-killing mistakes. The bottom line is that with Bledsoe at QB, the Bills were good enough to beat 75% of the teams in the league. Donahoe and Mularkey could have been happy with another 8 or 9 win season, but they wanted more and took the gamble on Losman. I like the decision, as Bledsoe has shown that he is unable to raise his game against the better defenses in the league, regardless of who is in at RB. 364398[/snapback] How about the sack stats? Drew was sacked more than 50 times in 02, and sacks were cut in half while Willis was in there, right? Don't you think that this matters at all?
ganesh Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 The points "EXPLOSION" had much to do with the quality of opposition and little to do with Drew Bledsoe. 364302[/snapback] Don't forget the TDs scored by the D and STs. They formed a big part of the "Points Explosion"
VABills Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 How about the sack stats? Drew was sacked more than 50 times in 02, and sacks were cut in half while Willis was in there, right? Don't you think that this matters at all? 364408[/snapback] Actually Drew was sacked 25 times with Travis in last year. 12 in the 11 games that Willis started.
ganesh Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Actually Drew was sacked 25 times with Travis in last year. 12 in the 11 games that Willis started. 364415[/snapback] Again, could it be that those 12 teams had average and bad defense ? It is probably a combination of many factors....THs lack of blocking, WG being good at it....bad/average teams during the 9-3 record....and good rush defense teams during the 1-4 stretch...Bottom line....our offense sucked in spite of WM performance.....Bledsoe being the leader should take the blame for the offense's offensive performance.
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Actually Drew was sacked 25 times with Travis in last year. 12 in the 11 games that Willis started. 364415[/snapback] Thanks. Again, nobody cares.
Alaska Darin Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 How about the sack stats? Drew was sacked more than 50 times in 02, and sacks were cut in half while Willis was in there, right? Don't you think that this matters at all? 364408[/snapback] Willis is definitely a better overall back than Travis and significantly better at helping out in the passing game. Doesn't change the fact that Drew is an extremely limited QB who has not made much if any progress in fixing the glaring issues that have plagued him throughout his career. It's very ironic to me that you will spend so much time ripping Travis but defending Drew when from a football perspective they are VERY similiar.
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Willis is definitely a better overall back than Travis and significantly better at helping out in the passing game. Doesn't change the fact that Drew is an extremely limited QB who has not made much if any progress in fixing the glaring issues that have plagued him throughout his career. It's very ironic to me that you will spend so much time ripping Travis but defending Drew when from a football perspective they are VERY similiar. 364424[/snapback] Not at all Sir. Drew is approcahing 40,000 yards at the age of 33. When Travis has 10,000 yards rushing, an easier stat to achieve, I will defend him too. OK maybe I would not, but this will NEVER happen. In any event, Drew will be in this league far longer than Travis Gump, who is a statistical and in fact loser. Drew is #10. Travis sucks.
Alaska Darin Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Not at all Sir. Drew is approcahing 40,000 yards at the age of 33. Whe Travis has 10,000 yards rushing, an easier stat to achieve, I will defend him too. OK maybe I would not, but this will NEVER happen. In any event, Drew will be in this league far longer than Travis Gump, who is a statistical and in fact loser. Drew is #10. Travis sucks. 364435[/snapback] Thanks for proving my point.
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Thanks for proving my point. 364436[/snapback] What did I prove. That Drew has put forth a good career and that Travis is a loser?
BuffOrange Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 Maybe we could surround Drew with Hall of Famers in the other 10 spots and he will eventually learn to progress off his security blanket, throw to the correct shoulder, put the proper touch on passes under 10 yards, look off the safety, stop making poor red zone decisions, etc. 364386[/snapback] 2 different HOF coaches in NE have already tried that. Thanks to TH it didn't work either time.
Bill from NYC Posted June 22, 2005 Posted June 22, 2005 2 different HOF coaches in NE have already tried that. Thanks to TH it didn't work either time. 364454[/snapback] Did Drew get to the superbowl in NE? C'mon, you can do better than that.
Recommended Posts