Bad game -- not a bad team.

[Max Fischer]

I think there's an important difference between a bad game and a bad team.

 

I thought the Bills played very poorly (see Indy, Jax, & Pats) but they're not a poor team (see MN, SF, Miami).

 

Yesterday, the talent is there but gameplan and execution were not. Even then, the Bills were in this game until the beginning of the 4th quarter.

 

1. Bills had ZERO turnovers.

 

2. Oly 3 (3!) penalties.

 

3. Subpar game from their punter.

 

4. A great Defense that did not stop the run when the stadium knew they'd run. AND the D gave up the back-breaking 80-yard drive in the 3rd including Griese's 3-and-5 conversion when Spikes left his man who was WIDE open at the 5. (Takeo - Griese is not a threat to run for the 1st).

 

5. Very, very conservative "play-not-to-lose offensive" game plan

 

6. Where the hell was Damion Shelton????

 

. . . and STILL in the game ON THE ROAD through the 3rd Quarter.

 

Fact is, TB had the superior game yesterday at home, they did everything right (despite the penalties), a good gameplan on D, well executed run game and no big mistakes. (Williams is a beast).

 

Note about JP: He had an bad game but not a terrible game, they weren't winning because of JP, not losing b/c of him, either. Bills had NO running game (not his fault), JP rarely had a receiver open and usually was under pressure. I'd even argue he was one step away from escaping the safety.

 

I don't think it's simply coaching hyperbole to think Mularkey was right when he said "this is a learning experience." It was a wake-up call to the whole team from Head Coach to waterboy.

 

If they "play to win" - i.e. play agreesively next week I think they'll stomp the Falcons.

[Kgun5]

I agree with a lot of what you say, but not the defense.

 

How many times has this defense shown that they are a very good, but not great unit?

 

The problem is that they'll never be able to win a big game for us on their own, which is something a great defense MUST be able to do.

 

The coaching will get better. JP will get MUCH better. The defense will remain solid. There is a lot of room for hope.

[BuffOrange]

The fact that they had no turnovers, only 3 penalties and still got their asses kicked so badly is actually kinda discouraging to me.

[Puhonix]

I think there's an important difference between a bad game and a bad team.

 

I thought the Bills played very poorly (see Indy, Jax, & Pats) but they're not a poor team (see MN, SF, Miami). 

 

446104[/snapback]

Hmm, bad teams, Minnesota, obviously has troubles. SF, looked terrible against the defending NFC champs. Miami?

 

Sure... pick on Miami, cause they were a bad team last year. I take offense to that, and its obvious you havent seen Miami play this year.

 

Were they bad last year, obviously. But this year they played great in week 1, and good in week 2. If you want to compare the Bills and Fins from two weeks into the season, Miami has the edge. Why? Both teams looked great in week 1. Buffalo had a disastrous game yesterday. Miami didnt.

 

Before everyone slams me, it's too early to tell what the season is going to look like, and how these teams will finish. But if you want to make a list of bad teams after 2 weeks, you should look at Houston, Minnesota, and Baltimore. But not Miami.

[Max Fischer]

The fact that they had no turnovers, only 3 penalties and still got their asses kicked so badly is actually kinda discouraging to me.

446126[/snapback]

 

Not discouraging in the least. Bad teams turnover the ball and have penalty problems. Those things are talent indicators (see Pats).

 

I just think the Bills had the wrong gameplan and attitude -- the play not to lose strategy caught up to them mid-3Q. After the Bills got their first possessionl in the 3rd at mid-field they should have opened it up but they played like they were ahead by two TDs. To me, that was the turning point of the game (especially after Moorman booted the ball into the EZ ) 80-yard drive ensues . . .

 

Plus, we should also credit TB for playing a GREAT game.

 

You can change game plans but that doesn't do a whole lot to eliminate turnovers and penalties.

[BuckeyeBill]

Hmm, bad teams, Minnesota, obviously has troubles. SF, looked terrible against the defending NFC champs. Miami?

 

Sure... pick on Miami, cause they were a bad team last year. I take offense to that, and its obvious you havent seen Miami play this year.

 

Were they bad last year, obviously. But this year they played great in week 1, and good in week 2. If you want to compare the Bills and Fins from two weeks into the season, Miami has the edge. Why? Both teams looked great in week 1. Buffalo had a disastrous game yesterday. Miami didnt.

 

Before everyone slams me, it's too early to tell what the season is going to look like, and how these teams will finish. But if you want to make a list of bad teams after 2 weeks, you should look at Houston, Minnesota, and Baltimore. But not Miami. 

446134[/snapback]

 

Until Buffalo ends the year 10-6 and Miami finishes 5-11. Then your tune will change.

[Matt in KC]

I agree with a lot of what you say, but not the defense.

 

How many times has this defense shown that they are a very good, but not great unit?

 

446119[/snapback]

I think we need to consider the circumstances when judging the D's performance yesterday.

 

1) Fletcher going out was a big hit (he left when the score was 2-0), 1a) the D plays were called in from the sideline (maybe from Fletcher ? ) 1b) to Crowell, who was hurt and unable to play last week and may not have been 100% 1c) and Crowell looked like he was playing the playbook, not the opponent. I saw several times he charged through his gap, completely ignoring the ball carrier a over one gap.

 

2) The heat and time of possession. [A similar injury situation plagued the offense: MW went out, and Jerman was manhandled, leaving CV who was not fit enough to finish last week to man the rightside of the line.]

[Max Fischer]

Hmm, bad teams, Minnesota, obviously has troubles. SF, looked terrible against the defending NFC champs. Miami?

 

Sure... pick on Miami, cause they were a bad team last year. I take offense to that, and its obvious you havent seen Miami play this year.

 

Were they bad last year, obviously. But this year they played great in week 1, and good in week 2. If you want to compare the Bills and Fins from two weeks into the season, Miami has the edge. Why? Both teams looked great in week 1. Buffalo had a disastrous game yesterday. Miami didnt.

 

Before everyone slams me, it's too early to tell what the season is going to look like, and how these teams will finish. But if you want to make a list of bad teams after 2 weeks, you should look at Houston, Minnesota, and Baltimore. But not Miami. 

446134[/snapback]

 

We'll see. I'm not a knee-jerk Fish basher, I did see the game and while they did not play disasterously that was kind of the point. Better than last year, but I've yet to see how they are good enough to win many games.

 

Though I won't be surprise if Miami's first game occupies 55 minutes of a 60 minute 2005-2006 Dolphin highlight reel.

 

I will agree you can add Baltimore and Houston (though PGH is awfully good).

[Puhonix]

We'll see.  I'm not a knee-jerk Fish basher, I did see the game and while they did not play disasterously that was kind of the point.  Better than last year, but I've yet to see how they are good enough to win many games.

446161[/snapback]

I'm not expecting us to go 10-6. I'd be tremendously happy with 8-8. But the difference is going out and falling to 1-1 by losing 17-7, and by falling to 1-1 by losing 42-3. We're going to be in a lot of these games this year, and I think we can win our fair share of them.

 

I will agree you can add Baltimore and Houston (though PGH is awfully good).

446161[/snapback]

Baltimore is a shock, going out to Tennessee and falling apart. Minnesota has major Offensive issues, and Houston is going to need to do something to get going. Who else is really bad?

[canbuffan34]

I think we need to consider the circumstances when judging the D's performance yesterday. 

 

1) Fletcher going out was a big hit (he left when the score was 2-0), 1a) the D plays were called in from the sideline (maybe from Fletcher ? ) 1b) to Crowell, who was hurt and unable to play last week and may not have been 100% 1c) and Crowell looked like he was playing the playbook, not the opponent.  I saw several times he charged through his gap, completely ignoring the ball carrier a over one gap.

 

2) The heat and time of possession.  [A similar injury situation plagued the offense: MW went out, and Jerman was manhandled, leaving CV who was not fit enough to finish last week to man the rightside of the line.]

446150[/snapback]

[QUThe heat and time of possessionOTE]Exactly! After I watched the game I couldn't help but feel that these were the 2 most significant factors in this game, period! Our guys looked completely sluggish by the 3rd Quarter, my grandmother probably could have ran for 75 yards against us in that 2nd half!

[BenchBledsoe]

Green Bay is unbelievably bad. Lose in your home opener to Cleveland after being held to 3 in Detroit. . . and on reggie White Day? Packers will be lucky to win 5 games.

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I couldn't tell whether the offensive game plan was putrid or the execution was. MM said that WM had room to run, but just ran sideways--that to me suggests he was more upset with the execution than the playcalling. And to be fair to Tom Clements, what plays can you call when your QB is so errant and your running back is going backwards? In any event, a lot of the execution things can be fixed, especially with the running game and defense.

 

We're a good team and as JP plays more, he'll get better. I would have loved to face this same Tampa team later in the year when JP has 7 or 8 games under his belt. That would be a game!

[BuffOrange]

Not discouraging in the least.  Bad teams turnover the ball and have penalty problems.  Those things are talent indicators (see Pats).

 

You can change game plans but that doesn't do a whole lot to eliminate turnovers and penalties.

446144[/snapback]

 

I see the Pats and they obviously don't have turnover problems very often, but when they do lose, turnovers and penalties usually play a role. They don't lose because their offense is completely helpless and incapable of getting a first down.